Immigration as advantage

wrenchspinner, says:

Due to the limitations placed upon my response to your article, I have had to post this in 3 separate posings, so here then is Part 1 of my reply :

Well put Mr Larry James .... at least so long as a part of the deal you mentioned includes your payment of the cost of such appeasement moves to this illegal segment of our society and not the good old American taxpayer who's quite tired these days of doling out their dollars for every freebie anyone but themselves seem entitled to.

Let's start this discussion with one clarification first though shall we ?

Throughout your article there seems to have been a simple omission of one term quite central to this discussion which is Illegal Immigrant, at least when considering any point relevant to those already here who have chosen to simply bypass our already well thought out and accepted immigration/naturalization procedures by illegally entering our country.

It does indeed seem quite relevant that this particular facet of this issue be considered when entering into such a discussion so you'll note I have done so where ever relevant within my own text below.

Step One: Our border may as well already be "open" between the US and Mexico with an expected crossing daily in the thousands by foreign nationals streaming across it.

While there is already a documented procedure for entering legally into the US, my question is what makes you believe making things simpler for our southern neighbors to enter legally into this country would stop the same hoards of illegals from streaming across anyway (if not even in greater numbers) once our borders are essentially as you say "opened" further ?

The burgeoning populations of illegal immigrants here have already managed to pass into this country by ignoring the legal avenues afforded them, so why do you think this would realistically change in the future ?

Secondly, I'm afraid your thoughts on a mutually beneficial working relationship between Mexico and the US are a bit misguided since the only real benefit in reality is to Mexico, and not the US, but, more on that later.

Step Two : The idea of any type of ID that is impossible to counterfeit is totally implausible. No area of technology ever devised by man has yet to have been able to remain untamperable and these days with technology rewriting what is possible every year or so, how could anyone reasonably think such security could remain in effect regarding any type of documentation for long ?

Quite simply, whatever can be made by men or women can be replicated or modified by other men and women. Does the old saying "When there's a will, there's a way" ring any bells? If so, try thinking of that same will multiplied by a factor of millions and then try to tell me again about how secure this idea really would be.

Step Three: Acknowledge the benefits of immigration by Mexican laborers to the US and how that strengthens both nations ? Surely you jest or are seriously deluded in your thinking.

As a Native Texan I have seen how this illegal workforce utilized by industry has progressively driven down the expected wages within many fields such as manufacturing, construction and general service work as well as how it has also led to an increased level of maltreatment by employers of workers within these segments.

A common environment within these industries exists today where a legal citizen here can expect lower wages than even as little as 10yrs ago for doing the exact same work. Where contractors employing legal citizens are forced by the unfair competition of employers of illegal workers to bid ever lower for their labors, goods and services making fewer and fewer dollars available for the families of these legal citizens and .... heaven forbid that a legal worker expect to be well treated or paid more for their labors when a company will often essentially tell them to shut up and take what they're given or simply be replaced by an illegal who'll keep his mouth shut and work for less!

Sorry, but I fail to see how further appeasement of such practices is beneficial to anyone who is a legal citizen here, with the exception of course of the employers of the above mentioned illegal workers.

You also ask why we accept the outsourcing of industry and work to points outside our borders ? My question to you is whom you're talking to outside of the businesses and corporations making such moves who would be in agreement with this concept ?

Try addressing this issue with the now unemployed or at best underemployed US citizen who used to work for Ford, GM, Motorola, or the other hundreds if not thousands of companies who have abandoned these workers who used to be the ones who made their products here which they now simply manufacture elsewhere because it improves their bottom line, regardless of the cost to the American citizens themselves.

I think if you were to listen to a side of this issue from these workers instead of the businesses themselves you'd find an unwavering dissent about such outsourcing tactics by our manufacturing and industrial complexes.

To say Americans are in tune with such practices is a bit short sighted and not a very well thought out logical process in such issues.

I fail to comprehend how simplifying the process for increased immigration of lower wage, undereducated people, which would then be basically outsourcing lower paying jobs within our own borders could possibly be beneficial to anyone but the immigrant workers themselves, their families living outside our borders who in turn benefit from the wages paid here then sent out of the country to them, and the companies who would then employ these individuals at wages below what would otherwise be paid to legal American workers.

If you Mr. James can find the logic in this thinking it only points up your readiness to further undermine the American middle class and just how out of step you yourself, much like our federal government is, with what the bulk of the American middle class in this country thinks in regard to this issue.

