A Civil Debate
EDITORIAL, NYTimes on
the Web, March 27, 2006
Something powerful pulled more than
half a million people onto the streets of Los Angeles on Saturday, turning 26
downtown blocks into a pulsing sea of white T-shirts and American flags. A
veteran police commander said that in 38 years he had never seen a march so
huge. Its target was a harsh immigration bill passed by the House that
would erect a wall on our Southern border and turn 12 million illegal immigrants
— and any who give them aid — into a nation of felons.
The demonstrations have been timed to a climactic showdown for immigration
reform in the capital. Today the Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled
debate and a vote on a bill offered by its chairman, Arlen Specter. Unlike
the House bill, it seeks comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws — not just
tighter borders and stricter enforcement, but also a sensible path to legal
status for illegal workers already here and others who want to come.
Mr. Specter and his colleagues are working under intense pressure, since the
Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, has threatened to put forward a hard-line
enforcement bill if the committee fails to complete its work today. Senate
staffs were racing over the weekend to nail down compromises before today's
deadline. Anti-immigrant forces, meanwhile, stand ready to try to torpedo
anything other than a strictly get-tough approach.
That would be an awful outcome for immigrant advocates and for President Bush,
who has long argued for comprehensive reform and tried, with limited success, to
steer his party away from the one-note harshness of the wall-building crowd.
Last week he urged Congress to have a civil, respectful discussion about the
issue. But with looming elections and Republican presidential jockeying
casting a distorting fuzz over the debate, it may be too late for Mr. Bush's
hands-off approach. If the president really wants a sensible reform bill
to reach his desk, he will have to do more than stand on the sidelines, urging
everyone to have good manners.
The marchers recognize — as much of the nation seems not to — the urgency of
comprehensive immigration reform to the nation's future. Their indignation
is mixed with pride in their work and hunger for fair treatment. Their
protests have been a model of peaceful dissent and a blow against the mental
straitjacket that defines immigration reform as entirely a problem of policing.
Mr. Bush should make his case with equal force.
|
