That Was No Reform; It’s a Sellout of Our Border

The 104th Congress is history, most of its members now working hard back home to be part of the 105th Congress. That means boasting of their victories on bills dear to constituents’ hearts and avoiding questions about bonehead bills they supported. Exhibit No. 1 in the latter category, at least for the 52-member California delegation--in particular three of its top Republicans, Bill Thomas, Jerry Lewis and Tom Campbell--has to be the Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996.

This laughably named law was supposed to be a corrective to the 1986 and 1990 “reforms,” which opened the door to immigration abuse on an unprecedented scale. Once the old-line congressional obstructionists and their lobbyist and business pals were done, it had been sliced, diced, ground into pulp and watered down into a feeble hoax.

What happened? With a majority in Congress and a cadre of “Blue Dog” conservative Democrats on their side, nothing could stop the Republicans but themselves, and that’s exactly what they did.

At the first sign of a fight, they caved in. Out went debate on lowering legal immigration numbers. Next to go was a bona fide employee verification program. Then the Gallegly amendment on public education for illegal aliens was compromised to the point that nobody could support it. By that time, conservatives couldn’t even muster up support to pass a simple amendment for a tamper-proof Social Security card.

Those who understand the consequences of failed immigration reform policies must now ponder just how easily effective comprehensive immigration legislation could be dismantled and by exactly what forces.

The original bill, HR 2202, took years to draft. The findings of the bipartisan immigration commission, the so-called Jordan commission, were its guiding light. However, when it came out of the House, both the Senate and the White House threatened to bury it if certain parts were not removed.

The obstructionists of immigration reform did their usual thing, but never in their wildest dreams could they have replaced so much good legislation with bad as easily as the conservatives who live by the motto “When things get thick, we thin out.”

Bill Gates, the CEO of Microsoft and the richest man in the United States, shot down two key provisions: a harder-hitting employee verification program and a reduction in legal immigration. All it took was a six-figure check to a smooth lobbyist and Gates got what he wanted: plenty of cheap foreign labor for the cyberindustry and a lax verification system affording labor subcontractors a wide berth.

The family reunification zealots, aided by the misguided lobby of the Christian Coalition, climbed into bed with trade and teachers’ unions, agribusiness and liberal organizations to split the bill apart. At this point, 75 Republicans jumped ship rather than risk the wrath of Rottweiler-minded organizations.

As a result, extended family chain migration is guaranteed. The economically disadvantaged here can continue to sponsor economically disadvantaged, uneducated and unskilled extended family members, piling onto a depressed U.S. labor market and into our very own Third World inner cities.

This will continue in spite of an existing backlog of 3.6 million extended family members awaiting approval, many of whom are already illegally in the U.S. Records show that some sponsors are responsible for bringing in 20, 50, even 200 distant relatives who will in turn be able to sponsor others.

But the most insane and ominous part of the bill, which the president signed into law, was New Jersey Republican Chris Smith’s warm and fuzzy gift to the right-to-lifers: an amendment reestablishing political asylum for people--notably, Indians and Chinese--eager to get on a rusty freighter and enter into servitude here because of family-size restrictions at home.

This is even more ludicrous when you consider that a federal court recently ruled that policies of coerced abortion are not legitimate grounds for political asylum.

Other provisions were passed into law that are certain to set back illegal immigration control. One will reduce the already minimal interior Border Patrol presence. Another will allow illegal aliens with AIDS to remain in the U.S., eligible for tax-supported medical care. This could add up to hundreds of millions of dollars in a short period of time. With the worldwide AIDS problem growing, why invite more of it into the U.S.?

The corker in the debate was the strange-bedfellowship of Sens. Dianne Feinstein, Orrin Hatch and Ted Kennedy, and Rep. Dick Armey, all of them eager to continue educating illegal aliens at public expense. Together they trashed Rep. Elton Gallegly’s amendment, which would have done the right thing by allowing states to determine public education policies for illegal aliens.

In one breath, these critics argued for 13 years of public education for illegals while also demanding the toughest of measures to prohibit illegals from gaining employment in the U.S.

Figure that out! First, encourage free education for illegal aliens but, come graduation time, make sure they can’t get a job. What are the illegals supposed to do then? How will society handle this problem?

Let’s face it, the illegal immigration problem was not resolved by the 104th Congress. What it left us is a paradox similar in kind to, “What do you do about an animal on the endangered species list that eats only endangered plants?”

The voters can and must make certain that not a soul will be elected to go to Washington who does not fully understand that this immigration mess will be fixed in the 105th Congress.