                           End of Part 1

wrenchspinner, says:

Part 2

Step Four: Your mention of "Work out a reasonable approach to taxation for non-citizen residents." on the surface sounds great, but let's dig a bit deeper shall we?

We currently have an estimated illegal population of between 12 and 20 million depending on whose numbers one chooses to quote, but for the sake of simplicity let's use 15 million as a median and easily worked through figure as a basis for further discussion. For the sake of similar simplicity let's further work from the figure of a 5yr term these individuals have been in our country already.

So, with a population of 15 million at a term of 5yrs each and let's just say an annual tax liability for their earnings of $3,000 dollars. Using these figures it would appear this illegal immigrant population already owes the US government a staggering $225,000,000,000 in unpaid taxes, not even considering the same penalties and interest every legal citizen here would be assessed for such tax evasion.

Yet I see no mention whatsoever of this facet of this issue in your article, how curious? Is this a slip of the keyboard perhaps or an outright omission perhaps because it doesn't well suit your quite obvious agenda in this issue?

The above figures are realistically well below what would be more in line with a tax debt already owed the American government and indeed the legal American taxpayers who have had to pick up the part of the tax liability these illegal immigrants have not paid into the system while yet availing themselves of our road systems, park systems, school systems, healthcare facilities, welfare programs and myriad of other public services and ... it's also fairly well accepted by many who estimate the above illegal population figures to be on the low side all while also not taking into account the illegals who have already been here within our borders for 10, 20, 30 or more years meaning the overall tax debt this illegal population owes the US could easily exceed as much as $400,000,000 and in case anyone has difficulty with all those zeroes, that's 400 billion with a B dollars, and again does not include relevant penalties and interest !

But, let's move on shall we to another grand misconception in your article. You mention offering some form of payroll deduction for medical expenses/insurance costs.

When nearly every state in the US now already has laws in place to tie the hands of medical facilities in currently forcing them to administer healthcare free of charge to illegals irrespective of whether they ever get paid for such services, the question that begs to be answered here is why these same illegals would want to then PAY for insurance for these services?

They're already assured by law, much to the chagrine and detriment of the medical facilities that are required to treat them, they be treated for free, so why on earth would they ever accept the idea they would then need to actually pay for such services?

You go on to mention how immigrants desirous of citizenship could also pay in to a type of naturalization fund to allow them to pay towards whatever expenses relevant to their citizenship so that when the time comes for them to choose to initiate the naturalization process the funds would be ready for them to do so.

With hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants having taken to our streets, proudly waving Mexican flags, often while burning or disgracing the American flag, with many openly demanding they be given automatic citizenship here with many of these same protesters in the same breath voicing their disgust and hatred for America how many of these people do you think want anything more from us that our money and availment to our abundant social services?

With what's already been shown of their obvious claims of their intentions of re-taking/re-claiming the states of California, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado and Texas as real estate that was "stolen" fro Mexico, what on earth would lead you to believe these people want our citizenship, and much less be expected to do anything much less actually pay for the right to be citizens of this country?

Here's a clue Mr. James : they don't want citizenship, they only want the benefits of our society without any of the responsibility for it! More than that, they truly want us to simply turn over six American states to them and have publicly stated this demand all under the term "La Reconquista".

Perhaps Mr. James you should undertake a bit of study on La Reconquista or La Raza to get a clue just how treacherous and deeply this rabbit hole goes.

Step Five: Why should the American taxpayer once again be expected to foot the bills for children of illegal immigrants to remain here, attain IDs, attain citizenship or assist them in achieving higher education whether their parents have already been illegally on our soil for 5yrs or even 50yrs? Is this meant to reward these lawbreakers who managed to avoid obeying our laws for at least 5yrs ?

Perhaps if this concept makes sense to you we should extend similar benefits to other foreign national lawbreakers children like those of known child molesters, murders, and rapists.

Or, by such similar logic perhaps we should just totally subvert our current judicial process and grant amnesty to anyone who's managed to avoid apprehension for at least 5yrs for any crimes period? Osama Bin Laden has managed to avoid us for more than 5yrs now, should that mean we should then say "Oh well" and in turn grant him amnesty for his crimes simply because he's managed to avoid prosecution for them for this long ?

Yes, I know the above is stretching at least part of the point to a rediculous degree, but I hope the core point is getting across, and that is, why should the American public be expected to further extend our hands to those here illegally, no matter how long that term has been ? Illegal is illegal ... period!

