Searching for migrants.
Preparing to drop bottles of water attached to parachutes to migrants crossing the desert in New Mexico.
Posted on 07/20/2005 5:35:48 AM PDT by OESY
...After nearly 20 years and numerous enforcement escalations, the undocumented immigrant population continues to grow -- and restrictionist lawmakers continue to insist that throwing ever more money, men and material into border enforcement is the key to fixing the problem.
Yesterday, Senators John Cornyn (R., Texas) and Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) introduced legislation that would authorize $5 billion over five years "to acquire and deploy unmanned aerial vehicles, camera poles, vehicles barriers, sensors" and other technologies. They'd also create a new 10,000-man army to raid businesses across America and make sure there are no illegal chambermaids working at Marriott. For this, we need Republicans?
Never mind that since 1986 the U.S. strategy of spending more and more money on militarizing the border hasn't worked. According to a recent Cato Institute study by Princeton sociologist Douglas Massey, "By 2002, the Border Patrol's budget had reached $1.6 billion and that of the [Immigration and Naturalization Service] stood at $6.2 billion, 10 and 13 times their 1986 values, respectively."
Over the same 16-year period, the number of border patrol officers tripled, and the amount of hours spent patrolling the border increased by a factor of eight. By 2002, Professor Massey notes, "the Border Patrol was the largest arms-bearing branch of the U.S. government next to the military itself."
Meanwhile, the illegal immigration flow has only increased, and all of this extra "enforcement" is arguably one reason. When illegals felt they could more easily cross the border, they'd enter the U.S. on a seasonal... basis or when they needed the money. Then they'd often return home. But with the difficulty of re-entry so much higher in the last 20 years, many more migrant workers choose to remain here permanently. The risk of staying is lower than the price of re-running the border gantlet....
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
13 dead found in the desert yesterday.
It may not totally halt illegal immigration but it would go a HELL OF A LONG WAY TOWARDS SLOWING IT DOWN!!!
bttp
Illegal immigration is much in the news today and it is BAD. But, perhaps not for the reasons put forward to date.
Any time a law exists and is ignored, all laws are less respected. Thus the 65 mph speed limit and illegal immigration both contribute to our higher than needed murder rate.
It is said the Federal Government cannot control our border. If that is true, then we need a new Federal Government; control of our borders one way or the other is the first priority of a national government. We need to control who is in our country for security reasons. It is patently obvious the Federal Government can control the borders, they just do not want to.
There was no problem with illegal immigration in the 1950s. Why? Economic conditions in Mexico were bad then. That is an easy guess, they have always been bad in that Third World country and always will be until they get a Constitutional Democratic Republic that recognizes property rights and civil rights.
The reason was there were no jobs here in the United States. The jobs were being done by Americans.
Today, there are many job openings that cannot be filled by Americans.
We do need immigrants to do jobs Americans will not do. That pretty much describes any job that pays less than $12.50 per hour, after taxes. But, you say, the Minimum Wage is too low, $6.25 per hour here in Kalifornia. No one can live on $6.25 an hour. No one works for Minimum Wage here. PERIOD.
I need help keeping my yard. I pay $10.00 per hour for yard help, CASH! To a needy person from the city? Not hardly, they do not have to work. The State takes money from me at the point of a gun and gives it to them; they call it Welfare. I call it robbery.
The problem is Welfare. Welfare pays about $25,000.00 a year ($12.50 per hour) here. There are tens of thousands of people in the county who do not have to work. They live on my money, yet they won't cut my grass. There are thousands on welfare whose grandparents were on welfare.
Eliminate welfare. If you want to give aid to children, sterilize both parents who spawned children they cannot take care of. Do not let them reproduce more unproductive leaches on productive members of society.
Isn't is odd that those who find no problem in murdering children via "The Right to Choose" cannot grasp the benefit of sterilizing those who will not work?
Eliminate welfare, secure the border, grant work visas to those who want them.
Look at this fence and tell me again that it is difficult to cross. This might keep some cattle or sheep from crossing, but it will barely slow down people.
