Democrats & Liberals Archives

Human Beings Are Not Illegal !

Sometimes a placard at a demonstration captures the essence of truth more effectively than any opinion piece.

The Senate and Bush have reached a compromise plan on immigration which provides a pathway for those here illegally to acquire residency, and attempts to stanch the flow of more unlawful immigration here in the meantime.

As some pundits have noted, there's something in the compromise to upset everyone, and no one will call it perfect. Let's be real, though. There IS NO perfect solution. There may not even be a good one.

You will be hearing the hue and cry from those who understandably fear that any solution which appears to reward illegal behavior will only encourage more.

I am sympathetic to those concerns, but the fact is that the demand for coming to our land of opportunity despite risks of every imaginable kind has been and always will remain very high. People will get here regardless of how high the fence, or how high the penalty for being caught. We do want to take care not to make it so easy to come, and subsequently stay that we become so flooded as to cease functioning. Be skeptical of those who cry that this compromise does just that. It is NOT amnesty.

You will hear far less the concerns from the other side about the innocent children of poor immigrants who will have neither the money nor the connections to come up with the necessary $5000, and will end up leaving the only world they've ever known, to face a dire and uncertain future in the land of their parents, or else have to give up their parents entirely.

Practical considerations played into this compromise as well they should have.

Compassion should be considered as well. Compassion is an American value.

We are a nation of immigrants - the tired, the weary, the huddled masses.

No we cannot take everyone, and yes the rule of law is important - but whose laws, and written to what end. When refugees come here, their stories are as varied as the human story. Some escaped persecution, some poverty or hopelessness, most have the hope of improving their lot. Some break our laws once they are here, and richly deserve deportation, other break only the law of entering and undeniably contribute positively to our society. This complex variety coupled with the fact that millions are here illegally who are already woven into the fabric of our society, is what is bound to make ANY solution problematic.

We do not have the resources to "round them all up", even if we had the will. The practical impact of mass deportation, even if it were doable, would likely be just as catastrophic as doubling the number of immigrants here. The Tancredos and Sensenbrenners pander to fears, as they offer up utterly impractical solutions that they know have no chance of passing, much less being implemented. We rely on the labor of these "illegals" for our daily life.

Each person here due to illegal immigration is a human being. Some have espaced real persecution. Many are children - not "anchor babies". Their stories are varied and a perfect solution would consider each individually. That's impossible. Practical solutions require some global parameters, which necessarily can't be completely fair. The art of compromise necessitates imperfection. Be skeptical of those crying emergency.

Here are some varying perspectives on the issue:
White House fact sheet press release
Study questioning the assumptions about illegal immigration's contribution to the health care crisis.

Posted by Walker Willingham at May 18, 2007 2:15 PM
Comments
Comment #220746

Everybody is putting the cart before the horse. We don’t have to “round them all up” and send them back where they came from. All we have to do is enforce the existing laws, i.e., prosecute employers who hire illegal/undocumented/people who aren’t supposed to be here [choose your own euphemism]. If the supply of jobs dries up, the people who came here illegally will go back home, and no more will come. Duh!

Posted by: Dragon at May 18, 2007 2:39 PM
Comment #220750
mass deportation

I haven’t seen anyone (except fear-mongers as a red herring) advocate mass deportation. They need to be deported as they are found.

And many ARE anchor babies.

Of course they are human beings, and of course we are a country of immigrants, LEGAL immigrants.

If they pay the fine, go back to their own country to apply for a green card, then I’m for it. I don’t buy the “no americans will do the work” crap. I have done the work as have others I know.

The employers who hire illegal aliens need to have a punishment that takes away any and all profit they have made by using illegals, then a little more. Perhaps they would think twice then.

The perfect solution is to enforce the existing laws and secure the borders.

Posted by: womanmarine at May 18, 2007 2:55 PM
Comment #220755

Walker,

Well said. Great post.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at May 18, 2007 3:15 PM
Comment #220759

Why even PRETEND work inforcement is the way to control the boarder. You know it’s a (keep the boarders wide open) red herring, I know it’s a red herring. It’s a bogus attempt to pass useless laws so that those who want the boarders secure can pretend we haven’t just decided to leave them wide open.

And, while we are talking about what democrats are doing in the US…where are all these plans the democrats said they had…their super secret plans, to bring down the price of gas. Oh, vote democratic, they will pee cheap gas. But now they are telling me that I’m causing the glaciers to melt and that they may have to massively tax me…..and none of the DO NOTHING democrat congress has DONE NOTHING to lower my gas prices.

Gee, do you think they lied to me when they told me they could make gas cheap again?

And as far as the do nothing dems….when are they going to pass Kyoto? The control congress….why don’t they pass it? And why didn’t Clinton and Gore send it to congress when they had control of congress? Why do dems PRETEND to support Kyoto…then refuse to pass it when they have control of congress and the Whitehouse as they did in the Clinton days? And now they have congress and once again no Kyoto.

Too bad about how Kyoto is working out in Europe ehh? All those countries saying they would NEVER be able to meet the targets! Only a few will meet them, the rest have announced it’s not going to happen. Talk about defective, bogus, useless environmental treaty. And of course, it’s all Bush’s fault right?

Comon dems, kick your leaders and make them actually fix something, do something besides institutionalizing an illegal migration across US boarders.

Where is my Social Security Fix

Where is my Medicare Fix.

Where is my balanced Budgets?

Why are dems spending more than republicans and planning to let my taxes go up?

Why don’t dems pass Kyoto if it’s so good?

Why are dems allowing so much corruption form their own leadership in their own ranks?

