Just and Holy Principles

Jason Chaffetz

Yesterday, I attended a debate between Utah 3rd congressional district candidates Jason Chaffetz (R) and Bennion Spencer (D) at the Sutherland Institute in downtown Salt Lake City. The most interesting, and intense, part of the debate was when Chaffetz pointed at Spencer and demanded an apology for “mischaracterizing” his position on immigration.

Spencer had apparently said that Chaffetz wants to “lock people up in razor-wire ringed tent cities because of their ethnicities.” Chaffetz asserts that though he did suggest locking up illegal immigrants who commit crimes or those who are awaiting deportation, ethnicity had nothing to do with it. Ethnicity or not, Chaffetz’s iron fist approach to immigration is troubling.

I think I agree with Chaffetz on most issues but not on immigration. His what-part-of-illegal-don’t-you-understand rule-of-law-is-supreme we-don’t-want-those-people-here attitude now prevails among most “conservatives.”

Shortly after the debate, I noticed another example of this attitude on Fox News. The anchor was reporting that three people had been killed in an auto accident in Colorado and that the driver was an illegal alien who had “been arrested more than a dozen times.” He informed viewers that this tragedy never would have happened had this alien not entered the U.S. illegally. The reporter’s logic is faulty.

True, had the driver not been in the U.S. the accident would not have happened, but his illegal status had nothing to do with it. U.S. citizens get into accidents every day. Some U.S. citizens have committed dozens of crimes and should be in prison but are not; they also continue to commit crimes. Enforcers of the law should do their best to keep all serious criminals behind bars regardless of their citizenship status. The driver didn’t commit this heinous crime because he’s an illegal immigrant, he did it because he regularly commits crimes far more serious than crossing the border without permission.

We need to distinguish, both in our own minds and in public policy, between illegal immigrants who are otherwise law-abiding citizens and those who commit serious crimes. Those who commit crimes like rape, robbery, fraud, and murder should be deported. Illegal immigrants who are people of good will–those who come for a better life and make positive contributions to society–should be treated as human beings, not criminals or objects.

One common misperception about illegal immigrants is that they commit far more crimes than citizens do. A recent Sutherland Institute report called “Utah’s Citizens and Illegal Immigrants: Side-By-Side” reveals that in Utah from 2005-2007 the proportion of illegal immigrants in Utah grew by .4 percentage points whereas the proportion of illegal immigrants in state prisons grew by only .1 points. Only 5.3% of all inmates in state prisons are illegal immigrants.

Illegal immigrants are good people just like most citizens, and we should treat them as such. There are important immigration issues that we need to address as a nation, states, and communities. But in the meantime, and always, we should treat every person, no matter their legal status, and especially those of good will, as human beings, neighbors, and friends.

What do you think?

I now have a Master of Public Policy degree and start a new job in June. I’ll be a policy analyst at the Sutherland Institute in Salt Lake City, Utah. Sutherland is a public policy think tank that focuses on Utah issues. I believe strongly in its conservative governing principles and am excited to support them. I may address Utah issues more often now but most will be applicable to other states and the federal government.

More compassion for immigrants
For instance, the Sutherland Institute recently published a unique conservative position on immigration. Most self-proclaimed conservatives support a no-nonsense, punitive approach to illegal immigration. They demand that government officials find, arrest, and deport all illegal immigrants. This position rightly supports upholding the rule of law but is unrealistic. It is logistically impossible to deport millions of immigrants from the U.S. to their native countries, and it is also very harsh.

States are in a difficult situation. The federal government makes and is supposed to enforce immigration laws. But since the feds do not properly enforce immigration laws, states must decide how to treat illegal immigrants residing in their jurisdiction. Since Utah can do little to enforce federal laws, Sutherland advocates treating illegal immigrants already living in Utah with more compassion than is typical.

The Sutherland approach
Most illegal immigrants are good people who come to the U.S. to help their families survive poverty. Most make positive contributions to society. We should help these people integrate themselves into our communities as we would a legal immigrant.

It is important to understand that some laws seek to prevent actions that are wrong in themselves (E.g. theft, assault, fraud), whereas other laws prevent actions that are wrong only because the law prohibits them (E.g. speeding, paying taxes) (see difference between malum prohibitum and malum in se). For example, theft is wrong whether or not the law prohibits it, whereas failing to pay taxes is not wrong unless government prohibits it. Immigration laws fall into the second category.

Crossing the U.S. border is not inherently wrong. It is wrong to do so if U.S. law prohibits it, but disobeying an immigration law to help your family survive is far less severe than, say, robbing a bank for survival. Illegal immigrants who break more serious laws should be prosecuted and deported, but we should treat those who are otherwise law-abiding citizens with more compassion.

