AZ
lobb152
Posts: 193
Why do Americans, and I am going to stereotype here: white, Republican, young and old, have such a nationalistic sense of entitlement to this place. Just because History is history doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. You were not the first people here. You came by boat too. I do not need to mention what happened to the native peoples here and the struggles they continue to face. The ideas that we should close the border, build walls, or kick everyone who is here illegally out is just crazy to me. The Statue of Liberty:
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Thinking of the history of the United States and the ideals it was supposedly built upon there is a massive disconnect when I hear about what’s going on in Arizona. You could be a Mexican American: third, fourth, fifth generation, walking down the street and be stopped. If you’re white just try and pretend how that would feel if the tables were turned. “This cop is asking me if I belong here because I look white. Are you serious. I have lived here my whole life, born and raised,” is what you might think. Concerning those who are here ‘illegally,’ at the end of the day, they are just people like you and me. People who are trying to make a better life for themselves and their families. They do the jobs no one really wants to do for pay no one really likes. None of you would have roofs on your homes. I cannot fault an individual who’s willing to travel that distance, take that amount of danger and uncertainty to try and pursue a dream. A dream that we wave in the face of everyone. The “I’m already here; I’m OK Jack” attitude is not a very compassionate lens to view the world through. That is what it’s all about: compassion for human being.
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Thinking of the history of the United States and the ideals it was supposedly built upon there is a massive disconnect when I hear about what’s going on in Arizona. You could be a Mexican American: third, fourth, fifth generation, walking down the street and be stopped. If you’re white just try and pretend how that would feel if the tables were turned. “This cop is asking me if I belong here because I look white. Are you serious. I have lived here my whole life, born and raised,” is what you might think. Concerning those who are here ‘illegally,’ at the end of the day, they are just people like you and me. People who are trying to make a better life for themselves and their families. They do the jobs no one really wants to do for pay no one really likes. None of you would have roofs on your homes. I cannot fault an individual who’s willing to travel that distance, take that amount of danger and uncertainty to try and pursue a dream. A dream that we wave in the face of everyone. The “I’m already here; I’m OK Jack” attitude is not a very compassionate lens to view the world through. That is what it’s all about: compassion for human being.
I am a nothing dreaming of something unknown.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
+1
Excellent post!
Regarding the part I underlined, though... what's absolutely amazing to me and I think is telling of some of the attitude here is that you really do need to mention the struggles the native people continue to face, for instance. As a matter of fact, someone right on this forum said just a couple of days ago that "The Indians are set up now"! I was just floored. But with beliefs like that, it's no wonder we have attitudes that precipitate laws like this. :(
Watch Bill and Geraldo go at it. Personally.....I agree with Bill on this one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Lb3oFzC ... re=related
Agreed, the same thing was said when the Patriot Act was made law and we now see how well that went over and I'm going to Phoenix for one month this summer. Yikes!
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I can't watch the video but I fully agree with with your comment,+1 :thumbup:
Godfather.
Since more people are dying from illegal immigrants than in Iraq what do you think the right solution is?
I've got an idea? End the bullshit war and special ops and use that money on our own country and fix the illegal immigration issue.
As far as the new law is concerned, I really have no problem with it and I doubt it will be the gestapo everyone is trying to make it out to be. If it is, then I will fully condemn such bullshit. However, if I get pulled over, the police will ask me for my license, and I must provide that or suffer the consequences. Infact, the police can ask for your license at any time (yes, I know some people think you don't have to show it, but try arguing with the cop about it).
I guess I just don't see the problem with enforcing the law. The state actually wouldn't be in this position if the government did it's job to begin with. No, what am I thinking, the government isn't there to protect our borders, they're too busy forcing us to buy health insurance. There are millions of people that come to this country every single year through legal channels. This process costs time and money. So, how is it fair to those people who do things by the book, when we treat people who break the law as victims?
