Related articles:

Ernesto Portillo Jr.: Immigration answers are all in the eyes of the beholders Some suggestions for true immigration reform Amnesty foe Kyl working on new immigration bill How immigration debate may unfold Bush: Border security working Illegal immigration high on legislators' lists

General
Drexel Height Fire District
Firefighter Part Time Employment
AVIVA Children's Services
Monitor: Parent-Child Visits General
MEDLEY COMMUNICATIONS
INSTALLATION PROFESSIONAL

In the highly charged debate over illegal immigration, inflammatory rhetoric is not exclusive to the ship-'em-all-home, build-a-wall, close-the-border activists. Groups supposedly on the side of the immigrants often sound equally unreasonable and could hinder efforts to pass meaningful and effective immigration reforms in Congress.

Members of the Tucson-based Coalition for Human Rights, or Coalición de Derechos Humanos, and the May 1st Coalition purport to be on the side of illegal immigrants. But by opposing the STRIVE Act now working its way through Congress, those groups are on the wrong side, we believe. The act is a well-reasoned and comprehensive plan for the 12 million or so illegal immigrants in the United States.

Last month we told our readers that the STRIVE Act is a balanced compromise that should be adopted. It would solve many problems associated with illegal immigration, protect U.S.-born workers from the influx of cheap labor and help companies find the workers they need to keep the American economy strong.

The plan is supported by dozens of members of Congress, including Tucson's Raúl Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords, who are co-sponsors of the measure. Immigration-rights groups like the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform and the Border Action Network have called the act a good platform for change. Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform, a business group, also supports the measure.

However, Derechos Humanos and the May 1st Coalition remain staunchly opposed. The groups decry the security measures in the bill introduced by U.S. Reps. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., while mostly ignoring other aspects of what is a big, complicated piece of legislation.

"This measure will result in more deaths, detentions, deportations and criminal prosecutions," said Isabel Garcia, co-chair of Derechos Humanos, which works to protect the rights of immigrants. "The act will militarize the border even more. We're moving toward a police state."

Similarly alarming statements were expressed last week by Alexis Mazón, a member of Derechos Humanos and the May 1st Coalition.

Mazón told the Star's Brady McCombs that the STRIVE Act "is a proposal intended to criminalize the entire immigrant population."

We believe activists like Garcia and Mazón should choose their words more carefully. While the immigration-reform bill is not perfect, it's farfetched to say that it will bring about a police state in which officers could ask at any time, "Your papers, please."

Groups like Derechos Humanos and the May 1st Coalition seem to be forgetting — or ignoring — the direction in which the political winds are blowing. There's a great deal of anti-immigrant sentiment around the country, and any immigration-reform bill would need to include security measures to have any hope of receiving bipartisan support.

The STRIVE Act includes measures that should cut down on illegal border crossings and help the immigrant community in the long run.

Last week, the National Conference of State Legislatures reported that at least 1,169 pieces of legislation designed to address immigration or immigrant-related issues have been introduced in all 50 states, which is more than twice the total number of bills considered during 2006.

Pro-immigrant forces can rail about increased border enforcement, but it has to be a necessary component of any bill being considered. Otherwise, it simply won't get enough support.

The STRIVE Act would tighten security by adding more than 15,000 jobs related to illegal immigration, including 11,600 border agents.

But the act includes measures pro-immigration activists should support, such as an AgJobs provision that would create a minimum-wage, guest-worker program for the agriculture industry. It also includes the DREAM Act, which would put the children of illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship if they get a post-secondary education or enter the military.

Garcia said that if she were writing a comprehensive immigration-reform bill, it wouldn't include any border-security provisions. "Our border is militarized enough already," she said.

But if not the STRIVE Act, what? A presidential election will take place next year, and activists on both sides of the issue seem to indicate that immigration will be a taboo issue during the 2008 election cycle. Failure to fix the immigration system this year could mean that the issue won't be debated again in a meaningful way until possibly 2009.

With immigrant-rights groups planning marches and protests May 1, we urge them to reconsider their opposition to the STRIVE Act. It may not be perfect, but it would help many of the people they purport to represent.