I agree with Sutherland’s position, and not just because I’ll be working there. It’s hard to imagine deporting my neighbor or someone I home teach for illegally crossing the border, especially when they do so only hoping for a brighter future. They should probably make some sort of retribution for not honoring federal immigration laws, but it should be minor.

For practical reasons, the feds might want to stem the heavy flow of illegal immigration through better border control, but when any good person arrives among us and is an otherwise law abiding citizen, we should open our arms to them and help them integrate into our communities. Please go to the links below to learn more.

Sutherland Position Statement
Sutherland Executive Summary
Sutherland Full Essay
LDS Church urges more compassion for immigrants

What do you think?

Principle: Rule of Law

Article: Reuters: Immigrants start new round of demonstrations

Article Summary: On Friday, pro-immigration activists protested in the streets of Chicago. In recent months, hundreds of thousands of such protesters have been walking the streets of large U.S. cities in hopes of capturing the attention of Congress and President Bush. Views on immigration vary within the Democratic and Republican parties, and an immigration bill was stalled in Congress before the summer recess. Activists on both sides of the issue are aiming to prepare voters to scrutinize candidates’ immigration stances in this fall’s election.

My Thoughts: Let’s begin with two important observations: 1) Has anyone else noticed a pattern in the names we give to illegal immigrants? I heard David Kupelian, a widely read columnist, point out that they used to be called “illegal aliens” because they are here illegally and an alien is a foreigner living in another country unlawfully. The name then transformed to “illegal immigrants” because we didn’t want to call humans “aliens.” With time, we started using other euphemisms such as “undocumented workers” and “guest workers,” as if they innocently showed up with a lunch pail ready to work for a few days. Interesting how names evolve.

2) Isn’t it ironic that thousands of the people protesting for the rights of illegal immigrants are actually illegal immigrants themselves? If I or any other American trespassed on the White House lawn demanding welfare payments, higher wages, and education for my children, I’d be jumped immediately by the Secret Service and locked up in a federal penitentiary. Why don’t law enforcers seem to mind all the illegal immigrants’ protesting? This question brings us to one of the core challenges with illegal immigration: the massive number of immigrants crossing our border illegally.

The Office of Immigration Statistics in the Department of Homeland Security estimates that from 2000-2004 an average of 408,000 immigrants crossed our borders illegally bringing the total illegal immigrant population to 10.5 million. (see stats) What do we do with all these people who are breaking the law but also have specific needs? The magnitude of this group may require a solution different from that of a few thousand people.

Though I’ve been in Los Angeles for a very short time, I’ve quickly learned what an impact illegal immigration is making in our country. While driving through several L.A. neighborhoods this weekend, I felt like I was in Mexico. The names of stores and signs in their windows were all in Spanish, and in the restaurant where I ate they didn’t speak English. Now, I love Latino people, as well as their tacos, and I’m not assuming that all or even most of those people are here illegally, but the scope of immigration is clearly reaching unsustainable levels.

The merits of the debate on whether the Latino influence in the U.S. is beneficial or detrimental to our society are valid. Also, whether here legally or not, we have a duty to treat these people and their families as human beings and look out for their well-being. However, I will leave that debate, and many other important debates pertinent to immigration for another forum. The main issue is not whether or not these illegal immigrants help or harm our nation or how we should deal with those already here, but the fact that they shouldn’t even be here and how we can prevent more from crossing the border. That brings us to the principle of the Rule of Law

The principle of the Rule of Law says that the laws of a sovereign nation, established using authorized procedures, must be upheld by the systems, institutions, practices, and people of a nation, i.e. obey the law or suffer the consequences. The less the law is respected, the more people believe they can get away with breaking the law until such acts can potentially result in anarchy.

Now, if you think I’m being harsh on illegal immigrants, let’s turn the tables for a minute. I can’t blame a young, poor father in Mexico, whose greatest desire is to support his family, for sneaking across the border to work and send money home. Let’s clean the inner vessel before working on the outer. It’s our own fault for giving these poor people an incentive to come here. The key to solving the illegal immigration problem is simply to enforce existing laws that prohibit American employers from hiring illegal residents. Yes, the companies would have to find Americans to fill those jobs and pay them higher wages, but no immigrant, in their right mind, would risk their life to cross the border if they knew their chances of getting hired were slim to none.

I also agree with the idea, as proposed to me by Joe Meservy, to require employers who hire illegal immigrants to bear the costs of deporting those immigrants to their countries of origin. This plan would remove the incentive for people to come illegally and would force those not upholding the Rule of Law to defray the costs of deportation. By simply enforcing the Rule of Law, though it be a daunting task, we will gradually regain control of our Southern border and reestablish respect for the immigration laws of our country.

What do you think?