When the Archdiocese of Los Angeles and the AHA line up to question you, what should you think?

The current HR4437 making its way through committee in the house is a real piece of work, if I understand the coverage correctly, giving into paranoia and alarmism to again overextend the government's work. Yes, it may be true that immigration is a topic that should be discussed and debated, especially as a nation of immigrants and workers, legitimate (as my family was) and illegitimate we are dependent upon in the immigrant experience.

But to take draconian action against those who would treat their fellow human as human beings... is not the government's best business.

A fine pullquote from the AHA letter:

There is no need for such overreaching language to assure the prosecution of those who intentionally engage in smuggling activities.

This situation makes for a comparative to the gun or wiretapping laws (do we need more laws, or just better understanding and enforcement of the laws which presently exist?) that continue to inspire discussion. It's been four years for any broad opposition to arise to the ongoing culture of fear; it's optimistic to think this is a tipping point we're in now (what is the Dubai reaction if not misplaced fear), but one tries to lean toward the optimistic.

The bill itself (browseable from Thomas here) makes for somewhat numbing reading - but we're planning on building over 600 miles of fencing (hello government contracts!) along our southern border, and looking at the feasibility of fencing along our northern border, per sections 1002/1003. And many other biometric and technological palliatives to social problems.

Posted by esinclai at March 09, 2006 07:11 AM |