NYT

‘Family Friendly’ White House Proves Less So for Many Aides

0
Miami Herald

Honduras quits Organization of American States

 0
Don Surber

Would Galileo buy global warming?

 0
AP

Mrs. Obama bringing glamor to Moscow this weekend

0
WaPo

Obama Urges Groups to Stop Attacks [on Dems who oppose ObamaCare]

 0
All Headlines »
 

Illegal immigration – yes, it’s a problem

Posted by: Sister Toldjah on March 27, 2006 at 8:42 am

But not surprisingly, legal and illegal immigrants alike (as well as ‘civil rights advocates’) see little problem with it and instead have serious issues with the proposed federal legislation that would: crack down on illegal immigration, make it a felony to be one and assist one, and build a security wall against the southern border of the US. Via the LA Times:

Spirited but peaceful marchers — ordinary immigrants alongside labor, religious and civil rights groups — stretched more than 20 blocks along Spring Street, Broadway and Main Street to City Hall, tooting kazoos, waving American flags and chanting, “Sí se puede!” (Yes we can!).

Attendance at the demonstration far surpassed the number of people who protested against the Vietnam War and Proposition 187, a 1994 state initiative that sought to deny public benefits to undocumented migrants but was struck down by the courts. Police said there were no arrests or injuries except for a few cases of exhaustion.

At a time when Congress prepares to crack down further on illegal immigration and self-appointed militias patrol the U.S. border to stem the flow, Saturday’s rally represented a massive response, part of what immigration advocates are calling an unprecedented effort to mobilize immigrants and their supporters nationwide.

It coincides with an initiative on the part of the Roman Catholic Church, spearheaded by Cardinal Roger M. Mahony, archbishop of Los Angeles, to defy a House bill that would make aiding undocumented immigrants a felony. And it signals the burgeoning political clout of Latinos, especially in California.

“There has never been this kind of mobilization in the immigrant community ever,” said Joshua Hoyt, executive director of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. “They have kicked the sleeping giant. It’s the beginning of a massive immigrant civil rights struggle.”

The demonstrators, many wearing white shirts to symbolize peace, included both longtime residents and the newly arrived, bound by a desire for a better life.

Arbelica Lazo, 40, illegally emigrated from El Salvador two decades ago but said she now owns two businesses and pays $7,000 in income taxes each year.

Jose Alberto Salvador, 33, came here illegally four months ago to find work to support the wife and five children he left behind. In his native Guatemala, he said, what little work he could find paid $10 a day.

“As much as we need this country, we love this country,” Salvador said, waving both the American and Guatemalan flags. “This country gives us opportunities we don’t get at home.”

On Monday, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to resume work on a comprehensive immigration reform proposal. The Senate committee’s version includes elements of various bills, including a guest worker program and a path to legalization for the nation’s 10 million to 12 million undocumented immigrants proposed by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.)

In addition, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has introduced a bill that would strengthen border security, crack down on employers of illegal immigrants and increase the number of visas for workers. Frist has said he would take his bill to the floor Tuesday if the committee does not finish its work Monday.

(Hat tip to Bryan Preston)

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) isn’t pulling any punches:

Tancredo may not be a household name yet, but he’s doing everything he can to change that. As the House and Senate debate the nation’s immigration and border-security laws, the four-term Coloradan has positioned himself as the loudest, angriest voice against the estimated 11 million illegal aliens now living in the United States. They are “a scourge that threatens the very future of our nation,” he says. He laments “the cult of multiculturalism,” and worries about America’s becoming a “Tower of Babel.” If Republican presidential candidates don’t put the problem atop the agenda in 2008, he says he’ll run himself, just to force the front runners to talk about it. Not that he thinks he’d win the White House. He declares himself “too fat, too short and too bald” to be president. If the Republicans lose the election because he’s too tough on the issue, he says, “So be it.”

