Deportation isn't a given

By Al Knight, Denver Post

April 5, 2006

http://www.denverpost.com/knight/ci_3672569

If there is one sentence that has come to dominate the current debate over illegal immigration, it is this: "We can't deport 11 million people."

This comment, or one of its variants, has been uttered endlessly by both liberal Democrats and some conservative Republicans....

The comment, no matter who says it, is not particularly helpful...

Even the most ardent proponents of immigration reform haven't been advocating the roundup and immediate deportation of 11 million illegal immigrants. What these proponents have been arguing is that the nation should adopt fresh policies that would do two principal things: improve border security and internal enforcement, and put in place a variety of disincentives that would lessen the number of new arrivals and lead to a material reduction in the illegal population.

There is a long list of things that might be done to create disincentives. These are just a few:

Effective employer sanctions. These were supposed to be a part of a federal amnesty program enacted in 1986 but never materialized. Most people recognize that no reform is possible without some way to punish employers who exploit illegal immigrant workers.

Stiffer penalties for those who traffic in false identification documents. The ready availability of false identification papers has made it relatively easy for illegal immigrants to avoid detection and has invited tax fraud.

Allow development of local and state initiatives for dealing with illegal immigration. A recent Denver Post story detailed how the state of Utah has virtually invited illegal immigrants by providing them with both benefits and accommodations. It logically follows that another state might take a less welcoming approach to lower the number of illegal immigrants. Several states have enacted legislation; this year's ballot in Colorado may contain a measure addressing this subject. Even small increases in the risk of deportation or impediments to finding employment can have significant effects on those who contemplate migration to the U.S.

The oddest thing about the fight over illegal immigration is the oft-repeated assertion that because mass deportation isn't a practical option, the only choice is to create a program that would offer "forgiveness of past offenses" (amnesty) to all who are here illegally.

This sense of futility is not to be found in any of the other contentious policy disputes that define the current political order.

Conservatives, for example, haven't thrown up their hands in surrender over the issue of abortion. They don't say, "Well, since nothing can be done about the million or so voluntary abortions a year, nothing can be done to reduce the total or to control partial birth abortion." On the contrary, they have focused more attention on such issues as partial birth abortion and parental notification laws designed to reduce the number of abortions.

The same thing can be said of same- sex marriage. Just because a Supreme Court in Massachusetts suddenly discovered a right for same-sex couples to marry in the folds of a state constitution hasn't invited total surrender on the issue....

The idea that Congress must now pass an all-or-nothing bill to address illegal immigration is simply false.

Any reasonable reading of public opinion polls reveals that the American people are looking for policies that will lessen the impact of illegal immigration. That can be done with better border security, a higher level of internal enforcement and stiffer employer penalties.

Because the American public might want better enforcement doesn't mean it must also want a huge, government-sponsored guest worker program. It is nothing less than sophistry to suggest otherwise.

Read the complete article.