MRRL hosts discussion on immigration

Robert Pinhero moderates the "Coming to America: Immigration Forum" on Thursday at the Missouri River Regional Library. The discussion centered on the issue of immigration. In the background is Charlie German.
Robert Pinhero moderates the "Coming to America: Immigration Forum" on Thursday at the Missouri River Regional Library. The discussion centered on the issue of immigration. In the background is Charlie German.

Missouri River Regional Library hosted a discussion about U.S. choices on immigration Thursday night.

The "Coming to America: Immigration Forum," which is a National Issues Forum, took a deep look at immigration from three perspectives.

Robert Pinhero moderated the discussion. The only ground rule was participants respect each other. After completing the discussion, participants filled out a questionnaire about it.

"These have been going on all over the country for the last couple of months," he said. "The sheets will be used to start a dialogue with some legislative committees. (Organizers) aren't going to solve the immigration issue, but they are trying to get people to discuss it in a civil manner."

NIF is a network of organizations that brings together people from around the United States to talk about news-making social and political issues, according to the National Issues Forums Institute. Schools, libraries, churches and civics groups have hosted the forums, designed to give people a public voice in issues affecting their communities.

"I felt strongly about discussing this issue at the library," Library Director Claudia Cook said. "I feel strongly about libraries being a neutral platform, where we can talk about potentially controversial topics in a civil way."

Participants were given a booklet that considered three options for approaching the issue. The institute has developed issues booklets to help frame, support and streamline conversations, Pinhero said. The goal is to contain discussions so the issues can be covered in a couple of hours, he said.

The first option in the book was to broadly welcome all immigrants as "the right thing to do." The position says open immigration creates "a dynamic and diverse culture, an engine of global economy and a beacon of freedom."

Frank Rycyk said broad immigration from his point of view was desirable. He argued borders are imaginary things created by people. And they can be undone by people.

Downsides to this broad approach to immigration, detractors say, is it rewards unauthorized immigrants for breaking the law, it would weaken America's sense of unity and common purpose, it would make getting accurate background checks more difficult and it would divert resources from other vulnerable Americans.

Another option, according to the pamphlet, is to strictly enforce existing immigration laws and be fair to those who follow the rules. This approach calls for strengthened border security, crack downs on visa overstays and introduction of measures to deal with unauthorized immigrants.

Detractors say this option (including deportation) would tear families apart, drive a wedge between law enforcement and immigrants, and compromise public safety by discouraging some immigrants from reporting crime. Cracking down on "sanctuary cities" undermines local authority, they say, adding prosecuting employers who hire unauthorized workers would injure some industries.

"We run into so many (immigrants) here in the library," Cook said. "They are hard-working, family-oriented people who are grateful to be here."

Americans take so much for granted, she said. When she meets someone who doesn't take things for granted, it touches her, she said.

Holly Grantham said she discussed immigration with her children before attending the forum.

"Put yourself in their shoes," she told them. "What would you need or want?

"They want to be here."

The third option is to take a "measured approach" to immigration, by slowing down and accommodating newcomers without compromising national unity, according to the booklet.

This approach embraces the diversity of American society.

The downside, according to the pamphlet, is it prevents many of the workers some industries rely on from entering the country, limits the flow of lawful immigrants, makes it more difficult for minorities to integrate into culture and may hurt high-skilled American workers by letting employers more easily hire high-skilled foreign workers.

Pinhero warned about taking a hard-line stance toward either end of a topic of discussion. He said sides need to find ways to compromise.

"A no-give-in position," Pinhero said, "results in no change."