A Citizen's Suggestions (to a Reluctant Government) to Stem The Crisis of Illegal Immigration

self | 08/21/05 | joanie-f

[joanie-f]

Something happened in Boston in the winter of 1773 that served as evidence that the final straw had been laid on the camel’s back … and the spark for a revolution against tyranny and aristocracy was ignited.

What happened in Boston spread, and other colonial seaports defiantly followed the example set by Sam Adams (‘It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds’). When the news spread of what Sam Adams and a handful of Boston patriots had done, other seaports all down the Atlantic coastline followed the example and staged similar acts of defiance of their own.

Of all of the signers of our Declaration of Independence, Sam Adams probably best embodies those character traits found in colonial American patriots. He was an eloquent man, determined to keep himself informed regarding the abuses of power that continued to be heaped upon the colonies, and, in addition to sharing his insight and stirring eloquence, he was not afraid to act when it appeared that words would no longer suffice.

In spite of the education garnered, and knowledge shared, on this forum, I believe that most adult Americans could not even tell you who Sam Adams was. And, of those who are aware of his role in the revolution … and beyond … I believe most know him through his most famous declaration, ‘If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen’.

Powerful words indeed … and perhaps more powerful now than then.

But another of Adams’ statements may even prove to be more pertinent and providential in America 2005:

Among the natural rights of the colonists are there: First a right to life, second to liberty, and thirdly to property. Together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.

Life, liberty and property were the three sanctified entities that our Founders sought, and sacrifice beyond our comprehension, to guarantee each and every American – not only their eighteenth century contemporaries, but every one of us who has followed in their footsteps.

Yet during our lifetimes alone, there have been countless examples of government gone awry that have represented a direct and destructive assault upon the sanctity of those three God-given human rights that our Founders sought to ensure for us. The government-sponsored murders at Waco, the Supreme Court decision in Roe vs. Wade, the passage of the McCain-Feingold assault on the First Amendment, the court-ordered murder of Terri Schiavo, and the government land grab upheld two months ago in Kelo vs. New London come to mind. And in between each of those travesties, there occurred dozens more.

What happened in Douglas, Arizona this week deserves to be added to the growing list of what our Founders would have called ‘grievances against the King’.

In America 2005, we are experiencing a growing arrogance on the part of government at all levels … represented by the passing of liberty-restrictive laws and by judicial rulings that all but declare the Constitution a nuisance, and the American citizen a slave of the state.

But not only is government pro-actively trampling on our three most precious God-given rights, it is also accomplishing the same result by simply refusing to defend them when their sanctity is threatened by outsiders.

The illegal immigration travesty is the prime example of death through neglect.. We are pro-actively fighting a ‘war on terrorism’ six thousand miles from our shore, and yet an onslaught that is threatening to destroy us, both physically and economically, and that also affords terrorists the ability to find a home and a breeding ground from which to proselytize on our own soil, and in our own neighborhoods, is being allowed to continue unabated. Government efforts to stop illegal immigration have been half-hearted, at best – and entirely unsuccessful.

Alexander Hamilton (and Washington and Jefferson as well) vehemently opposed granting immediate citizenship to new immigrants, writing, ‘To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens, the moment they foot in our country, would be nothing less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty.’ And he repeatedly warned against allowing masses of immigrants to cross our borders, because he believed that our safety and sovereignty would be threatened by such ‘reckless policy’.

The Founders’ concerns were focused on the deadly threats to our republic represented by failing to limit legal immigration. It’s difficult to imagine what they would think of laws and court rulings that hold the American citizen/taxpayer hostage to the ‘rights’ of illegal immigrants. The fact that the American legal/judicial system would go so far as to seize the property of an American citizen and lawfully convey it to an illegal immigrant would surely be beyond their ability to comprehend, let alone condone.

The dollar cost of illegal immigration is rising exponentially, and consists of (among other considerations), the cost to the American taxpayer of:

• Providing ‘benefits’ to those illegal immigrants who are hired by American businesses looking to make a quick, illegal buck, but who provide no healthcare – thus causing their illegal employees to obtain ‘free’ (on the backs of the taxpayer) healthcare (thanks to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1985).

• Food stamps, free education and school lunches, subsidized housing, and seemingly countless entitlement ‘perks’ for their children born on this side of the border.

• The cost to the American taxpayer of supposedly ‘cheap labor’ being obtained by unscrupulous businesses.

• Driving down the wages that American citizens receive in whatever businesses the cheap immigrant labor finds a foothold (generally agriculture, construction and food services)

• Incarceration costs of those illegals who drive uninsured or otherwise get in trouble with the law, pro-bono legal services, and the cost of interpreters

• The drain, sometimes to the point of collapse in the border states, on the healthcare system … indirectly resulting in inferior, and more expensive, healthcare for our own citizens.

  All of the above expenses, and more, have resulted in estimates ranging from $10 billion to $40 billion a year pilfered from the American taxpayers’ pockets as a result of our government’s unwillingness to address the immigration issue.

  I can think of much better ways to spend our money, one of which would put a major dent in the cause of the US/Mexico border immigration crisis.

  Simplistically, here is a layman’s partial solution – a very rough and ‘non-expert’ draft which would, of course require significant ‘fine tuning’ …

  Let’s use the ‘average’ of the $10 to $40 billion estimates, and assume that illegal immigrants cost the taxpayer $25 billion annually.

  The length of the US (CA, AZ, NM, TX)-Mexico border is approximately 2,000 miles.

  Many nuts-and-bolts conservatives (yours truly included) have suggested building a wall and/or stationing armed guards as a reasonable solution to the illegal immigration problem occurring across our southern border.

  Let’s look at the potential cost of doing both:

  The extraordinarily effective protective wall that Israel has built in the West Bank in order to prevent the infiltration of Palestinian suicide bombers cost them $1.6 million per mile.

  Using that figure, the construction of a similar wall along our entire southern land border, would cost $1.6 million/mile x 2,000 miles = $3.2 billion.

  Now, if we were to build small guard stations and assign an armed guard at each station every half-mile along that wall, we would require 2,000 x 2 = 4,000 guard stations.

  Let’s liberally assume that each small station (something along the lines of this or this ) would cost $100,000 each to install (including wiring for air conditioning and a set of outside floodlights, plumbing, communications equipment, etc.). The total cost for all 4,000 stations would be $400 million.

  If we were to station guards at each station so that each worked an 8-hour shift, five days a week – and hired a sufficient number of guards so as to have a guard on duty 24 hour a day, seven days a week -- we would require 21 eight-hour shifts (totaling 168 hours) per week with each guard working a 40 hour week. Therefore we would require 4.2 guards per station.

  4.2 guards per station x 4,000 stations = a total of 16,800 guards needed to patrol the border.

  Let’s assume a cost of training each guard (in the procedures to be followed and in firearms training, both of which would be done in classes of 100 or more guards per class), and the providing of each guard with a firearm, to amount to $2,500/guard. Then the cost of training 16,800 would be $42 million.

  Assume that each guard is paid an annual salary and benefits totaling $75,000. The total annual salary/benefits cost for all 16,800 guards would amount to $1.26 billion.

  Now take the estimated $25 billion dollar per year to the taxpayer cost of illegal immigration and subtract the $3.2 billion cost of an Israeli-like security wall running along the entire border and the $400 million cost of guard stations positioned every half mile along that wall, the $42 million training costs, and the $1.26 billion in guard salaries and we are left with $20.1 billion dollars (a full 80% of the figure with which we started) – which could be used for maintenance purposes, insurance, utility costs, additional equipment, etc, with a sizeable surplus left over.

  The large portion of the outlay described above is a one-time – as opposed to annual -- cost (the construction of the wall itself, especially). The construction of the wall would surrely employ thousands of Americans in the process. As would the guard positions, which would presumably be permanent, unless and until the exodus were to subside.

  Of course, all of the above are simply the estimates of a layperson, who has no expert knowledge in the costs of the physical items involved. But I believe those estimates to be not unrealistic. Neither do I suggest that I have covered all financial considerations that would be involved.

  My entire purpose in creating this hypothetical example is to suggest simply that I believe there is a fundamental, nuts-and-bolts solution to the crisis represented by the exodus of illegals coming across our southern border. And I also believe that the financial cost of such a common sense solution would be nowhere near as prohibitive as the financial cost of continuing to support (and now actually cater to, at the cost of our own freedoms) non-citizens who have committed a crime simply by being here in the first place.

  How to address the problems cause by those illegals who are already here is an entirely different issue. But I believe that stemming the source of the problem now is entirely within our power … and entirely possible, dollar-wise.

  As for the ramifications of the Douglas, Arizona Ranch decision …

  I can’t help but wonder when we citizens of America 2005 will declare that the last straw has been placed on the camel’s back. Are we more ‘tolerant’ of the tyranny of government than Sam Adams and his fellow patriots were? Are we more of a mindset that we will not take action until the abuse occurs in our own backyard? Are we more willing to wear the chains to which Adams referred, because we love the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom?

  Back in 1999, Claire Wolfe observed in her book, ‘ 101 Things To Do ‘Til The Revolution’:

  ‘America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards. '

  Considering the atrocities (both by neglect and by overt action) committed by our government in the six years since Claire penned that thought, I can’t help but wonder whether we have been pushed significantly closer to the revolution she envisioned in those last three words.

  ~ joanie ..

[moehoward]

In regards to a wall. On Friday, during the round table portion of Special Report, one of the regulars -don't know his name , he's the one in the wheelchair- said that if Mexico was a communist state there would be no question that a wall would be in place to keep them out.

He is right.

You can bet the farm that the same Republicans that claim a wall is ineffective at keeping Illegal Aliens out would claim it integral in keeping out Communists.

[satan]

"As a professed conservative, surely you realize this is a lockstep republican forum."

Well said! You might refer to most as Kool-Aid drinking Republicans. Wwe have become the sheeple.

[B4Ranch]

Just the idea that we need to build a fence or a wall is beyond belief! Are we in a state of denial because the Republicans are in the majority? Are we in a state of "late term abortion" or "suicide"? We Americans are shifting from threatened to endangered because of the lawyers, judges, and politicians currently in authority across America. Our Court system is releasing illegal immigrant felons into the America instead of deporting them.

We must accept the reality that America's most debauched and shameless city, Washington D.C. is filled with traitors. We the voters, are 100% liable for the consequences of their actions. Why do we permit such anti-Americanism from our legislators? There are those who are purposefully trying to sabotage our Bill of Rights and the US Constitution who will be running for re-election in 2006. Are we going to re-elect traitors?

Anti-Americans are beginning to make progress in terms of their political participation in the mainstream. President Bush's averts his gaze concerning the costs and damage from the illegal aliens. Our kids think that we have put them on the "Road to Nowhere" as they watch their classrooms and playgrounds fill with illegal Hispanics.

Last week, one of my daughters burst out with a line that I never expected from a 25 year old female who doesn't profess an interest in politics and has turned a deaf ear to political talk radio shows. "President Bush, the President Clinton appointee, has declared all true expressions of patriotism in the Oval Office to be rude and unacceptable."

She is convinced that the aversions to enforcing the U.S. Code provisions regarding deportations and these backdoor amnesty Bills boil down to financial contributions. We can afford the fiscal and social costs of this recolonization if we are willing to give up our pride of being Americans. She was the one who explained to me about our national pride being taken by unreasonable search and seizure. Here I thought it was my responsibility to raise and supervise her. Thankfully her reluctance to government indoctrination remains strong. I'm certain she's on a list of being in alliance with a radical, her Dad.

I think we need some brand new representatives whose promince is in the publically announced reintroduction of an endangered species, true Americans. I will support people who have read and understand Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution. Men and women who are willing to put America first. I am against voting for anyone seeking re-election in 2006. They denied themselves that opportunity by not introducing honest Bills to secure the borders during their past term in office.

Senators and Congressmen currently in office.
You have become irrelevant due to your inactions. Your support for state-funded educational, medical and welfare services for illegal alien criminals is a crime within itself. Your regection of the Ten Commandments is disgusting and dishonorable to people in your position. Your acceptance of the eminent domain decision is true sabotage to the citizens. It is the biggest threat to America I have ever seen and I will not tolerate you anymore.

I don't believe it is necessary to have blood in the streets to change our leaders and I do believe it should be done as soon as possible.

‘America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.'

That day is rapidily advancing because of the sincere inaction in Washington D.C. and our state capitols.

[upchuck]

Fantastic post joanie-f. I back your thoughts 100%. And have an additional idea...

You wrote:

Now take the estimated $25 billion dollar per year to the taxpayer cost of illegal immigration and subtract the $3.2 billion cost of an Israeli-like security wall running along the entire border and the $400 million cost of guard stations positioned every half mile along that wall, the $42 million training costs, and the $1.26 billion in guard salaries and we are left with $20.1 billion dollars (a full 80% of the figure with which we started) - which could be used for maintenance purposes, insurance, utility costs, additional equipment, etc, with a sizable surplus left over.

We could take part of the surplus and strengthen and fully implement the existing SAVE program along with tough, ENFORCED legislation that features fines and significant jail time for businesses who hire Criminal Aliens.

Preventing border access via your ideas and removing the number one reason the Criminal Aliens come here (a job) would, IMHO, clear up the problem once and for all.