I am from Canada but last week I was in NYC and I went to the Ellis Island immigration museum. It was pretty amazing the fact that back when that place was used, it was pretty much if you had the means to get to the United States, had a little bit of money and wanted to contribute to society, as long as you weren’t a criminal and you didn’t have any contagious diseases you were pretty much welcomed in. My understanding is that one of the big reasons there is illegal immigration is because it is extremly difficult to emigrate to the United States legally. Why is that?
I think this is more of a political jousting issue then anything.
back then our population was a lot less compared to today not tosay thats a excuse to get rid of illegals.
also who wrote :Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!":
I really don't know ..was it a American or the French ?
Godfather.
So what we should just have open boarders and just let people come here from other countries wthout knowing who they are and why they are here?
Are you Nuts ? Do you have any Idea or clue for that matter that there are many people in this world who would love to see another 911 happen. Not to mention we already have people living here that feel that way.
Also there are many people here that have immagrated here from other countries who love this country who agree with what Arizona did.All they are doing is enforcing federal law. Another thing to, If you are in this country on a visa for school, work, or are here visiting you must always have the correct documentation with you at all times. Why is that such a big deal ? You have to do the same thing in other countries as well and I don't hear any of you crying about any civil rights being violated . As a matter of fact why don't you go down to mexico and get caught with out your passport and see what happens. The fedaralies are just wonderful people :roll:
IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU COULD GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR.
IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.
IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.
IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET
· A JOB,
· A DRIVERS LICENSE,
· SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
· WELFARE,
· FOOD STAMPS,
· CREDIT CARDS,
· SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
· FREE EDUCATION,
· FREE HEALTH CARE,
· A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON
· PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE
· THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY’S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON’T GET ENOUGH RESPECT. ONLY IN AMERICA CAN YOU DO THIS...
·
I think many of you who are against this bill are in denial or are cluless to just how bad the problem is on these boarder states. Yesterday and last night I listened to a talk show and there were calls after calls coming in from residents who lived on the boarder many who were latinos and who are terrified right now bcos of gangs and all the killing that is happening. Children can't even go outside to play or walk to school one caller said.
and no one is going to be asked to show anything in Az if there is not probable cause. It clearly says that in the Bill that a law enforcement official or agency cannot solely consider race, color or national origin when implementing these provisions, except as permitted by the U.S. or Arizona Constitution.
and Obama is clearly lying when he said what he said yesterday about going out for ice cream. If you ask me he clearly trying to divide us as a nation.
Also I have nothing against anybody who comes here that want to make a better life for themselves and their family. What logical and decent person would ? But do it the right way bcos it's not fair to the hundres of thousands of immagrants that came before them that did.
Why ??? Because we have freedoms in this county like no other thats why.Because people died fighting for this country that's why. Because you can follow whatever dreams you might have thats why in this country thats why..
You also make the assertion that white ,republican males ony feel this way.. I got news for you dude.. There are millions of people in this country that are women, democrat, black, and from other countries that feel this way.
and what didn't happen ??? If you are talking about the indians and salvery I suggest you go and look up Old Hickory and see what party he started .
People have sympathy toward illegal immigrants because they are our fellow human beings. The only difference between them and us, many of us believe, is that they have come here illegally. Should we cease to have any sympathy for all our fellow human being as soon as they have committed ANY crime? Who among us has never committed a crime?
Actually, your Texas driver's license does not count as proof of legality under this bill, and neither does my New Mexico one. The only driver's license that counts is an Arizona one. So will we need to carry our passports or birth certificates? It seems so. And that is not something the police can traditionally as you for at any time.
How do you figure that the United States has freedoms like no other coutry?
I sure hope you don't think a good command of the English language should be necessary for people to be here.
I still don't know why you keep saying this. As I pointed out in the other thread, it is very clear that this law is not just a repetition of the federal law, as you keep saying, but in fact creates crimes and penalties that are "in addition to" any violation of or penalty prescribed by the federal law. Furthermore, it makes you a felon if you are busted twice.
