One of the many implications of a front-page story in the New York Times (“U.S. Set to Act on Mexico Border Drug Flow”—June 26) is that the border crisis has already reached such proportions that important but secondary questions—Are illegal aliens good for the economy? Do illegal immigrants contribute to a pluralistic society? Should America, as a “nation of immigrants,” continue to encourage immigration (whether legal or illegal)?—have been rendered positively academic in the face of what is recognizably a problem no longer of “immigration” but of outright invasion.
According to the Times writer, the Treasury Department, spurred finally to action by the tremendous influx of illegals since the beginning of the year and appalled by the correspondent increase in murder and drug-smuggling episodes, is planning on spending upwards of $250 million over the next few years on equipment and personnel, if not literally to seal off the border, then at least to reduce the flow of invaders to tolerable numbers. It is a first and welcome sign that the U.S. Government, to date unable to pass legislation adequate to the crisis, can yet respond administratively (and in a direct manner that is preferable to the indirections, tergiversations, and compromises of Simpson-Mazzoli) io a threat so immediate that the long-term strategic danger posed by the Soviet Union pales in comparison.
Comments