Is it immigration policy, or is it racism?

As reported here, some people are saying that the House immigration bill making it a felony to be here illegally is racist.

Erin Texeira of the AP starts her article with this forebodingly toned sentence, "As the fight over immigration reform drags on, an ominous undercurrent to the debate -- racism -- is becoming more pronounced." Perhaps it is with the fringe-hate groups, but not among thinking Americans and legal immigrants, who see illegal immigration as a threat to our National security, and our way of life.

"From muttered ethnic slurs to violent attacks, activists say an anti-immigrant backlash seems to be growing in America's neighborhoods and workplaces." Which absolutely proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that those opposed to illegal immigration are - gasp! - 'racists', rather than people who are concerned about the welfare of the our Nation. I don't think so.

"Some activists say the House of Representatives started it." Did not. Did too. Did too. Did too! Sounds like little kids on the playground, arguing over who did what to whom, with the attendant finger pointing. What the House of Representatives did was iterate what has been on the minds of the American people for a long time, namely, that those who are here illegally ought to be punished for breaking the law!

"When lawmakers passed a bill in December that would make illegal immigrants felons, many believed that was a swipe at Latinos, who make up 80 percent of the nation's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants. Former President Carter has said the bill had "racist overtones," and that feeling helped push more than 1 million demonstrators to attend street rallies in recent months." No, that wasn't a "swipe at Latinos", even though Latinos do make up the vast majority of those who are here illegally (probably due to the fact that Mexico and the US share a rather long border, making it easy for Latinos to enter illegally, don't you think?). What it aims at is ALL of the people here illegally, no matter what the peanut farmer from Georgia says it is, and those people demonstrated against the bill because, if signed into law, they knew they would be branded as criminals, and to gain 'sympathy for their plight', they threw out the race card.

"Some reacted the same way after the Senate passed an amendment to its immigration bill last month that declared English the national language. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, called that "racist" and "divisive."" No, Senator, making English the National Language isn't 'racist' or 'divisive', it's pragmatic and practical. Look at China. They have several different dialects that people speak there, but their government knew that if they didn't declare one to be their national language, things would degenerate into an impossible mess, with people being unable to communicate freely and efficiently, and at the time, that move was hailed as being pragmatic and practical. But when we do the same thing here, it is called 'racist' and 'divisive'? "The amendment's sponsor, Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe, called Reid's statements "ridiculous."" I agree.

"Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., who wrote much of the House bill, issued a study on six countries' immigration policies and found that five -- including Mexico -- make illegal entry into their nation a criminal offense." Which is as it should be, and is here, but only at the misdemeanor level, and rarely, if ever enforced except in the 'catch and release' manner; the House bill would elevate that to felony status, with provisions for prosecution.

Why is that wrong? Because " ... Luis Valenzuela, of the Long Island Immigration Alliance in New York, said the measures feel hostile to many immigrants. The bills "set (an) overall climate which is quite racist," he said. "That elicits action by extremists."" The measures should feel 'hostile' to those who are here illegally, because they are already breaking existing laws, which the House bill will strengthen.

To further bolster the 'racist' angle, Ms. Texeira cites a few random, isolated incidents of whites assaulting Latinos near Houston and on Long Island, NY. While I do not condone any assaults on anyone, these were made by extremist wing-nuts, not by your average American who is concerned about border security, and yet that is the very impression that Ms. Texeira wants you to have.

"Sociologist Gonzalo Santos of California State University-Bakersfield said immigration is just the latest example of social policy issues taking on racial overtones in America.

"People talk about immigration as if race doesn't matter, saying, 'No, I don't have anything against immigrants or Mexicans, it's just the illegal part of it I don't like.' But those are code words," he said. "We experience race in this country through issues like welfare policy, anti-poverty programs and now immigration."" Code words? Code words? When it comes to immigration, I have absolutely nothing against those who wants to come here legally. In fact, I welcome them with open arms. But I do take exception to those who come here illegally, Mr. Santos. Race has nothing to do with it! Basically, it appears that Mr. Santos sees no distinction between 'legal' and 'illegal', just that it mainly involves Latinos.

"Cecilia Munoz of the National Council of La Raza said it's important for immigration advocates not to slip into bias themselves.", and says, ""The assumption is that we believe everybody who disagrees with us in this debate must be a racist but that's absolutely false," Munoz said. "But we are feeling the effects of what can only be described as racism and hatred."" [Emphasis mine] Ms. Munoz is correct when she states that immigration advocates must not slip into bias themselves and make the assumption that everyone who disagrees with them is a racist. Ms. Munoz also said that in the past two months, they have received letters containing ethnic slurs, and that she has come under personal attack, being called a 'wetback' and the 'N' word, which is unfortunate and disgraceful. But, again, this has been done by the extremist wing-nuts out there, and not by your average American who is concerned about people coming here illegally.

Policy designed to stem the tide of people coming here illegally may seem, on the face of it, to be racist in nature, aimed specifically against Latinos, but if you look at it dispassionately, you will see that is hardly the case. It isn't aimed at a specific ethnic group, but rather, at a specific group engaged in criminal behavior, and that group happens to be those people who are here illegally.