And They Want INS to Run an Amnesty Program?
Wednesday, March 6, 2002
By: Dan Stein

Front Page Magazine

Despite millions of dollars' worth of the latest computer equipment and programs, and countless years of man hours spent trying to make the technology functional, the Immigration and Naturalization Service still cannot keep track of 547,000 student visa holders who may or may not be attending school in this country. We might all enjoy a good laugh at this example of government at its most inept, if this ineptitude had not been such an important contributing factor to the tragedy of September 11.

Foreign students are not the only people the INS has lost track of. There are thousands of people the INS has ordered to be deported from the U.S., including some 5,000 from terrorist-sponsoring nations, whom the agency cannot locate. Then there are the estimated 8.7 million illegal aliens believed to be living here, whom the INS cannot even be bothered looking for unless they turn up on a police blotter somewhere.

While this latest example of malfeasance has deservedly drawn scathing criticism from Capitol Hill, Congress and the Administration are devising massive new programs to legalize illegal aliens that will rely on INS's ability to identify and screen out potential security threats.

Congress, with the Administration's support, is seeking to revive a provision known as Section 245(i), which would allow hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens to become legal residents without having to return to their homelands for a thorough background check. In addition, plans for a sweeping amnesty that could encompass millions of illegal aliens, first proposed last summer but pushed to the back burner after September 11, are once again being discussed in Washington.

Both 245(i) and an amnesty program would be administered by INS, in addition to the functions the agency is already carrying out (poorly, by most accounts). They would be required to process millions of applications, collect and analyze information and testimony in support of each application, and conduct background checks on each applicant. If the student visa program, in which applicants are screened before coming to this country remains a serious national security risk, what sort of problems would be posed by an amnesty program encompassing millions of people about whom the only thing we know for certain is that they violated our immigration laws?

The INS has done a lot to earn its role as everyone's favorite whipping boy, but in all fairness, it is also the victim of the incoherent and politicized mandate it receives from Congress. Over many decades, Congress and successive administrations have loaded the immigration process with countless gimmicks and loopholes, while constantly shifting the agency's priorities. And even a seemingly simple task, liking tracking foreign students, is complicated by Congress' refusal to require universities to report when visa holders do not enroll.

Instead of just beating up on the beleaguered INS, Congress must clean up the mess that passes for an immigration policy. Congress must finally institute an effective and verifiable system of identifying citizens and legal permanent residents, from illegal residents and casual visitors. Without a mechanism to prevent people from living and working in the United States illegally, finding anyone - much less sophisticated and well-financed terrorists - is like searching for a needle in a haystack that grows larger everyday.

It was not the INS's fault that the September 11th terrorists had valid Social Security numbers issued by the federal government and state-issued drivers' licenses that enabled them to hide in plain sight while they planned their attack. Nor is it INS's fault that millions of illegal aliens are encouraged to remain here, because Congress and successive administrations dangle the promise of legalization for those who stick it out.

It should not be too much to expect that the INS get its computer system working well enough to keep track of the people to whom it has issued visas, or to find the people it has ordered deported. But it should also not be too much to expect Congress to establish rules, provide the means for enforcing the rules, and then refrain from changing the rules and rewarding those who broke them.

As Congress considers what to do about the latest security risk posed by mismanagement at INS, they should be asking themselves what role they have played in INS's failures.