The Jan. 29 editorial "Let Haitians in" was admirably soft-hearted. But it was also soft-headed.
The editorial and two op-eds within three days demanded significant increases in Haitian immigration. But why Haiti? It's poor and hurting, of course -- which is why we've rightly launched a massive relief effort. But troubled as Haiti is, many countries are far worse off. Congo, for instance, is much poorer than Haiti, and years of brutal war have caused widespread suffering. How many of Congo's 69 million people should we admit?
And what justification is there for expediting immigration applications of people outside the earthquake zone, which is what The Post implicitly called for, while most in the zone languish because they don't have a relative in Miami? Even before the earthquake, a Gallup poll indicates that half of Haiti's 9 million people want to emigrate. Any "humanitarian" immigration scheme like this would inevitably be capricious.
Immigration to the United States can never make even a small dent in the world's misery, with 5 billion people poorer than the average Mexican. The place to help Haitians is in Haiti, not the United States.