« Must Read: Totten Reports From The West Bank | Main | Civil War And Civil Progress »
May 20, 2006
What Are The President's True Feelings On Border Enforcement?
In his recent speech on immigration, the President proposed sending troops to the border (not for any direct duty, mind you) to relieve border patrol officers of administrative duties, which would presumably result in more officers patrolling the border. But Charles Krauthammer writes that National-Guard-to-the-border idea is foolish for several reasons:
The critical element -- border enforcement -- is farcical. President Bush promises to increase the number of border agents. That was promised in the Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty legislation in 1986. The result was 11 million new illegals.
The president himself boasted about having already increased the number of border guards by one-third under his administration. Yet he acknowledges in the same speech that we do not have the border under control -- "full control,'' as he comically put it. The president's new solution? Increase the number of border guards again, by half this time. Everyone knows that anything short of enough border guards to do Hands Across America from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean won't do a thing to eliminate illegal immigration.
The only thing that might work is a physical barrier. The president offhandedly dismisses a wall as something that could never stop the "enormous pressure on our border.''
By what logic? Opponents pretend that these barriers can always be circumvented by, say, tunnels or clandestine entry by sea. Such arguments are transparently unserious. You're hardly going to get 500,000 illegals lining up outside a tunnel or on a pier. Such choke points are exactly how you would turn the current river of illegals into narrow streams -- which is all we need to turn the illegal immigration problem from out of control to eminently manageable.
Both emphases are mine. On the second point: It is transparently obvious that Krauthammer is correct on this--no one would be silly enough to claim that a barrier would stop all illegals, but of course that is not the point. Increasing the difficulty by an order of magnitude or so would do wonders to reconfigure the risk/reward equation that each potential illegal immigrant must initially consider.
On the first point (GWB's dismissal of the effectiveness of a barrier): There was an interesting discussion recently in The Corner of the President's core motivations--or lack thereof--in pursuing truly effective border enforcement. In response to a column by Peggy Noonan in which she speculated on the influences driving Bush's immigration ideas, Mark Krikorian wrote
I get asked this question all the time and the conclusion I've come to is this: The president is morally and emotionally opposed to immigration enforcement, especially on the Mexican border. He sees it as uncompassionate and un-Christian, at best a necessary evil that must be entered into with the greatest reluctance and abandoned as soon as is practical. And this is especially true with regard to Mexico because he sees it as a "cousin" nation, like Britain or Israel, and thus enforcing immigration laws against Mexicans is even worse than doing so against Chinese or Pakistanis.
There's more here in The Corner on this question.
I have, at least so far, dismissed as nonsense the repetitious characterizations of Bush by Leftists to the effect that he is a religious zealot taking his marching orders straight from God. And I still hold that that caricature by extremists is bogus; but Krikorian's post brought me up short--I wonder if he's not come close to a real insight here. It's awfully depressing to think that GWB's attitude toward enforcing our existing immigration laws might actually be warped by his personal religious beliefs. Robert Robb of the Arizona Republic also thinks Bush's heart is not in it:
The reason that Bush failed to provide reassurance about enforcement is, in part, because he is clearly among those who do not think that it will work. He said as much in his speech: "(T)o secure our border, we must create a temporary-worker program."The implication of this position is profound. The president of the United States believes that this country does not have the ability to determine an immigration policy that best serves the national interest and make it stick. Instead, there is a level of unskilled immigration from Mexico that the country has no choice but to somehow accommodate.
There's no objective basis for this defeatist attitude. The country has the ability to pick an immigration number in our best interest and make it stick.
The United States can reduce illegal immigration across the border to a trickle, through fencing, technology, surveillance and manpower. The country can be aggressive about tracking down and deporting those who overstay legal visas. The country can dry up employment opportunities for illegal workers through universal verification procedures and employer enforcement.
A comprehensive enforcement regimen hasn't failed. It hasn't been tried. And Bush doesn't really propose to put one in place.
Robb goes on to note that the Bush's vaunted proposal of sending 6,000 National Guard troops to the border will free up only about 500 border patrol agents for actual enforcement duties. 500 agents might have an effect--in maybe one or two of the vast counties in west Texas.
And one of Bush's right-hand men is echoing the same sentiment. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was here in Houston yesterday, and he continued the defeatist rhetoric. From the Houston Chronicle:
As he sought to drum up support among local officials for more coordinated immigration enforcement, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales warned Friday that a measure championed by conservatives to build a wall across the U.S.-Mexican border would be counterproductive."This notion of building a wall across the entire southern border I just think sends the wrong message," Gonzales said in an editorial board meeting with the Houston Chronicle. [...]
While the administration has signed off on building a limited fence along part of the border, Gonzales said a more extended wall, as some GOP House members have advocated, would inhibit trade and legal immigration with Mexico.
"To completely seal off America from our friend Mexico would be a mistake," said Gonzales, who also met with civic leaders and law enforcement officials to discuss immigration enforcement.
A wall would inhibit trade and legal immigration? How, exactly?
I fear our only hope is the House.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.thebernoullieffect.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/671
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What Are The President's True Feelings On Border Enforcement?:
» dragon force from dragon force
shit-happens 2912950 Latest dragon force news [Read More]
Tracked on June 16, 2007 10:51 PM
» nascar picture from nascar picture
shit-happens 2912950 Approved articles about nascar picture. [Read More]
Tracked on June 26, 2007 12:01 AM
