I’ll believe it when I see it
AP
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said his department aims without exception to expel all those who enter the United States illegally.“Our goal at DHS (Homeland Security) is to completely eliminate the ‘catch and release’ enforcement problem, and return every single illegal entrant, no exceptions.
“It should be possible to achieve significant and measurable progress to this end in less than a year,” Chertoff told a Senate hearing.
Thousands of “Mexicans who are caught entering the United States illegally are returned immediately to Mexico. But other parts of the system have nearly collapsed under the weight of numbers. The problem is especially severe for non-Mexicans apprehended at the southwest border,” Chertoff explained.
“Today, a non-Mexican illegal immigrant caught trying to enter the United States across the southwest border has an 80 percent chance of being released immediately because we lack the holding facilities,” he added.
“Through a comprehensive approach, we are moving to end this ‘catch and release’ style of border enforcement by reengineering our detention and removal process.”
October 18, 2005 - 08:25 PM on October 18th, 2005
We start by closing the borders and ending illeal imagration we should just pull out of the UN:roll:
October 18, 2005 - 11:18 PM on October 18th, 2005
I wonder if the administration is finally starting to feel the heat from its conservative base on the immigration issue. How absurd it is to talk about homeland security and how we need the Patriot Act when we haven’t even secured the borders.
That’s what I told a caller from the “Republican Issues” group when they called to ask for a donation. I said when that issue is high on their issues list, I’ll donate. Right now it isn’t even on the list.
I agree with the author of this thread. Talk is cheap. The way to do it is:
1. Close the borders. Put the National Guard on the border to enforce it.
2. Systematically find illegals, round them up, and ship them home.
3. Automatic, $50,000 fine per occurence for any company hiring an illegal.
Then we’ll know this is more than talk…
October 18, 2005 - 11:31 PM on October 18th, 2005
Not to burst Chertoff’s bubble, but the first thing we need to do is get off the “technology solves all of our problems” band wagon. They just spent $14,000,000 for a predator drone to patrol the border from 50,000 feet. Unfortunately the drone can only cover a fraction of the area that needs to be covered and really can’t do much but take pictures and provide live video feed to agents potentially hundreds of miles away. That same money could’ve equipped and paid 200 agents for at least a year. If the politicians would pull their heads out of (as we used to say in the Army) rectal defillade, they’d realize that while technology is wonderful, it simply doesn’t work as well as the low tech approach of putting boots on the ground. A drone can’t apprehend or even deter anyone unless it’s armed and allowed to fire on a target. An I.C.E. agent on the ground can. We have agents in hazardous locales without backup. We have agents with communication gear that’s not up to the task of operating in rough canyon terrain (an agent was ambushed and severely wounded as a result of this travesty.) But instead of hiring, equipping and training more agents, we’re spending 14 mil on a drone. That’s almost hald the monthly payroll for a division of soldiers. With the impact that only a couple hundred Minutemen had on illegal immigration, imagine what a couple hundred armed agents could do? I’d also like to see them actually set up the volunteer auxillaries that they were talking about. Sheriff Joe Arpaio has a huge volunteer “Posse” that’s virtually available on a moment’s notice. A good number of these volunteers were among the 100 people that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office sent to Louisiana to help with the search and rescue effort. The Phoenix PD has a voluntary auxillary that helps out when necessary. Both receive rudimentary training in police procedures, communications, and first aid. They don’t have arrest authority, but they are perfectly capable of handling support roles such as directing traffic, doing search and rescue, securing a crime scene, etc etc etc. Those who pass a firearms course can carry sidearms for self protection. Why can’t the border patrol do the same thing?
It would be a low cost force multiplier. 16 hours of training should be enough to train someone how to man an observation post for a 6 or 8 hour shift. It would free up paid agents to actually apprehend people while the volunteers observe and report illegal border crossings. Hell we could hook some loud speakers on some helicopters and blare Wagner’s “Ride of the Valkyries” as the ICE agents swoop down on them from the low flying helcopters. It’s quite a rush to ride in a Blackhawk at 150 knots at treetop level (militarese it’s called Nape of the Earth) with the doors open. And at 180 mph, you can get someplace in a hurry.
9 blackhawks, strategically placed, could put 3 dozen agents on the ground anywhere along the AZ border in under 45 minutes. And that’s with only 3 bases, spaced about 130 miles apart with 24 agents at each base. That would allow for no more than 2 helos operational from each base at a time, thereby assuring that the helos and crews get adequate rest and repair. Use the Helibourne agents to intercept and round up the miscreants and send ground vehicles to transport the secured detainees. Whoops, is my background in the military and simulation gaming starting to show?
