Immigration and Property
By Dave Murrow

The central point of Paul Weyrich's "Immigration Solution?" article is that the primary allegiance of U.S citizens and new prospective citizens should be to the United States of America and the ideas that it represents.

I believe the central point is a bulls eye/ right on/ absolutely correct and absolutely necessary for progress on the illegal immigration front, especially considering the painful failure of our past 4 or 5 or presidents. All declined to accept their duty to completely stop all illegal immigration. Truly, this central point is essential to our forward progress in dealing with all legal immigration plans for the future.

However, there is one slight mistake - a mistake in emphasis that we could make if we are not careful.  I believe the emphasis should be on allegiance to "the ideas" or even better to "the correct ideas" of the American nation.

The emphasis on allegiance to ideas which make the United States work is stated explicitly in his quote about the senator: "Senator Alexander reminded the Senate in late March that our country has long derived its purpose and strength because 'we have united people from many backgrounds into one nation, based upon our belief in a few ideas rather than upon race, ancestry or background.'"

Notice the word is "ideas." It is the key word. That which makes America so attractive and so powerful is the IDEAS upon which it is based.  And it is not just the specific ideas which are stated explicitly or even implicitly in the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, or any other great document or speech or proverb.  The key is that we are dedicated to seeking the most accurate ideas regarding man's nature and the form of self government that allows each individual man to seek his full potential in terms of financial security, physical security, emotional peace and well being, and spiritual ascension (happiness).

This brings me to what I consider to be an important idea that our founding Fathers should have introduced into the Declaration of Independence but failed to do so. And we are suffering for that mistake now as it relates to the present problems with illegal immigration. This idea was originally written by John Locke and was partially inserted into the Declaration but not exactly the way Locke wrote it.

Here is what our Founding Fathers wrote:  "....all men are endowed with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..."   The last right, the "pursuit of Happiness" was perhaps the first politically correct phrase ever used in America. Our Founding Fathers were trying to sell the colonialists on the whole idea of revolution, and they were afraid that the average colonialist might misunderstand the word "property" and think it was too materialistic.  Therefore they watered it down with the phrase "pursuit of happiness" because it sounded so much nicer and so much less offensive.

This was a major mistake! The word "property" as originally explained, defined, and elaborated upon by Locke has profound importance on what any man needs to survive and what any good national government should offer to the individual citizen.  If a nation fails to protect the citizen's property rights the citizens cannot possibly survive.  The government must set conditions which allow the individual to produce, to own the property he produces, to protect that property, and to use his property in what ever way he considers best for himself and the ones he loves. (Pretty much the opposite of communism,)  Without the protection of property rights there can be no life, no liberty, and not happiness.

Our allegiance should be primarily to the right ideas which are necessary to the well being of all individuals. One of those right ideas is that our government should hold as one of its most important duties the protection of our right of property,

While the word "property" should have been explicitly stated in the Declaration and emphasized to a greater degree in the Constitution's bill of rights, somehow our government has managed to offer an unusually high degree of protection of property rights as can be seen by our acceptance of the most effective economical system - capitalism. Capitalism is the only form of economy that respects the property rights of the individual.  It is the most effective system of economy and the most moral.  "Fair" equals a situation by which the individual gets to keep that which he works hard to produce and he gets to use it in whatever way best serves himself and the ones he loves.

However, the failure to make more out of this word property has taken its toll.  And now we see it happening in this ridiculous Kennedy-McCain bill and the prevailing attitude of most Democrats and far too many Republicans.  The primary problem with those illegals who "only want to work here" is an absolute violation of the most important right of all--the right of property. 

We cannot survive without the protection of our property.  And the loss is clear.  In monetary terms alone it is around $50 billion per year. The loss of $50 billion per year renders our physical well-being not nearly as solid. In spiritual terms it has caused a devastating loss to our sense of dignity, our sense of sovereignty, and our sense of security--our happiness.