           End of Part 2

wrenchspinner, says:

Part 3

Step Six : Your mention here of identifying illegal immigrants of "good moral character" here longer than 5yrs again falls very much in line with my thoughts in step five. The question that yet remains is how good really is their character when they've been here illegally for 5 days or 5 years ?

The only "factoring in" that seems reasonable in this discussion is that the longer they've managed to be here undetected makes the criminals against the American immigration policies for extended periods of time. With that in mind how should that then in any way allow them any special considerations aside from prosecution under our existing laws ?

Step Seven : Any such "Educate the nation about the realities of immigration relative to education, labor, economics, class, American history and national security." programs must include a realistic examination of both short term and long term impact of the facets of this issue on the welfare, sovereignty and continuance of America as a country, not one of how much we can continue to give away to those illegally here on our shores and their dependents elsewhere.

The real truth is our social services are already past the point of being strained by the ramifications of this issue, our tax dollars that should be currently collected to help fund these costs are not being collected, steadily worsening the situation even more and there's already a population of illegal immigrants numbering at about 300,000 currently incarcerated in our prison systems and literally hundreds of thousands more clogging up our legal system with many of these getting not only free court appointed lawyers, but requiring bilingual lawyers along with court system interpreters once they go to trial and we, the American people are now being asked to simply forgive all these transgressions and debts and then say, OK Jose and Juanita Q Lawbreaker, you can now be granted citizenship and full legal rights to be here.

In summation the pro-immigrationist and most certainly the illegal immigrants themselves are always quick to play the racism and racial discrimination cards when anyone outside the brown race steps forward and tries to explain the impact and scope of the issue of illegal immigration within these United States of America. However, all in all, that's just way too simplistic a view.

They never seem willing to discuss the issues and costs to the American society of this problem in a fair and reasonable manner, choosing instead to simply cry racist, racist, racist, or scream who's going to pick your oranges or cook your food ? or such similarly inane questions against anyone decrying their right to be here, which if examined from a purely logical and legal viewpoint, does not exist at all.

The bleeding heart and leftist contentions within our society are quick to jump on the bandwagon to support these purported "downtrodden and abused" folks but my question to these same individuals is when they will finally realize it is instead the American lower to middle class legal citizens who are ones actually downtrodden as the millions of illegal immigrants climb right over their backs to grab the golden rings we as native born and naturalized citizens were promised ?

In truth these illegal immigrants are invaders of our country who have been let go as lawbreakers for far too long and now need to asked to peacefully return to the country(ies) of their birth as we as Americans can ill afford to continue the costs of their illegal invasion of our country.

Mr. James, I would implore you to explore more of the "other" side of this issue before once more touting some grandiose plan that will once more be funded almost completely by the American people in support of the illegal contention now within our borders and the millions upon millions more your "steps" would allow into our country in the future.

The American people rose up en masse just this past June to relate to the Senate their grave displeasure with the amnesty plans congress sat ready to foist upon us.

Americans who had never in their lives picked up a phone to call their senators, representatives and the president did so. Americans who had never faxed or emailed the above mentioned individuals did so. Americans who had never vocalized concerns about the ramifications of our un-secured national borders, much less even given the idea much thought at all since 9-11, did so. Americans who had never spoken out about ANY issue in all their lives did so.

I implore you to think long and hard about the obvious resolve of the American public and THEIR thoughts on this issue before once more proposing some plan we obviously won't care much to read, much less be expected to once more pay for.

wrenchspinner, Lone Oak, Tx.

legend500, says:

You point out a great many problems (some extremely good points as well), but what is the solution?

1) "the only real benefit in reality is to Mexico, and not the US," Prove it.

2) "I think if you were to listen to a side of this issue from these workers instead of the businesses themselves you'd find an unwavering dissent about such outsourcing tactics by our manufacturing and industrial complexes. " Agreed, but the businessman are better placed to make these decisions than the average workers. Who benefits from cheap chinese products in Wal-Mart? Who spends their money at a dollar store? The American consumer has determined that overseas production and illegal immigration are good things, through their purchase of goods produced by both.

3) "With what's already been shown of their obvious claims of their intentions of re-taking/re-claiming the states of California, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado and Texas as real estate that was "stolen" fro Mexico," Ironically enough, Texas was stolen from Mexico. How? Illegal immigration of Anglos into Texas in violation of Mexican law. Should we both leave this land originally stolen from Native Americans? After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander...

