Illegal Immigration

Dec 02, 2012 -- 6:51am

On Saturday's (December 1) show we talked about the quandary that Arizona faces.

The Obama administration has, by Executive Order, permitted as many as 800,000 illegals to stay in this country without fear of deportation if they were brought here before they turned 16, are younger than 30, have lived here for continuously for at least five years, have graduated from high school or the GED program, or have served in the military. Additionally, they may apply for a two-year renewable work permit.

Governor Jan Brewer has issued an order denying those immigrants, with work permits, driver's licenses.

Question: How will those people, having been given permission to stay and work, get to work? This is just one problem that arises from having State and Federal laws/policies that conflict.

Here is the position I posted on my website when running for the U.S. Senate in 2010:

After the economy, illegal immigration is probably the foremost issue in the minds of most Americans.  Comprehensive reform is the solution, so say our legislators.  While I agree with that, the question becomes "What is comprehensive reform?"

Before I answer that question, allow me to address jurisdiction.  The Constitution of the United States makes it clear that the only authority granted to Congress is to establish a uniform rule of naturalization so that once an immigrant becomes naturalized he/she won't have to do it again should that new citizen move to a different State.  The Congress has not been authorized to regulate immigration as is commonly purported. (See Article 1, Section 8 [4])

There is one thing the Federal Government should do which would be to not extend unemployment benefits beyond a reasonable time.  I'm thinking three to four months.  Better yet, the Federal Government should get out of the insurance business completely.  Receiving unemployment for nearly two years only encourages recipients to not find a job and to do work (e.g. mow lawns) for cash, thus, abusing the system and taking tax dollars unlawfully.  In a word, that's theft.  If they went to work at, let's say, a chicken processing plant, after a couple of weeks (days?) they'd find a job and get off unemployment.  If they didn't they'd have income and that would be one less job an illegal alien could seek.

There's no question the Federal Government and both major political parties bear responsibility.  The Republicans and Democrats want to give amnesty to illegal aliens - don't forget, Reagan already did in 1986 - because they would be a huge voting block, and the Federal Government is run by the Republicans and Democrats so keeping illegal aliens out of the country is not our government's goal. As if that's not bad enough, Obama's Justice Department is intent on keeping Arizona from protecting its citizens by doing what it can to stop illegal immigration, and that is shameful.  Congress should demand (Attorney General) Eric Holder's resignation or impeach him.  That won't happen.  The Republicans and Democrats really want that vote, America be damned.

When a foreign national comes to this country, that person enters a State.  It is the State's job to determine how an immigrant, legal or illegal, is dealt with.  The State can require registration or not.  The State can deport illegal immigrants if that is State law.  The State may allow them to stay indefinitely without ever keeping track of their whereabouts.  It is only when the foreign national makes the decision to become a citizen that the Federal Government's Constitutional role becomes effective.  Of course, this is all hypothetical because the Federal Government has taken over immigration policy and the courts, the States, and we have allowed it.

The first step toward comprehensive reform is to secure our borders.  If we brought our military back to this country, posted them along our borders, and tasked them with stopping illegal entry, I have no doubt the flow of illegal aliens would be drastically reduced to a trickle.  I have complete confidence that if the Joint Chiefs of Staff were to set about resolving our porous-border problem they could find the solution.  This would eliminate the Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and probably a half-dozen other agencies, thus reducing our taxes and the inherent problems of interagency communication, not to mention reducing the number of illegals who are incarcerated at taxpayer expense.

Here's a scenario I support:  I would like to see a window of time open to give an illegally-residing foreign national a stay of deportation by registering at a local courthouse.  At the time of registering, that person would be given a court date to enter his/her guilty plea.  A judge would then schedule another appearance far enough into the future for the State to do a criminal records check and for the plaintiff to bring in character witnesses and any documentation necessary to show that remaining in this country would be in the best interest of the people of that State.

Those persons with a criminal record, no job history, or any other reason for which the judge would revoke their stay of deportation, would face seizure of assets and deportation.  Moreover, if an illegal immigrant failed to register and was apprehended after the registration period expired he/she would immediately be arrested, and, upon conviction, have their assets seized and be deported to their home country with no appeal.

Those who a judge decided may stay would have certain conditions they must meet such as paying all back taxes, learning English, getting driver's licenses, etc.  They would receive temporary guest worker status with scheduled court appearances until they had complied with every condition the judge had set.  Then, at the judge's discretion, their status would change to resident alien.  However, they would not qualify for citizenship due to entering the country illegally and therefore never be able to vote or enjoy any of the benefits of being a citizen.

I believe this could be accomplished without the person here illegally having to pay thousands of dollars for an immigration attorney.  Simple forms could be filled out and submitted to the court.  Plaintiffs could stand before the judge with or without representation and attest to the truthfulness of the information they've provided.  Clearly, the burden would be on the plaintiff to prove his/her worthiness to remain in this country.

Unquestionably, there are people who have been in this country illegally for 20 years or more.  Many of them were children when their parents chose to violate our immigration laws.  Those children grew up here and only know the United States as their home.  I would like to think that more than not have become productive members of our society.  I see no reason to disallow citizenship to those brought here illegally as children.

To be sure, I support the Libertarian Party's position: "…we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property."

This is not my original opinion on how to deal with illegal aliens. I wanted to round them up, seize their assets, and send them home on their "dime" after selling those assets! Then, a friend asked me what do we do with the illegals who were brought here as children. That got me to do some soul searching to find a realistic, fair way to deal with this problem.

After realizing that the then-children of illegal aliens should be treated differently, I had to question my thinking regarding all illegals, which brought me to the above position. Well, that and the fact that if it were me and my family who were facing a long wait and thousands of dollars in fees to immigrate legally, I'd take my chances, cross that border, and live "under the radar," too. Wouldn't you?

 

Return to: Jim Rash Blog

Michael Savage

9pm-12am


Coming Up
Coast to Coast AM, 12:00 a.m. - 5:00 a.m.