It just boggles my mind that you keep ignoring the fact that it's not just immigrants who will have to carry their paperwork.
Dude, you've gotta stop listening to these talk shows and get a grip. Though no doubt there's a problem, you are blowing it way out of proportion. How does being so inflammatory help your argument? That kind of bullshit only works on people who just believe anything they hear on the radio.
Again, as I pointed out in the other thread where I quoted the bill word for word, probable cause is not necessary. Only suspicion is necessary.
Also from the other thread:
I was sure to note the part you keep quoting about how they're not supposed to solely consider race. But here's the thing:
1. This only means that they can find a person suspect based on their race if they can identify ANY other pre-judged indicator of illegality. For instance, if someone is Hispanic and wearing certain clothes. If someone is brown and near the border. If someone is Mexican and a victim of domestic violence (if their prejudice tells them that victims of domestic violence are more likely to be here illegally). Does this not, then, allow profiling based on individual prejudices?
2. Just because they're not supposed to solely consider race doesn't by any understanding of reality mean they won't. And what's stopping them? The person being questioned has not only the burden of proof of legality, but also the burden to prove that the cop acted solely based on race. The cop has the benefit of being presumed innocent until proven guilty. And we all know that most regular citizens and legal immigrants don't have the resources to fight this battle against the cops. Plus, if they did fight, they would likely be subject to even more harassment. So how exactly does this one line in this law really protect anyone?
Are you serious, you mean for the fricking month I'm going be in that sweltering heat i'm going to have carry my passport. I'm driving from South Florida to Phoenix and i'll carry my PP but not everyday while in town, that's crazy.
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Can any one please tell me where in this biil and why is it in constituional ? I keep hearing this from a lot of people.
one more thing....
I keep hearing from MSM outlets that this bill and AZ is like or reminds them Nazi Germany.... :roll: IMO is absured, But,
How so ? The illegals immagrants that came to AZ did not arrive in shackles or in Box cars like the jews did. They came on their own accord and they can leave if they choose to do so.
whatever, you and I totally dissagree on this whole subject I think you are wrong on all points.
It's one thing to have a difference of opinion, which we have. It's another thing to blatantly misrepresent what is said in the law, which you are doing.
will you show this please..
there are misrepresentations on BOTH sides.
Also, in that other thread you speak of I answered your points with points of my own, if you get a chance I would like to see what you have to say about them.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Please tell me how Im misrepresenting it.. and where.
Here is the whole thing again...
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp ... nforcement of Immigration Law
· Prohibits law enforcement officials and law enforcement agencies of this state or counties, municipalities and political subdivisions from restricting or limiting the enforcement of the federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.
· Requires officials and agencies to reasonably attempt to determine the immigration status of a person involved in a lawful contact where reasonable suspicion exists regarding the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation.
· Stipulates that if the person is arrested, the person’s immigration status must be determined before the person is released and must be verified with the federal government.
· Stipulates that a law enforcement official or agency cannot solely consider race, color or national origin when implementing these provisions, except as permitted by the U.S. or Arizona Constitution.
· Specifies that a person is presumed to be lawfully present if the person provides any of the following:
Ø A valid Arizona driver license.
Ø A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
Ø A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
Ø A valid federal, state or local government issued identification, if the issuing entity requires proof of legal presence before issuance.
· Requires that if a person is convicted of any state or local law, on discharge from imprisonment or on the assessment of any monetary obligation imposed, ICE or U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) must be immediately notified.
· Authorizes a law enforcement agency to securely transport an unlawfully present alien to a federal facility.
· Requires a law enforcement agency to obtain judicial authorization before securely transporting an unlawfully present alien to a point of transfer that is outside of Arizona.
