House Approves U.S.-Mexican Border Fence

[Ituyu]

The amnesty of the 1980’s was a major mistake and caused severe damage to the US. An unintended result was to send a very wrong message that just encouraged massive illegal immigration.

The IRCA of 1980 did not solve the problem but it did manage to take 2.5 million people out of the shadows and allow them to give direction to their lives here in the US.

We didn’t address the problem in the first place. We did alleviate some of the symptoms. The problem is related to other issues in our country such as: contraception, abortion, minimization of family size, divorce, single parent families and our increasing longevity. These factors have left us with insufficient manpower to infuse the necessay manpower into our infrastructure. We’ve severly underestimated our labor needs and thus our “legal” option has closed the doors to the needed labor. Through necessity, and to our benefit, people have come around those “legal” doors instead of through them. Even if we close the border, we will still have to meet our labor needs and in the short term that can only happen through MORE immigration. So it is absolute utter nonsense to propose that those who have found jobs, are otherwise law abiding productive members of our communities should leave.

To do that again would be a disaster. We must avoid any sort of amnesty or legalization at all costs

 

[Fremont]

There is no way to accomplish that other than to submit to the decline that is ocurring thoughout Western Civilization. The cost would be a decline in our economic growth…recession/depression along with a failure of our infrastructure. With no people to fill needed jobs that is what we are looking at.

 

[Oscar_Ubaldo]

Ituyu;1500557:

No matter how it happens when all workers have legal status cheap labor will go away. The various labor laws will cover all workers and the labor costs will go up substantially.

Immigrants do many menial jobs who nobody else wants to do. It is not only a matter of cheap labor. The question remains, where to find the people who want and can do those jobs, given that, without immigration, population is declining.

The businesses models that depend upon the current availability of cheap labor may well fail. New business models will evolve just as they have in the past.

It is going to be very difficult to adapt a system to have one or two workers paying for one retiree. It is not a matter of economic model, it is simple arithmetic. Europe is already facing a crisis nobody wants to solve as declinign population is putting enormous strains on Europe’s social systems. France’s debt alone is well over a trillion euros (most of it coming from the last years). Economists point to population growth (a significant part of it coming from immigrration) as one of the most important elements contributing to US economic expansion.

1. Impose severe penalties on employers if they hire anybody without proper credentials – maybe a fine of $200 per workday by such workers is a good starting point and maybe some jail time for the employer.

This would means that the US government has to ensure that there is somebody with the proper documents ready to take the job, otherwise on what basis can anybody be punished for getting the workers he needs? Moreover, such a principle would imply that every single potential employer has the means (time, know how, systems) required to verify every potential employee credentials. Who is going to pay for that? Not to mention the humanitarian questions raised by these potential measures.

1. Provide companies a period of time, say from 1 to 5 years, to purge their staff of all workers who do not have proper credentials and to assure all of their workers are legitimate residents of the US. Impose penalties similar to those for new hires on employers who fail to comply.

Most probably, many of these companies will be willing to keep some or all of their illegal" employees. Are they going to be denied this possibility?

Closing the borders entirely is not a realistic possibility for a forward looking country. Decreasing poplulations occurs in declining countries. I do not believe this is the case of the US; it is probably the case in Europe.

 

[Fremont]

Immigrants do many menial jobs who nobody else wants to do. It is not only a matter of cheap labor. The question remains, where to find the people who want and can do those jobs, given that, without immigration, population is declining.

From the information I see the menial job point is largely a myth. There is an issue of what the wages should be. I would hope some sort of guest worker program would address issues in this area.

It is going to be very difficult to adapt a system to have one or two workers paying for one retiree. It is not a matter of economic model, it is simple arithmetic. Europe is already facing a crisis nobody wants to solve as declinign population is putting enormous strains on Europe’s social systems. France’s debt alone is well over a trillion euros (most of it coming from the last years). Economists point to population growth (a significant part of it coming from immigrration) as one of the most important elements contributing to US economic expansion.

