Lucia

de Vernai

Read Lucia's bio and previous columns

December 17, 2007

Will Democrats Pander to Illegal Immigrants to Win?

As every American journalist sits down to write about the immigration issues facing our nation in the present day, there is a brief pause, a sigh, and a final flip of pages in the Associated Press Style Guide. “Undocumented worker” is the industry standard identifying phrase. Try as you might, nothing else is ever going to get past an editor. Nevertheless, the adherence to our progressive style book may be compromising journalism’s higher obligation: Honesty and impartial fact reporting.

Last I checked, immigrating without authorized documentation was illegal. And plenty of those who cross our borders do not work. Hundreds of street corners across cities in the southwest portray the same saddening scene – a dozen or so men leaning on a car wash fence, crouching to stay in the shade, waiting for a car to cruise by and offer them a day’s work. To say that even a surplus of these immigrants is preferable to their absence because they are the only ones willing to do the dirty work is incorrect and disrespectful to the millions of Americans and legal immigrants who have been cutting your hedges, cleaning your toilets and making lunches for decades.

If you really believe that if it were not for unlawful crossing of the border, there just wouldn’t be a soul to watch your kids while you are at work, you have obviously not seen the lines of people around the world who travel for days to stand in line in front of the U.S. Embassy for 18 hours a day with the hope that they will get the opportunity to do just that for the six months their visa lasts. And no, that little stamp does not include airfare.

When those people get here, they pay taxes. No, they don’t reap benefits after retirement. But just like you, they contribute to the fund that pays for every illegal immigrant’s emergency room visit. Under federal law, if a person claims that their medical condition is an emergency, even if it is not, they must be treated. In 2004, this cost California $1.4 de Vernaiion, Texas $850 million and Arizona $400 million in unreimbursed medical health care for immigrants. If the Chicago economists are right and there is no such thing as a free lunch, the money the state ponies up to pay that de Vernai – the feds hand down the rules but don’t hand the cash over – could potentially be used to help unemployed constituents get affordable medical insurance. The elderly probably wouldn’t complain from a similar boost either.

If anyone should be really miffed about illegal immigration it should be the people who enter this country legally, often after being denied the opportunity for years, and do everything persons without legal status do. Then, instead of getting a march with pretty posters and diversity slogans, they return to their home countries. The tax money they contributed benefits those who stay. Is this a racially loaded issue? Yes, but only by geographic circumstance. If the Pacific Ocean were as easy to cross as the desert, the immigrants would be Asian. If anything, Latino’s have the advantage of being able to benefit from amnesty far more than Africans or Eastern Europeans.

Instead of treading softly on the eggshells of the politically correct, let us plant our feet firmly in the factually correct: Entering the United States without a permit with a clearly defined time span is a felony. It is disconcerting to think that in order to secure the Latino vote, the soon-to-be-determined Democratic contender is more likely to cater to the interest of the foreign undocumented worker than an unemployed citizen.

Click here to talk to our writers and editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.

To e-mail feedback about this column, click here. If you enjoy this writer's work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry it.