White House Meeting on Immigration "Reform" Likely to Leave Out Interests of The American Public, Cautions FAIR

(Washington DC - June 24, 2009) Tomorrow’s long anticipated and oft-delayed White House meeting on immigration will likely produce a blueprint for a massive illegal alien amnesty in exchange for hollow promises of future enforcement, warns the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). The plan being promoted by President Obama and Democratic congressional leaders is essentially the same one that the American people rejected in 2006 and 2007.

The American people have little reason to believe that any commitments to protect their interests would be honored. Since taking office, the Obama administration has all but abandoned enforcement of U.S. immigration laws. Worksite enforcement has been dramatically curtailed, implementation of E-Verify requirements have been scuttled, cooperation with state and local law enforcement has been scaled back, while the Department of Justice has made it easier for illegal aliens to remain in the country. Ironically, tougher enforcement efforts implemented during the final 18 months of the Bush administration had, for the first time, begun to reverse the flow of illegal immigration.

“The only thing comprehensive about so-called comprehensive immigration reform would be the amnesty for people who have violated our laws,” observed Dan Stein, president of FAIR. “While millions of illegal aliens would be rewarded, struggling American workers and overburdened taxpayers would pay a heavy price were Congress and the administration to repeat the mistakes of the 1986 amnesty.”

Some of the questions likely not to be addressed at tomorrow’s White House summit include:

• What impact would a massive amnesty have on already soaring unemployment?
• How would a repeat of the massive fraud that took place in 1986 be prevented?
• How would adequate background checks be carried out on the estimated 12 to 15 million illegal aliens who would be eligible?
• How many additional relatives, now living outside the U.S., would be eligible for amnesty?
• How would future illegal immigration be averted when the administration refuses to implement existing systems to prevent employment of illegal aliens?
• How would state and local governments some already teetering on bankruptcy pay for services required by newly legalize aliens and their families?

“The American people have some very clear ideas about the priorities President Obama and Congress need to address and a massive illegal alien amnesty isn’t one of them,” said Stein. “The public wants our immigration system fixed, but they expect their interests, not the interests of the people who broke our laws, to be paramount. Unfortunately, the public interest will at best be an afterthought as the president and congressional leaders pursue a politically driven, narrow interest immigration agenda,” concluded Stein.