FALSE ASSUMPTIONS
Doing nothing is better than George W. Bush’s immigration plan
BY HEIDI HARRIS

Heidi Harris hosts “The Heidi Harris Show” weekday mornings, 8 to 10 a.m., on NewsTalk 720 KDWN in Las Vegas. Visit her website www.heidiharris.com. Other stories by Heidi Harris

Most people would agree that something needs to be done about immigration. There are times, however, when doing nothing is better. President Bush’s immigration plan is a perfect example. Regardless of last-minute modifications, this legislation is terrible for our nation because it’s based on false assumptions. 

This “comprehensive” plan does little more than legalize millions who arrived here illegally. President Bush rejects the word “amnesty” to describe his bill, but if you allow people any avenue to become legal residents other than those already allowed by federal law, you’re providing amnesty.

The theory is that since all these millions of illegals are already here, and it’s impractical to gather them all up and send them back, we may as well give them legal status. Let’s apply that logic to the problem of auto theft. Since auto theft is a terrible problem, and we have no possibility of gathering up all the stolen cars, why not just allow the thieves to keep them? After all, it’s the practical approach. Then, after we allow the thieves to register the cars legally, we promise we’ll get serious about the problem and prevent future car thefts.

Bush’s bill calls for anyone who wants legal status to register, pay back taxes, pass a background check, etc., but what makes him believe anyone who has broken numerous federal laws would suddenly grow a conscience? The sad reality is, our politicians know this, yet they try to persuade us these reforms are necessary and beneficial. 

Sen. John McCain has backed this legislation, and has been downright feisty with anyone who questions it. He’s asked constituents who object if they have a better plan. 

I do, and it’s simple.

The Heidi Immigration Reform Plan would include the following provisions, although most of them are already law: 

• Anyone illegally in the country who comes to the attention of law-enforcement authorities would be detained by INS officials and deported post haste. This would include people discovered during traffic stops, people who attempt to find employment using forged documents, etc. 
• Just as federal laws required a “duty to report” for anyone who comes into contact with a child who may have been abused, the same duty shall apply to those who come into contact with a suspected illegal. 
• Employers caught hiring illegals would be punishedaccording to current federal law. 
• Our constitution would be amended to prevent “anchor babies” from automatically becoming citizens. Only children born of at least one parent who is a citizen would be granted citizenship.
• No social services, loans or grants of any kind shall be given to anyone who has broken the law by entering illegally. This would obviously include welfare, housing, mortgage loans, and the Millennium Scholarships for Nevada teens who are not citizens, even though in many cases they were brought here as children and did not choose their illegal status. 
• Anyone who arrives in an emergency room would receive humane emergency care, and if it becomes apparent that they are here illegally, they would be deported after emergency treatment is provided. (Hospital workers would also have the aforementioned “duty to report.”) 
• The U.S. Supreme Court would overturn Plyler V. Doe, which allows children to be educated in U.S. schools regardless of legal status. 
• Once a person is granted citizenship, extended family members will not be allowed to move to America unless the new citizen can demonstrate an ability to provide financially for them. 

It’s very simple: Turn off the tap of free services to illegals, and a legitimate “guest worker” program could actually be successful. As for creating a “secure border,” I have a hunch that if all the provisions of the Heidi Plan were enacted, we wouldn’t need a fence.