Recent news reports show that the US population is not only growing but the growth is actually accelerating – faster by births than by immigration. Plus immigration will not only continue it will be expanded under these proposals.

We need to address social security and Medicare issues in any case. There may be some bubbles in the pipe along the way but fewer workers ultimately mean fewer retirees too.

This would means that the US government has to ensure that there is somebody with the proper documents ready to take the job, otherwise on what basis can anybody be punished for getting the workers he needs? Moreover, such a principle would imply that every single potential employer has the means (time, know how, systems) required to verify every potential employee credentials. Who is going to pay for that? Not to mention the humanitarian questions raised by these potential measures.

Sure the right tools are required. See the first point of the congressional proposals.

Humanitarian questions? I do not know what you mean. There is no legal, ethical or moral duty to hire illegal immigrants as far as I know. The illegal immigrants entered this country voluntarily and they can leave voluntarily.

Most probably, many of these companies will be willing to keep some or all of their illegal" employees. Are they going to be denied this possibility?

Certainly companies will be denied the possiblility to retain illegal workers. That is the whole point.

It is likely that some companies will try to retain illegal employees at least for a while. But over the years this will diminish.

Most publicly held companies will likely comply reasonably fast. The stockholders will hold management responsible if there are fines or other damage to the company because of non-compliance. Their records are fairly public and it will be pretty easy to determine if they are hiding a significant number of illegal employees.

Most private companies still have to file tax returns and things like invalid social security numbers will be quickly discovered. Other attempts to hide illegal employees expose managers to a variety of criminal laws in addition to the penalties mention. As inspectors uncover and prosecute even a few companies and managers many others will decide to comply – it sure beats jail.

In the case of either public or private employers there will also be the very real possibility of “whistle blowers”. Under current laws the whistle blower will receive a portion of any tax penalties – such as unpaid social security and Medicare taxes. This will help enforcement

The number will continuously decrease and as it does it will be easier to identify the holdouts. It may take 10 years but the number of illegal workers will likely become so small it may not be of real concern.

Closing the borders entirely is not a realistic possibility for a forward looking country. Decreasing poplulations occurs in declining countries. I do not believe this is the case of the US; it is probably the case in Europe.

I think one of the great things about these concepts is that there is no need to close our borders. We will have legal immigration and likely at a much higher level than we do now.

 

[palmas85]

reading at the posts, it seems to me that the border fence remains an example of misplaced resources.

Solving a problem requires not mixing it with something else. There is one issue concerning people who come looking for jobs and a better life and who, at least to a certain extent, contribute to fulfill an existing need in the US as many of them find jobs nobody else wants to do. Another, very different issue, is that of criminals/terrorists trying to enter the US.

The answer to every problem, to be effective, needs to be specific. the border fence is an inadequate response to each one of them. Is a kind of window dressing for politicians to try to convince voters they are doing something. The border fence is an easy way fo parading and ask for votes.

It is the responsibility for voters to reclaim effective and just measures and not to be satisfied with “cosmetic” (and nonetheless, in this case, extremelly damaging) measures.

I agree that the fense is at best a cosmetic device designed to get votes and look tough without really doing anything concrete.

Immigration is a complex issue. Illegal Immigration is not. It is very simple. The problem is that many people put the two issues together, and they really cannot be. The United States admits more immigrants, legal immigrants that is, to the United States for residency every year then do all the other nations of the world combined. That is a verifiable fact. The United Staters also deals with more illegal immigrants every years than do all the other countries of the world combined.

