|
Heritage
Foundation
We’ve Seen the Effect of
“Amnesty” Before
By
Ed Meese
May
17, 2013
Experts
can’t always predict exactly how public policy will affect
the nation, despite our best efforts. But when it comes to immigration
policy,
we have tried many of the types of reforms advocated by today’s Gang of
Eight—so we should consider the effects these reforms had in the past.
In
the mid-’80s, many Members of Congress advocated amnesty for
long-settled illegal immigrants. President Reagan considered it
reasonable to
adjust the status of what was then a relatively small population, and
as his
attorney general, I supported his decision.
The
path to citizenship was not automatic. Immigrants had to pay
application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics,
pass a
medical exam, and register for military selective service. Those with
convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible.
This
should sound familiar, as it’s quite close to the path and
provisions set forth by the Gang of Eight.
Today
they call it a “roadmap to citizenship.” Ronald Reagan
called it “amnesty.” And he was right.
The
1986 reform did not solve our immigration problem—in fact, the
population of illegal immigrants has nearly quadrupled since that
“comprehensive” bill.
Why
didn’t it work? Well, one reason is that everything else the
1986 bill promised—from border security to law enforcement—was to come
later.
It never did. Only amnesty prevailed, and that encouraged more illegal
immigration.
Today,
we have many of the same needs we did then. We need to work
on better securing our border. We need to modernize our legal
immigration
system, including effective temporary worker programs. And we need
strong
enforcement of the laws we already have, including those that enforce
immigration policies in the workplace…
Read
the rest of the article at the Heritage Foundation
|
