Two views on Obama’s immigration move
To the editor:
Some people, including Bruce Feher in his Wednesday letter ("The right way"), have a misunderstanding of what President Barack Obama has done with his executive order regarding deportation of foreign nationals brought to this country as minor children by their parents.
Mr. Feher closes his letter saying this is a cheap way for the Democrats to pad the voter roles. He is utterly and completely wrong.
The president recognizes that these people were brought to this country as minors, with no control over what their parents were doing. Most of these children had their schooling completed here, and have always used English as their primary language. Many of these people have served in our military (some died defending us) and graduated from schools here.
Under the president’s new guidelines, these people will not be targeted for deportation, and will be granted work visas only if they apply for them, provided they do not have a criminal record. That just means they will be able to work here. Nothing more. There is no automatic citizenship.
Our president has increased enforcement of immigration laws well beyond what any other president has ever done, and certainly more than George W. Bush. That has resulted in more criminal illegal immigrants being deported than at any other time in our history. We are all safer because of his actions.
The people affected by this order will be granted only work permits. They will not become citizens under this order. They will not be able to vote. They do not insult Mr. Feher’s great grandfather, nor are they "discounting" the citizenship procedures. They were victims of their parents’ illegal actions.
Dan Wesley
Lake Havasu City, Ariz.
Deport the kids
To the editor:
The Obama administration’s recent decision not to seek deportation of younger illegal immigrants, and proposals such as the DREAM Act, reveal that most Americans are not good at math.
The correct policy is to target on a priority basis for deportation younger illegal immigrants. This will cause their parents to leave the country voluntarily or help identify them for deportation purposes – possibly a 3-for-the-price-of-1 deal.
The rhetoric about "here through no fault of their own" is nonsense. "Fault" is irrelevant to the immigration issue. The elements are: 1) presence in the country; and 2) either here with legal permission or not.
You will occasionally see media accounts about some undocumented immigrant who got an advanced degree from UCLA, and who now cannot work. These are written to arouse sympathy. My question: What is a public university such as UCLA doing denying a seat to a citizen in favor of an illegal immigrant?
The toll on public resources such as schools and hospitals caused by illegal immigration is real. Unfortunately, certain industries (agriculture, hotels, restaurants, construction) like the idea of an unlimited pool of low-wage labor.
The citizens of this country need to decide if we are going to officially tolerate illegal immigration, or if there is going to be a serious effort to enforce the law. Voting is in November.
Richard C. Sipan
Las Vegas
