News
I am definitely your standard bleeding-heart liberal when it comes to the topic of immigration. I'm well informed about the issue, and understand the many sides of the issue, but my bottom line is the human factor. I know, without a doubt, that if I were living outside the United States, I'd want in, and I'd do just about anything to get here. If I believe in the Golden Rule—if I believe that I should treat immigrants as I'd want to be treated—then I can't be supportive of any aspect of the current immigration policies in this country. I think our immigration policies are inhumane and stupid—the worst possible combination of characteristics. We should be ashamed.
So, I'm looking forward to reading the report from the University of Denver Strategic Issues Panel on Immigration, which will be released on Dec. 9, 2009. After reading the excellent article in last Sunday's Denver Post Perspectives section, by Jim Griesemer, I have a sense of hope, and I haven't felt hopeful on the immigration issue for a long time.
Have you seen the letter going around on the Internet, attributed to Bill Cosby, which lists his campaign platform for a write-in presidential candidacy in 2010? I hope Cosby didn't write it, but I haven't checked that out—I'm afraid maybe he DID write it. Anyway, it is, amongst other belligerent and stupid things, an immigrant-o-phobic diatribe, so I was really disappointed. He panders to the worst of us, instead of encouraging our best, and I'm surprised.
Then Washington Post columnist Reuben Navarette does an article in which he urges undocumented immigrants from Mexico to go home. He took me by surprise, too, but only because I almost agreed with him. In a way, I think he has a good point—Mexico needs its people. You know, why hasn't the Catholic Church in Mexico put together programs to keep people home, and employed? It's clear that the government won't do it, and the Church has more money and power. They've helped keep Mexico poor—why not help them toward prosperity? The Catholic Church needs a project to upgrade its image as hypocritical and indifferent. Fixing Mexico would be a good project. Anyway. I don't want to SEND people “home” who don't want to go back, but it can't be good for Mexico to have so many families torn apart like this. It is dreadful that Mexico is in the mess that it is, politically and economically—I can't think of a better country to live next door to. They need a middle-class, and all their potential for a middle-class is living in the US.
People—human beings—are the most important resource in any successful country. Because we are a country of immigrants, we've had the people power AND genius to be able to achieve on a scale never seen before. Knowing that, I don't understand why there's still such a powerful anti-immigrant undercurrent in this country—it's so self-defeating. Is it one of those weird psychological things where we hate the things we are?
OK—back to the Strategic Issues Panel on Immigration report. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall during the year of in-depth research that the panel did—I wish I'd been there for those seminars. The report contains 25 recommendations, which altogether propose major reforms in US immigration policy. As I read Griesemer's article, I was impressed by the thoroughness, and thoughtfulness, of the work. It's about time.
Notable observations: “Conflicting priorities are the nemesis of good public policy. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in our own nation's immigration policy, which is a tangled web of statutory and administrative approaches patched together over many years. It is impossible to overstate the byzantine complexity of the current immigration system. The present system is unpredictable and opaque, with processing backlogs that almost defy imagination. The US needs a new immigration system that is supportive of national goals, responsive to rapidly changing economic conditions, produces predictable outcomes, and is vastly simplified.”
Griesemer says, “An effective immigration policy is about applying enlightened self-interest to capture a national opportunity.” Amen.
Grand Junction resident Judith Curtis-Mardon also writes a the popular “Bossy Gardener” column weekly for the Grand Junction Free Press Home Sweet Home section.
So, I'm looking forward to reading the report from the University of Denver Strategic Issues Panel on Immigration, which will be released on Dec. 9, 2009. After reading the excellent article in last Sunday's Denver Post Perspectives section, by Jim Griesemer, I have a sense of hope, and I haven't felt hopeful on the immigration issue for a long time.
Have you seen the letter going around on the Internet, attributed to Bill Cosby, which lists his campaign platform for a write-in presidential candidacy in 2010? I hope Cosby didn't write it, but I haven't checked that out—I'm afraid maybe he DID write it. Anyway, it is, amongst other belligerent and stupid things, an immigrant-o-phobic diatribe, so I was really disappointed. He panders to the worst of us, instead of encouraging our best, and I'm surprised.
Then Washington Post columnist Reuben Navarette does an article in which he urges undocumented immigrants from Mexico to go home. He took me by surprise, too, but only because I almost agreed with him. In a way, I think he has a good point—Mexico needs its people. You know, why hasn't the Catholic Church in Mexico put together programs to keep people home, and employed? It's clear that the government won't do it, and the Church has more money and power. They've helped keep Mexico poor—why not help them toward prosperity? The Catholic Church needs a project to upgrade its image as hypocritical and indifferent. Fixing Mexico would be a good project. Anyway. I don't want to SEND people “home” who don't want to go back, but it can't be good for Mexico to have so many families torn apart like this. It is dreadful that Mexico is in the mess that it is, politically and economically—I can't think of a better country to live next door to. They need a middle-class, and all their potential for a middle-class is living in the US.
People—human beings—are the most important resource in any successful country. Because we are a country of immigrants, we've had the people power AND genius to be able to achieve on a scale never seen before. Knowing that, I don't understand why there's still such a powerful anti-immigrant undercurrent in this country—it's so self-defeating. Is it one of those weird psychological things where we hate the things we are?
OK—back to the Strategic Issues Panel on Immigration report. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall during the year of in-depth research that the panel did—I wish I'd been there for those seminars. The report contains 25 recommendations, which altogether propose major reforms in US immigration policy. As I read Griesemer's article, I was impressed by the thoroughness, and thoughtfulness, of the work. It's about time.
Notable observations: “Conflicting priorities are the nemesis of good public policy. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in our own nation's immigration policy, which is a tangled web of statutory and administrative approaches patched together over many years. It is impossible to overstate the byzantine complexity of the current immigration system. The present system is unpredictable and opaque, with processing backlogs that almost defy imagination. The US needs a new immigration system that is supportive of national goals, responsive to rapidly changing economic conditions, produces predictable outcomes, and is vastly simplified.”
Griesemer says, “An effective immigration policy is about applying enlightened self-interest to capture a national opportunity.” Amen.
Grand Junction resident Judith Curtis-Mardon also writes a the popular “Bossy Gardener” column weekly for the Grand Junction Free Press Home Sweet Home section.
