In our Pro vs Con series, we ask two experts to weigh in on a hot button topic. This week, we tackle the immigration debate. Stacey Swimp is a spokesperson for Project 21 and president of the Frederick Douglass Foundation of Michigan.
Swimp: States’ rights are “not granted by the U.S. Constitution to the federal government and not forbidden to the states by the Constitution.” Alabama, South Carolina, Arizona and states that are stepping up to the plate to enact state immigration policies are exercising the authority given to the states, by the U.S. Constitution, to “administer equal protection under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.” These laws are not “tough”, as liberals suggest, nor are they forbidden by the Constitution. These state laws are necessary to ensure the safety and general well being of American citizens where the federal government has failed to do so. Moreover, they are in accordance with the responsibility given to government by the Constitution to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, and promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” Illegal aliens have created public health crisis (i.e., reappearance of polio, etc.), public safety crisis (30% of all federal prisoners are illegal aliens) and drained our public dollars. For example, illegal aliens cost taxpayers $28.795 billion annually at the federal level, overshadowed by outlays of $84.211 billion at the state and local level. Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. (See The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers.”) The states have taken credible steps to address the aforementioned crisis.
To read the full article, please click here.