Posted by: Stephen at May 18, 2007 3:41 PM
Comment #220760

I guess if China figures out a way of dumping several million people on our shores in order reduce their population issues we won’t be able to boot them out either. Then add India and a bunch of other countries struggling with over population finding ways to unload their excess population on us. Even if that doesn’t happen what makes you think the flow from south of the border will ever slow down (without putting up a fence)? How many tens of millions of these people do we need to absorb before you would say enough? Do we need to have cities like Mexico city with 20 million people? Why don’t we have a right to limit who and how many enter this country? As our farm land disspears under a mountain of new housing and strip malls just how are we going to feed this mass?

Posted by: carnak at May 18, 2007 3:50 PM
Comment #220761

Everybody is putting the cart before the horse. We don’t have to “round them all up” and send them back where they came from. All we have to do is enforce the existing laws, i.e., prosecute employers who hire illegal/undocumented/people who aren’t supposed to be here [choose your own euphemism]. If the supply of jobs dries up, the people who came here illegally will go back home, and no more will come. Duh!


Posted by: Dragon at May 18, 2007 02:39 PM

Very good post Dragon. Thinking, caring and compassionate persons have been saying for years that the solution already exists, we simply do not have the will to do the obvious. First, build a fence (or whatever) to stop the flow across the border. Then enforce existing legislation regarding employers. No jobs, no money, no incentive to stay here illegally. Let us welcome those from “all over the world” who know our language, have skills we can use, and who love this country enough to obey our laws. Finally, end the stupidity of granting citizenship to a person simply because they are born on our soil by parents here illegally. Please help me, is there any other country in the entire world that has such idiotic laws? Oh, yes, lest I forget, let’s not allow some cities to declare themselves “illegal immigrant safe city” status. That’s as offensive as mayors marrying same sex couples in violation of the laws of their own state. If this practice of obeying only the laws one agrees with continues we face national anarchy.

Posted by: Jim at May 18, 2007 4:21 PM
Comment #220763

Walker,

How about “criminal aliens”. That ok with you? At least we know humans can be criminals.

wkw

Posted by: wkw at May 18, 2007 4:40 PM
Comment #220764

I’m in agreement with several on here…womanmarine, carnak, dragon, Jim T….
We are a country of (LEGAL) immigrants, who followed the rules and were determined to bring their culture here and add it to the rest of the mix in creating what we have now become. These (LEGAL) immigrants did not come in demanding that we change our rules and laws to suit them. Doesn’t it just make you mad as hell to see these (ILLEGAL) immigrants gathered in the streets trying to repudiate our laws and rules and trampling our principles and flying their flag above the Stars and Stripes?????
These other posters are right…cut off the drawing power and they won’t continue to feel such a need to come here. They can quit destroying and disabling our services and providers ….they can quit taking our money back to their economy and stay there and build their own.
If you think this is hate, then I think you’re very wrong and need to look at reality. This, is survival!!!! OURS !!! Or if you don’t see that happening to us, then look ahead just a short time to our children, and theirs. I’ve got news for you……they will not be left the United States of America that it has been a privelege and honor to enjoy like we have.
I will also bow to the opinions that think this is just another exercise in futility, too. I don’t believe this bill will go any farther than the others have…………

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at May 18, 2007 4:46 PM
Comment #220767

Oh come on, y’all can do better than that.

What about:
“How about some compassion for the taxpayer that is funding their kids’ education, their impact on the infrastructure and health care system, and caving to demands to make us bilingual?”

or:
“How about fairness for those waiting in line legally to obtain immigration status?”

Actually there’s a whole host of very reasonable objections to this bill, from many perspectives, and on many grounds. I expect to hear more. No doubt there are many better plans for dealing with the problem, than this particular one.

Still it’s pretty amazing when a compromise can get Ted Kennedy and Saxby Chambliss to agree on something. David in his opposing perspective in our center column astutely observes that there is a coalition of business interests with Democratic interest in swelling of their likely base that even makes such a compromise possible.

Nonetheless, it’s the compassion and reasonableness which both sides supporting the compromise can fall back on to buoy their case. It’s a rare day when this liberal will quote G.W. Bush, and actually agree with him:

This is a bill where people who live here in our country will be treated without amnesty but without animosity.

Dragon & womanmarine, you say by enforcing existing laws on employment we won’t need a massive roundup, and the undocumented workers without work will simply have to return. But the problem is that the demand for this labor exists, and we all benefit by its being met. If an undocumented worker is filling a niche, paying taxes, and woven into the fabric of our society, penalizing their employer for hiring them, the beneficiaries of their labor for having that work accomplished, and their friends and neighbors for losing their friendship is mean to far more than the worker.

As our friends in the Republican column love to point out, the economy is rolling along and unemployment remains relatively low. It’s not that all American citizens are unwilling to do the same unskilled work - it’s that there aren’t enough citizens to replace the labor pool which is doing it if they suddenly all went away.

I agree with liberal detractors of this compromise that it’s a problem when cheaper labor undermines collective bargaining and the ability of the working class to demand a living wage and reasonable working conditions. I’m all in favor of many liberal proposals for returning balance to the relationship between management and labor. But I will not scapegoat hardworking people whose lot was far worse south of the border or elsewhere, and pretend that their removal, by whatever means, will solve those issues.

We can’t get on top of this issue with a simple obvious fix. Some better solutions than the current proposed one are politically problematic. Creating a process which brings undocumented workers into a more open position, allows businesses which rely on them to continue to function, and honors the reality that many have become a functioning part of our society - legally or not - seems a reasonable first step to me.

And yes, where miscreants are identified who don’t have proper documentation, let’s deport them.