· Prohibits, except as provided in federal law, officials and agencies of counties, cities, towns or other political subdivisions from being prevented or restricted from sending, receiving or maintaining information relating to the immigration status, of any individual or exchanging that information with another governmental entity for the following official purposes:
Ø Determination of eligibility for any public benefit, service or license.
Ø Verification of any claim of legal domicile if legal domicile is required by law or judicial order.
Ø If the person is an alien, determination of the person’s compliance with federal registration laws.
Ø Pursuant to federal laws regarding communication between government agencies and federal immigration agencies.
· Stipulates that these provisions does not implement, authorize or establish and cannot be construed to implement authorize or establish the REAL ID Act of 2005, including the use of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID).
· Allows a person who is a legal resident of this state to bring an action in superior court to challenge officials and agencies of the state, counties, cities, towns or other political subdivisions that adopt or implement a policy that limits or restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.
· Requires the court to order any that a violating entity pays a civil penalty of at least $1,000 and not to exceed $5,000 for each day that the policy has remained in effect after it has been found to be violating these provisions.
· States that the court will collect the penalty and transmit the collected monies to the state Treasurer for deposit in the Gang and Immigration Intelligence Team Enforcement Mission (GIITEM) Fund.
· Authorizes the court to award court costs and reasonable attorney fees to any person or any official or agency that prevails in a case brought under these provisions.
· Indemnifies officers against actions brought under these provisions, except if the officer has been adjudged to have acted in bad faith.
· Stipulates that these provisions are to be implemented consistent with federal immigration law protecting the civil right of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of US citizens.
Willful Failure to Complete or Carry an Alien Registration Document
· Specifies that in addition to any violation of federal law, a person is guilty of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document if the person is in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1304(e) or 1306(a).
· Stipulates that the immigration status may be determined by:
Ø A law enforcement officer who is authorized by the federal government to verify or ascertain an alien’s immigration status.
Ø ICE or CBP pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c).
· Prevents a person convicted of the new offense from being eligible for suspension of sentence, probation, pardon, commutation of sentence, or release from confinement on any basis except for as authorized by the Director of the Arizona Department of Correction until the sentence imposed has been served or the person is eligible for release due to early release credits.
· Requires the court to order the person to pay jail costs and an additional assessment of:
Ø At least $500 for a first offense.
Ø Twice the amount the person was ordered to pay for the first offense if this is the second or subsequent offense.
· States that the court will collect the assessments and transmit the collected monies to the Department of Public Safety for deposit in a special sub-account of the account established for GIITEM.
· Stipulates that monies in the sub-account are subject to legislative appropriation for distribution for gang and immigration enforcement and for county jail costs relating to illegal immigration.
· Stipulates that any record that relates to the immigration status of a person is admissible in any court without further foundation or testimony from a custodian of records if the record is certified as authentic by the government agency responsible for maintaining the record.
· Makes a first offense a class 1 misdemeanor.
· Increases the penalty to a class 3 felony if the person commits the offense while in possession of:
Ø A dangerous drug (A.R.S. § 13-3401).
Ø Precursor chemicals used to manufacture methamphetamine (A.R.S. § 13-3404.01).
Ø A deadly weapon (A.R.S. § 13-3101).
Ø A dangerous instrument (A.R.S. § 13-105).
Ø Property used for committing an act of terrorism (A.R.S. § 13-2308.01).
· Makes violations a class 4 felony if either:
Ø It is a second or subsequent violation.
Ø Within 60 days, the person has been removed from the U.S. either under 8 U.S.C. § 1229a or 8 U.S.C. § 1229c.
Unlawfully Picking up Passengers for Work
· Specifies that it is a class 1 misdemeanor for an occupant of a motor vehicle that is stopped on a street, roadway, or highway to attempt to hire or hire and pick up passengers for work at a different location, if the motor vehicle blocks or impedes the normal movement of traffic.
· Specifies that it is a class 1 misdemeanor for a person to enter a motor vehicle that is stopped on a street, roadway or highway in order to be hired by an occupant of the motor vehicle and to be transported to work at a different location, if the motor vehicle blocks or impedes the normal movement of traffic.