4) "Illegal is illegal ... period!" Speeding, jaywalking, littering, and tax fraud are all illegal, but you seem not to care about enforcing those laws. The sole laws you deem necessary to enforce to their fullest are immigration laws. Why is that?

5)" golden rings we as native born and naturalized citizens were promised ?" Americans are unique in that they aren't promised anything. If native Americans are too fat, lazy and privliged to compete with people who can't even speak the language, much less stay here legally, what does this say about the "downtrodden middle class". Maybe immigrants are drawn here to work because our middle classes have gained a misplaced sense of entitlement to not work hard. If we can't compete with immigrants, maybe that says a lot more about us than it says about them.

6) "The American people rose up en masse just this past June to relate to the Senate their grave displeasure with the amnesty plans congress sat ready to foist upon us." Congress should have ignored them. The American people also believe that flying saucers are real, and more know who Beyonce Knowles is than Richard Cheney. The only group in the US who had a high level of knowledge (More than 50% high) according to the Pew Research Center were persons making more than 100,000 dollars a year. Congress should ignore the feelings of the illiterate whole in favor of businessmen and lawyers whom are informed enough to make a decision on this important topic.

Harsh, but true.

loni1127, says:

What makes you think for one minuet that wrenchspinner does not feel the need to enforce all of the laws of this great nation? The topic of the discussion is IMMIGRATION or did you miss that part? Our great nation The United States of America has always allowed outsiders to become a legal part of our country if you can in fact pass the REQUIREMENTS to do so. That does include entering the country legally, obeying the laws of the nation (ALL OF THEM!) I have visited our southern neighbors many times, it does have some beautiful areas. And to do so I have obtained the required documents, and I do brush up on my Spanish/Mexican before I go. I even spend quite a bit of money while there, but I do not expect nor do I demand any privileges while there! I am not a citizen! I do my level best to not impose my native ways on the locals. I do to the very best of my ability follow ALL of their laws.

Something that I recently observed in our local Wal-Mart that really angered me to no end. 3 Mexicans that did not speak English were buying their groceries with their FOOD STAMP cards while their other friend sent $400.00 to Mexico. The three carts of groceries that these fine fellows "bought" (paid for by the taxpaying American public) would have fed my family for 3-4 months. We are modest folks so we can not afford to spend 4 to 600.00 a payday on food, and yes sir I do know that they have to use it or loose it next month. In our house we are hard working POSTAL workers and we can not afford to eat steak and shrimp like our Mexican neighbors who come here illegally and buy their food with my tax dollars that I have to pay or go to Jail!! If we do not pay our taxes we will be terminated, we will be prosecuted, and of course the IRS that does not even know that the other guy exist will take everything I own. Not so for my illegal brother who gets interest free loans, free food, free medical, free education... Dang I should just renounce my citizenship so I can have all that and never have to worry about paying for anything!

Unfortunately I still believe in the American way and that our nation can still be saved, if we do it now and stop this madness we currently call boarder control. Build the wall stop the flow, shoot, put in land mines if need be. Make it a no treatment zone, you blow yourself up in here to bad there will be no medical treatment! How's that for a boarder control solution!

And as for the "Beyonce Knowles is than Richard Cheney" poll. You can put your polls where ever you want them to make them come out to say anything you want. It all depends on whom you are polling. I do know who Richard Cheney is but I don't have a clue who Beyonce Knowles is, my guess from your inference is that they are probably some sort of "celebrity" I don't waste my time on that box that sooo many people worship as to have one in every room so they don't miss a thing that does not matter that is broadcast over the airwaves. While their children grow-up without them. I grew up in a home where that box often caused my parents to shush us, my children do not say the same, we were more into the park or bike riding or swimming or reading you know that old fashioned stuff people did before their kids got hooked on drugs and their parents did not have a clue.

So get a clue buddy and understand that those hundred of thousands of us that did call, fax, and write to our representatives this past June do care about ALL of the laws, this one is just the one under the microscope right now.

Just outside of Ft Worth, TX

wrenchspinner, says:

Legend 500 Since you ask for solutions I can only say I have no firm solutions to this complex and perplexing issue, but, I think I do have at least a few relevant clues.

1.Get back to basics. Simple enforcement of the laws relevant to immigration already in place as well as those regarding employers of illegal workers is a good start. So long as the fed takes the stance that it will only make appeasement moves towards fulfilling their duties as protectors of our borders nothing of any real consequence will ever occur.