Posted by: Walker Willingham at May 18, 2007 5:17 PM
Comment #220773
If an undocumented worker is filling a niche, paying taxes, and woven into the fabric of our society, penalizing their employer for hiring them, the beneficiaries of their labor for having that work accomplished, and their friends and neighbors for losing their friendship is mean to far more than the worker.

How, exactly, do you figure they are paying taxes? Are they paid at least minimum wage? Benefits? Do they pay school and property taxes? Please.

Posted by: womanmarine at May 18, 2007 6:31 PM
Comment #220777

Human Beings Are Not Illegal !

But their actions can be. Making them criminals. What is the PC nonsense, Walker. Are we now going to frown on calling thieves, rapists, and murderers criminals because they are human beings. Illegal immigrants are illegal because they didn’t come into this country by LEGAL means. That makes them ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

Your spin is pure poppycock! Illegal immigration is a huge and growing problem in America and the way to address it is to HALT immigrants at the border who are not INVITED through our legal system. YES, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. They are immigrants. They crossed into this country illegally. They are illegal immigrants. A portion of these illegals are coming from the Middle East as well, our government says Hezbollah are amongst them.

Guess you Democrats won’t be wake up until a number of Synagogues are bombed by these illegal immigrants. Are you aware that of the 155,000 illegal immigrants apprehended in 2005, (mind you 1 million came in), many were from Communist China. Are you aware that the CIA has reported that China now has a spy network in America every bit as extensive as the Soviet Union had during the Cold War?

Check it out, while you move to pass this Compromise of our national security you call a comprehensive immigration bill. Of course, responsible folks would check it out BEFORE supporting this sham of an immigration bill which will leave our nation vulnerable until it is too late for many innocent Americans just trying to go about their business. Shades of 9/11 all over again, in the offing.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 18, 2007 7:03 PM
Comment #220779

P.S.

The supporters of this bill claim that it isn’t an amnesty because there are “triggers” or because illegal aliens would have to pay a fine. The public knows better. If I steal a car, I don’t get to keep the car if I pay a fine and pass a driving test. A child would understand the difference. I hope you will too.

A passage from an email sponsored by NumbersUSA against this sham of an immigration bill.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 18, 2007 7:12 PM
Comment #220782

The argument I often hear is we need these undocumented workers to do the work that Americans won’t do. That’s nonsense. Once again, let’s get the border under control, eliminate the jobs for illegals and then, if we find we need more laborers, we can easily increase the immigration quotos from all over the world. Mexico is not the only country with their citizens longing to become Americans. And Mexicans are not the only nationality with a strong work ethic. Why are we discriminating against the rest of the worlds peoples who also wish to come here legally and who will make our melting pot grow and prosper?

Posted by: Jim at May 18, 2007 7:41 PM
Comment #220785

womanmarine,
Absolutely many undocumented or falsely documented workers have taxes withheld from their checks. Some studies have held that “illegal migrants pay taxes at high rates while using public services at low rates.”

David,
It’s not “spin” to acknowledge that some desparate people who, yes, break our laws to get here, subsequently contribute to our society and abide by our other laws, precisely because they want to stay. It’s not “spin” to suggest that we may be better off for this type of “illegal” to remain. The problem, of course, is that it is impractical to determine for every individual who is thus here whether it is better to forgive and provide a path to residency, or to deport.

I am not opposed to halting illegal immigration at the border, but I am opposed to carte blanch solutions that refuse to acknowledge the practical catastrophes that can occur on the other side of the coin. Do you punish children for the misdeeds of their parents - misdeeds often undertaken with the intended benefit of the children? How many generations do we go back? Let’s kick everyone out who is not of Native American descent!

You may be right that it doesn’t add up, and passage of this law will have a net negative effect. I don’t claim to know all of the downstream consequences. But I’m pretty damned sure its not as black and white as you paint it, and I know that many “illegals” are worth their weight in gold. Go read the Scarlet Letter.

Posted by: Walker Willingham at May 18, 2007 8:41 PM
Comment #220788

“It’s not “spin” to acknowledge that some desparate people who, yes, break our laws to get here, subsequently contribute to our society and abide by our other laws, precisely because they want to stay. It’s not “spin” to suggest that we may be better off for this type of “illegal” to remain. The problem, of course, is that it is impractical to determine for every individual who is thus here whether it is better to forgive and provide a path to residency, or to deport.”

It IS spin to suggest that they are not illegal, as the title of this post says.

Posted by: tomd at May 18, 2007 9:19 PM
Comment #220795

David R. Remer:

OUTSTANDING ANALAGY!!!!
If I steal a car and get caught, can I pay a fine and take a driving test to keep the car? Hilarious. Absolutely correct that a child could see this, why can’t you, Walker?

Dragon:
Stephen:
Carnak:
Jim:

High fives to you all!

Sandra Davidson:

You are hitting the nail on the head with what I beleive to be one incorrect assumption. I do think that there is enough “bipartisan” support to get this bill passed, unfortunately. I pray you turn out to be right on this.

Womanmarine:

Make me proud, girl.

Posted by: Beirut Vet at May 18, 2007 11:08 PM
Comment #220798
We are a country of (LEGAL) immigrants, who followed the rules and blah, blah, blah…

Speak for yourself. My ancestors were pirates, con-men, roustabout cowboys, rum runners, bar brawlers and way, way back they were barbarians, cannibals and reavers. At least one deserted the English Navy and jumped ship here back in the 1600s. Knowing my family, half the others were probably shipped here as convicts. ;)

Posted by: American Pundit at May 18, 2007 11:13 PM
Comment #220799

Walker, I have never advocated for sending all illegals here back home. And I never will. That should be decided on a case by case basis. But, NOT until the border is sealed against the return of those we will deport, and against the millions of others who already have plans to come here illegally.

