BNN provides English-language US and world news, analysis and opinion from all over the Internet. We strive for high standards, ethical behavior, and the presentation of multiple responsible points of view.
|
Get More Traffic For Your Blog! Blog Explosion brings hundreds of interested visitors to your blog - without costing you a cent. BNN News Archive Page |
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
ACLU Earns Money on the Backs of Immigrants First, the ACLU is at the forefront of litigation and lobbying to prevent the United States from having a national identification card (the kind of thing the 9/11 Commission suggested we do to prevent terrorism). The problem is that we already have a national identification; we call it a Social Security Number. If someone steals that number, they own your identity, it's just that simple. Instead of adopting some form of strong identification for citizens, we are stuck with the easy to steal SSNs which have greatly contributed to over $24 billion in compromised assets belonging to US citizens that is available to be stolen at any moment by malicious hackers. With SSNs being so valuable, schools have no business having them. They simply shouldn't be spending their money on data protection when our schools are rivaling the third world for the gutter. If we are going to continue to waste money on public schools, at least they should try to spend it on students. However, the key point of contention of the ACLU isn't privacy; it is that immigrants will be scared off from sending their students to public schools "both documented and undocumented." The problem is that all documented students can get Social Security Numbers. If you are in this country legally, you have no problem with the Social Security Administration. They are simply throwing that up there to make the policy sound xenophobic. The only people who would potentially have problems with this policy is illegal immigrants, or more specifically, the illegal immigrants who don't bother to steal an SSN for their kid. The sticky part here is that despite both the government of Mexico and the government of the United States refusing to actually enforce their own laws, there is still a group of people who don't strictly speaking have a legal right to be here. No politician has suggested we just dissolve the border, or for that matter, abolish immigration law, but they continue to act as if the law doesn't exist. Amazingly enough, failure to enforce the law has lead to lawlessness and confusion. This case wouldn't exist if it weren't for the US government deciding certain laws aren't really laws without bothering with what some of us like to call "the democratic process". The ACLU, for its part, is at least open that it believes the United States really isn't a nation but just a spot on the map where everyone who can manage the trip is entitled the full privileges of citizenship. Despite everything to the contrary in the Constitution and US Code, the ACLU believes every foreign citizen has the full rights to be in this country, regardless of what the law says. If the ACLU was truly intellectually honest, however, they'd be suing to have the entire body of immigration law thrown out. That seems to be what they really want, no regulations on immigration whatsoever. It's a rather startling departure from a pro-regulation group. Instead, they keep the laws on the books and the dyslexic approach to immigration this nation takes so they can continue to file lawsuits. Immigration lawsuits have become an income stream and the ACLU doesn't want to see that go away because the problem was "solved". Much of the lawyer industry has adopting tactics that ensure litigation and maximum possible lawyering, why should the ACLU be any different? After all, they are the beneficiaries while the common man picks up the tab. The biggest deception of the ACLU is thus leveled right on the shoulders of the undocumented workers they claim to support. They don't try to solve their problems; they simply try to prolong them so they can keep racking up legal fees. Protectors of the Bill of Rights? Hardly. John Bambenek is an academic professional for the University of Illinois and a columnist for the Daily Illini and blogs at Part-Time Pundit deep from the corn fields of Illinois. Blogger News Network is advertiser-supported, and your visits to our advertisers help BNN to meet its expenses. Help keep us afloat! posted by John C. A. Bambenek at 12:32 AM |
Subscribe to BNN and get a daily bulletin of all our news postings. Interested in writing for BNN? Want information on our news service? Contact The Editor Writing for BNN BNN Editorial Policies Previous Posts
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home