When I say illegal, that is exactly what I mean. Every person who has snuck across the international border or managed in some other way to avoid inspection at the Border has committed a criminal offense. they are in violation of 8 USC 1325, first conviction a misdemeanor and subsequent convictions a felony… Their motives in entering are truly irrelevant. A man who robs a liquor store in order to get money to pay for his sons hospitalization is just as guilty as one who robs to pay for his heroin addiction. His case may be mitigated by the factors involved but he is still guilty and a criminal, and so are they

Should US Immigration policy be changed? Absolutely. Should those who violated the law to enter be allowed to stay? No. that would be manifestly unfair to the millions who are trying to immigrate the right way. It would also send an incredibly bad message around the world. That was the problem with IRCA(Immigration Reform and Control Act 1986). It rewarded this illegal behavior and convinced others that all they had to do was get in, stay and they too could get amnesty one day. It created a culture where violation of the law was actively encouraged and seen as the best way to immigrate. Those who tried to do it the right way had to wait years and years to obtain visas.

Being an immigrant myself, Filipino, and a Law Enforcement Officer besides, I have faced this problem daily as well as with my own family. I petitioned for my sister 16 years ago. She is still waiting to get a Visa to enter legally. So I understand full well the issues involved.

As far as the old standby that they do the jobs no one else will do, that may very well be true in a some cases. The other old standby that they just come to work may also have been true at one time. I see every day hundreds of unemployed young men, most of whom are illegal, we’ve found out, just hanging around looking to get ino something. Some looking to work, others, who knows?

I would estimate that close to half of the arrests I mke are illegal immigrants. These are mostly for either drug offenses, domestic violence, assault and theft cases. Not very nice people. My next door neighbor, a Border Patrol Agent, Mexican by birth, relates to me that about 1/2 to 2/3rds of the aliens they arrest have criminal records here in the United States, most of them felony cases and a surprisingly large number with crimes of violence on their records… So it is a huge huge problem.

I don’t have an answer, but I do know that rewarding illegal activity is not the answer either.

 

[Oscar_Ubaldo]

I agree that the fense is at best a cosmetic device designed to get votes and look tough without really doing anything concrete.

Immigration is a complex issue. Illegal Immigration is not. … The United Staters also deals with more illegal immigrants every years than do all the other countries of the world combined.

I know the data you mention concerning the number of immigrants the US hosts every year and I believe this is a positive sign of the overall health of the US as a contry and as a community of people. I appreciate your distinction between legal and illegal immigration and I agree with your analysis on this.

When I say illegal, that is exactly what I mean. Every person who has snuck …

There is a third kind which is probably more problematic and these are the ones who enter legally and stay illegally. They do not have to dodge border inspections and the fence is irrelevant for them.

Their motives in entering are truly irrelevant. A man who robs to pay for his sons hospitalization… His case may be mitigated by the factors involved but he is still guilty and a criminal, and so are they

You have probably read “The Miserables” by Victor Hugo where a very poor man is jailed and sent to “Devil’s Island” (one of the most dreadful french prisons of the time), for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his hungry family. Sure, he is guilty. But is the sentence conmensurate with the act? Probably not. Iwould agree with you that this comparison might not apply in the immigration case ubt it shows that justice is a complex matter where circumstances have to be taken into account, as you said before. My point is that even illegal immigrants once they have settled and worked for several years, raised a family which they support and whose children go to school and know anything else but english and the US neighborhood they have have grown in should be given the opportunity to legalize their situation. It is not longer a legal matter but a humanitarian one.

ofhave thes such but hould US Immigration policy be changed? Absolutely. Should those who violated the law to enter be allowed to stay? No. …had to wait years and years to obtain visas.

On the contrary, those who illegaly live in the US and who do not have any “mitigating” arguments, should be sent back to their own countries.

In any case, the fence here is again irrelevant.

Being an immigrant myself, Filipino, and a Law Enforcement Officer besides, I have faced this problem daily as well as with my own family. I petitioned for my sister 16 years ago. She is still waiting to get a Visa to enter legally. So I understand full well the issues involved.

I see your point. You might feel torn between the “Law Enforcement Officer” who applies the law, even if it is unfair to you, and the family man who would like to see the doors opened for you sister. How to reconcile both?

As far as the old standby that they do the jobs no one else will do, … Some looking to work, others, who knows?

