Opinion: There’s nothing ‘anti-immigrant’ about advocating for a sustainable future for American workers

To the editor: Amid the often-passionate debate about immigration issues, the advocacy of our organization, NumbersUSA, is sometimes misstated — as it was by a letter writer who called us “anti-immigrant.” (“The GOP hardliners’ stance on DACA is the act of a dying political party,” Readers React, Jan. 16)

NumbersUSA is nonpartisan and comprises moderates, conservatives and liberals who are committed to the single goal of reducing immigration levels. We do so to encourage wage growth for our workers, conserve our open spaces and preserve a high quality of life for future generations of Americans. To this end, we work with decision-makers in Washington that they may see the wisdom of Barbara Jordan’s policy recommendations, which the White House recognized on Wednesday.

While we favor lower immigration and measures like mandatory E-Verify, we strongly oppose nativism and immigrant-bashing. The debate is about the numbers, not about whether our welcome of those we invite to join our national community should be warm (it should!).

Together, we now have an opportunity to push key changes to improve our immigration laws. We should not let our chance die.

Roy Beck, Arlington, Va.

The writer is president of NumbersUSA.

..

To the editor: While I’m happy that one letter writer from Germany was able to obtain a green card and legally come to this country, it would benefit him to know that this isn’t the case for every immigrant. (“Forget a DACA fix. Congress should take up the bipartisan immigration bill passed by the Senate in 2013,” Readers React, Jan. 18)

The majority of “Dreamers” have demonstrated that they can take care of themselves, are in school or are employed, are healthy and follow the laws of this country. Unfortunately, as a condition of applying for enrollment in the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, Dreamers are not able to apply for a green card or citizenship.

I would think that had permanent status been available to DACA recipients, most would have taken advantage of that opportunity.

Sheryl Grabow-Weiss, Chatsworth

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook