One Reporter's Opinion: 'Do We Want 'Mexifornia'?'

It is this reporter's opinion that we will eventually face the decision to either close our porous borders with Canada and Mexico and sort out our illegal alien situation or throw up our hands and become another Third World nation.

Strong words, I know! But thousands arrive illegally each year and, as an example, the state of California has become home to fully 40 percent of America's immigrants – legal and illegal. They come in such overwhelming numbers because a tacit alliance of Right and Left has created an open borders policy aimed at keeping wage labor cheap and social problems fresh.

Recently I interviewed Victor Davis Hanson, Professor of Classics, California State University,* who asked the question, "Do we want 'Mexifornia'?" He refers to unlawful immigration as the third rail of California politics.

Hanson knows the problem firsthand. He is a college professor who lives in the sleepy town of Selma, Calif., which has grown from a community of 7,000 to 20,000 in only two decades – as a result of mostly illegal immigration from Mexico.

Selma is 60 percent to 90 percent Hispanic. No one knows how many of these people are citizens. Hanson rarely hears English spoken and almost every car displays a Mexican flag or decal.

Professor Hanson points out that he loves the Mexican people, but that tensions abound even within families when the subject of our sovereignty and citizenship is discussed. One of his siblings is married to a Mexican-American; another has two stepchildren whose father was an illegal from Mexico; he has a prospective son-in-law whose parents crossed the border, yet they all disagree at different times whether open borders are California's hope or its vane.

And why not? California cannot even obtain accurate numbers as to how many of the state's more than 10-12 million Hispanic residents have arrived from Mexico unlawfully.

Our Hispanic population – 70 percent of which are from Mexico – grew 53 percent during the 1980s and rose another 27 percent, to a total of 30 million between 1990 and 1996; and at present rates of births and immigration, by 2050 there will be 97 million Hispanics in the U.S. – one quarter of our American population!

Hanson points to the fact that the liberals swear that these newcomers bring in $25 billion net revenue annually; but realistic statisticians conclude that they cost the United States over $40 billion a year and that in California, each illegal immigrant will take $50,000 in services from the state beyond what he will contribute in taxes during his entire lifetime. One study suggests that the average California household must contribute at least $1,200 each year to subsidize the deficit between what these immigrants cost in services and what they pay in taxes.

The uninvited who have flooded into California have all but filled our newly built prisons; nearly one quarter of the inmates are from Mexico.

The Labor Department attributes 50 percent of real wage declines to the influx of cheap immigrant labor.

The going wage is $8.00 per hour in California, $8.00 a week in Mexico. But that's only the beginning. These "guests" use their counterfeit documentation to get workers' compensation, unemployment insurance and state assistance, meanwhile romanticizing Mother Mexico while chastising Lady Bountiful America.

Surprise! The second generation has learned how to live, spend and consume as Americans – but not, like their fathers, to work and save as Mexicans. If rising crime rates, gang activity and illegitimacy are any indication, they resent rather than sacrifice to escape poverty.

Tragically, 37 percent of all births to Hispanic immigrants are illegitimate. The illegitimacy rate among American-born Mexican mothers is now 48 percent. Census data show median household income for the nation's Hispanics dropped 5.1 percent, yet recent immigrants from Mexico and their U.S.-born children under 18 make up only 4.2 percent of America's population and represent 10.2 percent of our poor. Hispanics account for 24 percent of America's impoverished – that's up 8 percentage points since 1985.

... and yet they keep coming, refusing to be assimilated, with romanticized Mexico ever close to their hearts, many dying in California never having sought to become U.S. citizens.

Professor Hanson points to the heart of our immigration problem: While it has always been easier for people who emigrate to keep their own culture rather than join the majority, for the first time in our state and nation's history, we have made it easier for them to do it.

Unfortunately, the future is dismal. Out of every 100 Hispanics who enter California high schools, 40 drop out and of the remaining 60, fewer than four will go on to college. Only 7 percent of all Mexican-Americans currently hold a BA. This is a national tragedy!

I praise professor Hanson. If he did not really like his Mexican-American students, who make up the majority of his classics classes, if he wanted them to fail, he would not continue to try to teach them Latin, much less Greek, English Composition or Western History and Culture – nor would he insist on essays free of grammatical error, or demand oral reports that employ classical, rhetorical tropes.

No ... if he did not like them or did not wish to live among thousands of illegal as well as legal immigrants and wish them married into his own family, he would keep them distant, teaching them therapy, letting them speak poor English or no English at all and insisting on the superiority of the "Mexican culture" – that they or their parents had fled.

Instead, the professor struggles on at what sometimes seems to be a losing battle. But he leaves for us the choice. Will we continue down this endless path facing the great question: Will California remain multi-racial or become America's first truly multi-cultural state? Will there be assimilation or will we stay with the deceitful multiculturalist present that is failing? For unchecked illegal immigration and multiculturalism are a lethal mix. California, if it is to stay as California, might cope with one or even the other – but surely not both at once.

Professor Victor David Hanson, our heroes are found not only on violent battlefields. We salute you!

******* * Victor Davis Hanson, a professor of Classics at California State University, Fresno, received his B.A. at the University of California at Santa Cruz and his Ph.D. from Stanford University. He was given the Award for Teaching Excellence by the American Philological Association – an annual citation given to the top undergraduate teachers of Classics.

He is the author or editor of several books on military and ancient history. He has also written about traditional agrarian and rural life and contemporary culture wars. His articles and reviews have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Times, American Heritage, The Weekly Standard and The Wilson Quarterly, and has been featured on NPR and the Jim Lehrer News Hour. He currently writes a biweekly column on the war against terrorism for National Review Online.

