FAIR deals in facts in immigration debate

 

In a recent Congress blog, Robert Gittelson accuses the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and other like-minded organizations advocating for immigration reductions and enforcement of not being conservative, and for not looking out for the best interests of the Republican Party. FAIR doesn’t deal in labels or partisan politics, just facts and ideas.  

Our mission is simple: We believe that our nation’s immigration policies need to be reformed in a manner calculated to place the interests of the American people ahead of narrow agendas. In our view, that means limited immigration – especially during times when unacceptably large numbers of Americans cannot find jobs and millions more are losing their grip on the middle class. It means ending family chain migration policies and replacing them with fair and objective policies that select new immigrants based on their likelihood to succeed and contribute to our nation. And it means reducing immigration to more sensible and sustainable levels to avert potentially harmful social and environmental consequences.

ADVERTISEMENT
And, yes, immigration reform means enforcing our immigration laws – protecting our borders, punishing employers who hire illegal workers, removing illegal aliens when we find them, and encouraging as many as possible to leave on their own by eliminating the incentives for them to remain. In our view, immigration reform does not mean rewarding people who break our laws with amnesty and throwing open the floodgates to as many as 30 million new immigrants over the next decade.

FAIR has been around for 35 years. In that time we have compiled a copious record of advocacy and research on immigration policy, which are on display for all to see. Our views are also on public record in thousands of media interviews, and in hundreds of appearances before congressional committees.

Not being that familiar with the National Hispanic Leadership Conference (NHLC), despite my 32 years in the field, I checked its website to find out more about its positions and read some of its policy papers. Aside from a few press releases, there is very little that establishes them as a thoughtful immigration policy organization. NHLC’s best case for amnesty and continued border anarchy is that “God’s going to be faithful to making sure we get comprehensive immigration reform,” according to the group’s president Samuel Rodriguez.  Good to know.

Gittleson is also co-founder of Conservatives for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, a coalition whose entire immigration stance consists of a 970-word statement summarizing letters they have sent to members of Congress and citing selected passages from Scripture.

What can be documented about the alliance of self-described conservative and Evangelical groups for amnesty that have suddenly materialized is that much of it is financed by business interests and by left-leaning groups with ties to Soros. Creating front groups to give the appearance of popular support where there really is none is a time-honored tradition in the political lobbying game. However, few are as transparent as those designed to misrepresent how conservatives and Evangelicals feel about amnesty for illegal aliens.

Over the years, FAIR has put forth cogent arguments for why limiting immigration and enforcing our laws would serve the best interests of current and future generations of Americans. We’ve been attacked by better empty shell groups than the ones claiming to represent the views of conservatives. Let’s get back to a discussion of policy based on facts and sound public policy.

Stein is president of FAIR.