NO solution is valid, nor humane, nor cost effective, nor comprehensive until we FIRST stem the flow at the borders. Absent that, any solution is a sham, a hoax perpetrated upon the American public. I hope and pray the Senate is being swamped by emails and faxes that will deter them from passing this sham. So we can get on with the very first task at hand, allocating funds to seal the borders against the millions with plans to cross it illegally, including those who would harm us in our residences, our places of work, and play. That is the first duty of government.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 18, 2007 11:20 PM
Comment #220803

In her usual concise way, womanmarine nailed it with this:

The employers who hire illegal aliens need to have a punishment that takes away any and all profit they have made by using illegals, then a little more. Perhaps they would think twice then.

The perfect solution is to enforce the existing laws and secure the borders.

That’s it. We don’t really need new legislation, just the actual enforcement of what we already have.

Posted by: Adrienne at May 18, 2007 11:38 PM
Comment #220804

Holy Cow, AP,

I didn’t know you came from such a long lineage of Democrats!!

JD

Posted by: JD at May 18, 2007 11:41 PM
Comment #220831

They came into the country illegally, and all should be sent back. To give them a chance to buy there way to citizenship is a bunch of BS from both parties.

Posted by: KT at May 19, 2007 12:20 PM
Comment #220842

When they become legal, why would they want to do those jobs when they can live on government programs?

Posted by: JM1656 at May 19, 2007 3:18 PM
Comment #220856

Here ya go. I’ll end this whole discussion on how illegals have the right to be here.

The DAY that i can go to mexico, and get equal benefits and rights that they get when mexicans come here illegally, is the day that I will give in to them coming here illegally.

Until that happens they need to fix their own country and stop running here away from their problems and creating them for us.

Mexico is currently whining about US guns flowing into their country! OH POOR BABYS.

Live by the sword and die by the sword (in this case corruption is the sword).

Mexico needs a bowel cleaning of titantic proportions.

Posted by: jrjr at May 19, 2007 8:15 PM
Comment #220857

You never here a single complaint about Canadians coming here. Hell half of Canada could move into the US and nobody would even raise an eyebrow. Why? It’s not because most of them are white, hell half of them speak french as is. Nobody would complain because they carry their own weight.

They don’t have 4-6 kids and obliterate our government with tax credit fees. Seriously, why does a family of six who just came here from mexico get to claim 4 kids and get 5-6000 dollars of our tax money? How is that logically fair? They don’t force a drain on our medical institution that has been growing exponentially (and while it is only one factor that is messing up our healthcare system, it is still a factor).
And canadians tend to keep up on their education where as the average hispanic crossing the border usually has not completed even a 10th grade equivalent and cannot speak english.

My wife is hispanic and i’m helping her raise 3 of her kids so if you call me ‘racist’ I will laugh in your face.

There’s a legal and an illegal way.

Posted by: jrjr at May 19, 2007 8:22 PM
Comment #220858

Rough estimate. Average 3 kids per illegal family.

Family unit size 5.
Low estimate 12 million immigrants. Cut 3 million out for those that may not fit the situation.

9 million / 5 = 1.8 million family units at 3 kids each getting 1000 per child in earned income credit = $5.4 billion dollars per year.

Average legal family that does not qualify for EIC makes around $65k per year (based off two working family members making around 32k per year). They will pay approximately $4000 in taxes.

So 1.35 million american familys are supporting the earned income credit for illegal immigration. This does not count schooling. Free school meals. Medical care. The list goes on…

I want to be a nice guy too. The realization has to set in at some point that there is so much our kindness and economic system can take before we too are put down.

Posted by: jrjr at May 19, 2007 8:41 PM
Comment #220861

Well said, jrjr !!!

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at May 19, 2007 9:15 PM
Comment #220862

Thanks :)

I don’t want to be a jerk about it, but it’s getting pretty bad.

I try to just sweep it under the rug but when I saw 100+ illegals traveling in 3 large groups crossing the freeway one sunday evening a year or so ago it just blew my mind. Sure the border patrol and police had stopped one group on an overpass but to larger groups we traveling like a herd of cattle through 2 other sections of freeway. I actually called 911. It was that rediculous.

A large majority of the people crossing, do not even know, or care of what it took to get this country where it is, and they would not fight for it if it came to that point. I kind of almost wish we would get invaded just so we could see how many of them were back in Mexico within the week.

America is a land of opportunity and I’m proud to be part of it. We really need to get our attention focused to the south however. There is a major problem brewing. Mexico has been living fat off oil revenues and not reinvesting in locating more reserves. Their leaders have no concepts of averaging out income and forming a tax revenue basis. Pemex is getting siphoned for almost every profit cent they make. They have nothing to go prospecting with.

I could see either a partial government collapse due to lack of funding or some form of uprising as the mexican government tries to force more taxes on the people as it loses oil revenue.

Posted by: jrjr at May 19, 2007 9:36 PM
Comment #220873

>>That’s it. We don’t really need new legislation, just the actual enforcement of what we already have.

Posted by: Adrienne at May 18, 2007 11:38 PM

Right! We have just about quit trying to bust drug users, because our prisons filled up too fast. We started to arrest more dealers and mules.

Why our DC brethern think tackling the illegals problem by addressing the illegals themselves will work I’ll never know. The answer is as simple as ABC. Arrest and fine employees who hire them. Make sure, as womanmarine says, that the fine is at least as high as the money made from paying those low wages, plus just a little bit more. How can that not be a better solution than giving out amnesty/5000 dollar citizenships?

malemarine

Posted by: Marysdude at May 19, 2007 10:55 PM
Comment #220882
I didn’t know you came from such a long lineage of Democrats!!