If the fed had real intentions of strictly enforcing our borders and laws it should have become immediately apparent after the defeat of the bill in the senate in June but their lack of resolve to enforce the will of the average Americans thoughts were made obvious on the issue by the lack of enforcement of even the current laws afterwards.

On the state and local levels many police organizations are forbidden to ask whether a person can verify citizenship, even if an individual is arrested for a crime. This is exactly the type of political correctness that is eroding our country from within. I ask anyone to state a valid reason behind such a policy if no more than to stymie attempts at realistic enforcement of our laws. The logic of such policy totally evades all sense of reason to me and only further insures the possibility for real enforcement of our laws has no chance of success.

1. Our border with Mexico stretches nearly 2000 miles and most of that is unmanned and even when guarded, such efforts are strained beyond the expectation of their performance of a good job at it. It's not the Border Patrols fault, but those running the show, which is more of what's going on than an honest effort at policing our border.

Couple that again with the constraints of political correctness and hand tying that goes along with the border enforcement efforts and it isn't too hard to see how ineffectual a process it turns out being.

Even the segments or border fencing approved by congress and funded over a year ago have yet to see any serious progress. Again, while this is not the total solution, it would go a long way towards making the enforcement of the unfenced sections of our border a greatly simplified process compared to trying to police a 2000 mile span.

1. Denial of social services to anyone incapable of producing verification of citizenship would go a long way towards stopping the continued drain of these services by people who have no legal right to expect to receive them, nor are contributors to the funds that enable them to be available in the 1st place.

4.The current position held by the fed in relation to "anchor babies" seems to violate the spirit and letter of the law as is laid out in the Constitution and reversal of this policy would remove one of the major incentives for pregnant immigrants to come here at all. If their babies were not granted instant citizenship rights for simply having been born here and then their parents themselves were denied any citizenship rights the flow of such people would be greatly stemmed. As it stands now they can slip across the border, have their baby in an American hospital for free and proceed towards a much better life for their progeny and themselves, all paid for by the American taxpayer. Hard to beat a deal like that !

Like I said, just a few clues ;>) Wrenchspinner

Clay213, says:

I don't really have a problem with immigrants.. illegal or not.. I will never disparage someone for working hard and taking risks to better their lives(in a decent manner)

I do have a problem with gangsters, thieves, thugs, and people who steal identities and SS#s to avoid paying taxes.

fossil_digger, says:

wench spinner for president! lol!

terryorze, says:

I love this are article. What a great addition to the Pegasus team. Thanks Mr. James.

ladyofpawpaw, says:

Right on Loni. Rawlins doesn't have a clue to what is really going on with the welfare system. Let me enlighten him. I work for the Department of State Health Services. We have illegal Mexicans who can't speak a word of English come into Texas illegally with TB. We have to treat them free or they won't get treatment. If we don't treat them they give the disease to you and everyone else. They can't speak a word of English, but they know where to come and get free services! Not only do they know where to come to get the treatment, they demand it! They don't have legal documents. Your tax dollars are going to treat these illegals. I guess you think that is okay. Yes, they get food stamps, plenty of them. Want to come look at them in the lobby of the HHSC office? You need to get your head out of the bushes and learn what is really going on in this world instead of reading myths and thinking you know it all.

ProudTexasWoman, says:

Responses to a few different points by Wrenchspinner:

*"those already here who have chosen to simply bypass our already well thought out and accepted immigration/naturalization procedures by illegally entering our country"*

Get us some "well thought out immigration procedures" (and enough staff and funding to implement them), and then we'll talk. Our current policy exacerbates the illegal immigration problem by ruling out any legal path of entry for millions of people among that category who were law abiding citizens in their homelands but who didn't have access to the secondary and postsecondary education or training that would qualify them for the only jobs our government wants them to fill.

Don't misunderstand: I do have a bit of patience for people who want to argue that we shouldn't let in people who don't have sufficient education or training, which is an approach you used later in the discussion. What is trying my patience are the people who ignorantly, or in some cases disingenuously, insist that these people had a legal route in and just chose to ignore it. In the case of most Central American and Mexican illegals that I've met (the most familiar groups for me, and the greatest numbers) there was no such option. AT ALL. Again, if one wants to argue that's a problem for their own governments to solve, go ahead, but that's a different argument entirely.

...

