Immigration is back on the table in Congress, and you know what that means: the political equivalent of Ultimate Fighting Championship. Insults are being hurled, party unity is dissolving, and Congress doing its best to come out of the scrap with a plan that pleases nobody. The current deal struck by Democrats and Republicans involves concessions by both sides; Dems get a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., and Republicans get tighter border security, as well a merit-based system of immigration that favors skilled-workers.

This, of course, has royally pissed off true believers on both sides of the debate. Concessions? Never! Conservatives are railing against the plan because they claim it amounts to “amnesty.” They’re so unhappy they’re boo-ing fellow Republicans who support the plan. So much for a “big tent party.” Poorly written manifestos are also increasing exponentially. Take, for example, this grammar-bomb dropped by Oregon State Representative Jeff Kropf, which he encourages all of us to send to our local representatives:

“Dear Mr. President/Senator/Congressman or woman

I am offended by spin, smoke and mirrors Feel betrayed, angry Rewards lawbreakers with a defacto [sic] amnesty many are felons having stolen ID and wont [sic] be held accountable will not secure the border or stop border illegals crossing hiring more border patrol wont [sic] matter if they are put in prison builds less fence than congress [sic] has funded already doesent [sic] require english [sic] so illegals wont [sic] assimilate will not teach illegals respect for rule of law history shows previous reforms have not worked good fences make good neighbors so build a fence or they will just keep coming no confidence in federal bureaucracy to make it work does not address the cost to taxpayers of supporting illegals through government benefits”

Wow, I can’t decide if that’s spam gibberish or slam poetry.

Immigration supporters, on the other hand, decry the deal because the merit-based system it proposes will replace the former system, which gave favor to those with family already in the U.S. You know, family re-unification and all that jazz. The new policy would be a “radical shift,” they claim. The deal would only extend visa preferences to spouses and children and not include extended family. Personally, I don’t see what the big deal is; if some of my extended family were physically barred from ever seeing me again, I’d break out the champagne (just kidding, Grandma!)

Oh well, at least we can rest assured that the debate over immigration will make good television, and that’s all that matters, right?

This entry was posted on Monday, May 21st, 2007 at 12:04 by CJ Ciaramella and is filed under National, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.