LETTERS: ‘Immigration reform’ a misnomer

To the editor:

“Immigration reform” is a term used quite often by crafty politicians seeking favor. In nearly all instances, the term is used incorrectly. By definition, reform means to remove abuses or faults. Therefore, true immigration reform would improve the efficiency of border patrols and prevent massive illegal immigration, as well as enforce current immigration laws.

Immigration activists claim we need to change the immigration laws because there are millions of immigrants in this country who are enduring hardships due to their illegal status. The activists claim that these people are not criminals, even though they broke the law by illegally entering the country. The activists’ solution to this problem is not to increase enforcement of the current laws, but to grant all undocumented immigrants a pardon.

They make no mention of the impact upon future illegal immigration. Pardons for undocumented immigrants have been tried before and weren’t effective in dealing with this problem. A pardon of all undocumented immigrants in this country basically rewards those who do not have respect for the laws of this country and enter the country illegally, rather than applying for immigration through lawful channels.

Highly skilled and educated immigrants enter the country through proper legal channels and provide welcome skills to our workforce. I cannot imagine that a professional such as a doctor, engineer or educator would enter this country illegally. I would imagine that most families entering this country legally would be highly skilled and would have children who are fluent in English and would not pose a burden on our educational system.

Under the present situation, most of the undocumented immigrants are not highly skilled, and their children do not speak English. Because of their undocumented status and lack of native language skills, their assimilation into American society is hindered.

Activists want to paint the local populace as villains and racists, when the exact opposite is true. Undocumented immigrants suffer because of their illegal status and lack of skills, and they resent those legal citizens who have more than them.

PATRICIA LEE

LAS VEGAS

Gay marriage

To the editor:

Compliments to Chuck Davison on his well-composed May 13 letter regarding gay marriage. However, I am not in accord with many aspects of his opinion. Religion has been inculcated into marriage by choice. It is also a social and legal institution formed to found and maintain a family. It’s a lawyer’s paradise, and thus it should be adjudicated by the Supreme Court to clear up the morass of different ideas and regulations, from tax benefits to health care decisions.

I respect one’s religion, but it is possible to have marriage without religion. Family structure can change. Two people of the same sex can rear children. Gay people should have the same rights as others. If society decrees you have to be married to obtain those rights, then it is prejudicial to deny them.

WILLIAM V. LOFTON

NORTH LAS VEGAS

State offices and solar

To the editor:

I don’t think it is the state of Nevada’s duty to prop up the bottom line of utility companies. Having said that, why don’t all state office buildings and state parking lots have solar panels?

Any state project is supposed to be designed to get the job done as efficiently as possible. Just imagine how much would be saved, for example, if all schools were retrofitted with solar panels. That money could build more schools or pay additional teachers’ salaries.

Let’s use the resources that are unique to our state to bring us into the 21st century.

WILLIAM BRZEZINSKI

NORTH LAS VEGAS