Statement Of Sen. Patrick
Leahy,
Ranking Member, Judiciary Committee,
Hearing On Examining The Need For Comprehensive Immigration
Reform, Part II
July 12, 2006
I am disappointed that in
recent weeks we have seen election-year politics diminish
the hard work the Senate has done to find a comprehensive
solution to the nation’s immigration problem. The Senate
worked hard to create a bipartisan bill that delivered fair
and comprehensive reforms. Since its passage we have seen
the Republican Congress reject efforts to move forward and
make progress, despite the efforts of the Senate Democratic
leader to get the matter to conference. Instead of progress
toward legislation we see a series of after-the-fact
hearings. A few, like the one held by the Senate Armed
Services Committee this week and the Chairman’s field
hearing last week contribute to the record supporting the
Senate bill. Others seem intended to do nothing more than
inflame the passions of anti-immigrant activists and attempt
to doom any chance of progress towards a comprehensive
solution.
The lines that have been drawn
by opponents to comprehensive legislation are clear: The
anti-immigrant faction opposes a fair and comprehensive
approach. They abhor establishing a pathway to earned
citizenship. Apparently they believe this anti-immigrant
position will help them in the upcoming elections. I hope
not. I think we reject the best of America
and our values when we refuse to recognize all that
immigrants bring and mean to this country. I hope that fear
and intolerance are not a winning political strategy.
It is unrealistic to think
that we can apprehend and deport every undocumented
individual the Bush-Cheney Administration has allowed into
the United States. The reality is that our
economy depends upon the labor of foreign workers. Small
and large business owners have told us this, the Mayor of
the one of the largest cities in the world—who is no
stranger to economic success—has told us this, and labor
unions have told us this.
The Wall
Street Journal editorial board recently
wrote that the choice—framed by immigration opponents as a
choice between “amnesty” or border security—is a false one.
It is false because we can have border security at the same
time we bring out of the shadows and assimilate individuals
who are hard working, honest people contributing to our
economy.
I do not often agree with
The Wall Street Journal
editorial board, but in this case we do agree.
When border patrol agents are not spending time and
resources apprehending people coming here to work, they can
focus on preventing the true threats to our national
security. I believe there is real merit to the President’s
argument that if we increase the opportunity to come to the
United States legally, we will reduce the
demand for illegal entry.
It is disheartening to watch
this debate devolve into a discourse with tinges of
intolerance for those who come as immigrants. We are a
welcoming, diverse country built and enriched by
immigrants. Isolating ourselves, and turning this country
into a police state is not the way our Nation will remain
the beacon of freedom and prosperity it has always been.
Many decry a realistic
immigration policy as the downfall of our unique American
culture and way of life. In these arguments, I hear the
echoes of those who resisted women finally obtaining the
right to vote and when the modern civil rights movement
helped end Jim Crowism. We are an inclusive society that
draws strength from diversity and believes in equality.
The opposition to providing
bilingual ballots to bilingual American citizens, who are
vested with the right to vote, is a particularly troubling
aspect of this debate. A recent
Washington Post
editorial pointed out the obvious: when more eligible voters
can make an informed and intelligent choice in voting, our
democracy benefits from their participation. Section 203’s
guarantee of equality is not just for immigrants but for
Native Americans and those who have long been citizens. The
reality is that people who come to the United
States embrace the English language along with patriotism.
Immigrants do not deserve or need the legal restrictions
sought by the English-only crowd. And America loses when we
discriminate on the basis of national origin or language.
Let us have faith in our
traditional values and show the strength and purpose needed
to accomplish the comprehensive reform we need. Our
democracy and free markets can adapt. We should not fear
these changes. We should embrace the cultural and economic
opportunities that change will bring. Most importantly,
along with a comprehensive policy will come better border
security. When government agencies can identify and account
for those who are here, and those who are crossing the
border, we will be more secure as a result of that
knowledge. We know well that no matter how much effort we
pour into locking up our border, those who desire to come to
the United States will find a way, which in
turn will lead to more people in the shadows of society,
more deaths in our deserts, and more trafficking in human
beings.
It is critical that President
Bush make good on his commitment to support the Senate’s
work. Without his active support and his steadfast
dedication, the congressional Republican efforts to derail
comprehensive reform will succeed. Many conservative
commentators have praised the President for his “political
courage.” I hope the President will remain true to his
pledge to support comprehensive reform our immigration
laws.
# # # # #