I welcome constructive criticisms.

[ForGod'sSake]

America's elites are now de-racinated, de-culturalized and de-nationalized...which is largely in line with the public's state of mind.

May be an accurate description of our handlers, but not of America at large, if you believe all the poll numbers. This particular issue, in which the vast majority of Americans want the borders (more or less)sealed, our handlers are at odds with us, the represented. Now it would seem they are taking a calculated(?) risk in swimming upstream so the potential rewards must be staggering. Our handler's handlers must have a very large carrot, eh?

The American public was until circa 1965 unafraid of asserting its superiority as a people, a culture, a nation.

I might quibble with your date. I submit it may have started shortly after WWII when, from most accounts, there appeared to be no end to the coruncopia; the represented stopped paying attention. The date however is academic since the rest of your sentiment hits with deadly accuracy. On second thought, you are probably pretty close. I've seen the breakdown in my lifetime(a young 58 y/o). What happened during the 60's that set Americans back on their heels?

So, OK, let's all wait patiently for the nationalist revolution.

I'm running out of patience. So, who's gonna organize this revolution???

FGS

[ForGod'sSake]

So you're back spreading your propaganda again. Are you ready to answer the questions I put to you a few days ago???

FGS

[ForGod'sSake]

The only thing that comes to my mind is Globalism.. It serves a globalist agenda.

Seems to doesn't it? The global king makers are up to no good. A sovereign US and US citizenry is problematic for those that would our rulers. You've gotta hand it to 'em though, they are patient and persistant.

FGS

[meadsjn]

Joanie, your response needed its own thread.

If I remember correctly, the tyranny leading to the American Revolution grew over a twenty or thirty year period, while the patience of the colonists was being stretched to its breaking point. Likewise, the tensions leading to the Civil War grew over a thirty year period, dating back to 1828, with the "tariff of abomination."

In both of those cases, thousands of reasonable law-abiding citizens worked through their existing systems for one and a half generations, trying to correct their situations in a relatively peaceful and civilized manner. Yet the result of both those periods was warfare, with much death and destruction. Had not WW-II unified the country against common external enemies and pulled us out of the Depression, we probably would have had a civil war around that same time or shortly thereafter.

One thing that can happen, and will happen with increasing frequency, is that the citizens will stop cheering for the government thugs when citizens are gunned down and/or deprived of their property and liberty. At the same time, the agents and supporters of the tyranny will increasingly meet with shame and ostracization among the people. The fact that constables conceal their identities and deploy weapons of war against the citizenry for even minor infractions (real or imagined), while selectively ignoring the criminal invasion over our borders, is a clear sign that the government already views itself as being at war against the citizens.

Decent law-abiding people will once again be forced to pick sides in a senseless conflict instigated by power-hungry bureaucrats and self-anointed elitists.

[YankeeReb]

A perfectly workable solution. Hell, communist dictators have been doing the exact same thing for decades to keep people from leaving those countries, so we know it'll work. Heres the other half of the equation, in a short time word will get out to the turd world that we're now SERIOUS about protecting our borders and the flow of illegals will slow to a trickle, so the job of patrolling will get easier over time.

Once we secure the borders we start ENFORCING the laws on the books dealing with those who employ illegals. Again, the illegals here will see that things have changed and they'll leave of their own accord. No need for mass deportations or incarcerations.

The only ingredient missing is the political will to fix the problem.

[ForGod'sSake]

We had the might, did that make it right?

Moot point wouldn't you agree? That was then, this is now.

Conquests of one nation(people) over another have gone on since the beginning of time if our history books are remotely accurate. Not to mention, the Bible. Do we have the right to defend what we as a culture now have, regardless of how it was acquired? The revisionist's histories would have us hanging our heads in collective shame because of what we as a culture have won. Should it be so? The globalists would have us reject our accomplishments as ill gotten gains, if for no other reason than to instill a sense of guilt in us.

This ain't no time to go wobbly(Thank you Maggie Thatcher).

FGS

[BIRDS]

BTTT

[BIRDS]

Excellent comments. I'm one of those conservativse, by the way, of the true kind that you describe: no wincing.

[Nea Wood]

Excellent post. Very well stated. From your keyboard to God's ear!

[FOXFANVOX]

In spite of the education garnered, and knowledge shared, on this forum, I believe that most adult Americans could not even tell you who Sam Adams was. And, of those who are aware of his role in the revolution … and beyond … I believe most know him through his most famous declaration, ‘If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen’.