I would estimate that close to half of the arrests I mke are illegal immigrants…, a Border Patrol Agent, Mexican by birth, relates to me that about 1/2 to 2/3rds of the aliens they arrest have criminal records here in the United States, …

I don’t have an answer, but I do know that rewarding illegal activity is not the answer either.

I would say that you and your mexican friend have a very close view to both aspects of immigration. The good side you yourselfs represent and the ugly side of people who commit crimes or felonies. Law must exist, be just, applicable and allow for differences in trreatment depending on people’s situations, don’t you think?

I see, with you, that this is a huge and complex problem. I remained convinced that the fence is a useless and inappropriate response.

 

[Damascus]

I dont care how much money it costs or if it does a whit of good. I still want it up if for no other reason to make it clear that we dont like people border hopping and breaking the law.

 

[palmas85]

I know the data you mention concerning the number of immigrants the US hosts every year and I believe this is a positive sign of the overall health of the US as a contry and as a community of people. I appreciate your distinction between legal and illegal immigration and I agree with your analysis on this.

There is a third kind which is probably more problematic and these are the ones who enter legally and stay illegally. They do not have to dodge border inspections and the fence is irrelevant for them.

You have probably read “The Miserables” by Victor Hugo where a very poor man is jailed and sent to “Devil’s Island” (one of the most dreadful french prisons of the time), for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his hungry family. Sure, he is guilty. But is the sentence conmensurate with the act? Probably not. Iwould agree with you that this comparison might not apply in the immigration case ubt it shows that justice is a complex matter where circumstances have to be taken into account, as you said before. My point is that even illegal immigrants once they have settled and worked for several years, raised a family which they support and whose children go to school and know anything else but english and the US neighborhood they have have grown in should be given the opportunity to legalize their situation. It is not longer a legal matter but a humanitarian one.

On the contrary, those who illegaly live in the US and who do not have any “mitigating” arguments, should be sent back to their own countries.

In any case, the fence here is again irrelevant.

I see your point. You might feel torn between the “Law Enforcement Officer” who applies the law, even if it is unfair to you, and the family man who would like to see the doors opened for you sister. How to reconcile both?

I would say that you and your mexican friend have a very close view to both aspects of immigration. The good side you yourselfs represent and the ugly side of people who commit crimes or felonies. Law must exist, be just, applicable and allow for differences in trreatment depending on people’s situations, don’t you think?

I see, with you, that this is a huge and complex problem. I remained convinced that the fence is a useless and inappropriate response.

We agree. The fence is a meaningless expense and a totally inappropriate reaction to the problem.

As to being torn, yes, I am in many ways, however, i was raised to respect the law, and to respect this country. I always have. No one has the right to make up their own rules or to selectively pick and choose which rules they will obey.

As far as those illegal immigrants who have families here, I can only say, get in line with everybody else.

The end of the line. The law abiding people should get the first shot.

 

[Fremont]

My point is that even illegal immigrants once they have settled and worked for several years, raised a family which they support and whose children go to school and know anything else but english and the US neighborhood they have have grown in should be given the opportunity to legalize their situation. It is not longer a legal matter but a humanitarian one.

“Opportunity to legalize their situation”, yes. But no free lunch.

They, both men and women, and children if applicable, should return to the country where they are a citizen or have legal residence. Then they apply for immigration from there. New laws may possibly provide some acceleration in the process if they have family legally living in the US.

They must face the consequences of their choices. They chose to break the law and it will be time to pay up and start playing by the rules

I do not think I agree with what seems to be your take on “humanitarian”.

Over the past 40 years abortion has grown to a multimillion-dollar industry. When abortion goes away thousands and thousands of people will lose their jobs. These workers too “ . . have settled and worked for several years, raised a family . . ” and they have done nothing illegal.

Some will argue that for humanitarian reasons we should keep abortion so these people and their families will not be inconvenienced.

I disagree. What is wrong is wrong. It is up to us to strive for the right.

We wish to get rid of illegal immigration and we wish to get rid of abortion (as well as a few other things) and if some are inconvenienced in the process we can live with that.

