Will There Be Progress On US Border Security?

Yesterday (January 28, 2013), members of the Senate announced an immigration reform plan that was constructed by and supported by a clearly bipartisan group.  That is a major milestone in a debate that has divided our nation for decades.

There are many among my conservative fellows who are intransigent and, to my way of thinking, irrational in their desires regarding the specific details of a solution to the problem of illegal immigrants in the US.  Many will be dissatisfied with the plan outlined by the Senate “gang of eight” yesterday, primarily because they will be unsatisfied with anything short of a plan to locate and deport every person who is in this country illegally. 

I have arrived at the conclusion that a plan to deport every single illegal alien in this country is at the very least impractical.  Put aside the legitimate point that every illegal immigrant in the country is by definition a criminal, having broken US law the moment that they set foot in this country.  We could discuss at great length the relative weight of that crime in the spectrum of criminal activity in the US, as we have discussed it at great length for many years.  For the moment, I want to put that debate in perspective with a little bit of simple math.  As of today, the population of the United States is slightly in excess of 315 million.  In all of the discussions of illegal immigrants, it is estimated that approximately 11 million of those people are in the country illegally.  Some suggest it is much higher, but those numbers would just make my point all the more clear.  A little simple math reveals that 3.5 of every 100 residents of the United States of America are here illegally.  Deporting 3.5% of our population is not a practical solution.

To put the numbers in perspective, deporting all of the illegal immigrants in the country would be equivalent to deporting the entire population of Ohio.  Or, to use the example of less populous states, it would be like deporting the entire populations of eleven states and the District of Columbia:  Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Montana, Delaware, South Dakota, Alaska, North Dakota, the District of Columbia, Vermont, and Wyoming. 

With those numbers in mind, it becomes clear that deportation is not the solution.  Some plan of assimilation must be found and established as law. 

As major as the problem presented by sheer numbers is, the fiscal implications of any proposal are far greater.  However, that is a not the topic of this post.

It is too early to jump on the bandwagon either for or against the Senate proposal.  We haven’t seen the proposed legislation.  But it is still a positive step that there is a truly bipartisan plan under consideration.  What we do know is that the first step in the plan outlined yesterday is to secure our borders.  It would appear that a significant majority of Americans agree on that first step.  Any other proposed steps toward immigration reform are meaningless if there is no border security.

A parting thought on border security: 

 

When we talk of border security, almost everyone immediately thinks of our border with Mexico.  That border is 1,951 miles long and is manned by approximately 11,000 border patrol agents.  Allowing for administrative personnel and off-duty personnel, there would be less than 2,000 agents on duty at any point in time – with many of them operating well inside the border, rather than on the border.  Contrast that with our border with Canada.  Our border with Canada is almost 4,000 miles long, with approximately 1,000 agents assigned to enforcement at that border.  Making the same allowance for administrative and off-duty personnel, that would leave less than 250 agents on duty to enforce border security on a 4,000 mile border.  Fortunately, on that border we also have an effective Canadian force (the RCMP) dedicated to border security on their side of the border.  A consistently overlooked “border” of the US is represented by the waters surrounding Florida.  I will pretty much overlook it at this time, too, although I know it deserves far more attention.

With that information in mind, which border might present more danger to the US?  More on that in a later post.

A Word About Egypt

I want to start out by saying that I believe religious liberty (for people of ANY faith or NO faith) should be a basic premise of any culture. 

I am a Christian.  I believe deeply what Jesus Christ said in John 14:6 – “I am the way and the truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.”  Those who do not follow Christ have every right to believe as they do, but as a Christian, I want all who do not follow Christ to have every opportunity to do so – and their misdirected faith is a source of sadness to me, rather than anger.  As a Christian, my primary function in life is to spread the good news of the salvation brought by Jesus, not to drive non-believers away from it.

With that said, I want to emphasize that non-belief should be respected and tolerated, not supported.  This subject is brought to mind by a news item that I read today.  In Egypt, a woman and her seven children have been sentenced to 15 years in prison for their conversion to Christianity.

Nadia Mohamed Ali was raised as a Christian.  She converted to Islam 23 years ago when she married Mohamed Abdel-Wahhab Mustafa, a Muslim.  After his death, she decided to convert back to Christianity.  It is that action that precipitated the sentence against her and her children.  As a Christian, I could succumb to the temptation to question her faith and her religious conviction – whether to Christianity or to Islam.  But the Bible clearly teaches me that the relationship between any individual and God is judged only by God – so I will leave it where it belongs.

My real issue in this story is something else.  Something not directly involved in the story.

The United States government has, currently does, and clearly plans to continue to send aid to the Egyptian government.  Beyond any cash aid, the US is scheduled to start deliveries later this month (January, 2013) of 10 F-16 fighter jets and 200 Abrams tanks.  That is about $213 million in military aid to a country that has no interest in religious liberty.  The deal was made some time ago – when Hosni Mubarak was President of Egypt.  Since it was approved by Congress at that time, it can only be withdrawn by the President.  Obama has shown no interest in rescinding the aid, thought, even though it is now destined to go to a regime headed by Mohamed Morsi, who in 2010 said of Jews and Israelis that they were “Descendents of Apes and Pigs” and “Bloodsuckers.”

To those that would say it is not the function of the United States to dictate the policies of other governments, I would respond with complete agreement.  I would further respond, though, that it is not the function of the United States to support governments that promote policies so diametrically opposed to our own, and have policies so antagonistic to our firm and long-term allies.

When we look at the importance of religious liberty in the community of nations and at the attitude of the Morsi regime toward Israel, our staunchest ally in the region, it makes no sense at all for the United States to follow through with this aid.