Distorting the Immigration Debate

By Michael Medved
Beyond the News

The shrill immigration debate features distortions on both sides. Pro-immigration forces suggest all illegals are hard-working and decent, while anti-immigrant demagogues imply that they're all drug dealers and welfare chiselers.

The truth, of course, is mixed, so any policy treating all immigrants the same is idiotic. It's senseless to consider blanket amnesty, or to talk about mass deportation of the best along with the worst.

A constructive policy must draw distinctions among individuals, and that's what reform proposals by President Bush are designed to do. If undocumented workers can pass a background check--proving they've worked consistently since arrival, stayed out of trouble and mastered the English language--and if they admit guilt for illegal entry and pay a fine, they can begin a six year process culminating in legal residency.

This allows the best of the undocumented to work toward legalization, while targeting the worst for quick deportation--making the clear distinctions necessary for any sane immigration policy.