Bad border policy

In the parlance of the 2004 elections, the Bush administration was against sending the National Guard to the Mexican border before it was for it. Why the change? The 2006 elections.

Here is Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff on “The O’Reilly Factor” in December fending off a suggestion to enlist the Guard: “I think it would be a horribly overexpensive and very difficult way to manage this problem. Unless you would be prepared to leave those people in the National Guard day and night for month after month after month, you would eventually have to come to grips with the challenge in a more comprehensive way.”

He was right, but that answer isn’t sitting well with many members of Congress who must face the voters this fall. So they’re holding the immigration bill hostage until they are assured of tough-looking action, even if it doesn’t amount to much.

President Bush delivered this week when he told the nation that he would send upwards of 6,000 members of the Guard to the border for the kind of temporary assignment that was a bad idea six months ago and remains a bad idea today.

Up until now, the president has put forth reasonable solutions and backed the more sensible Senate bill on immigration reform. The Guard has already been taxed with its unprecedented level of involvement in a foreign war. Plus, it was heavily used in response to Hurricane Katrina. These troops need a break, not an assignment as political pawns in a game of election-year chess.

Traditionally, this nation sends in the Guard in response to emergencies for which it has been trained. Though some political careers might be in crisis, the border with Mexico is not. There’s no question that the nation needs to shore up border security, but that needs to be done as a part of a comprehensive package to reform immigration laws.

Congress passed a bill in December 2004 to hire 2,000 border patrol workers a year for five years, but the president’s 2006 budget paid for only 210 slots. Now the president tells us the Guard is needed until more border patrol agents can be hired. That sounds more like political desperation than a national emergency.

The grandstanding doesn’t stop there. The Senate just tacked on a couple of symbolic amendments that make English the “national language” and “the common and unifying language.” There’s no way to violate these provisions, but they sound good. Never mind that the bill already calls for proficiency in English for anyone seeking citizenship.

It’s too bad that the immigration issue is getting bogged down in election-year fear, because reform is long overdue. This isn’t about foreign hordes suddenly pouring over the border in search of a better life. Reasonable changes need to reflect the fact that American complicity over many decades has allowed the illegal immigrant problem to grow to this point.

Knee-jerk reforms will tell a new story about America that will resonate long after the November elections. As a nation of immigrants, we can do better.