The legendary George Putnam is 87 years young and a veteran of 67 years as a reporter, broadcaster, and commentator ... and is still going strong. George is part of the all-star line-up of Southern California's KPLS Radio – Hot Talk AM 830.

Rather than call it Mexifornia, we need to call it something more Oprah-esque. Calico comes to mind.

And what shall we call Tennessee?

TENNESSEE DRIVER'S LICENSE STATIONS OVERRUN BY ILLEGAL ALIENS

Tennessee in earlier years allowed illegal aliens to obtain a driver's license with a translated birth certificate from their country of birth. Then, the law was changed to state that no one could receive a driver's license without a valid social security number.

This caused a huge problem. Since thousands of illegal aliens have flocked to Tennessee in recent years, that meant a large number of unlicensed drivers on the roads (also uninsured). So, the cry went up from immigrant (illegal) advocates for a change in the law. Just recently, Tennessee again began allowing illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses with documentation as to identity, but, without the requirement for a valid social security number.

Almost every Tennessee driver's license office now has lines cueing up at around 4-5 a.m. as thousands of illegals previously denied a driver's license are trying once again. Also, they are required to take the written test in English which is also causing a lot of repeat business for the driver's license offices. Sources also say that illegal aliens are coming from other states which still have the old "valid social security number" law.

This does seem to validate the claim by many that the census undercounted the number of illegal aliens in the United States. Every time an amnesty or driver's license situation like this arises, the numbers are incredible.

The time has come for conservative-minded Americans to ask themselves that old "Ann Landers Question": would we be better off _with_ California as part of our union in the years to come, or withOUT it?

Would we be better off without Tennessee to? You people need to understand, this is a national invasion. Not just isolated to California. Don't let your jealousy of California, cloud the facts.

TENNESSEE DRIVER'S LICENSE STATIONS OVERRUN BY ILLEGAL ALIENS

I've been forced to accept it and move forward.

I accepted it, and then moved north.

LOL! You moved north to Washington? Where you gunna run to next? You think your isolated from this invasion of millions? Hehehe. WASHINGTON is considering chargeing in-state tuition for illegal aliens that are attending taxpayer supported colleges and universities.

Oregon and Washington have hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens, with more coming everyday. I have been there.

Where you going to run to next Blue Monk? Would you care to see more invasion articles involving Washington State?

More States Consider In-State Tuition For Illegal Aliens CNSNews.com | 4/08/02 | Melanie Hunter

Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) - Several states are considering following the lead of California and Texas, which charge in-state tuition for illegal aliens attending taxpayer supported colleges and universities.

According to published reports, Minnesota, North Carolina, Utah, and Washington are among the states considering the move, following on the 1982 Supreme Court Plyler v. Texas decision that required states to provide taxpayer funded elementary and secondary education to illegal aliens through grade 12.

But immigration reform groups argue the in-state college tuition plans are a direct violation of federal law.

Section 505 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 states that:

"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident."

Apparently, members of Congress intended the law to mean exactly what the immigration reform groups claim. House conference Report 104-828, referring to Section 505 stated, "this section provides that illegal aliens are not eligible for in-state tuition rates at public institutions of higher education."

But Texas and California circumvent the law by basing their in-state tuition policies for illegal aliens not on whether the alien is a "resident" of the state, but rather on whether or not the alien graduated from an in-state high school after three years of continuous attendance.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) says the issue can be reduced to a simple question of fairness.

"The tuition debate is really a question of a finite commodity whether you're talking about the limited number of seats available or the limited number of tax dollars available to subsidize tuition," according to David Ray, spokesman for FAIR.

"If you're saying that these funds and seats should go to illegal alien children, then you're saying, 'No,' to American children, children whose parents have paid taxes in this country for decades and who can legally hold a job in this country once they get a degree," he concluded.

FAIR believes that states offering in-state tuition to illegal aliens will entice greater numbers of illegal alien families to move to those states.

Proponents of the idea, such as State Rep. Rick Noriega (D) who sponsored the Texas bill that allows illegal aliens to pay in-state tuition rates, disagree.

"I am just happy that here in Texas we got it through when we did," he told the Chronicle of Higher Education in November 2001.

"For ... fear-mongers, these are perfect times to execute your agendas," Noriega added, referring to the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

But conservative Internet columnist Gregory Hand, who lives in California and opposes that state's illegal immigrant education subsidy, doesn't believe he's a fear-monger, just a pragmatist.

"Socialist supporters of subsidized higher education for law breaking immigrants blame the illegal-immigrant parents (and who can punish a child for the sins of the parents?), point out that these children have graduated from American public schools (again at taxpayer expense) and therefore somehow bizarrely deserve access to higher education subsidized by someone else's hard earned money," Hand writes in his online column at GregoryHand.com.

In August 2001, Wisconsin Gov. Scott McCallum (R) vetoed a provision lawmakers inserted into the state's budget that would have provided an identical in-state tuition discount to illegal aliens as the ones in Texas and California.

"Until Congress changes the eligibility status of undocumented persons for this benefit," McCallum said announcing the veto, "the focus of taxpayer subsidized postsecondary education needs to remain on students who are legal residents of the state."

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) believes the debate is irrelevant.

INS spokeswoman, Elaine Komis, told the Chronicle of Higher Education in November 2001 that the agency has "no reason" to issue regulations on whether someone who is in the country illegally could qualify for tuition benefits. The agency, she said, believes that person should be removed from the country.

But that message has apparently not been disseminated throughout the agency.

"It's not the role of the INS to tell the states how they should administer their educational system," another INS representative told CNSNews.com.

"Given our very limited resources, with only 2,000 agents, we just don't have the capability of going out to universities and checking papers," added the INS representative, who did not want to be identified.

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.