Not so long ago, Tancredo was regarded as little more than a noisy pest on Capitol Hill. His colleagues shook their heads at his tireless demands for crackdowns on American employers who hire illegals and his idea for a 700-mile-long fence along the Mexican border. But in recent months, some of those same Republicans have come to realize that, while Tancredo may be a crank, he is a crank with a large and passionate following. Anti-immigration sentiment has always simmered, and it flares up about once a decade—the last time it hit this level was 1996, when California Gov. Pete Wilson made it the centerpiece of his failed presidential campaign. Tancredo was one of the first politicians to tap into the latest surge of anger. In states with large numbers of undocumented workers, voters complain that poor illegals are overwhelming public schools, clogging hospital emergency rooms and bankrupting welfare budgets. And they worry that inadequate border security makes it easy for would-be terrorists to sneak into the country. Tancredo’s colleagues are listening. When he arrived in Washington, he started the Immigration Reform Caucus. The group attracted just 16 members. Today, there are 91.

The battle over what to do over the problem of illegal immigration is obviously heating up …. but the problem is that both sides of the aisle offer little more than platitudes when discussing the issue and, until recently, never seemed to want to discuss anything meaningful in the way of solutions to the problem – for fear of offending potential voters, as well as Hispanic voters who are here legally. This problem needs to be gotten under control – it’s something that is long overdue, and I’m with Tancredo on what he said about the GOP taking a stand on this: if the GOP loses over standing on principle on the issue of illegal immigration, so be it.

Read more via Mark Krikorian at NRO’s “The Corner”, Joshua Sharf at Newsbusters

In: Immigration, Social Issues | Email This Post | Print This

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

  • Church and State trackbacked with If Scalia Should Have to Recuse Himself, Then...
  • Conservative Outpost trackbacked with Rally for "illegal alien rights"

    • 43 Responses to “Illegal immigration – yes, it’s a problem”

    Comments

    1. sanity says:
      March 28, 2006 at 4:53 pm

      One thing, untie the hands of the local police so they can ask if people who commit crimes are US citizens or not.

      Currently they are forbidden to ask if they are here illegally.

      And, if they are found hte be here illeally and have committed a crime, allow them to contact INS and have them deported.

      No need for extra money to be spent searching out illegal immigrants, but let law enforcement oficers who find illegals committing crimes allow them to remove these illegal immigrant criminals from the US and put them back into the country of origin they have come from.

    2. Mahwah says:
      March 28, 2006 at 5:29 pm

      I’m all for legal immigration, but I have seen the effects of the onslaught of millions of illegals coming here from (mostly) Mexico, and feel that immediate and drastic measures must be taken if we are to preserve the sovereignty of our nation.

      I live in the metro Phoenix area, and I have been here for going on twenty-five years. I am now getting ready to leave Arizona, as the crime rate in my town has skyrocketed, and the threat of crime is ever-present. I have some friends on the local police force, and they feel it is mostly due to the influx of illegal Mexicans settling here. Is every Mexican that comes here illegally responsible for the crime wave? Of course not. However, the fact is that over two-thirds of the prison inmates incarcerated in Arizona are illegal aliens. Many of the publicly-funded hospitals here in the State are being overwhelmed by illegals who arrive ready to give birth to ‘Anchor Babies’ and demand free service from the medical facilities because they know they can get it. This has caused many of the hospitals to operate in bancruptcy, their staff never knowing when their next paycheck will be their last. This is also a huge burden on the taxpayers and those who prefer to ‘pay their own way’ as the costs of healthcare for us has drastically increased to compensate for all the ‘freebies’ that are given out. The police here are overwhelmed with the task of dealing with the gang activity that is now present. We actually have armed guards at the entrances to the GROCERY stores that are around me due to constant robberies, and we are #1 in the nation for auto theft. Coincidence? I think not. Think I just happen to live in a ‘bad’ part of town? Think again. My home is in Tempe – yup – home of the AZ Cardinals and Arizona State University. Tempe was once considered the center of culture in the Valley, and a very desireable place to live. Now when I mention I live in Tempe, many shake their heads and say “Oh man, that place has gotten baaadd…”

      My grandparents immigrated here legally, through Ellis Island. As a condition of immigration, they had to have a sponsor, enough cash to survive without being a burden on the community, and a job waiting for them. That was just to get off the boat, never mind being granted citizenship. Like many, many others before and after them, they learned English, and became citizens. My grandmother would tell me that her mother and friends would sit around and listen to her speak English after she had been here only a year – they marvelled at how beautifully she spoke it. She was only a child then, but felt it was important to immerse herself into the American culture. As new Americans, they never took a dime of welfare benefits, never used the ’system’ to cost the taxpayers an extra penny. They were proud of that. They also never flew the Austrian flag outside of their home – but you better believe the United States flag was always present. They helped instill in me patriotism for this country, and respect for the rule of law.