· Specifies that it is a class 1 misdemeanor for a person who is unlawfully present who is an unauthorized alien to knowingly apply for work, solicit work in a public place or perform work as an employee or independent contractor.
· Defines solicit and unauthorized alien.
Unlawfully Transporting or Harboring Unlawful Aliens
· Stipulates that it is unlawful for a person who is in violation of a criminal offense to:
Ø Transport or move an alien in a means of transportation, or attempt to do so, if the person knows or recklessly disregards the fact that the alien is here unlawfully.
Ø Conceal, harbor or shield an alien, or attempt to, if the person knows or recklessly disregards the fact that the alien is here unlawfully.
Ø Encourage or induce an alien to come to this state if the person knows or recklessly disregards the fact that doing so would be a violation of law.
· Specifies that a means of transportation used in a violation of these provisions is subject to mandatory vehicle immobilization or impoundment.
· Specifies that these provisions do not apply to a Child Protective Services worker acting in the worker’s official capacity or a person who is acting in the capacity of a first responder, an ambulance attendant or an emergency medial technician and is transporting or moving an alien in relation to emergency medial services.
· Stipulates that violators are guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor and subject to a fine of at least $1,000. However, a violation involving 10 or more illegal aliens is a class 6 felony and subject to a fine of at least $1,000 for each alien involved.
· Requires a peace officer to immobilize or impound a person’s vehicle if the officer determines either that:
Ø In furtherance of the illegal presence of an alien and in violation of a criminal offense, the person is transporting or moving, or attempting to do so in a vehicle if the person knows or recklessly disregards the fact that the alien is here unlawfully.
Ø The person is concealing, harboring or shielding an alien in this state, or attempting to do so in a vehicle if the person knows or recklessly disregards the fact that the alien is here unlawfully.
Employer Sanctions
· Provides employers with the affirmative defense that they were entrapped, but they must admit the substantial elements of the violation.
· Stipulates that the employer has the burden of proof proving the following by a preponderance of the evidence:
Ø The idea of committing the violation started with the officer or their agents.
Ø The officers or their agents urged and induced the employer to commit the violation.
Ø The employer was not predisposed to commit the violation before the law enforcement officer or agents urged and induced the employer to do so.
· Stipulates that an employer is not entrapped if the employer was predisposed to violate the law and law enforcement merely provided the employer with the opportunity. Additionally, it is not entrapment for law enforcement to use a ruse or to conceal their identity.
· Requires employers to keep a record of the employment verification from E-verify for the duration of an employee’s employment, or three years, whichever is longer.
Miscellaneous
· Authorizes peace officers, in the enforcement of human smuggling laws, to lawfully stop a person if they have reasonable suspicion to believe the person is in violation of any civil traffic law.
· Authorizes a peace officer to arrest a person without a warrant if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the U.S.
· Establishes the GIITEM fund (fund) and directs monies collected from penalties resulting from policies limiting the enforcement of federal immigration law to the fund.
· Requires the Arizona Department of Public Safety to administer the fund, which is subject to legislative appropriation and is to be used for gang and immigration enforcement and for county jail reimbursement for costs relating to illegal immigration.
· Contains intent and severability, implementation and construction clauses.
· Specifies that this act may be cited as the “Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act.”
· Makes technical and conforming changes.
Here's exactly what it says:
A PERSON IS PRESUMED TO NOT BE AN ALIEN WHO IS
35 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES IF THE PERSON PROVIDES TO THE LAW
36 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR AGENCY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
37 1. A VALID ARIZONA DRIVER LICENSE.
38 2. A VALID ARIZONA NONOPERATING IDENTIFICATION LICENSE.
