< }}” alt=”2010-07-30T012238Z_01_PHX11_RTRIDSP_0_USA-IMMIGRATION-ARIZONA_1_.jpg” width=”300″ />Normally, the TNM would applaud local officials embracing Texas independence. What self-respecting Texas Nationalist hasn’t envisioned an elected official standing up to the D.C. bureaucrats and refusing to enforce some Federal mandate? At this point, Texans would applaud any elected official “showing some backbone” when face-to-face with the Federal machine, no matter how small.
But the latest flap over illegal immigration and the sanctuary city policy in Dallas shows exactly how tangled these issues are and points clearly that the only way to untangle this mess is Texas independence.
This issue poked its head above water over the past several days with an announcement from Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez that her office would consider federal requests to turn over jailed illegal immigrants on a “case by case” basis and would not automatically honor requests to hold them for Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.
This announcement was followed by what has become Governor Greg Abbott’s most frequently used weapon as Governor – a tersely worded letter.
Abbott’s message in the letter was clear. The Sheriff’s catch-and-release approach to illegal immigrants who break the law in Texas “will no longer be tolerated in Texas.”
Valdez response was equally clear. “Our policy is very similar to Federal policy.”
And therein lies the root of the problem.
Texans have consistently indicated that they want a sane border and immigration policy. An overwhelming majority of Texans have indicated in multiple polls that it is their number one concern. Texans have consistently indicated that they view the Federal Government’s management of the border as abysmal and their belief that Texas could do a better job of managing both the border and immigration.
But Texas is part of a Union run by a Federal Government primarily comprised of people that were not elected by Texans. That same Federal Government has a border and immigration policy that is rooted more in social engineering, their concern for the immigrants, and their “feelings” than on any of the day-to-day realities faced by Texans or any concern for the well-being of the people that they allegedly govern. These Federal policies are mimicked by a Texas Sheriff that is similarly driven by their “feelings” on the issue. This, in turn, puts the Texas Governor, who swore an oath on a document that refers to Texas as a “free and independent state”, in the position of telling a Texas Sheriff that she should comply with Federal law even though the rule of law has long departed from the Federal Government.
But play out the same scenario with a completely different issue – guns.
Texans have consistently shown that they believe in few to no restrictions on gun ownership. If a Texas Sheriff refused to enforce Federal gun restrictions, would the Governor, given his stance on the right to keep and bear arms, be quick to defend the Sheriff or would he demand that they obey Federal law?
You could run this scenario on any number of issues. They would be legitimate questions although the answers don’t really matter other than they would expose the real problem facing Texans.
Texans want to govern themselves one way. The Federal Government wants to govern us a different way. What’s best for the Washington bureaucrats and the other States is almost never what’s best for Texas. And, as long as Texas as in the Union, the Federal Government gets what the Federal Government wants. Feelings and all.