October 19, 2005 - 12:47 AM on October 19th, 2005
Arty, you’re right. It’s amazing what *could* be done…if they wanted to…
October 19, 2005 - 06:28 AM on October 19th, 2005
Yep, it’s amazing what could be done if only the government were bigger.
October 19, 2005 - 08:14 AM on October 19th, 2005
3- The only technology I support is an integrated system that has all the departments on the same page. The computer technology is antiquated and needs to be brought into the 21st century. That 14M could have done a lot and there still would have been enough left over to hire the manpower to cover the border.
October 19, 2005 - 08:16 AM on October 19th, 2005
My plan is MUCH simpler…shoot on sight.
next?
October 19, 2005 - 08:21 AM on October 19th, 2005
All those Mexicans doing landscaping work sure are threatening.
I feel safer already.
October 19, 2005 - 08:34 AM on October 19th, 2005
Zelda, I don’t give a FUCK if they are landscaping, selling oranges, hauling bricks, etc… they are BREAKING THE FUCKING LAW.
The second half of my solution is to take all of those scumbag welfare slugs, buying all of the ho-hos, ring dings and strawberry soda with MY MONEY, and make them LANDSCAPERS!!!!!
problem solved.
next?
October 19, 2005 - 08:36 AM on October 19th, 2005
My plan is MUCH simpler:shoot on sight.
My addition to the plan - leave the corpses where they lay for the next batch to trip over.
October 19, 2005 - 09:01 AM on October 19th, 2005
8-I’ll be the Negative Nancy here. Where I live, we hire lawn services and call them that. They are not our gardeners, they are our lawn service. These people make very nice livings in the warmer months and supplement their incomes by plowing in the colder months. These are not Hispanics that have the services.
October 19, 2005 - 09:51 AM on October 19th, 2005
Lots of people break the law all the time. It doesn’t necessarily make them threatening to the welfare of the rest of us.
October 19, 2005 - 10:04 AM on October 19th, 2005
But the fact is that illegal immigration, in addition to the obvious security issues, is a net drain on the economy, a net negative for society, and is threatenting the “welfare” of the rest of us by wrecking infrastructure like hospitals, schools, etc.
Haven’t you heard of all the hospital ERs that have closed because so many of their patients are illegals (many of whom abuse the system by using the ER as a clinic)? Wonder why our schools system is always broke when they are getting almost half of all the money the State spends? There are other reasons for that but illegals are swamping the system).
And last there’s the issue of the law. Those laws are in place for a good reason. When a society picks and chooses what laws are to be enroced and which will be ignored, then it has lost control. Effectively there is no law, as is the case in the 3rd world. Is that what you want?
October 19, 2005 - 10:28 AM on October 19th, 2005
9. How bout we take all the welfare scumbags in Toledo, buying all the crack, stealing merchandise and setting fires and make them FUCKING LANDSCAPERS.
problem created
October 19, 2005 - 11:08 AM on October 19th, 2005
12- You are correct about that Zelda. But why add to our own home grown problems? Not all illegals are bad people but the fact is they are “illegals” and that is a crime. They are draining resources from our own citizens. Why should we pay for them?
October 19, 2005 - 12:16 PM on October 19th, 2005
“They are draining resources from our own citizens.â€
I think that is our fundamental difference of opinion. I don’t see them as a drain at all. I think that mostly they come to America to do the jobs that other Americans can’t or won’t do. We get the cheap labor; they get what they consider to be high paying jobs. I think the net effect to our economy is good.
October 19, 2005 - 12:53 PM on October 19th, 2005
16… “other Amercans can’t or wont” because we are paying them to do JACK SHIT!!!
take away the welfare crack pipe and you’ll see a whole new batch of landscapers and fruit pickers.
October 19, 2005 - 12:58 PM on October 19th, 2005
16- Fair enough.
I see them coming here and doing some jobs that others won’t, but not limited to that. I see them coming here and getting good paying jobs and sending the money back to their country. That is one of the primary reasons Fox is angry about our new found agression at the border. Mexico has come to depend on this money.
I also don’t think that they would be doing these jobs if; a. We forced those on assistance to do the jobs or b. Force the employer to pay minimum wage at the very least.
I don’t see the cheap labor as a plus to our economy. That is offset by the medical costs, jail costs and insurance costs that we the taxpayer pay for because of them.