      I admire and respect all those that ‘earn’ their citizenship to this country, as it is those people and their children that make the best stewards of our nation. It is very telling to me that many of those marching in the anti-immigration reform rallies were displaying the flag of their country of choice – Mexico. Perhaps they should instead be marching to Vincente Fox’s office , and demanding that he keep his campaign promises and reform THEIR country, and make it a place worth living in. Maybe then the corruption that drives the poverty in Mexico will begin to abate.

    3. Baklava says:
      March 28, 2006 at 6:00 pm

      Mahwah wrote, “I admire and respect all those that ‘earn’ their citizenship to this country, as it is those people and their children that make the best stewards of our nation.”

      Amen.

      We are generous. We allow more legal immigrants into this country than all other countries combined and need to enforce our laws and provide for out national security. Being illegal and being paid under the table and/or using someone elses social security number to pay taxes and have earnings above the table isn’t helpful.

    4. CB Howell says:
      March 28, 2006 at 6:42 pm

      Baklava said, “You are leaving out the national security implications. Your argument is pre 9/11″

      National security implications are exactly what I meant when I said,

      “The other nice benefit of this idea is that it would drastically cut the border patrol’s work load allowing them to focus on those who seek to come here persuing criminal intentions.”

      :(( LIKE TERRORISM :((

      Baklava, I don’t know where you’ve been for the last 4 1/2 years, but I’ve really seen a huge increase in port/border security given the billions upon billions of dollars we’ve spent to improve it…and it’s everything the border patrol can do not to get thier asses shot off. They’re streched too thin chasing the folks who just want to work.

      It just blows me away. Is it just that because the government prints money, they’ll never run out? We can’t keep spending like we are….national security….what do you propose, the mexican “iron curtain” with barbed wire and land mines? With our economy in the crapper cause we’ve kicked out all our laborers and small businesses (70%of the job providers) going out of business right and left…who’s going to pay for your ‘national security’ then, baklava?

      I would argue that in a general sense, doing any thing other than what I propose is a higher threat to our national security than anything coming across our southern border.

      But hey, I guess if we go broke….we’ll cease to exist as a target for Islamo-faciscm…we’ll be just like mexico and no one will want anything to do with us.

    5. Baklava says:
      March 28, 2006 at 6:55 pm

      CB asked, “what do you propose, the mexican “iron curtain” with barbed wire and land mines?”

      Nope. I propose the opposite of you. If illegal immigrants can’t be employed or receive benefits they will find that they have to leave. Leaving will cost us less (referring to your printing money argument) because our hospitals, schools, jails will not be over utilized.

      Your argument of marginalization is backwards. If people feel welcomed here they will be attracted even more. Amnesty and giving benefits and full citizenzhip quickly (after breaking the law) will attract more and more illegal immigrants. All of these people need care, benefits, education, health care, jailing, roads, etc. I’m sorry but we are generous. We allow more legal immigrants than all other countries comibined. That is good. Now we can take a stand for once and for all and really help the people who came illegally understand they need to go home.

      A few deportations will do the trick also. We don’t need buses from Tijuany to Anchorage. We only need to START enforcing our laws and not doling out benefits before people realize they will not be rewarded for law breaking and will not be allowed to continue breaking the law. We need to know who is in this country. The national security implications are tremendous

      CB made a false argument saying, “With our economy in the crapper cause we’ve kicked out all our laborers and small businesses (70%of the job providers) going out of business right and left…who’s going to pay for your ‘national security’ then, baklava?

      You are behind in understanding the issue. Even Paul Krugman gets it. He sets you straight on the costs to the U.S. Badly sets you straight. So bad it hurts to watch.:((

      CB wrote, “But hey, I guess if we go broke”

      Paul Krugman thinks as I do that we have a higher chance going broke over the benefits and entitlements that’ll cost us to allow illegal immigration to exist. Not knowing who is here needs to be solved so that we spend less in homeland security. The way to know who is here is making it so that if you aren’t a citizen or with visa you will pretty much HAVE TO GO HOME to get money.

