[Poohbah]

Secondly, I don't buy the argument that we don't have the resources to go after millions of illegals.

It's not just resources--it's civil liberties. Do you want checkpoints every 50 miles so you can show your papers to a surly "border guard?"

We've found our way clear to increase the federal budget by 23% since 2001, exploding spending in every area except immigration and border security. Adding 1047 border patrol agents over a three-year period ain't gonna cut it - we can do a lot better than that.

Uh-huh. Define "a lot." BE SPECIFIC. WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE TO DO?

I get extremely annoyed with proposals that say "well, uh, do SOMETHING."

As for the employers: "Probable cause," and mens rea. Those four words make it damn near impossible to enforce harsh penalties.

[kevao]

Random checkpoints would be inefficient. The problem is illegal immigrants working illegally. You will find the illegal workers at their places of employment.

Specifically, we could easily spend another $100 billion/year on enforcement. With that, you could add thousands of agents to the INS and Border Patrol.

And how about posting Guard units along the borders? Why hasn't the military been guarding our borders all along?

Enforcement really isn't all that complicated. It is costly, but it's far less complex than this amnesty proposal, which in order to work needs an effective enforcement component anyway.

And if lack of specifics gets you annoyed, then you can't be all that happy with President Bush's proposal either.

[jpsb]

Ok, you're right it is not possible to protect our border, not possible to punish employers of illegals and of course we can deport them either. Sounds like we all need to learn how to speak Mexican and practice living 5 or 6 to a room.

Welcome to Azland