39 3. A VALID TRIBAL ENROLLMENT CARD OR OTHER FORM OF TRIBAL
40 IDENTIFICATION.
41 4. IF THE ENTITY REQUIRES PROOF OF LEGAL PRESENCE IN THE UNITED STATES
42 BEFORE ISSUANCE, ANY VALID UNITED STATES FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
43 ISSUED IDENTIFICATION.
Upon re-reading it when I'm not half asleep, it looks like #4 might cover out-of-state licenses, but I'm not entirely sure. I actually can't imagine that it could mean that, since some states (or at least one) issue licenses to undocumented immigrants.
From where are you quoting this? I don't know why you keep saying it's the whole thing. The whole thing is 19 pages long. Here's the link: http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf
I've already shown you where you're misrepresenting it. I don't have time to do show you again right now. Read my posts if you want to know.
so... What's wrong with that ? I just don't get why you and others have such a problem with this. We have to do the same thing in other countries. so why is it a big deal when people from other countries have to abide by our laws. :?
Doesn't the word ILLEGAL mean anything these days?
Racist! Nativist! Profiler! Xenophobe!
Write or say anything about illegal immigration, and one should expect to be called all of that and more—even if a strong supporter of legal immigration. Illegal alien becomes undocumented worker. Anti-immigrant replaces anti-illegal-immigration. “Comprehensive” is a euphemism for amnesty. Triangulation abounds. A fiery op-ed grandstands and deplores the Arizona law, but offers no guidance about illegal immigration — and blames the employer for doing something that the ethnic lobby in fact welcomes.
Nevertheless, here it goes from a supporter of legal immigration: how are we to make sense of the current Arizona debate? One should show concern about some elements of the law, but only in the context of the desperation of the citizens of Arizona. And one should show some skepticism concerning mounting liberal anguish, so often expressed by those whose daily lives are completely unaffected by the revolutionary demographic, cultural, and legal transformations occurring in the American Southwest.
As I understand the opposition to the recent Arizona law, it boils down to something like the following: the federal government’s past decision not to enforce its own law should always trump the state’s right to honor it. That raises interesting questions: Does the state contravene federal authority by exercising it? If the federal government does not protect the borders of a state, does the state have a right to do it itself? The federal government has seemed in the past to be saying that if one circumvented a federal law, and was known to have circumvented federal law with recognized impunity, then there was no longer a law to be enforced.
A Losing Political Issue
The politics of illegal immigration are a losing proposition for liberals (one can see that in the resort to euphemism), even if they don’t quite see it that way. Here are ten considerations why.
Law?—What Law?
First, there is the simplicity of the argument. One either wishes or does not wish existing law to be enforced. If the answer is no, and citizens can pick and chose which laws they would like to obey, in theory why should we have to pay taxes or respect the speed limit? Note that liberal Democrats do not suggest that we overturn immigration law and de jure open the border — only that we continue to do that de facto. Confusion between legal and illegal immigration is essential for the open borders argument, since a proper distinction between the two makes the present policy indefensible—especially since it discriminates against those waiting in line to come to America legally (e.g., somehow our attention is turned to the illegal alien’s plight and not the burdensome paperwork and government obstacles that the dutiful legal immigrant must face).
Why Wave the Flag of the Country I Don’t Wish to Return To?
Second, often the protests against enforcement of immigration law are strangely couched within a general climate of anger at the U.S. government (and/or the American people) for some such illiberal transgression (review the placards, flags, etc. at May Day immigration rallies). Fairly or not, the anger at the U.S. and the nostalgia for Mexico distill into the absurd, something like either “I am furious at the country I insist on staying in, and fond of the country I most certainly do not wish to return to” or “I am angry at you so you better let angry me stay with you!” Such mixed messages confuse the electorate. As in the case with the Palestinians, there is an effort to graft a foreign policy issue (protecting an international border) onto domestic identity politics, to inject an inflammatory race/class element into the debate by creating oppressors, victims, and grievances along racial divides.
Big Brother Mexico?
