Posted on 04/21/2005 6:59:39 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
I shouldn’t repeat myself, but every rule has exceptions. The Minutemen’s efforts on the US-Mexican border have proved the accuracy of my column on 20 November, 2003. “Double Crossing at the Rio Grande” can be found here
The gist was that the cure for the alien tide from Mexico is to change the incentives so that Mexico will control its own side of the border with its own troops. Here’s how:
Total the cost to local, state and federal governments for finding, rounding up, jailing and expelling Mexican illegals. Divide that cost by the total number of truck crossings of the Mexican border. Then charge that amount as a security fee on every truck that crosses, regardless of the truck’s ownership or cargo.
My article dealt with ways to handle the howls of protest which would arise from the World Trade Association and others who believe in open borders for the US. It points out that Mexico knows how to use its federales to close its border whenever it chooses.
Mexico currently uses its troops to close its southern border with Guatemala, to prevent aliens even poorer than Mexicans from getting in. More importantly, the Mexican response to the efforts of the Minutemen also proves the point.
While the Minutemen have been in place, the federales have been stationed on the border, warning Mexicans not to try to cross the 23-mile section now patrolled by American volunteers. In short, Mexico has done exactly what I argued it should be forced to do by appropriate changes in American policies.
Those who bother to read their history know the border can be closed by Mexico. It did so for two decades during the Bracero Program, which lasted from World War II until the mid-60s. Under that, the US and Mexico agreed on the precise number of Mexicans who would come here to work, with a requirement that they would return after their work. Mexico also made, and kept, a commitment to prevent any significant illegal entries.
Today, of course, Mexico’s incentives are reversed. Remittance of money by Mexicans (legal and illegal) to family at home is now the largest single source of earnings in their economy. As I said previously, reversing the economic incentives will reverse Mexico’s policies. And closing the border with Mexican troops will save a huge financial burden on American taxpayers, and personal burden on American soldiers.
A few other points deserve discussion. President Bush has falsely applied the word “vigilantes” to the Minutemen. The President’s use of this word gave the American press license to slander these American citizen-volunteers likewise. Again, anyone who knows their history knows this word does not apply.
Vigilantes in the American West, and in many places across the nation during times of civil law breakdown in the American Revolution and the Civil War, all followed the same pattern. They established Committees of Vigilance which assumed the powers of “government” in their territories, dispensed “justice,” and sometimes carried out executions after “trials” with few or no legal niceties. The Minutemen are doing NONE of these things.
They are merely watchers and reporters. Because most aliens come in on foot, there is an hour or more in which the watchers could spot them, call the Border Patrol, and have officers come to the exact place where the illegals are. In short, they make the Border Patrol extremely effective, rather than have a pathetically small number of agents drive thousands of miles, looking for aliens – who have the common sense to run and hide whenever they see headlights at night.
While we’re solving the problems of closing the borders, we should deal with the problem of “anchor babies.” Alien women close to giving birth are risking their lives and their children by trying to sneak into the US to give birth here. The baby is then an American citizen, which gives preference to the parents seeking legal status.
Congress could put a stop to this by simple legislation. By law it could define the place where an alien mother gives birth to a baby inside the US as foreign territory of the mother’s nationality, at the time of birth. Can this be done?
Consider that all embassies in the US are defined as territory of that nation, not American. Consider that there are “foreign trade zones” many places in the US, defined as “not American territory” under import and tax laws. Congress has this power; the question is only whether it has the brains to use it.
Remember, a nation that cannot control its borders also cannot control its destiny. It’s as simple as that.
About the Author: John Armor is a First Amendment attorney and author who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. John_Armor@aya.yale.edu
There are two sources, ONE OF THEM IS BY THE AUTHOR OF THE CLAUSE, FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, AND DURING THE DISCUSSION OF THE CLAUSE PRIOR TO ADOPTION. There is nothing more authoritaive. You are merely being obstinate, insisting upon a subjective reading being equivalent to law.
Not subjective, literal.
Bull. The author of the clause and those who approved it for ratification upon his explanation are the authority on what it means. You clearly believe that the Constitution means whatever you think it does when you read into it what you want to be there. In that respect, you are just like the Democrats.
The law means what it did was when it was passed, or it means nothing. Best you listen to Scalia a little more closely.
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.