Would that you were wrong on the first and right on the second. I fear you are wrong on both. Most modern day adults, at least younger ones, probably think only of BEER when they think of Sam Adams.

[BIRDS]

My take on the "native american" notions and tales is that they are largely romantic in nature and have been for a while now, given that we now know about truly deplorable behaviors among some earlier "tribes" or groups of peoples in the Southwest, particularly, of North America, and, based upon realities from Colonial Americas -- specifically, Sir Francis Drake's first colonializations -- the "native americans" literally absconded with the English and Portugese who tried to settle in areas in the then Virginia Company area (which extended from what we now call the State of Maine down to now Florida, along mostly the Eastern Coastal areas).

AND, it's proven by DNA that the "native americans" in the Northern areas (all the way down to but not including the area where the Hopi lived, and those peoples themselves) had Northern Asian and Northern European DNA.

Meaning, the "white man" is an ancestor of "native americans," proven by migration routes and actual DNA migration among human populations.

My main difficulty from the present tense in those who try to interject the "native american" argument or counter argument (depending upon the perspective) to the present day immigration problems is that it's an entirely inaccurate set of references in general (refusal by most to include the "white man" in the issue as to who native americans are/were, and some sense of proprietary ownership of North -- even South -- America by these earlier migrations of peoples, which is the predominant militant outcry by gangs from Central America today as to their sense of [false] "ownership" and/or entitlement to be present in the United States today without sanction of legality or other permissions).

And, thus, it's not an argument but an irrational tangent, to try to rely on these early migration issues as to priorities and propriety of current-day citizenship and residency in the U.S.

I've written this before on FR but I'll add it again here just to include this information: the EARLIEST KNOWN human population of South America and North America is by Australian Aborigines in the very southermost part of South America. But the Norse peoples are suspected to have been here simultaneously in the North.

Thus, combined with the now known/proven presence of Northern European DNA in those first immigrants that arrived here from Northern Asia, our most current science about human populations in BOTH North AND South America is: the "white man" and Australian Aborigines were here first.

Everyone of Spanish and Asian ancestry (of Asian ancestry are the Hopi and every group southward after the initial populations by the Aborigines in the very far South) ARRIVED LATER.

End of story. As in, there is no accuracy in the colloquial claim that "we (they) were here first" by Asians and the later arriving Spanish immigrants to the Americas who then intermingled with the earlier mostly Southern Asian-ancestral peoples, by whom the Central Americas and most of South America were later populated.

[BIRDS]

I'd like to add to your comments that the drug trade and prostitution contribute MILLIONS ANNUALLY to "our economy," as does almost certainly theft.

The point being that just because there is an economic "contribution" involved does not make an activity moral, right, acceptable to society (most of us), or even legal by way of our laws in the country.

I know you agree...my comments are to reinforce yours, to counter the original.

[Know your rights]

the $800 Billion that illegal immigrants contribute to the GDP

Gross Domestic Product = Consumer Spending + Business and Residential Investment + Government Spending - Trade Deficit.

I can believe that illegal aliens "contribute" several hundred billions of dollars to the costs incurred by government. Oddly, I don't feel grateful.

[moehoward]

Good luck getting those that spout "we were here first" to wrap their minds around the truth you have stated.

They only know it is better here than where they are and will tell themselves whatever lies necessary to justify their actions.

[BIRDS]

To answer that last question you also include rhetorically ("I think they will respect hate speech laws...").

No, I don't, and based upon what is easily observable today by many among many racial groups in the U.S., they don't now.

I lived in Hawaii for a long time and I can tell you that as a "white" person, there is outright disdain and utter lack of courtesy bordering on the outright destructive to and about white people there, by many who are of mixed ethnicity and just badly mannered, using the "racial" thing to mistreat who they can. And in Hawaii, white folks are the minority and they are mistreated terribly.

Except when you're an obvious tourist staying at a hotel, in which case they will sugar you to spend more. But, in general population in Hawaii (just go into most retail there and experience it for yourself if you are white), they openly revile white people.

Let's see...Hawaii is today populated by about (I approximate) 70% Asian/Polynesian, 20% White, 10% Japanese.

Same thing applies for most of California today, as to behaviors. The term, "hate speech" ONLY occurs when it is being levied against and about white people. And, lastly, the only time I EVER hear the dreaded "n" word is by black people, and the ONLY racial epithets I EVER hear are by Mexicans in CA about white people and in Hawaii, by the 70% about white people (but they also revile the Japanese, for an odd turn of events).