October 19, 2005 - 02:24 PM on October 19th, 2005
“That is offset by the medical costs, jail costs and insurance costs that we the taxpayer pay for because of them.”
Perhaps. I wish I could see some good data on the issue; however most organizations and people give biased reports. I guess I don’t know, but I think a lot of the posts here ignore the benefits of cheap labor. Often they even pay FICA when they can never hope to get it.
Kicking out the illegal aliens isn’t going to result in welfare losers doing the work.
October 19, 2005 - 02:35 PM on October 19th, 2005
19-Kicking out the illegal aliens isn’t going to result in welfare losers doing the work You’ve got that right!
October 19, 2005 - 02:36 PM on October 19th, 2005
#16-In Kalifornia alone, illegals send $9B per year back home. That is money taken out of the state economy. The ones that are working for cash are not paying any taxes, yet are using public services. The ones that are working jobs that pay taxes generally use more in public services than they pay for. The state prison population is somewhere around 20% illegals at about $40,000 cost per year each.
Chaep labor? No it is not cheap at all if you look at the big picture. That $1 head of lettuce in the store, picked by illegals, is probably costing $3 if you figure in the real cost in social services and other related costs. The cost to society from crime and demographic change? Incalculable.
No that “chaep labor” isn’t really cheap at all, and in fact forces the rest of the economy and society to subsidize those industries and products in an unfair and destructive way.
Anecdotal stories: Many illegals use the county hospital emergency rooms as clinics. Even worse, they call 911 and get an ambulance to give them a ride. I used to work in a County ER and the staff called the ambulance the “welfare taxi.” A bus ticket costs about $1, a cab ride about $15, the welfare taxi costs (taxpayers) about $500. Then who pays the ER bill? Taxpayers do, as much as the hospital can recover. That’s why ERS are closing, especially in the Los Angeles area. Do the math.
About five years ago, in the San Jose, California local newspaper, they had a story about this illegal dude who had five “families” locally. He had five different women that he was flitting around between, like a bee, periodically impregnating them. Each had multiple children. ALL of them were on welfare. He paid nothing, had no responsibility whatsoever. This case is unusual only in the total numbers (5 satellite families, about 20 children).
So, Zelda, still think illegals are “good” for the economy? For the social service infrastructure? For the society?
October 19, 2005 - 02:36 PM on October 19th, 2005
it will when there is NO MORE WELFARE.
October 19, 2005 - 02:44 PM on October 19th, 2005
21- Great post. Zelda made a good point as well though. We need to see some really good figures that are unbiased.
October 19, 2005 - 03:34 PM on October 19th, 2005
21.
Good points, but you are only listing your one side of the story.
Are you going to try to convince me that Wal-Mart is bad for the economy too?
October 19, 2005 - 04:24 PM on October 19th, 2005
Zelda, you did say something that is absolutely true. many of the cash workers pay into Socvial Security and never colelct, because they have to provided SS#s to get a job. They get fake ones. The Gov’t knows this and doesn’t do anything about it because it wants the $. Howver, on the balance sheet, this is not enough to make a difference.
I am trying to think of anything that is positive about illegal immigration. Culture? It’s already here. Cheap labor? Again, unfairly subsidized to be that way.
But I can think of other negatives. Like public health. I did a research paper on the subject for a college Sociology class years ago, and it is frightening how some really bad diseases, some of which we had almost eliminated in the U.S., are making a comeback.
Objectively look at both sides. I think it is clear that illegal immigration is a net very, very bad thing. Add to it the terrorism issue and it becomes a slam-dunk issue.
October 19, 2005 - 04:27 PM on October 19th, 2005
Almost forgot to address the Wal Mart issue. I do think Wal Mart is a net negative, because where does 90% of what they sell come from? China. That’s money flowing out of this country.
The Chinese will never have to attack us militarily. They’ll just buy up so much of our national debt they will virtually own us.
October 19, 2005 - 04:27 PM on October 19th, 2005
Day Off
I took the day off work today (gasp!)
Sure, I dabbled a bit in a little design work and dealt with a few help tickets - but for the most part, I played hookey. Hey - a girl needs a break once in awhile . . and it’s been AGES since I called in …
October 19, 2005 - 04:35 PM on October 19th, 2005
24-Are you going to try to convince me that Wal-Mart is bad for the economy too? No, just bad in general. I went to one and hated the stupidity of the employee. I think I developed an allergy to the place!
