Mayor’s idea is more problem than answer

It is all too easy to list the problems that come with illegal immigration, which by just about any measure cost the U.S. greatly. A 2004 report by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, for instance, pegged illegal immigration’s cost to California at more than $10 billion a year. Educating immigrants and their children cost $7.7 billion. Providing healthcare cost $1.4 billion. Keeping the ones who commit crimes in prison cost another $1.4 billion.

Citing the costs of these problems is, indeed, easy. Finding solutions to those problems is far more difficult.

Costa Mesa will not find its answer in a proposal -- put forth by Mayor Allan Mansoor last week -- to have city police trained to enforce immigration laws in the course of their regular duties.

The problems with Mansoor’s plan, which the City Council is set to debate Tuesday night, are myriad. They are both practical and political.

Practically, it is difficult to see how this policy can be implemented fairly.

Who will be targeted? It is inconceivable to think that under the exact same circumstances -- a traffic violation, for instance -- a blond man with a German accent would be treated the same as a Latino man with a Spanish accent. Having a Spanish accent is far from suggesting probable cause that a person is in this country illegally. Thinking it is is nothing less than racial profiling.

The basic unfairness of this proposal illustrates the failure of arguments that the police would be enforcing only federal laws, treating immigration status the same as they would murder or drug dealing.

That blond man with the German accent might be a murderer or a drug dealer, but after being pulled over for speeding, he’s likely to go on his way if there is no reason to suspect him of another crime.

Police cannot be expected to routinely investigate every person’s background without cause. It is, in fact, unconstitutional for them to do so. Again, having a Spanish accent is far from probable cause that a person is in this country illegally.

Also, the proposal would not be especially practical for Costa Mesa police officers, who would suddenly be saddled with a whole new level of responsibility. Costa Mesa Police Chief John Hensley already has raised concerns about the proposal’s cost, how it would hurt officers’ handling of other crimes, and perhaps reduce their response time in moments of crisis.

Perhaps the most disturbing practical problem with Mansoor’s proposal is how it would practically destroy any working relationship police officers have with Costa Mesa’s Latino community, a relationship the Police Department has spent years trying to build.

Instead of looking to the police for help in a crisis, Latinos in Costa Mesa would understandably avoid any contact with the authorities -- even ones not wearing a badge.

Would anyone want his or her children going to school with other students who are afraid to go to a doctor if they are sick? Do we want children to be afraid to go to the police if they are being hurt?

Such are the unintended consequences of this plan.

The political problem with the proposal is that immigration is an issue that needs to be handled at a federal level, despite what Costa Mesa’s Rep. Dana Rohrabacher told the Pilot.

Rohrabacher’s assertion that “the impetus for reform is going to have to come from the bottom and not from the top” is nothing more than abdicating the job he was elected to do. The issue cannot be solved just within Costa Mesa’s city limits.

Now, were there to be a national program involving law enforcement at all levels, the argument would be entirely different. There is the chance, then, that it could be effective.

Proponents of this plan will point out, rightly, that illegal immigrants by their very nature are lawbreakers. For that reason alone, there is no denying that it is a problem that the country -- the country -- needs to solve.

Costa Mesa alone will not be able to do so, but its City Council certainly could add to the problem by approving the mayor’s understandable but misguided proposal.