 

[BlyssfulDreamer]

I think this is a good idea and a good start, but actually the horses have already been let out of the barn. There are not only illegals coming through who want a better life, there are also would be terrorists. They are already here, I would bet. This should have been addresses so many years ago.

:heart:Blyss

 

[Ituyu]

They must face the consequences of their choices. They chose to break the law and it will be time to pay up and start playing by the rules

The problem here is that we have a mutual responsibility/obligation as well as a mutual benefit. In terms of the law the “illegal” were not given a viable “legal” option so they came to work however they could get here. So they benefited from their work but they were also punished through loss of wages and the stigma attached to their “illegal” presence. We (our government and business community et al) chose not to enforce the law and looked the other way for decades. Why? Because it was the best way to get the needed labor since our system has been broken for a long long time. Those people that came here “illegally” took great risks and expense to get here. Thousands of them have died in the effort. To intentionally inflict more pain only to enforce a law that would have worked to our detriment seems too extreme to me. This has nothing to do with our safety but with a desire to punish people who should have been allowed legal admittance to begin with. Somewhere down the line we should be big enough to admit our own culpability and make it possible for these people to legalize their status by paying fines and meeting the requirements needed to be here legally. We need not ask more of that from them. So to those people who say that these people should have come here legally, nobody would agree with you more than those who came here at great risk to themselves and their families. The legal option was not a “real” one but fortunately for us they came. We have a responsibility to create laws and systems that work to obtain our desired goals. Part of that goal is to see that we get the labor we need legally. We failed to do that and the natural market forces of ‘Supply’ and ‘Demand’ filled the gap. This is nothing new in our history. When the demand is high they come and when it’s low, they stop coming and even leave. We’ve exploited this phenomenon since day one. The poor have always been at a disadvantage. Our advantage has netted us signficant growth as a nation. They given us some of our most decorated heroes. It has fueled our economy and now we want to punish them for it? Why? Because we miscalculated our labor needs? Oh yeah, they broke the “law” but have done nothing different than they have always done for over two centuries and it was exactly what we wanted them to do…work…work…work.

 

[Ituyu]

I don’t have an answer, but I do know that rewarding illegal activity is not the answer either.

Well making otherwise legal activity “illegal” is not the answer either.

 

[Oscar_Ubaldo]

Well we agree that we should get rid of abortion. That’s a point. Now, what is abortion? is the killing of a human being. This is an objective absolute evil. And the reason for that? isn’t it because the law agrees to the “elimination” of an unborn human being nobody wants? May I say that we agree that something that is legal is not necessarily moral?

Illegal immigration is “not legal”. We agree, but, haven’t we just said that other criteria than legal or illegal should be taken into account? especially when human lives are at stake?

 

[Fremont]

Well we agree that we should get rid of abortion. That’s a point. Now, what is abortion? is the killing of a human being. This is an objective absolute evil. And the reason for that? isn’t it because the law agrees to the “elimination” of an unborn human being nobody wants? May I say that we agree that something that is legal is not necessarily moral?

Illegal immigration is “not legal”. We agree, but, haven’t we just said that other criteria than legal or illegal should be taken into account? especially when human lives are at stake?

Yes I think we have much common thought.

I will say that I believe deporting illegal immigrants is not taking a life nor is it threatening a life – that makes it much different than abortion. It may cause some inconvenience but the illegal immigrants made choices and they knew the potential consequences of those choices. When they are caught I believe it is fair to impose those consequences.

Just as anyone who commits a crime and then hides to evade capture, when caught they must face the consequences of their act.

Certainly the court can consider their behavior while in hiding from the law as mitigating circumstances when determining how those consequences will be imposed. That is why we have courts.

In the bigger picture I favor new laws and regulations that encourage illegal immigrants to leave the US voluntarily. Another free choice.

 

[Fremont]

Well making otherwise legal activity “illegal” is not the answer either.

No one is even suggesting “making otherwise legal activity ‘illegal’.