Somebody take the time to read Massey's testimony before the Senate committee and then re-read the WSJ article. It's as if the WSJ just took his testimony and printed it.
http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1517&wit_id=4379
I assume the WSJ doesn't like Cornyn's bill (won't register). Another indication it's worthy of our support.
Well put!!
Since the notoriously open borders Wall Street Journal hates this bill then maybe it's a good one. Even if has that guest worker bllsht in it. The key to any bill, even past immigration amnesties is enforcement... enforcement....enforcement... enforcement....
And I have never seen serious enforcement of immigration and deportation laws. Why should I expect this after the Cornyn/Kyl bill is passed? Whom do I trust?
No, for this we need Americans.
"I assume the WSJ doesn't like Cornyn's bill (won't register). Another indication it's worthy of our support."
Agreed, if WSJ doesn't like it... then this bill must be "on the right track".
That is my instinctive reaction as well. This bill will be a tough one to get passed. The WSJ and big business in general will prefer the status quo, which is working just fine as far as they are concerned.
The status quo: a growing number of illegals willing to work, No effective government enforcement. Industry has no responsibility for anything other than wages and we taxpayers subsidize it all. Anything short of unrestricted access to cheep labor will be fought. Border and national security be damned.
FAIR says this is a good start. But can the Feds be trusted to enforce the law on this and punish/deport those who try to finesse it's rules??? Do you trust the Feds? I don't.
Never mind that since 1986 the U.S. strategy of spending more and more money on militarizing the border hasn't worked. . .
This may be true in a technical sense, but it is a lie. There was a story a few weeks ago that mentioned that during the Clinton administration over 400 businesses (a trivial number) were raided for illegals in one year while last year the Bush administration raided . . .wait for it . . . 3! To say beefing up the border patrol proves tougher enforcement doesn't work is like saying hiring police but assigning them all to one district proves law enforcement doesn't work. Immigration laws are not being enforced and the WSJ knows it.
But with the difficulty of re-entry so much higher in the last 20 years, many more migrant workers choose to remain here permanently.
There's little proof that this is true, it is deception from the WSJ. Most of these illegals will stay here no matter what happens on the border. PS, any of their children born here will be American citizens, a fact the WSJ dishonestly doesn't want to deal with.
I will hazard a guess that by 'here' you are referring to your specific locale, since I can immediately state truthfully that if you are referring to the State of California or the nation in general you are greatly in error.
I live in a very rural area in the mountains of Northern California, and by personal knowledge can attest to the fact that people will and do work and live on minimum wage. There are not very many jobs here, and since the number of individuals exceed the number of jobs by a significant amount, the vast majority of available positions pay only minimum wage. There are some that pay more, granted, but not all that much more nor are there really that many of them. This is primarily a seasonal-work area, since when the snows arrive many people leave for the valley and jobs dry up, so most of us strive to find work that both pays more than minimum wage and lasts longer than just the summer months.
When the only work available pays only minimum wage, you work or you starve. If you are unwilling to do the work, there is always someone else who will -and the position will be filled very quickly indeed. The concept that americans will not work for minimum wage is simply and totally wrong.
Well if the Real ID Act is any indicator no. The Act passed less than 6 months ago in the Senate and it called for 2000 new BP agents in FY-06. Two days ago the Senate passed the FY-06 supplemental appropriation but collective “forget their pens” and did not approve the funding for the new agents. They have been playing this game for years.
I still support this bill however as I think it is reasonable approach to immigration policy and the status quo is dangerous and irresponsible.
I get it, if we spend less money and effort on enforcement, the situation will get better. Is there nothing those that favor the explotation of illegal immigrants won't stoop to in order to ensure their precious flow of illegals continue.
As for the Border patrol being ineffective even with millions of dollars thrown at them every month. Just hire the minute men. You would get a much better result at a fraction of the price.
Still, our history is one of adjustments, and clearly there is something out of alignment with illegal immigration that needs adjustment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.