October 19, 2005 - 05:20 PM on October 19th, 2005
27.
Yeah, I’m a Target man, myself.
October 19, 2005 - 08:58 PM on October 19th, 2005
Robert;
I think I love you… Why? Because you state your issues without personal attacks. That can only facilitate positive exchanges of opinions and perhaps we can all learn a thing or two.
October 19, 2005 - 09:06 PM on October 19th, 2005
“Objectively look at both sides.”
I am trying very hard to do just that as I always do, can you do the same?
“I do think Wal Mart is a net negative”
See; I can respect your opinion, but I don’t agree. To me, we need to look at the bigger picture. What happens to China when they get more money, and America gets cheap products? Where is the problem?
FREE TRADE IS A GOOD THING!!! It is part of what made America great to begin with. In the long run it will be a great thing on a global level.
October 19, 2005 - 09:08 PM on October 19th, 2005
The company that has done the best job at mastering capitalism is a bad thing??? You guys need some of my pipe.
October 19, 2005 - 11:13 PM on October 19th, 2005
28, Mike, my brother who is an IS manager at Target thanks you heartily.
The bum opened 70 odd stores last month and I didn’t get an invite to one.
October 20, 2005 - 12:31 AM on October 20th, 2005
I think free trade is a good thing, a necessary thing. However, we don’t have real free trade with many countries. What China buys from us is a drop in the bucket compared to what we buy from them. When it comes to technology and IP, they buy just enough to reverse engineer it and steal it. Then they flood the market with it.
Free trade also requires a level playing field for competition, another thing we don’t have. When Kalifornia apple growers are going out of business because imported apples from China can be sold here cheaper, that is a real problem. Chinese apple growers don’t have to deal with the regulations, taxes, fees, and multiple layers of bureaucracy that Kalifornia growers do.
I own land that is in an area zoned agricultural. I don’t grow anything on it, never have, don’t graze cattle; it is natural. But starting last year, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, by regulation, defined natural rainwater runoff as “waste”. Then they required, by regulation, all landowners of agricultural zoned land to purchase a “waste discharge permit” for the “waste” (rainwater) that runs off naturally. There is a base annual fee, then a per-acre cost. Its only a few hundred bucks…..to start. I’d bet that soon, some sort of management plan will be required, then some sort of inspection/certification process, and of course, the fess will go up. All this over rainwater that has been running off from the land naturally for millions of years.
This is just a vignette, an anecdotal glimpse of the absurdity and insanity that is a growing cancer in America, and why in an era of greater global competition, America is handicapping itself. And the same bureaucrats and politicians who think this is good just want to keep expanding it, I guess until the Golden Goose is dead, and everything collapses. That is the track we are on.
So we don’t have real free trade in that sense, and it is only getting worse.
Starting last year farmers in Kalifornia have to get permits for stationary engines, like the ones usd to pump water. In addition to in some cases having to get rid of perfectly serviceable older equipment and buy new, they have to pay annual fees (which of course will only go up). So it just drives up their costs and makes them less competetive in the market. Yet another example.
October 20, 2005 - 06:38 AM on October 20th, 2005
Actually Robert, we do well on the global market, but it is in no one area that you can pin it to. Zelda made a good point with WalMart. They sell a great deal of product that was purchased abroad. (though WalMart does cause people to have allegeric reactions to shopping there due to the stupidity of the worker)
You used the example of Apples, so I will stick with that one. In MI, we have many apple orchards. The grocery stores all carry our states product. This is not due to the fact that they are homegrown, but due to the fact that they are marketable and the pricing is excellant. Our bigger farmers set up shops on their property. This time of the year, they are able to increase profit due to the fact that there are many idiots just like me that go there, buy the unusual merchandise that I don’t find in a mainstream store, and yes, I can go every week and find something to buy. When I am done in the gift barn, I go to the Apple Haus and buy my homemade cider that I can watch them make, buy a bag of apples or kettle corn and look over the various bakery products sold. I go on the weekends due to the fact that the farms are crowded during the week with school kids on tour. The bigger farms used their creativity to survive. These are the farms where there are generations ready to take it.
Part of the problems that you see are due to the State you live in.
October 20, 2005 - 12:49 PM on October 20th, 2005
Then why do have peprpetual trade deficits, that seem to reach new record levels periodically? A big part of it is oil, but take out oil and it is still a huge problem. I am not an economics guru, but it seems intuitive that the trade deficit is a macro report card of how well we are doing globally. And we are getting a D or D- by that standard.