Our View: Immigration shouldn't be divisive

The most recent proposals advanced by Gov. Tim Pawlenty to crack down on illegal immigration include some that make sense, others that are predictably contentious and still others, which require approval from the Legislature, that are dead on arrival.

The executive orders should make a dent in criminal activities. They include:

n Requiring a select number of law enforcement officers to work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to enforce customs laws.

n Requiring verification of immigration status for state jobs and contracts.

n Directing the Department of Public Safety to review driver’s license photos for possible fraud.

n Calling on the Department of Public Safety to co-host, along with state law enforcement agencies and ICE, a series of training exercises for law enforcement personnel across the state.

Several Minnesota communities, especially those with large food-processing plants in the vicinity, have benefitted from immigration — and from illegal immigrants, too, the vast majority law-abiding and hard-working. But it is wrong to imply these towns aren’t also dealing with serious problems associated with document fraud. The mayor of one of those communties told The Free Press only last week that he regrets the “undercover society” that exists due to burgeoning false identities. It causes serious problems for police, for schools (growing ESL classes cost money, and only a portion is funded by the state), and for health-care professionals.

Politically, the Minnesota landscape for dealing with illegal immigration is not good. Bitter division is palpable. When Pawlenty issued his latest proposals, he was immediately attacked by Democrats for posturing.

But we suspect most Minnesotans are tired of the division imbedded in the immigration debate. Instead, every side to this debate should consider solutions that all can agree on, then go on to the next step. In Minnesota, we should agree that tougher enforcement of existing laws is helpful, and equipping the law enforcement community with tools and education to assist in this effort is beneficial as well. Police want to do their jobs and they don’t necessarily want to be transformed into immigration agents. But many of them want to be able to inquire about status, though not forced to.

There are difficulties inherent in checking IDs for falsification (it costs time and money), but there need not be “sides” on that issue; rather, there should be more effort made into making it work. Increased penalties for identity theft is also a good idea.

The governor’s legislative proposals are bound to fail, however, at least this year. Pawlenty wants to ban sanctuary ordinances and prohibit local governments from restricting the ability of police to ask questions about immigration status. The Democratic-led Legislature will balk at taking up these proposals.

Proposed legislation to punish employers who knowingly employ or recruit illegals sounds good but needs more discussion. Pawlenty wants employers who use the Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify program as evidence of compliance, but the issue is far too explosive to be solved so easily.

Again, look for common ground.

As far as the governor’s most recent ideas, it would be better to view them as starting points rather than to dismiss them out of hand. Pawlenty has listened to illegal immigration worries from mayors and law enforcement personnel from across Minnesota since coming into office. It isn’t a stretch to say that, instead of forcing the action, he is rather responding to legitimate concerns of those who are on the front lines.