Chicago officials enact amnesty!

Last updated on: February 10, 2016 at 8:53 am by Jane the Actuary

Chicago officials enact amnesty! 2016-02-10T08:53:23-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Library officials, that is.

As announced by the Chicago Tribune (paywall) and eNews Park Forest (non-paywall), the Chicago Public Libarary is offering a fine amnesty. For a two-week period, borrowers may return their overdue items with no fines, and library staff hope that, as a side benefit, people who’d stayed away from the library will renew their library cards and become regular users.

You’ll note that no one is proposing that an amnesty means that people simply get to keep their library materials, with or without paying their fines.

In other everyday uses of the word “amnesty,” the issue is likewise a matter of cancelling fines, not granting new benefits. A “parking fine amnesty” for scofflaws who have been parking in prohibited places doesn’t grant them the right to access those parking spots — it just takes away the fines.

An amnesty for pot smokers? It would take away fines, but certainly wouldn’t be equivalent to the legalization of pot.

What about “amnesty” in its usage when a civil war is ended, say, somewhere in Africa, for instance, with South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission? I would assume that, even then, if an individual were guilty of property theft (as opposed to crimes of murder, torture, etc.), he would be required to return the stolen property to the victim.

All of which means that, when we speak of a mass legalization program for individuals who crossed the border illegally or overstayed visas, and who worked under the table or with false identification, we are not really speaking of amnesty. And, yes, I know that the terminology is a legacy from the 1986 “amnesty.” But I was in high school then, and not in a position to object to calling it “amnesty.”

A true amnesty program would actually be a just and right action to take, and would be limited in scope: it would offer certain groups of people who came illegally but now, for various reasons would be eligible for legal residency but for the penalties that apply to them from their initial illegal actions. This would include spouses of Americans, in s0-called “mixed status” marriages, as well as students eligible for student visas, and educated workers who would be able to find employment as H1-B applicants. And from what I learned when I last wrote about this, legislation to remove existing penalties has in the past been held hostage to wider legalization programs, which is not just.

So (in the category of “wishful thinking”) I’d like to see a few politicians, or pundits at least, change the conversation by saying, “yes, I support amnesty. I would back a bill that would waive penalties for people who came illegally but now have grounds to apply for legal status, as spouses, students, or skilled workers. What I don’t support is a mass legalization program.” Repeat, repeat, repeat.

Why? Because our discussion around the topic of illegal immigration has turned Orwellian, with politicians swearing up and down, “I don’t support amnesty,” then later on admitting that’s because (in the political variation of lying with fingers crossed) they’ve defined “amnesty” to mean “granting of legal residency without preconditions” and they’re willing to attach a precondition, such a promise to attend an English class, to their legalization program.

Stay in touch! Like Jane the Actuary on Facebook:

Jane the Actuary

I share blog posts there, as well as other worthwhile articles I come across that don’t necessarily make it into blog posts.

Uncategorized

amnesty

illegal immigrants

Previous Post

February 8, 2016

Three reasons I'm skeptical about the Year of Mercy

Next Post

February 9, 2016 My dream jobs (sigh. . .)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the king of Babylon during the exile of the Israelites?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Belshazzar Nebuchadnezzar Cyrus Darius