And proud of it. :)

The realization has to set in at some point that there is so much our kindness and economic system can take before we too are put down.

Damned straight. The sooner this bill passes, the sooner we can seal the border and have the workers already here pay into the system so we don’t have to support them anymore.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 20, 2007 1:16 AM
Comment #220891

American Pundit:

How are they going to seal the borders, and who decides that they are adequately sealed?????

If I believed that would actually happen, I might be for some of this, but I have serious doubts.

Posted by: womanmarine at May 20, 2007 2:19 AM
Comment #220896

the illegal will not go away becuse the house and senate doesn;t want too. americans doom, we vote wepay tases, we work at the jobs tht we can barely paying our house morgages.what are we to do Daniel Freeman hospital is close tight, illegals did it, no emermcy, why can’t they go and in prove their country,make their governor work for them, ca. is loaded, we can barely breath.

Posted by: peppi at May 20, 2007 3:25 AM
Comment #220917

jrjr
You are correct that things need to change in Mexico.One large factor is an extremely high population growth rate. There is no government that can adaguately deal with that. The Catolic Church just agravates the problem. A revolution leading to civil war might be in the offing. If that happens our immigrant problem today will be dwarfed by the influx of refugees. In the past we have intervened in Mexican affairs,usually supporting despots.Some of their problems of our making including NAFTA.Something to consider.
As it is there is a great demographic imbalace between our two countries. The immigration patterns in such cases are a natural occurence and no more stoppable that bird migration or tree pollen at least be any means likely in a civilized democracy ie,kill zones,landmines,summary executions and the like. Controlling the flow is a different matter.There are security aspects to consider. A path out of shadow for those already here is a part of this. So is a guest worker program if run fairly,not likely with this administration.
Another consideration is that Mexicans in particular ARE the indigenious people of much of the US.Have you ever looked at American history and thought that maybe we should have give the native people here better treatment? Now is our chance.

Posted by: BillS at May 20, 2007 4:06 PM
Comment #220920
If I believed that would actually happen, I might be for some of this, but I have serious doubts.

The alternative is to argue and DO NOTHING. Republicans fought themselves for years trying to get the borders sealed and nothing happened. Now, there are enought votes to get the process started.

Don’t think this bill is the end of discussion on this issue. It’s not. But, in the past 231 years we got, what, about 5 miles of fence up? This bill puts up hundreds of miles.

David wants 8,000 miles of fence. Fine. I suspect we’ll eventually get there — unless every time a bill is proposed that puts up more fence, you guys tell your representatives to kill it.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 20, 2007 5:17 PM
Comment #220924

“Something there is that does not like a wall.’
Put up a 12 ft. fence and someone shows up with a 20 ft. ladder. Fences are not the solution. Besides the contractors will probably hire undocumented workers to build it.

Posted by: BillS at May 20, 2007 6:00 PM
Comment #220934

A wall would work if the wall could be guarded and monitored with electronic equipment and human eyes from either the National Guard or a Federal Law enforcement task force. At present only about 2.5% to 3% of the Federal budget is spent on Crime prevention and enforcement. This needs to be doubled at the very least. If we could cut the funding of illegals with healthcare and other governmental goodies, and wean some more people off welfare, possibly giving them jobs in border patrol, we would save enough money over the long-haul to probably pay for the entire operation. People don’t want to do anything because it is too expensive and we don’t have the manpower. However, if we could get the situation under control, it would pay for itself eventually. We are talking about a long-term approach, not an immediate fix, and we need to look at the money from that viewpoint. It is embarrassing that the Congress can find so much money to pay for pork projects in their districts at home, but can not find the money for things that are desperately needed to protect the masses.

JD

Posted by: JD at May 20, 2007 9:34 PM
Comment #220936

JD
We are talking about 8000 miles of wall.Our military is engaged elsewhere. Its just not doable without minefields and kill zones etc. These are action that civilized countries do not engage in with nieghbors not at war.
Welfare people for the border patrol?LOL Do you want them on your job?
Cut off medical care? You mean use Doctors and hospitals to enforce immigration laws? They will not do it nor should they for ethical and practical reasons. To do so would increase public health threats as people with communicable deseaes would expose the rest of us. Polio and influenza viruses do not recognize legal status.

Posted by: BillS at May 20, 2007 9:53 PM
Comment #220941

Bills,

Do you really think that every illegal who receives medical attention has polio, aids, or influenza? We are talking about people who are getting all of their medical treatments paid for without proper identification or citizenship as if they were citizens with a medicaid card. If a doctor must give medical attention in an emergency, do so. But, immediately report the illegal for deportation by the authorities. That should be the law. Doctors who treat illegals without paperwork and refuse to report the incident while charging the taxpayers for the treatments are as guilty of crimes as those who hire them as employees. Their attitudes are “SHOW ME THE MONEY”, not, “Oh, those poor immigrants”. It would be nice to know how much of the medical charges to the government for illegal immigrant care is actually medicaid fraud perpetrated by these compassionate doctors. Let’s lay off the pious, all-compassionate nonsense shall we?

Countries protect their borders all the time. Just because we are not at war with Mexico does not give Mexicans a right to a free ride at American citizen’s expense.
I’m not sure certain border-state Congressmen and those from high Latino population states would actually have the intestinal fortitude to protect our borders even if we were at war with Mexico or another Middle American or South American country. They have to get re-elected, you know!

JD

Posted by: JD at May 20, 2007 11:36 PM
Comment #220943

Illegal Aliens.

If your willing to do that illegally… what else are you willing to do illegally!!!