When someone says "these illegals only want to work here, make their life better, etc.", each one of us should respond with " I have the right to own property, protect my property, and use my property in whatever way I consider best for myself and the ones I love. And I demand that my government perform one of its most basic duties - the protection of my property.  First, close the border to all illegal entry.  Then find, investigate, and deport all existing illegals. No more violation of my property.  My property is an essential part of my survival and well-being.  

Dave Murrow, Escondido, CA.

Yesteryear's Immigrant
By Carmela Harmon

While I waited impatiently in line to cast my vote, having arrived shortly after the polls opened, a car pulled up and a woman emerged from it. Actually, her crutches emerged before she did. Her leg was wrapped in a cast beginning about mid calf and encased her entire left foot. One crutch braced the car door open and one crutch took her weight as she worked her way from the driver's seat.

The attack of conscience was brief: should I lose my place in line or should I play Good Samaritan?  I left my place in line and went to help her. I could have spared myself that moment of moral superiority because the refusal of aid, punctuated with a waved crutch, preceded a stiff spine when I offered to hold her place in line while she rested. Perhaps most of all I remembered her response, one that is highly relevant today.

 "It took me 20 years to earn the right to stand here." She said, "I have never missed a vote and I wouldn't miss standing in this line for the world." Everything about her screamed pride and independence, she wanted no handouts, even those lacking strings. Curiosity demands answers they say and questioning revealed her as an immigrant of New Zealand who had driven herself to the polls, broken ankle and all, and had waited the better part of 20 years to become a citizen of the United States.

Reveling in her accomplishment, even though on that day it was painful to do so, she possessed the admirable qualities that are so lacking among the population today, gratitude towards America and its institutions, and distaste for dependency.

My respect for her was then and is now, boundless.  The impression she left upon me was definitely favorable to immigrants; indeed, one might say she became the model that formed my ideas about immigration. As immigrants legal and illegal were marching and issuing demands in cities nation wide recently, I thought of her often, trying to imagine what she might have to say about the entire ruckus. Some how, I cannot picture her pleased with the idea of amnesty, illegal aliens, or the rate at which they are entering the country. The long years she spent obtaining her citizenship must now seem fruitless and quite the labor made in vain. Perhaps, she is even asking herself if she should have waited a little longer or, more likely, wondering why she even bothered. It must seem grossly unjust to have worked so hard, opting for the long route through official channels, when apparently all one had to do was wait a few years for a changing political climate.

I thought of The New Colossus, written by Emma Lazarus, her family, descendants of first generation Jewish immigrants, and of Emma herself, caught between her pride in being Jewish American and dislike of the condescending attitudes Americans exhibited towards the immigrate Eastern European Jew of the late 1800's. Though a firm believer in the opportunity afforded by America to exiled Jews, as expressed in her poem 1492, at the time she penned The New Colossus, the first federal immigration law was only a year old. Hardly enough time for one to have an opinion on illegal immigration, especially considering the law itself dealt with the Chinese, ex-convicts, lunatics, and idiots.

The poem, written to raise money for the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty, was not a resounding statement for or against immigration. What would Emma say about the way her famous line “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,” is used today to justify an official estimate of twelve million illegal immigrants, though unofficial estimations put that number as high as 20 plus million?

To borrow a line from the marchers, "Immigration built this nation!" I say indeed it did. Though surely, the immigrants who founded this nation, those who fought and died to secure it, their descendants who fought and died to keep it together, and all those coming in legally, haven't they earned the right to claim a national identity? Does our decision not to travel the road of Rome merit any consideration whatsoever?

The generations of immigrants who worked and bled to build this country have earned the right to demand, “If you want to come to America, please have the courtesy to knock on the front door and quit sneaking in the back. We will welcome you as a new citizen, but do exercise good manners, learn about our laws and us before deciding you are entitled to what is in our billfolds.”

Carmela Harmon