Illegal Immigrants Cross the Arizona Border - from the blog Seeing Red AZ
A poll released by Pew Research shows overwhelming support for Arizona’s Immigration Law, which mirrors the Federal Immigration Laws already on the books. Aside from calls from the Los Angeles City Council to boycott Arizona, and similar calls from cities such as Boston, the average citizen, regardless of political affiliation or age, supports the immigration law passed by the State of Arizona.
The Pew poll divides into four categories; a total of all participants which gives the law requiring people to show proof of documentations receive a 73% approval rating. A partisan divide breaks that total down by party; Republicans 85%, Democrats 65% and Independents at 73% - which is a high rate of approval for the Democrat moniker. The third category is by age – with 18-29 year olds least supportive at 61% and the fourth is based on Obama’s handling Immigration, which receives a net positive of 31%.
Although one can argue that younger people and Democrats do not support the law as much as older Independents and Republican’s, the fact that the percentage is above 50% in both cases leaves one the impression that, nationalism aside, the news coming from border states as well as the current economy and laws either on the books or in progress regarding support for illegal’s (for example: See in-state college tuition for illegal immigrants proposed by Mass. Governor Deval Patrick), has not gone unnoticed.
Additionally, support from Hispanics who have entered the country legally has not been polled, and one would hazard to guess, not unlike any other immigrant who has had to run the gamut of legal fees and tests a U.S. high school graduate could not pass, might not favor an open border policy.
Is the Arizona Law racist? Although that’s the hue and cry from most that are in opposition to the Arizona law, one finds that most who oppose do so regardless of country of origin. There are other considerations that are on the minds of individual citizens regardless of ethnicity – such as border security vis a vis terrorism, and the number of crimes being committed in Border States as well as states that have high illegal immigrant populations is of concern.
The fact that by entering the country without going through Federal border crossing protocol, is, in itself, an illegal act, is not missed by the main populace. The fallacy that the open border policy is favored by the majority of Hispanics who vote in this country, may be the downfall of those politicians who are crying foul. A sensible immigration policy (the one already in place), allows for work visas, as well as offers a path to citizenship (granted one that is lengthy and costly and should be reformed), and protects those who reside legally within the borders of the United States. The fact that several administrations, from both parties, have neglected to secure the borders, and enforce the laws, will, in the end result, foster racism. As more border state violence is reported, as more fatal accidents involving those here illegally increase, it will be natural for citizens, regardless of ethnicity to look to the most egregious cause of the problem, and that will come by way of the southern border. Should the laws be enforced, those entering legally would be embraced by the majority (given that there will always be those who are bigoted, regardless of country of origin - See Irish Immigrants and circa 1900.
Plainly put, it is the Federal Governments Job to protect the borders (north, south and the coasts), but having failed to do so, the State of Arizona, in desperation, needed to be able to protect its citizens by enforcing Federal Laws on a State Level. The facts are not lost on the average citizen, regardless of party or age. Those who see the United States citizenship as less than notable are Progressives, who would rather have an open border policy. Progressives now align themselves with the Democrat Party, but it is a mistake to consider all Democrats as Progressives. Progressives (i.e. Socialists) hold a separate political ideology (see Nancy Pelosi) and, as of now, hold positions within the United States Government and espouse views that are contrary to the majority and the laws established by the Constitution. Unless and until border policy as defined by current laws is followed to the letter, the violence along border states and exported inland, will continue unabated.
2 comments:
I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case.
I know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!
Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them.
Benito,
The law in Arizona is not about discrimination – on the contrary, it is about protecting the rights of citizens to live in secure environment where they can be free – regardless of gender or ethnicity – the right to immigrate is not the issue – that right exists – and there are pathways to immigration – legally. As far as the “majority” of people in the United States being against freedom for women, that was never the case, as women have always been a majority (that argument is fallacious) – as far as the civil rights movement during the 1950’s is concerned, that has nothing to do with border control – but deep seated prejudice that was overcome by a majority – regardless of race or ethnicity or politics. The confusion here exists with the belief that laws protecting national borders are somehow “racist” - should there be reform to allow for an easier path to citizenship and immigration regardless of nation of origin, absolutely – that’s where the problem lays – (see argument for reduction in fees – which prevent so many people who are without the financial means to become a citizen.) It is simple, the Arizona law is a mirror of the Federal law, which is in place to protect, not deny, citizens – the situation in Arizona (and other border states) is at a crisis point – where citizens lives and property are endangered. (The emphasis on lives) – In addition no one speaks about the human trafficking that takes place – which is abhorrent – and which can only be contained if we have secure borders – were the borders secured, the incentive to bring literal slavery to these shores would be eliminated. This is a generous nation and a generous people based on the fact that the majority of us have either immigrated to, or our parents or grandparents immigrated to the United States. As a first generation American, having lived through the 1960’s and having seen, first hand, true discrimination, I do understand the difference, and I believe that the majority does so as well.
Post a Comment