*"I fail to comprehend how simplifying the process for increased immigration of lower wage, undereducated people, which would then be basically outsourcing lower paying jobs within our own borders could possibly be beneficial to anyone but the immigrant workers themselves, their families living outside our borders who in turn benefit from the wages paid here then sent out of the country to them, and the companies who would then employ these individuals at wages below what would otherwise be paid to legal American workers."*

Large numbers of legal American workers have jobs that benefit from population growth and depend on a stable population, for starters. Take the retail market, for example, whose growth means an increase in white-collar sales jobs for those who sell to the retail market, and a consequent boom market for the executive headhunters retained to find and attract the sales staff, etc. Second, those who send home do not only send money; they also send goods, bought here and sent there -- from TVs to chainsaws to vehicles. Third, a solid legal status also would likely increase the number of homeowners, with all the income that generates not only for the brokers, but for a host of related businesses that hire mostly or only legal American citizens and residents, such as your local hardware and furniture stores. Contrast that with what is generated by people who have to keep moving around and therefore have to travel light.

...

*"So, with a population of 15 million at a term of 5yrs each and let's just say an annual tax liability for their earnings of $3,000 dollars. Using these figures it would appear this illegal immigrant population already owes the US government a staggering $225,000,000,000 in unpaid taxes ..."*

That's assuming they came out ahead, which is quite the logical leap. Under the system in which they pay into Social Security under numbers that aren't theirs, taxes were already taken out -- from wages that are generally going to be lower to begin with -- and the many who didn't break even will have paid more than they actually owed. (Not asking you to feel sorry for them, mind; just pointing out the flaw in the math.)

As for the ones who have been here 20 years or more, at that point you're starting to get into groups such as the Salvadorans who came in the 1980s and were refused the asylum to which our laws entitle those who are politically oppressed, for the inconvenient reason that we were funding the oppression. So I really don't think you want to "go there," as they say.

... *[re: treatment in emergency rooms regardless of ability to pay] "The question that begs to be answered here is why these same illegals would want to then PAY for insurance for these services?"*

For one thing, using the emergency room or free clinic is a time-consuming process that can involve missing work or even getting fired; with insurance, many people who now clog ERs with non-emergencies would have the freedom to schedule an appointment like the rest of us. Also, depending on the type, insurance often affords more options in care, such as where one goes or who one sees or a chance at preventive care. While not everyone instantly sees the advantages, many would.

... *"'anchor babies' ... If their babies were not granted instant citizenship rights for simply having been born here and then their parents themselves were denied any citizenship rights the flow of such people would be greatly stemmed."*

The "anchor baby" myth derives from a basic ignorance of the law, which states that a citizen child may not apply for the parents' citizenship until reaching age 21, not to mention the reality that the petition currently takes another year or more to process.

An anchor that doesn't kick in for 21 years ain't much of an anchor.

... *"You go on to mention how immigrants desirous of citizenship could also pay in to a type of naturalization fund to allow them to pay towards whatever expenses relevant to their citizenship so that when the time comes for them to choose to initiate the naturalization process the funds would be ready for them to do so. what on earth would lead you to believe these people want our citizenship, and much less be expected to do anything much less actually pay for the right to be citizens of this country?"*

Well, to use yet again the example of our southern neighbors, I found these samples of the going rates by doing a Google search on "coyote" "$" and "paid": - $5000 coming from El Salvador in 2000 - $3000 at the Mexican-U.S. border as of 2004 - $5000 coming from Honduras as of 2005 - $7000 coming from El Salvador in 2003

plus traveling through the intervening countries over a period of 10-30 days, often hiding in trunks or railroad cars, then walking through the desert for three days or more, with good chances of being snake-bitten, raped, or abandoned (again, not asking you to feel sorry for them, just answering your question) and in many cases, having to make the crossing four to six times before managing not to get caught, possibly having to pay someone each time to lead the way. In several cases among our acquaintances in 2001, the families received a phone call once the loved one reached the States, with the caller insisting an additional $1500 be paid to get the loved one out of the "safe house" where they were hiding.

Contrast this with a process that would allow the person to buy a plane ticket, fly directly here, and pay the costs over time out of U.S. wages, rather than the $350/year that's average in El Salvador ... possibly even to bring family without having to pay another $3000-$7000 for each one and risk one's children being left to die.

I definitely know families who would go for that.

wrenchspinner, says:

As I mentioned previously this is multifaceted topic and as such quite difficult to get a good handle on all in all.

Some statements above query how it is expected to enable a process for allowing millions of immigrants into the country in a more streamlined manner. My thoughts are that we as a nation neither need nor can realistically address the needs of this type of continued immigration into our nation, nor can our social structures or environment withstand the impact of such numbers.