Third, Mexico is no help. Now it weighs in with all sorts of moral censure for Arizonians — this from a corrupt government whose very policies are predicated on exporting a million indigenous people a year, while it seeks to lure wealthy “gringos” to invest in second-homes in Baja. The absence of millions from Oaxaca or Chiapas ensures billions in remittances, less expenditures for social services, and fewer dissident citizens. But the construct of Mexico as the concerned parent of its own lost children is by now so implausible that even its sympathizers do not take it seriously. Mexico has lost all credibility on these issues, expressing concern for its own citizens only when they seem to have crossed the border — and left Mexico.
It’s Not a Race Issue
Fourth, there really is a new popular groundswell to close the borders. Most against illegal immigration, especially in the case of minorities and Mexican-American citizens, keep rather mum about their feelings. But that silence should not be interpreted as antagonism to enforcing the law. Many minorities realize that the greatest hindrance to a natural rise in wages for entry level jobs has been the option for an employer to hire illegal aliens, who, at least in their 20s and 30s, will work harder for less pay with fewer complaints (when sick, or disabled, or elderly, the worker is directed by the employer to the social services agencies and replaced by someone younger as a new cycle of exploitation begins). In this context, the old race card is less effective. The general population is beginning to see not that Americans (of all races who oppose illegal immigration) are racist, but that the open borders movement has itself a racially chauvinistic theme to it, albeit articulated honestly only on university campuses and in Chicano-Latino departments, as a sort of “payback” for the Mexican War, where redress for “lost” land is finally to be had through demography.
Bad Times
Fifth, we are in a deep recession, in which the jobs that for so long seemed unappealing to American citizens are now not all that unappealing. The interior of California suffers from 20% Depression-style unemployment; many of the jobless are first and second-generation Mexican-Americans, who would have some leverage with employers if there were not an alternative illegal labor poll.
A Fence—How Quaint!
Sixth, the so-called unworkable fence mostly works; it either keeps border crossers out or diverts them to unfenced areas. (There is a reason why Obama has ordered its completion tabled). It used to be sophisticated wisdom to tsk-tsk something as reductive as walls, usually by adducing the theory that if an occasional alien made it over or under a wall, then it was of no utility, without acknowledging the fence’s effectiveness in deterring most would-be crossers. But where the fence has gone up, crossings have gone down; and where it is not yet completed crossings have increased.
One Big Travel Advisory?
Seventh, Mexico is now more violent than Iraq. The unrest is spilling across the borders. The old shrill argument that criminals, drug smugglers, and violence in general are spreading into the American southwest from Mexico is not longer quite so shrill.
11 Million—Then, Now, Forever?
Eighth, the numbers are cumulative. We talked of “eleven million illegal aliens” in 2001, and still talk of “eleven million illegal aliens” in 2010. In fact, most suspect that there is more likely somewhere between 12 and 20 million. (Do the math of annual arrivals and add them to the existing pool, factoring in voluntary and coerced deportations).
Money for Mexico?
Ninth, we are at last turning to the issue of remittances: How can expatriates send back some $20-30 billion in remittances, if they are impoverished and in need of extensive entitlements and subsidies to cushion the harshness of life in America? Do those lost billions hurt the U.S. economy? Are they a indirect subsidy for Mexico City? Were such funds ever taxed completely or off-the-books cash income? Remittances are Mexico’s second largest source of foreign exchange; that it comes so often off the sweat of minimum-wage workers seems especially ironic, given Mexico’s protestations about human rights.
The California Canary
Tenth, California’s meltdown is instructive. If about half the nation’s illegal aliens reside in the state, and its problems are in at least in some part attributable to soaring costs in educating hundreds of thousands of non-English-speaking students, a growing number of aliens in prison and the criminal justice system, real problems of collecting off-the-books income and payroll taxes, expanding entitlements, and unsustainable social services, do we wish to avoid its model?
The Law’s a Mess?
