Our Views: Our assets, our liabilities

We think U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida said it best, and only in the distorted world of national politics can anyone disagree: “It feels weird to deport a high school valedictorian who was brought here through no fault of his own when he was four years old.”

Weird indeed.

As a Republican senator, Rubio still has problems with this principle being acted upon by President Barack Obama, who wiggled his way around existing but somewhat ambiguous laws to end deportations of youths who have long been residents of this country.

But Obama, and Rubio are correct to point out that the United States has a significant number of families, in the millions, which have young children living in this country without legal status.

Over time, kids grow up. Are those children illegal aliens, criminal trespassers on the bounty of America? Or, as the president and senator stress, if those children have grown up demonstrating responsibility in school, and probably working at least part-time in the bargain, aren’t they potential assets, not liabilities?

With Rubio and a number of other Republicans, including former President George W. Bush, we have long wondered at the political wisdom of anti-immigrant prejudices in the GOP. Many Americans of Latin heritage may well believe the debate has become politicized.

It’s not that anyone wants to encourage illegal immigration. In fact, despite the presidential order, the authorities will still be busy deporting those who have come to this country without following the rules.

Nevertheless, Rubio’s weird feeling is widely shared. The senator, son of Cuban immigrants, may offer legislation that will compromise on some of the contentious points that have tied up the immigration debate in Congress.

We hope so. This issue cries out for a long-term solution.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (10)


1) Comment by DMJ - 28/06/2012

Crickets...

2) Comment by DMJ - 27/06/2012

A little upset, jdk? Explain me this...how was what he did "unconstitutional"? Quick...go check Drudge for an answer...

3) Comment by jdk944 - 27/06/2012

King, I mean Emperor, I mean Dictator Obama didn't "outfox" anyone DMJ, to use your words!! He simply, once again, ignored what he has said in the past on this issue, as he has on most issues, and just pursued unconstitutional action!! Like a Bully not getting his way, he circumvented the process set up and went around it. And this is what you gloat about DMJ???? Really???? How sad!!

4) Comment by Whatnow - 27/06/2012

@ScotB, "Just imagine what can happen if the executive branch expands this policy of choosing which laws it wants to enforce and which ones it will not!" Isn't Obama already doing that? That's the rub in all of this.

5) Comment by DMJ - 27/06/2012

President Obama totally outfoxed Romney and the GOP on this. He painted Mitt in a corner- either he can continue pandering to xenophobic yahoos and nativists or he can change his mind, furthering the "flip-flopper" label he seems born to wear. Plus, the President did the moral thing: he made it official U.S. policy not to punish children for what their parents did. The Dream Act should have passed; it's a no-brainer, but surprise, surprise, the GOP filibustered it. Very stupid politics in a year when Romney is going to have to try to compete in Arizona, Colorado and Nevada.

6) Comment by 8point6 - 27/06/2012

"I will work with anyone in Congress who’s willing to make progress on comprehensive immigration reform that addresses our economic needs and security needs, and upholds our tradition as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. And in the meantime, we will continue to use every federal resource to protect the safety and civil rights of all Americans, and treat all our people with dignity and respect." Well, mr. prez. Does that include illegal immigrants, also? IMO, you will work with anyone in Congress who agrees with you on YOUR immigration reform.

7) Comment by jdk944 - 27/06/2012

Why doesn't The Advocate do an "Our Views" on how this administration will ignore the State of Arizona on issues of illegal immigration after the Supreme Courts ruling?? That's the REAL news, at this point in time, on this topic!!

8) Comment by lovemykids - 27/06/2012

ScotB the judicial branch and the legislative branch.

9) Comment by ScotB - 26/06/2012

The goal post keeps getting moved. First, the law says you cannot come here illegally. So now, we want to say, but if you were young and came here illegally, we want to make an exception for you if you graduated from high school, etc. Next, I predict, we will be keeping the high school dropouts, too. I would prefer we enforce our laws. If our laws are not working, the correct path is to change the law. Not to have the executive branch decide which laws it will enforce and which it will not. This is a dangerous path for either party to endorse. We depend on the executive branch to adhere to its oath of office. Just imagine what can happen if the executive branch expands this policy of choosing which laws it wants to enforce and which ones it will not! Who will have the power to restrain the executive branch then?

10) Comment by Being_Stupid - 26/06/2012

Fix the border first, then grant amnesty.