Uncle Sam’s welcome mat should not be trampled on

The United States is a nation of immigrants. Throughout our history, we have benefited from the diverse talents brought to our country. Immigrants have contributed both socially and economically to the achievements of this country.

But, our immigration policies continue to come under fire, and I must say, for legitimate reasons. We now have roughly 12 million illegal immigrants in this country.

To understand how we got here, we must look back to a debate that took place more than 20 years ago. What I’ve seen over the last several years is eerily similar to what I saw in the 1980s.

Soon after being elected, President Ronald Reagan asked Congress to pass an immigration reform package. Five years later, we passed what President Reagan hailed as the most comprehensive reform of our immigration laws since 1952. He stated that the legislation was a major step toward meeting the challenge to our sovereignty while at the same time preserving and enhancing the nation’s heritage of legal immigration.
I voted for the 1986 bill. At the time, I believed that a legalization component was in the best interest of the immigrants as well as our own citizens. I was led to believe that illegal immigration would decline with an immediate amnesty program.

Now I know that rewarding illegality as we did in 1986 only promotes further illegality. I have no intention of making the same mistake twice.

My 1986 vote on the Simpson-Mazzoli bill was wrong. In 1986, we had anywhere from 1 million to 3 million illegal immigrants in the United States. Now, with about 12 million people here illegally, the numbers show that the law simply didn’t work.

Many believed that amnesty was the answer to all of our illegal immigrant problems. Nobody envisioned we’d be sitting here again on the cusp of another amnesty debate.

I don’t want today’s Congress to make the same mistake. I don’t want to pass on the problems we have to future generations.

I understand people cross the border and overstay their visas in order to have a better life in the United States. I don’t blame them for wanting to be a part of this great country.  But it’s hard to sympathize with those who thumb their noses at the rule of law.

The fact of the matter is that until we get our enforcement and border security house in order, we shouldn’t be talking about amnesty. We need to first enforce, and more importantly improve, our border security and enforcement laws. Only after this is done will it be time to open the debate on legal channels for additional workers we need.

I support legal immigration. I support reforms to our visa process. I support more legal channels for those wanting to work in the United States. And, I agree that our country needs foreign workers. But, I respectfully disagree with those who say that amnesty or even indirect amnesty is the answer.

As a senator I took an oath to honor and obey the Constitution. I bear a fundamental allegiance to uphold the rule of law. That is why I cannot, in good conscience, support granting legal status to illegal immigrants who have violated our laws. Doing so would send the wrong message to millions of people around the world, particularly those who have followed the rules and are waiting in line to legally enter our great country.
Uncle Sam’s welcome mat should not be trampled on.

Grassley is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

SPECIAL SECTION: IMMIGRATION

Flake-Guiterrez bill, the STRIVE Act, toughens enforcement,  offers no amnesty, eases legal entry
700-page STRIVE Act reflects long, inclusive debate
The urgent need for AgJOBS legislation
National and economic security must drive the immigration reform debate
Solution is respect for the law, respect for people
Honest reform, true feasibility versus pusillanimous pandering, wink-‘n-nod
Uncle Sam’s welcome mat should not be trampled on