The key point here is that it is not legal to work in the US without permission, just as it is illegal to enter the US without permission.

Entering the US illegally, working in the US illegally; lying, cheating and stealing to obtain work are all wrong behavior.

It is illegal to do many otherwise legal jobs without permission or proper credentials.

It is illegal to haul hazardous materials without the proper licensing. Obtaining a forged license does not make it legal or proper.

Working as a healthcare worker without the proper credentials is illegal in my state. Obtaining forged credentials does not make it legal or proper.

It is illegal to dump toxic waste, even at an approved site, without permission. Sneaking in at night to dump the material does not make it legal or proper

The list can go on and on.

 

[Ituyu]

No one is even suggesting “making otherwise legal activity ‘illegal’.

Well we restrict the freedom of movement which in not inherently wrong. You do know that our citizens cross into Mexico every day? Working for a living is also a natural and necessary thing to do and we make that “illegal”.

The key point here is that it is not legal to work in the US without permission, just as it is illegal to enter the US without permission.

 

[Fremont]

Well we restrict the freedom of movement which in not inherently wrong. You do know that our citizens cross into Mexico every day? Working for a living is also a natural and necessary thing to do and we make that “illegal”.

Thousands of people cross international borders around the world every day. The big difference is that they do it with permission from the country they enter.

Sure working for a living is natural. We certainly do not deny anybody the right to work. But if they want to work in this country they have to do by our rules. The important point is that permission is required to work in the US and most other countries where one does not have citizenship or legal residence. Requiring that permission is perfectly legitimate and moral. To ignore or violate that requirement is illegal. We did not make them illegal they do that to themselves.

The documents and information that they were required to give to get a job are a function of us making something perfectly natural “illegal”. It was wrong to make it “illegal” when there is no intent to harm and when working is harmless. It’s like faulting somebody who kills in self defense because after all it is illegal to kill, a crime has been committed.

Credentials are required for many, many jobs. There is nothing wrong with that. Lying, cheating and stealing is wrong. Lying about eligibility to work and presenting false, forged or stolen credentials is wrong. The illegal immigrants perpetrate that wrong and they are guilty of fraud, lying and cheating. The ends do not justify the means.

As far as I know killing an attacker in self defense is neither illegal nor immoral – and no crime is committed.

Again, now you are talking about “criminal” activity. There is a good reason to provide for the safety of the public and workers.

Yes we are talking about criminal activity. Criminal activity that includes behavior by illegals violating federal laws, lying, cheating and stealing.

 

[Ituyu]

Thousands of people cross international borders around the world every day. The big difference is that they do it with permission from the country they enter.

Sure working for a living is natural. We certainly do not deny anybody the right to work. But if they want to work in this country they have to do by our rules. The important point is that permission is required to work in the US and most other countries where one does not have citizenship or legal residence. Requiring that permission is perfectly legitimate and moral. To ignore or violate that requirement is illegal. We did not make them illegal they do that to themselves.

I see nothing inherently wrong it what they do. The same thing our ancestors and theri ancestors have done for centuries.

 

[aleks]

What a waste of money…Because of criminals?Not all immigrants are criminals.Because of terrorism?Terrorists never crossed the border with Mexico,they came with visas…But what can I expect from some racists who blame immigrants,specially Hispanics, for the problems of the country.Timothy McVeigh was an American citizen and I consider him one of the worst criminals in history.So,not every criminal is immigrant…Think about it.

Aleks.

 

[Ituyu]

What a waste of money…Because of criminals?Not all immigrants are criminals.Because of terrorism?Terrorists never crossed the border with Mexico,they came with visas…But what can I expect from some racists who blame immigrants,specially Hispanics, for the problems of the country.Timothy McVeigh was an American citizen and I consider him one of the worst criminals in history.So,not every criminal is immigrant…Think about it.

Aleks.

I agree! And, most of these folks (“illegals”) don’t meet the definition of what we think of as criminals. It’s mostly semantics for no “real” crime has been committed.