Skip to content
A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Guest Commentary: THE DISHONEST DEBATE: The Cable News Immigration Debate by Monty Berns

THE DISHONEST DEBATE: The Cable News Immigration Debate by Monty Berns

Watching cable news one might assume that the immigration debate is being fought between those trying to protect us from criminals and those in favor of open border anarchy. Primetime talk show hosts like Lou Dobbs or Bill O’ Reilly base large segments of their respective shows highlighting isolated illegal immigrant crime. Then when it is argued that these incidents are being used to vilify an entire group of people, O’ Reilly or Dobbs angrily reply that those concerned with human rights are open border anarchists who welcome criminals and drunks to our country. Instead of honestly debating a practical approach to our immigration quagmire, this vicious cycle has, frustratingly, become the norm of our national immigration debate. In reality the sticking point of immigration reform is the treatment of the existing 12 million illegal immigrants already living in the country. There are those who are dishonestly pushing for a cruel enforcement only approach. On the other hand, are those who realize that immigration is not a black and white issue and recognize the human factor involved. Both groups actually agree that our current immigration quagmire is largely the fault of years of administrative neglect. Principally through a lack of enforcement we turned a blind eye so that business, small and large, had access to an endless supply of cheap labor. We left the door open, we shouted over the fence for those hardworking people and they came in numbers. So we let them work, let them bring over their families and we turned the other way when it came to enforcement. Surely any reasonable person would agree that to deport a hard working person who has settled and lived here for many years would be inhumane? Many illegals have been here so long and are so rooted in our society that deportation or loss of employment might truly be catastrophic to them. And it is this human factor that the O’ Reilly, Dobbs, Tancredo mob are attempting to obscure. They dishonestly use individual instances of illegal immigrant crime to justify an enforcement only crackdown on all illegals. Drunk driving, child molestation and other sordid crimes are universal problems and should NEVER be used as reason to target a general group of people. The goal behind this tactic is to avoid, at all costs, dealing with our existing illegal immigrant population in a fair & humane way. In Germany in the 30’s the Nazi propaganda machine highlighted specific isolated instances of universal crimes committed by Jews with the goal of demonizing the entire Jewish population. Since the majority of Germans were led to believe that Jews were a danger & a burden to society it was surprisingly easy for the Nazis to brutally crackdown on the entire jewish population. Even though this Nazi Germany correlation is extreme I have no doubt that the intention of these enforcement only advocates is similar in that they also use isolated instances of universal crime/behavior to promote the harsh unfair enforcement of an entire group of people. And it is the context in which these crimes are discussed which confirms their deceptive heartless intentions. It seems that the subject of comprehensive reform is hardly ever addressed when these crimes are highlighted. Instead, the debate is manipulated into a pro/anti crime prevention argument. Well guess what…. EVERY SANE PERSON WANTS TO PREVENT CRIME & RESTRICT CRIMINALS ENTERING OUR COUNTRY! Comprehensive reform actually addresses the very concerns of which these public figures complain. Strict screening, harsh workplace enforcement and better border security will make sure criminals are dealt with appropriately as well as severely curtail future illegal immigration. At the same time comprehensive reform addresses our basic humanitarian concerns. People who have been here for many years will be treated fairly. Not surprisingly, according to a field poll released Tuesday over 80% of Californians support a legalization plan for many, together with stricter enforcement. O’ Reilly might claim that his ‘sanctuary’ city crusade targets criminals but, in reality, this type of rhetoric is a blatant call for immediate catch one & all enforcement measures. One would think that these public figures, who claim to represent the majority of Americans, would instead call for immediate comprehensive reform(insert crickets sound effect please)!

Source of poll: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/04/10/state/n130112D56.DTL&type=politics

KJ