Posted by: Franky at May 21, 2007 12:24 AM
Comment #220944

Oh, and btw.

All the radio stations in California that are broadcasting to use ambulances instead of taxis for emergencies should be ripped from the air waves and thrown in jail.

Has anyone else looked at the mexico imigration policies btw?

Posted by: Franky at May 21, 2007 12:28 AM
Comment #220957
“Each person here due to illegal immigration is a human being. Some have espaced real persecution. Many are children - not “anchor babies”. Their stories are varied and a perfect solution would consider each individually. That’s impossible. Practical solutions require some global parameters, which necessarily can’t be completely fair. The art of compromise necessitates imperfection. Be skeptical of those crying emergency.”


Some of you are acting like America is the “lawbreaker”; America’s the “criminal”; America owes these “illegals” something for the way America is treating them. Some of you just don’t get it!! We are a “Nation of Laws” and wehave to uphold our laws!!!

Posted by: rahdigly at May 21, 2007 12:33 PM
Comment #220962

Precisely as I predicted. Sen. Ken Salazar just moments ago, on the Senate Floor stated there are ONLY 570 miles of border barrier to be erected. 570 miles of a 2000 mile border.

What they are crafting here is a sieve, which has no hope of stemming the illegal immigration tide. The illegals will simply pay coyotes a bit more to take them to where there is no barrier, making their journey more costly and more dangerous, especially once on the U.S. side in remote desert ranches or mountain range.

PAYGO does not apply. No cost for this bill is attached and no request for the cost from CBO has been made. So much for Democratic fiscal responsibility.

A 1000 page bill delivered on Sat. afternoon to be voted on this week. Sounds like a railroading of the bill to me.

Call your Senators today and demand they vote down this S. 1348 bill. It is a sham, a hoax, and irresponsible. These handful of Senators meet in secret, draft a 1000 page bill, and then try to rush it through before the rest of the Senate or the American people have an opportunity to see what’s in it. “Trust us” they say, it was the best that could be accomplished.

I say their best isn’t even close to good enough and their S.1348 bill should be defeated, the Senate sent back to the drawing board to craft TRUE BORDER SECURITY, and these handful should be voted out of office in 2008 if they are up for reelection.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 21, 2007 4:50 PM
Comment #220967

David,

“Precisely as I predicted. Sen. Ken Salazar just moments ago, on the Senate Floor stated there are ONLY 570 miles of border barrier to be erected. 570 miles of a 2000 mile border.

What they are crafting here is a sieve, which has no hope of stemming the illegal immigration tide.”

I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.

Posted by: Rocky at May 21, 2007 6:10 PM
Comment #220968

Give Mexico 90 days to fix the problem, and use that time to bring our troops home from Iraq. When the Mexican government fails to take care of business we take over Mexico and make a new row of stars on the flag. Suddenly there is no problem because they’re all Americans now.

Mexico is a nation rich in natural resources with a completely corrupt government. THAT is why people choose a criminal path that has resulted in a huge problem for my country.

Solve the problem.

Posted by: EdB at May 21, 2007 6:18 PM
Comment #220974

Actually, EdB, that’s a course of action I’ve been suggesting for a while. Well, maybe not the militarily taking of Mexico but why not just engage them in talks to enter statehood?

Posted by: Rhinehold at May 21, 2007 8:47 PM
Comment #220978
…there are ONLY 570 miles of border barrier to be erected.

Wow! That’s GREAT news, David. How many miles of fence are there right now? 5? Isn’t more than ten times that amount better?

Posted by: American Pundit at May 21, 2007 9:25 PM
Comment #220985

AP,

After the thrashing you and I took for saying the fence wouldn’t be built as they predicted…..

Posted by: Rocky at May 21, 2007 10:03 PM
Comment #220990

Hmm… Rocky, I’m not sure what you mean by that. Is it the irony that David really really wanted a fence, and now when the chance comes along to build one, he doesn’t want it anymore?

Frankly, I’m ambivelent over a physical fence. It just makes more sense to me to put more eyes on the border and boots on the ground.

For example, JD says:

A wall would work if the wall could be guarded and monitored with electronic equipment and human eyes from either the National Guard or a Federal Law enforcement task force.

But if you’ve got all that, you don’t actually need a fence too, do you.

BUT. I’m willing to spend my tax dollars on a boondoggle of a physical fence — as long as I get all the other stuff that does the real job of enforcing the border. And it’ll be worth it to shut David up. :)

Posted by: American Pundit at May 21, 2007 10:32 PM
Comment #220996

AP,

I am amazed that they have completed five feet of the fence, let alone five miles.
Dan (we all remember Dan), was shilling the weneedafence.whatever, and there were many tense moments, because (of course), I was wrong.
I feel this fence thing will be a boondoggle that will make Iraq look like a walk in the park.

A fence might slow down the flow, but it isn’t going to “stop” anything. If anybody feels that a fence will even slow down anyone that truly wants in (terrorists, for instance), I think they’re just pissing in the wind.

David is upset, and rightly so, that the 1,700 mile southern border will only see 570 miles of fence.

Posted by: Rocky at May 21, 2007 11:21 PM
Comment #220999

What tickles me is the famous Reagan speech “Tear down the wall, Mr. Gorbichav”, has turned into “Build the wall Mr. Bush”. Is this the same political party?

Israel is building one, why not America? We don’t have the balls to arrest and fine the great companies that hire illegals, so we shit on the guy who swims in to make a little money for his family. A wall seems like the very thing we need. While we’re at it why doesn’t some hero stick his finger in the dike?