I'm attaching a link to a discussion on these ideas. It is an open and honest examination of the potential impact of such a migration of immigrants and encourage anyone wanting information on this facet of the discussion to take the time to watch it.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...

I have in the past and assuredly in the future been deemed a dissenter to the immigrants cause and see above that by simply stating my own views about this issue it's been assumed I have some particular ax to grind in my postings here assumptively based on the idea that I am by nature discriminatory towards those outside my own race.

So, let me define my position/life status for the record. I am a middle aged white male, father of 2 lovely adult daughters, single/divorced, have worked within a mechanical/technical field for 30+ yrs now, consider myself middle of the road politically with a definite lean towards the right on most issues, would prefer less instead of more governmental intervention in our lives and affairs yet am still Pro-American and definitely Anti-Illegal Immigration which is NOT to be confused with anti-immigration as a whole.

I feel those wishing to emigrate here should have something more to offer our society than simply a desire to be here. My thoughts are that we have plenty of undereducated, lower wage earners already within our borders to address the societal needs for this kind of labor pool and have no need for the millions upon millions more who would like to emigrate here simply because they desire to do so.

The lower end of the socio-economic spectrum (the category a high percentage of illegal immigrants fall under) is now and always will be the largest drain on our social services sectors. People making $50k plus are not the types typically filling the emergency rooms at places like Parkland nor pulling out a food stamp card at Tom Thumb.

With that in mind, why would anyone agree with the concept of massive immigration of people in this category for anything but a compassionate philosophy? Not to say that I am not compassionate for my fellow humans, but honestly, at some point such compassion can lead to economic and social dysfunction of our nation as a whole and I feel we have already reached that point.

For myself, immigrants to this country should be able to prove some benefit to our society to be allowed in, and not be the type of folks who once here will simply raid our social services coffers, which is done currently by millions of people already present in our society illegally.

Here is a personal immigration tale I can relate that shows the resolve and intent required for those wishing to emigrate legally here : One of my best friends met and eventually married a Russian citizen he met while she was here as an exchange student in the summer after her college graduation. She was required under the terms of her student visa to return to Russia in September following her graduation. They fell in love in June and he proposed to her in a very touching way on a mountain trail in Colorado before her required return to her homeland.

Over the next 2 yrs (the period required by the US govt before allowing those on student visas to return here), as she worked in Russia as a college English professor they kept in touch through phone calls and emails, with him having visited her in Russia at Christmas and then having lived in Russia with her for the last 6 months before she was allowed to return to the US.

The paperwork, necessary documentation and fees spent in the process of her emigration efforts were intense and time consuming on both their parts in this process, but it was all done and after her 2yrs were up, she returned here and they were married. It's now 2yrs later and they are still happily married, both have good jobs, are expecting their 1st child in January and are doing well in the upper NE.

This to me is an example of legal immigration for all the right reasons and again shows given the hoops and hurdles both of them had to go through to make it successful that they both had a genuine desire to make it work out without having to look over their shoulders everyday for the rest of their lives which would have been the case had they chosen to subvert the required legal processes and simply have her overstay her student visa and melt into the American society illegally.

Both their resolves in this matter were required to complete the steps for her emigration here and ..... here's something many people don't know about emigration for the purposes of marriage to an American citizen by a foreign national. One facet of such an emigration is that the sponsoring (citizen) spouse has to sign an agreement stating that if the spouse for any reason files for social services benefits within the 1st 10 yrs after entering the US the sponsoring spouse will then be billed for all monies or benefits extended to the immigrating spouse.

This all seems quite reasonable to me and if the immigration of ALL people into this country required such agreements of support by a US sponsor this process would seem to make far more sense than simply allowing anyone to cross our borders simply because they have a desire to be here.

I take no issue with anyone in the world wanting a better life for themselves and their families as such ideology is certainly understandable and admirable. The problem realistically however is that our country can not possibly afford immigration of all the peoples of the world who would choose to live here and that of course is the basis for immigration quotas as set out by the government in the first place.

Anyway, gotta get off this magical machine and get some stuff done, but please, anyone wanting to get a reasonable and well thought out view of the various impacts of immigration totally devoid of bashing or name calling I ask that you check out the link to the video I attached above.

wrenchspinner Lone Oak, Tx.

ladyofpawpaw, says:

I agree with wrenchspinner and Loni. His points are right.Iam not arguing the topic. I don't care where you live Rawlins. I am not impressed. Like I stated earlier,Rawlins, if you think the illegals are not getting food stamps and free health services, get your head out of the bushes.

wrenchspinner, says:

After doing a search for "immigration" related articles here it seems Larry James has penned many such articles and each one with a similar pro-illegal immigrant slant.

