Friday, June 19, 2009

Is there a Difference between Legal and Illegal Immigrants?


By Tom Kando

A while back, the Sacramento Bee published a letter by Brian Donohue “Think your Ancestors Came Here Legally?” The letter basically condones current illegal immigration by reminding us that many of Americans’ ancestors also came illegally.
As a legal immigrant, let me rebut this:
True, until the 20th century, immigration was less restricted. However, Donohue’s use of history is arbitrary and self-serving: At least since World War II, i.e. over the past three generations, the distinction between legal and illegal immigration has been very real, as it should be.

I speak from personal experience. I am one of those “less desirable” Eastern European immigrants. Born in Hungary, I waited five years for the right to move to America and to obtain a green card, and another five years for my citizenship.

I know many people who come to America on temporary visitors’ or workers’ visas - for example Fulbright students and professors - and who must then leave the country once their visas have expired. And they do, even though many would love to stay.

Today, millions of visitors to America obey the law. To say that this is silly and that lawlessness is okay, because there was so much of it in the past, is like arguing that since we had slavery until 1865, we shouldn’t worry about it too much now.

Plus, there is a strong ecological and demographic argument against unfettered immigration: America is filling up fast. Sure, the country could continue to receive the world’s huddled masses, but at what cost to its environment?

I realize how phony I sound - “I’m in, so now close the gates and keep the riffraff out.” But that’s irrelevant to my arguments.leave comment here