Patterson: To help with immigrant surge, just ‘follow the law’

Thomas C. Patterson is a retired physician and former Arizona state senator who lives in Paradise Valley, Arizona.

The immigration crisis is crushing New York City. According to ABC7 news, in one week in September alone, 2,900 new “asylum seekers” entered one of the city’s 200 new emergency shelters.

Mayor Eric Adams says the city spends $383 per day per family on food, shelter and other expenses, which are deemed the migrants’ right to receive for no charge or obligation because, well, just because.

The formerly elegant Roosevelt Hotel has been designated the nerve center for services to accommodate the 120,000 illegal immigrants now in the city. Mayor Adams estimates the city will incur a $12 billion deficit as a result of the influx, meaning that “every service in the city is going to be impacted.” Fifteen percent across-the-board budget cuts are seriously looming.

Yet the expenditures are not adequate to address the surge. Immigrants are occupying the sidewalks in front of the Roosevelt, and locals are fuming over the takeover of schools, parks and other public facilities, while reports of subway crime are beginning to pop up. Maybe the sanctuary status the mayor pressed for, when the costs were borne elsewhere, isn’t such a great idea after all.

Mayor Adams correctly points out that, since border law is a federal matter, the feds should help alleviate the distress they are causing. What we’re getting instead is outrageous gaslighting. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre insists that President Joe Biden has actually done a great job of protecting the border, “and you have seen him do that.”

It’s no wonder Americans are starting to feel the strains in social services, health care, schools and prisons. Their advocates claim illegal immigrants are an economic boon, but, if that were so, why do leftist enclaves complain bitterly about receiving them instead of requesting more?

Truth check: Immigrants cost taxpayers $150 billion annually, a number that is growing. Even worse is the humanitarian crisis caused by cartels victimizing women and children vulnerable to “human trafficking.”

Illegal immigrants are often erroneously referred to in the popular press as “asylum seekers.” That’s a lie. Imaginary asylum seeking is the (very successful) strategy used to circumvent lawful border enforcement. Immigrants not otherwise eligible for entry are coached to say, “I feel unsafe,” to border agents. That automatically entitles them to an asylum hearing, which, because of the crowding at the border, is scheduled years in the future.

Democrats like to pretend there is nothing they can do about the ongoing border invasion because Republicans once voted against a bill that included additional border funding. But if Republicans were willing to discuss comprehensive immigration reform, maybe we could talk.

That gives away their game. “Comprehensive” reform is a euphemism for citizenship. The Biden administration willingly pays a high price politically for its devastating border policies. The hardships caused by unlimited immigration are causing widespread resentment. An election looms.

Yet they soldier on, refusing to consider even the most reasonable measures to reduce the ongoing surge. There’s only one possible explanation: They are playing the long game, taking hits now to achieve future political domination.

They see the 20 million or so foreign nationals now living here as future Democrats, who they will relentlessly portray as victims, if not eventually granting them citizenship. The gambit will work again. The American political landscape will be changed forever.

There is a way out. It’s not more money. It’s not more laws. It’s not even a wall. We must simply follow the example of decent self-respecting nations throughout history and employ the lawful force of government to maintain our sovereign borders.

Follow the law. It’s doable, it’s moral, and it’s necessary to protect legal immigrants, American citizens and America’s future.

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.