Posted by: Marysdude at May 21, 2007 11:33 PM
Comment #221002

JD
Nothing pious about it. Medical practioners WILL NOT act as law enforcement officers and should not. Besides how do you tell if someone is not a citizen. Do you demand papers from everyone,the same papers that employers see every day to CYA.Should we all have to show our passports to get care?Maybe just brown people?

Posted by: BillS at May 22, 2007 12:00 AM
Comment #221006

Marysdude, you can stop all the IRS reporting companies from hiring illegals, it won’t stop illegal immigrants from coming to take illegal and underground economy jobs. Only effective border security can do that, and more, increase our chances of halting Hezbollah, Hamas, and al-Queda from coming in at will.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 22, 2007 2:41 AM
Comment #221007

Rocky, detecting, interdicting, and apprehending 50,000 per year is a vast improvement over 1 million a year and growing. That is the point of a border barrier. It slows the rate down to only those with the incredible will and funds to hazard the journey through, over, or under the barrier. And our forces chances of spotting and apprehending them increases dramatically.

You are right about our nation’s enemies. If they are determined, some will find a way in, but, that’s no excuse not to lock one’s doors at night and take down the Open House sign, which is what we have now at our borders.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 22, 2007 2:46 AM
Comment #221008

AP said: “But if you’ve got all that, you don’t actually need a fence too, do you.”

Yes, you do, most definitely. Try catching a cat. One cat you can corner and net. Try catching 15 cats at once. You can’t and won’t. You will get a few, but while you are netting 2, the other 13 have scattered out of sight and reach.

The border barrier does a number of things. First, and this is crucial, it drives up the cost of coming across, and that alone on purely economic terms, slows the rate of illegal immigrants trying to come across. Second, with the rate slowed, the percentage of those who try and fail, goes way up. Which, in turn becomes common knowledge to those contemplating crossing, and will deter many more because of the low chances of success. That leaves our border barrier, and detection capacity lighting up the boards far less frequently and allows our increased Border Patrol manpower to far more effectively interdict and apprehend those detected: one or a couple of cats at a time, instead of 100 or more at a time, to use the appropriate analogy again..

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 22, 2007 2:55 AM
Comment #221009

AP said: “How many miles of fence are there right now? 5? Isn’t more than ten times that amount better?”

NO! It’s like locking one window in a house prone to burglary and leaving the others and the front and back doors unlocked. It’s not better at all except at along those border urban centers, like El Paso or San Diego, and then it only benefits those communities marginally, by redirecting the illegal traffic to other points of entry without a physical barrier backed by interdiction forces.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 22, 2007 3:00 AM
Comment #221010

AP said: “Rocky, I’m not sure what you mean by that. Is it the irony that David really really wanted a fence, and now when the chance comes along to build one, he doesn’t want it anymore?”

Your comment sounds desperate in its attempt to completely fabricate a stance I have never taken, AP.

I want the border barrier, I want the border barriers to be complete and as effective as possible. 570 miles of barrier on a 2000 mile border, will not be effective, and therefore a waste of taxpayer dollars, unless completed along the the entire length of the border where natural geology does not of itself create a barrier.

A compromised border barrier of 570 miles, is like operating to remove 1/4 of a malignant tumor. A lot of expense with no cure.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 22, 2007 3:08 AM
Comment #221011

The whole problem with illegal immigrants could

be almost totally resolved just by enforcing the

law on hiring illegals. Any an all Companies who

hire them must pay huge fines for each illegal an

can be in-forced by State’s, IRS an SSI. The

second offence should be mandatory jail time for

the person doing the hiring the illegals an the

owners and CEO,S an any other entities caught

hiring illegals. Allow a percentage to enter if

needed for specific jobs as needed.(NO MONEY-

NO JOBS) an no need for a colossal fence. Just

do it! Each State must also help enforce these

Laws!


Posted by: DAVID at May 22, 2007 4:27 AM
Comment #221031
Try catching a cat. One cat you can corner and net. Try catching 15 cats at once. You can’t and won’t.

You can with 15 cat catchers. That’s my point. If a physical fence requires every square foot to be monitored and patrolled anyway, then there are enough eyes and boots on the border to make a physical fence unnecessary.

570 miles of barrier on a 2000 mile border, will not be effective, and therefore a waste of taxpayer dollars

It’ll be more effective than 0 miles of barrier, which is what you’ll get if this deal gets killed.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 22, 2007 2:06 PM
Comment #221034

My biggest question on this issue is this;

If we intend to ignore the law created by a previous congress on imigration, why would we expect to generate new laws and adhere to them?
Folks, it is either LAw or it is not LAW. If we allow our government to ignore one law, we are free to deduce that all law is arbitrary and non enforcible. As far as i can see, until we begin to enforce all laws on the books, the further creation of law is a waste of time, money and human effort.

Posted by: john at May 22, 2007 3:30 PM
Comment #221101

john, you’re absolutely right. The best indicator of intent on this issue will be the amount of money allocated for enforcement of employment laws as well as the number of additional boots on the border.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 23, 2007 2:21 AM
Comment #221124

Marysdude

“What tickles me is the famous Reagan speech “Tear down the wall, Mr. Gorbichav”, has turned into “Build the wall Mr. Bush”. Is this the same political party?”

the berlin wall was built to keep people in, not keep them out. big difference.

Posted by: dbs at May 23, 2007 11:53 AM
Comment #221135

AP, again, your assertions are not based on the facts. Here is a quote to take into account:

National Border Patrol Council has come out squarely against it, as the Washington Times reports:

The leadership of all 11,000 nonsupervisory U.S. Border Patrol agents yesterday criticized an immigration compromise by senators and the Bush administration as “piecemeal” legislation that invites future terrorist attacks and fails to secure the nation’s borders.

