Policy Might Change For Illegal Immigrant Prosecutions

I certainly hope it applies to the illegals they're bringing in also. The free health care of their cheap illegal workers is starting to put serious strains on the taxpaying Americans. It's interesting how those American companies hiring mostly American citizens aren't the ones complaining because they already do offer health insurance and many other benefits. If the Mexicans don't like it --- then I would suggest they return to Mexico and run their business there.

How Come We Can Have 40,000 miles Of Interstate, But Not 2,000 Miles Of Border Fence?

By Edwin S. Rubenstein More than three years after 9/11 U.S. borders are more porous than ever. About 3 million illegals are likely to enter this year. It will be the largest wave since 2001—roughly four times the number of immigrants that enter legally each year. [Source: Barlett and Steele, “Who Left the Door Open?” Time, September 13, 2004.]

This illegal tsunami is not inevitable. For example, over a 10 -mile stretch of the border near San Diego, arrests of illegal immigrants have plummeted from about 25,000 per year three years ago to 3,000 per year today. Violent crimes have virtually come to a halt in that area, according to the San Diego PD. [Valerie Alvord, “Border fence plan runs into a barrier,” USA Today, April 19, 2004

The reason? The government built a fence. Or more precisely, a complex of two 16-foot high steel fences separated by a wide road.

It takes so much time to climb the first fence and cut through the second that apprehension is practically inevitable. Illegals have simply stopped trying to enter along the fenced border.

Of course, the San Diego fence pushed the illegal influx eastward, into the desert. Which is good, because the desert is more difficult to cross. But Arizona apprehensions climbed from 160,000 in 1994 to 376,000 in 2003. Texas apprehensions rose slightly. California apprehensions were cut in half.

So why not fence off the entire border?

This is what the project might cost:

The southern border is 1,951 miles long

The 14-mile San Diego fence cost $25 million, or $1.7 million per mile [Source: James Goldsborough, San Diego Union-Tribune, February 19, 2004].

The security fence Israel is building on the West Bank also costs about $1.7 million per mile. [Source: ParaPundit.]

Conclusion: At $1.7 million per mile, the entire U.S.-Mexican border could be sealed off for $3.3 billion dollars

Juxtaposed to other infrastructure projects, this border fence seems downright puny. The Federal interstate highway system, for example, is about 46,000 miles long. A 1,951-mile border fence would certainly not be more difficult to build than the equivalent length of eight-lane highway. All told there are about 4 million miles of public streets and highways in the U.S. [Bureau of Transportation Statistics, National Transportation Statistics 2003, March 2004. Table 1-5.]

And we could easily afford a fence. For perspective, remember that 3.3 billion dollars represents just:

3.2 percent of the $104 billion spent on highway construction annually [Source: National Transportation Statistics 2003, Table 3-29a.]

0.7 percent of the defense budget for FY2004 ($452 billion)

0.14 percent of the entire U.S. Federal budget for FY2004 ($2.3 trillion) [Source: OMB, Budget of the U.S. Government FY2005, Historical Tables, Table 8-4.]

Federal funding may not even be necessary. The state of California has only 140 miles of the U.S.-Mexican border. Securing that state’s border with Mexico would thus cost about $238 million. Theoretically, California voters could pass an initiative ordering the fence.

California taxpayers would save millions in social service costs currently incurred on behalf of illegal immigrants—I estimated in 2003 that nearly one quarter of the state’s annual budget deficit, i.e. over $9 billion a year, stemmed directly from immigration.

At the same time, a dwindling supply of illegal workers would raise incomes for native Californians—and boost tax revenues.

The fence would quickly pay for itself.

What are we waiting for?

Federal funding may not even be necessary. The state of California has only 140 miles of the U.S.-Mexican border. Securing that state’s border with Mexico would thus cost about $238 million. Theoretically, California voters could pass an initiative ordering the fence.

California taxpayers would save millions in social service costs currently incurred on behalf of illegal immigrants—I estimated in 2003 that nearly one quarter of the state’s annual budget deficit, i.e. over $9 billion a year, stemmed directly from immigration.

Where do I sign? Only possible problem I see here is the government accepting "low bid" from a company that outsources the labor to one of those temp agencies flush with illegal labor (similar to the AMFELS situation or the breaches at Hampton Roads). Would be unseemly to have illegals build it, si?

bump

Sounds great! Let's roll.