The enforcement of the law, such as it is, has become Byzantine: illegal aliens in California pay a third of the college tuition as non-resident citizens; police routinely inquire about all sorts of possible criminal behavior — except the violation of federal immigration statutes. Past, once-and-for-all, final, absolutely-no-more amnesties encourage more illegal entries on the expectation of more such no-more amnesties.
Bottom line. I can understand the liberal desire for open borders. For some, it is genuine humanitarianism — that the U.S. is wealthy enough to absorb a quarter of the impoverished population of Mexico. For others, it is policy by anecdote: helping a long-employed nanny with a car payment or a loyal gardener with a legal matter by extension translates into support for de facto open borders. I have met over the years literally hundreds of Bay Area residents who have assured me that because they have developed a close relationship with Juan, their lawn mower, by extension everyone in nearby Redwood City — which they do not frequent and keep their children away from — ipso facto is like Juan and thus should be given amnesty.
On the political side, Democrats clearly welcome new voting constituents. Illegal aliens becoming citizens, at least for a generation or so, translates into more entitlements and a larger government to administer. (Note how there is not a liberal outcry that we do not let in enough computer programers from India, small businessmen from France and Germany, or doctors from Korea). Then there is the gerrymandering of the American Southwest to reflect new demographic realities, and the pipe-dream of a salad bowl of unassimilated peoples in need of a paternalistic liberal technocratic governing class — all that apparently is worth the firestorm of trying to ram through something so unpopular as “comprehensive” reform.
Not Quite So Easy
Do conservatives have the winning argument? For now yes — simply close the border , fine employers of illegal aliens, and allow the pool of aliens to become static. Fining employers both stops illegal immigration and is sometimes cheered on by the Left, as if the worker has no culpability for breaking the law (e.g., a liberal can damn unscrupulous employers and thereby oppose illegal immigration without confronting the La Raza bloc). Some will marry citizens. Some will voluntarily return to Mexico. Some will be picked up through the normal government vigilance we all face — traffic infractions, necessary court appearances, interaction with state agencies. And while we argue over the policy concerning the remaining majority of illegal aliens and such contentious issues as green-cards, guest workers, and so-called earned citizenship, the pool at least in theory shrinks.
Yet if I were a Republican policy-maker I would be very wary of mass deportations. A gradualist approach, clearly delineated, is preferable, in which those who have been here five years (to pick an arbitrary number), are gainfully employed, and are free of a criminal record should have some avenue for applying for citizenship (one can fight it out whether they should pay a fine, stay or return to Mexico in the process, and get/not get preference over new applicants.)
Again, one should avoid immediate, mass deportations (it would resemble something catastrophic like the Pakistani-Indian exchanges of the late 1940s), and yet not reward the breaking of federal law. Good luck with that.
Finally, legal immigration should be reformed and reflect new realities. Millions of highly educated and skilled foreigners from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Europe are dying to enter the U.S. Rather than base immigration criteria on anchor children, accidental birth in the U.S. without concern for legality, and family ties, we need at least in part to start giving preference to those of all races and nationalities who will come with critical skills, and in turn rely less on the social service entitlement industry. They should come from as many diverse places as possible to prevent the sort of focused ethnic tribalism and chauvinism we have seen in the case of Mexico’s cynicism.
-Victor Davis Hanson
(his words which I mostly agree with-bigdvs)
— Socrates
+1. Great post, my favorite part is the part that I bolded.
Its hard for me not to believe that most of the support for AZ's new immigration law is seated deeply in racism. Nice political move hiding behind the economics. I don't blame supporters, its perfectly human to fear/hate someone who is of a different culture, skin color or speaks a different language. I can guarantee that if the illegal aliens were white, spoke fluent english and were described as having the same culture as "us" then most people would not have a problem with illegal immigration. Evolution gave some of us a brain that is capable of thinking beyond what is natural, sadly a lot of people in this country were born without one.