Amnesty Battle: Where do we find sensible solutions?

          While the topic of immigration stirs many into discussion, it has been a particular hot topic in media coverage since the President's State of the Union Address. As a close neighbor to Mexico, Texans have always held strong, often varied, opinions about immigration system reform. I personally come from an immigrant background, so I took interest in The Dallas Morning New's editorial on recent legislative proposals about amnesty.

          The author, whose credibility we cannot investigate as they leave the spokesperson unnamed, points out the current failings of our immigration system as well as the flaws in the recent radical plans that have been proposed. The target audience most likely is composed of local readers, those who keep up with political happenings and possibly reside in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. The newspaper takes on a vague, pro-amnesty attitude but instead of clearly defining their reasoning and evidence, leaves the readers with a question: "At some point, those who decry amnesty must contend with a question they might rather avoid: What do you do about the 11 million illegal immigrants already here?" That is the question of the hour indeed, but is hardly evidence of why we too, should support amnesty. From there, the author explains why simply rounding immigrants and taking them back is not a solution; consider the enormous cost of transporting almost 11 million people back to their homelands. I agree, it makes no fiscal sense in our current debt crises. Besides most of these people have come to America to find a brighter tomorrow. 

          The author's actual argument for amnesty is weak as it consists only of opposition to current proposals because they are "burdensome" or require actual effort for immigrants to become citizens. While this editorial provides little evidence and persuasive argument, I fundamentally agree that there are better ways of reforming our current immigration system. However, granting complete "guilt-free" amnesty to undocumented illegals is no solution either. Marco Rubio, Florida Senator and son of Cuban immigrant parents has sold the most convincing plan yet:  “If we do nothing, what we have is de facto amnesty because we don’t know who the undocumented are. We couldn’t enforce it even if we wanted to. What you get is a work permit, the ability to be here legally. We know where you are, we know where you live, we know where you work, you pay taxes, you have paid a fine — this is not amnesty.”

Texas lawmakers seeking reversal of Planned Parenthood ban

         Due to recent media coverage and the close proximity of our state's capital, many central Texans are aware of the recent controversial legislation that bans abortion affiliates from participating in a Medicaid program that offers reproductive health care to low-income women. In 2011, legislators cut family planning by two-thirds, slashing family funds from $111 million to less than $38 million. They also placed family planning providers like Planned Parenthood last in line for state dollars. In addition to cutting women's health care, a health reform bill was passed, which ensured that Women’s Health Program funds cannot be used to “perform or promote elective abortions, or to contract with entities that perform or promote elective abortions or affiliate with entities that perform or promote elective abortions.” This legislation has stirred up much debate as legislator Lon Bernam seeks to pass a bill that would nullify the “anti-abortion” language. Many supporters of the reversal attribute Texas’ high unplanned/unwanted pregnancy rate to inadequate women’s health care for low-income families; if these women we able to find contraceptives and have access to preventative medicine, that solution would be the best of both worlds.


         Regardless of which side you take on this discussion, this article is a great example of lawmakers standing up for their citizen’s rights; I believe that our government’s sole responsibility is to serve our great country and state, not to dictate how we live our lives or to push ideological agendas.