Now the bill proposes substantial increases to the Border Patrol manpower. But, nowhere sufficient to man every mile of border with sufficient feet on the ground to stem the tide. Remember, whatever the final number of border patrol manpower is agreed to, you must divide that number by 3 (8 hour shifts), and that 1/3 by the total miles to manned.

Let’s do a little math. 100 illegals attempt a crossing at point X, where only surveillance equipment exists. The signal is transmitted to the Border Patrol who then dispatch a minimum of 40 agents to interdict and round up the illegals. Assuming it will only take 5 minutes for 100 illegals to pass over the border. That means a minimum of 40 Border patrol agents would need to be within 5 minutes dispatch distance of point X.

5 minutes drive time at an average of 50 mph to point X would mean 40 Border Patrol agents would need to be on duty every 24 miles of border to be effective. A 2000 mile border would require a Border Patrol complement on duty on any given shift of 3,333. Which means an field active complement of 10,000 Border Patrol every day. Assuming a 5 day work week, that means another 2,857 agents for weekend duty. So now, we are up to nearly 13,000 Border Patrol. And this number does not include Administrative personnel, detention center personnel, maintenance and support personnel which easily amounts to an addition 20% increase in Border Patrol or another 2,600 personnel. Now we are up to 15,500.

OK, that takes care of the land based Mexican Border. Now there is the Canadian Border, and coastal borders. You lock down the Mexican Border, terrorists and other criminal elements will take to the coastal and Canadian Border entry points. Add another 20,000 personnel, minus cooperation from Canada’s Border Patrol 3,000 and Coast Guard, 2,000 (the Canadian Border is 1000 miles longer than the Mexican.) Now we are up to 30,500 Border Patrol.

What’s in the bill? Another 6,000 Border Patrol. Not the additional A far cry from the additional 13,500 that would be needed to seek a manpower solution which could only be 75% effective where 1000’s of illegal immigrants timed their crossing the border at the same time in groups of 100 at many different points of entry.

The manpower solution is incredibly inefficient, not fully staffed in the bill at hand, and horribly and prohibitively expensive since it requires that manpower in place for as long as there is disparity in quality of life and income between our nation and the people of other nations.

A physical barrier that drives the cost of crossing up prohibitively for a majority of prospective illegal immigrants becomes far more cost effective over time, far more efficient up front, and requires far less manpower put in harm’s way in the way of rapid response interdiction and round-up details.

Just as a physical barrier alone cannot stop the flow, manpower alone cannot either, especially without a vastly largely commitment in treasure and manpower than is discussed in this bill.

We need the physical impediment to drive the cost of crossing way up for illegal immigrants and deter the majority from even trying, and we need the manpower to detect, interdict, and apprehend the remainder who try making crossing a financially UNSOUND decision. Remember, its financial lures that motivate them to cross, for the most part. The answer is to make crossing financially unfeasible and unjustifiable.

The physical barrier, combined with rapid response manpower interdiction forces, combined with a huge crackdown on the underground economy in the U.S. as well as above ground economy which hires illegals, is the comprehensive solution that is needed.

This bill fails to provide for that kind of comprehensive solution. This bill is designed to give political and lobbyist interests what they want in order to pass it, and that means leaving loopholes in our border security wide enough to continue the illegal immigration for decades to come.

In other words, it is no solution at all to national security or illegal immigration. It is a political solution to appease wealthy special interest lobbyists with a vested interest in NOT eliminating illegal immigration and sub-standard wage workers, as well as future voters for one party or another.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 23, 2007 3:49 PM
Comment #221169
So now, we are up to nearly 13,000 Border Patrol. And this number does not include Administrative personnel, detention center personnel, maintenance and support personnel which easily amounts to an addition 20% increase in Border Patrol or another 2,600 personnel. Now we are up to 15,500.

Umm… Sounds good, David. That’s equivalent to about one division of troops. I’m not sure what your problem is with that. Heck, how about two divisions?

Posted by: American Pundit at May 24, 2007 1:37 AM
Comment #221227

AP, why increase expensive manpower indefinitely when a physical barrier can diminish both illegal crossing and the manpower requirements at substantial savings to tax payers over time?

Why are you so insistent on government becoming the employer of choice and expanding its size and cost well beyond more efficient and economical solutions to the same problem. Oh, yeah, your a Democrat. Never mind.

The more costly and less efficient method literally leaves the gate open for some illegal immigration to continue and 3/4 of them are believed by the Democrats to become Democratic voters after amnesty conditions have been met.

Could it be that Democrats oppose invading Cuba and liberating as our 51st state because 8 out of 10 Cubans would vote Republican? Just curious. But, granting serial amnesties to millions upon millions of Mexicans is just fine, because 3 out of 4 of them who become citizens here vote Democrat.

If only Democrats would question the motives of their party, thus. Our borders are an issue of sovereignty and national security when the political partisanship is stripped away. Our borders need to be defended and closed to those whom our culture, our economy, and our security would be threatened by. That is the non-partisan view of reason, which both Democrats and Republicans are fighting over. And that fight is costing tax payers, and our nation’s future through delays in effecting a sustainable and rational solution to the problem.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 24, 2007 3:51 PM
Comment #221246

I think this Country needs to take on a five year
moratorium on all immigration. ( with out exception.) Then remove most illegales, an jail an
fine all who hire them. There is no other solution.

Posted by: DAVID at May 24, 2007 7:25 PM
Comment #299604

Doing the Cha Cha in America means the Mexican border is coming down making Mexico the 51st state. Cuba is next. The sound of great music is in the air and there are no fences to stop the Latin American beat.

Posted by: melvin polatnick at April 27, 2010 9:40 AM
Post a comment