COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM NEEDED INSTEAD OF A WALL

MAY 3, 2008

(The following testimony was presented at the Field Hearing of the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans on April 28 at the University of Texas-Brownsville.)

As I begin my testimony, let me offer a few observations that will allow for a substantive and fruitful discussion on the proposed topic of this hearing, “Walls and Waivers: Expedited Construction of the Southern Border Wall and Collateral Impacts to Communities and the Environment.”

As a man dedicated to pastoral ministry, let me remind everyone here that the issues before this Subcommittee should not be used for partisan advantage. We have to guard against policy disputes that encourage or excuse ethnic hostility or discrimination. We must continue to seriously discuss legitimate concerns regarding the protection of our borders, curbing the flow of unlawful immigration, the potential displacement of native workers, and the possibility of exploitation within guest worker programs. These issues are not to be ignored, exaggerated, dismissed, or used as political weapons. The Church calls for charity and justice at all times, and especially in a public forum such as this.

The “Wall” has been discussed very frequently and thoroughly in this part of Texas, because our community is a border community. For many Americans the emphasis is on the word “border” but for those families that have lived in this area for generations, the reality is that the community comes first and our community has existed long before the border was ever drawn. This Wall, built on US Soil, will not only move the US border inward from the Rio Grande River, but will also alienate people and businesses who live and work between the Wall and the border, in effect creating a zone where US citizens and businesses exist “south of the border.”
In addition to the existing human community, which has thrived in this land for hundreds of years, the Rio Grande Valley houses several wildlife refuges and parks that preserve God’s creation. Wildlife areas including the International Falcon Reservoir, Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge, Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge, Nature Conservancy’s Southmost Preserve and Texas Sabal Palm Sanctuary would be threatened by such a wall. These parks enhance family life in our community. Therefore, let me humbly advise the Subcommittee that the word “expedite” should not be a part of this dialogue. For a great many people living in the Rio Grande Valley building a wall along the border would not mean protection from the outside world, but instead, the collateral impact of building a wall would mean building a barrier between families, friends, and businesses. I am very concerned, as well, about the wall’s proposed location and the possibility that it might be a barrier that may prevent us from fulfilling our pastoral mission in parts of this diocese. It would be wrong to discuss this in terms of expediting construction before our community has had a chance to voice its opinion on the merits of why we oppose the wall.

We oppose the construction of the wall because one-dimensional solutions may be simple, but they are often illusions and can make things worse. No fence we can build will be long enough or high enough to wall out the human and economic forces that drive undocumented immigrants into our country. We oppose the wall because immigration policies that begin and end at our borders will not be successful. We oppose this wall because residents of the Valley—and visitors from across the country—stand to lose the opportunity to visit the vibrant wildlife areas unique to our Valley, places where all can discover and connect with God’s creation and with one another. I have, therefore, supported Valley Interfaith’s petition against the Border Wall and have invited our parishioners to support it, as well. To date over 10,000 registered voters have signed this petition. Instead of a wall, we need Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Instead of a wall, we need national policies that help overcome the pervasive poverty and deprivation, violence and oppression that push people to leave their own homes. We need policies that promote family unity, debt reduction, economic development, foreign aid and fair global trade. These are essential elements that the Church recommends for effective comprehensive immigration reform.

Let me say again, that rather than debating the impacts of a wall, what we need is a constructive discussion that neither diminishes our nation nor divides our communities, but instead achieves realistic, practical, and principled steps towards solving the challenges that face our nation.

+Bishop Raymundo J. Peña

last updated 19-Sep-2008 13:30 sitemap