Each story I read plays upon the sympathies of the reader by making the illegal immigrant in the story out to be the victim. How quaint

In one article about the ramifications of the Farmers Branch stance on illegal immigrants he went so far as to quote bible scripture in an effort to show (his idea of) Un-Christian like behavior by city council personnel in their position on the issue and then offered an disparaging quote about illegal immigrants while writing into the article as if it had been delivered by a city council member or some other elected official, yet had NO legitimate source for the quote to offer.

This even led to admonishments on these issues and statements by other staff members here.

All in all a very brief scan of his writing here shows a tactic so common today in the American media. The tactic I mention is of writing articles in hopes of swaying public opinion by the readers to the view held by the writer themselves.

I much prefer to read articles on topics where the author in the true sense of fair and honest journalistic reporting simply states the relevant issues surrounding a topic (and not just the ones relevant to THEIR opinion in the matter!)and then lets the reader inspect these FACTS and make up their own mind once presented with the data on an issue.

Mr. James, I'm no journalist, but I can sure tell when someone else is grinding their personal ax in public under the guise of journalism and this seems to be exactly what you have chosen to do on the issue of illegal immigration.

My suggestion is a return to simply reporting the news instead of attempting to "make" the news or twist it to fit your own personal or political agenda. While it might seem to you that the readers here are too intellectually deficient to comprehend the news without your guidance, why not in the spirit of true journalism just give it a try anyway ;>)

wrenchspinner Lone Oak,Tx.

wrenchspinner, says:

Mike, I appreciate the clarification and certainly understand Larrys jounalistic endeavors are far from lacking a POV, much as are my own.

I am also quite flattered by your idea regarding personal article submissions and will ponder that thought a bit.

wrenchspinner, Lone Oak, Tx.

DC, says:

Well, after a relaxing weekend in the hill country, it's good to see Dallas is operating as usual. Since I'm feeling like it here are a couple of points:

1) Considering the time and cost in Wrenchers' little example (and many others), it's any wonder any one wants to go through the bother of emigrating legally.

2) BIG RED LASERS - right down the 49th parallel. Nothing good in Canada (just hosers and communist medicine) - worry only about issues Rio Grande and south.

That is all.

wrenchspinner, says:

Your concern about such international couplings are well noted and a major concern of my own for my friend in all this I assure you.

The suspicious side of my nature (coupled with having my eyes opened over and over to the possibility of manipulative women and their underlying motives:) even led me to voice my concerns about my buddys intended spouses possibility of ulterior motives prior to their marriage, and to borrow a line from the old Carpenters song, truly at 2yrs into their marriage .... "we've only just begun" seems fitting in how it could all eventually turn out.

With that said, they visited me last year for a 50th Bday bash I had here at the ol casa in the sticks and it was obvious she adores and admires him, with that being a mutually held position by my buddy, which went a long way in assuaging my doubts.

I know the immigration process gets perverted and used in many ways to the benefit of people choosing to do so for a myriad of reasons often totally contrary to the intent of its rules.

Having grown up in the city, then moving to the 'burbs and since that time having lived all around the metroplex, then having finally landed here well outside the hustle and bustle of the big city just 3yrs ago I can assure you my "rural" perspective is a relatively new one as I was well and truly "schooled" in the city for many more years than I've been here ;>)

Your mentions of Tv stuff are pretty much lost on me though Rawlins. My Tvs only function today is as a display method for my DVD player since I find the 'net far more entertaining and informative, most especially since a few mouse clicks will reveal what "I" care to see and not what some marketing driven medium (broadcast TV) cares to offer me.

'Sides all that, I find most Tv programming to be totally mindless fluff entertainment focused at the continued numbing of the publics sensibilities anyway, so .....

wrenchspinner Lone Oak, Tx.

ProudTexasWoman, says:

WrenchSpinner, I did find interesting the idea of there being an option of a U.S. sponsor who agrees to be responsible for the person not drawing benefits, the way one has to upon applying for citizenship via marriage. I wonder how we would go about making sure people on the U.S. end of the equation weren't doing it for money or some exploitative level of work. With the marriage arrangement, there are all those steps to investigate that it's a bona fide married relationship -- sharing accounts, living together, involvement with extended family and friends, etc. What would be the parallel for non-married sponsor and applicant?