    6. Baklava says:
      March 28, 2006 at 7:00 pm

      Here’s something else to understand which expounds on what I said here, “Leaving will cost us less (referring to your printing money argument) because our hospitals, schools, jails will not be over utilized.”

      If the federal jails have 17% illegal immigrants, if our schools have 11 million illegal immigrants… the roads, the hospitals (health care), the education, etc. All those things require labor and services rendered. The illegal immigrants leaving makes it so less services/labor is needed. The American economy more or less needs as much labor as there is people. Your ridiculous argument suggests that we need more labor that there is people. As if what? We have the right to lay back and be waited on by slaves? No. This would be the OPPOSITE of what Paul Krugman believes. We do not deserve a slave class. To be humane as Paul Krugman rights we need to pay a living wage and they need to receive all benefits and entitlements and health care and the works. Working under the table and or with someone elses social security is not the way towards having a secure nation and one with enough funds to provide government services for everyone.

    7. Baklava says:
      March 28, 2006 at 7:13 pm

      If 1 million out of the 11 million illegal immigrants are in our schools that is a cost of 8 Billion per year to educate if you use the figure of $8,000 per pupil which is about average.

      If 100,000 of the federal prison population (estimate with no research on the actual prison population but knowing that 17% are illegal) then that is a cost of 3 Billion per year.

      The roads.
      The hospitals that have had to close.
      The benefits that have to be doled out.

      Just here in CA the WIC program gives out more than $600 million in benefits and do you want to know who receives 1/3rd of those benefits according to estimates? Why is that? Because if you are a mom with child under 5 and you are under 185% of poverty you can receive WIC benefits. You don’t even have to be under poverty level. You can be above it. This is 1 program/benefit out of a couple dozen I could name. It is a huge cost to US. It is also less services needed to render if we don’t need to provide services to the people who leave. Acting like they leaving will really have us scrambling for people to provide services is not very intelligent of an argument. You only need to provide as much services generally as there are people. Absent people don’t need services, shelter, food, health care, education, their car fixed, their teeth fixed, their hair cut, their food served, benefits doled out.

      You would be wise to take that argument off the table.

    8. steve says:
      March 28, 2006 at 7:45 pm

      NAFTA, exports American jobs overseas and corrupt and greedy capitalists hire undocumented workers which drives down the wages and benifits of the Americans who do have jobs. Throw a few CEO’s into jail. Begin with bush. Peace

    9. Lorica says:
      March 28, 2006 at 11:30 pm

      The funny thing about NAFTA Steve is the 1st one is a Jimmy Carter initiative that Reagan was forced to sign by the Dem congress, and the 2nd NAFTA BJ signed. So what exactly is your point?? – Lorica

    10. bostonBC says:
      April 3, 2006 at 1:50 pm

      Lorica – Steve’s point is very clear, NAFTA screwed over Americans. The fact that both the morons on the left and the rich on the right believe in it is scary.

      It is this point that illustrates why we are in the current pickle on immigration.

      The righties want cheap labor at any cost and the lefties seem to want to help everyone except current citizens.

      Us regular Americans who try and keep our jobs in this insane ‘global’ economy are getting screwed by both the left and the right.

      Time for a centrist party to form in the US like the new one in Israel. It would clean up if it actually gave a cr*p about Americans instead of wealthy corporations and illegals.

    11. Baklava says:
      April 3, 2006 at 2:06 pm

      Boston BC,

      No, Steve’s point isn’t clear. Please show us the text in NAFTA where “undocumented” workers are allowed to be hired.

      Complete fabricication as his posts always are. Nothing truthful except that is what he “feels”.

      I see Boston likes to generalize by saying, “The righties want cheap labor at any cost and the lefties seem to want to help everyone except current citizens“….

      Businesses that hire illegals cannot be characterized as the “righties”. Businesses have generally donated to both parties and in ever increasing amounts as government gets larger. Why do businesses give to both parties as government gets larger? for favorable treatment as opposed to unfavorable treatment. I’m sorry you like the cliche’s. It’d be nice if facts were important.

    « Older Comments