The real answer to getting rid of illegal aliens

[Bill Mattocks]

Solution to what, exactly?

We had an amnesty in 1986. It was supposed to stem the tide of illegal immigration. It obviously didn't work.

I tried to start my car the other day and it would not start. I won't bother to try ever again; it obviously won't work.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 also did not create amnesty for all illegal aliens, but only created 'a path towards citizenship' for agricultural workers who had been in the USA 'continuously' since 1982. No one else needed to apply. That meant that seasonal workers and those who came to the US illegally after 1982 could not become legal immigrants under this program, nor could those who came after.

Ok, so those that are here are now citizens / legal residents. Now what? How do you stop further incursions across our border? Especially in light of the fact that if enough come across again, with the history that we are trending, we will have yet another amnesty program.


So it really wouldn't solve the problem.

No amnesty is going to end illegal immigration by itself. People come here for work and new generations come of age every year who want to do that. Amnesty for those here now, and a guest worker program for those who want to come here to work in the future, will end illegal immigration. Why climb a fence, when you can go to the gate, get an ID card, and enter legally and begin working? The only people who would still come through illegally would be those we want to catch - the criminals, drug smugglers, terrorists, and so on. And with millions fewer coming through the fencelines, it would be actually possible to catch them.

No, it's because they believe that there is a legal and proper way to accomplish U.S. Citizenship. Quite frankly, I only care about their plight in a distant, observational kind of way. I don't lay awake at night concerned about the daily occurings in Mexico.

Either way, you point about their view of "bad awful Mexicans", is yet more rhetoric that those for kicking them out are racist. Most Americans are for legal immigration and against illegal immigration. The polls show that time and again. But, in order to stir the pot, you have to bring up that some people are racist. Good job!

When people say "it's the principle of the thing," it's never the principle of the thing. It's a common weakness people have for not wishing to face what it is that's really bugging them. I know what it is, because I grew up a conservative in a family of ultra-conservatives, and I know just exactly what they mean when they say those things.

And frankly, if it were possible to secure our borders and not grant any kind of amnesty or legal status or guest worker program, I'd have no problems with it. But I see a single problem here; border security. I realize that there is nothing we can do to stem the tide of illegal immigrants coming here to work; we want them here, we love them here; we just ***** about it online, but we love it when they cut our grass and put roofs on our houses and pick our produce in the fields. We love those low prices that can only be achieved by paying next to nothing to unskilled immigrant workers. We don't want the consequences that we'd face if they all vanished tomorrow in a puff of smoke in terms of higher prices for us all. They want to be here, we want them to be here. And that's going to continue.

Therefore, since my focus is on border security and NOT on who is being fairest to whom, and how sacred the law is, and how we just can't make a mockery of our system of laws by giving legal status to every Tom, Dick, and Harry that waltzes in here illegally. I don't give a crap about those things. I care about securing the border. Since we can't do that without ending the influx of millions of illegal workers, I agree with Senator McCain; make them legal. That ends the influx. Then we can secure the borders.

It's that simple. Anyone who is against it has another agenda, and it's not about securing the borders, in my opinion.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Great Idea..lets just keep granting amnesty to anybody who crosses our borders illegally while doing nothing to secure them. Where do you see THAT leading?

Yes, it would lead to people no longer climbing over the fences. They stroll right in the gate, we find out who they are, check their criminal histories, and if they are the kind of people we don't mind having here, we give them work permits. That's where it would lead.

Then anyone going over the fence would be someone of much more interest to us. Someone worth devoting expensive law enforcement resources to.

We certainly DO have the ability to secure our border to a much more effective degree than we currently do, if we had a government with the will to do so.

But we don't. So wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one gets fuller faster. I propose we do something that has a snowball's chance of working, instead of perpetually demanding something that won't ever happen.

 

[Phoenix44]

Nobody's proposing "amnesty," in the sense of open the doors and everyone's legal. What Bush and McCain proposed was basically this:

For those already here, they must register, pay a fine, get on the end of the line for citizenship, and learn English.

And it's a good idea.

But in my opinion, before I want to discuss immigration reform with anyone, I want to know:

Who is mowing your lawn? Who is babysitting your kids? Who is doing your home renovations? Who is cooking your food? Because if you're hiring illegals, then shut up--we already know that you LOVE illegal aliens no matter how much you protest.

My kid, an accomplished baker, can't get a part-time job baking bread at Panera's, even when they've got a "Help Wanted" sign in the window--they want illegals, so they don't have to pay minimum wage or offer a safe, fair working environment. Very patriotic.

I'm with Joab--penalize the people who are hiring illegals, and people won't come here illegally anymore.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Nobody's proposing "amnesty," in the sense of open the doors and everyone's legal. What Bush and McCain proposed was basically this:

For those already here, they must register, pay a fine, get on the end of the line for citizenship, and learn English.

And it's a good idea.

I agree.

But in my opinion, before I want to discuss immigration reform with anyone, I want to know:

Who is mowing your lawn? Who is babysitting your kids? Who is doing your home renovations? Who is cooking your food? Because if you're hiring illegals, then shut up--we already know that you LOVE illegal aliens no matter how much you protest.

Also agreed. But in addition to that, who is picking the produce you buy at the grocery store? Who mows the grass where you work? Who puts the roofs on the news houses going up in the city you live in? Who is canning vegetables, hauling fish nets, and working in packing houses?

Even those who do not love illegal aliens per se do love the end result - lower prices. They'd pinch a purple loaf if they had to pay what it costs to have a union member and certified US citizen pick a head of lettuce. They want the benefits that illegal workers provide, even if they personally do not employ illegal aliens as workers.

The constant pressure for lower prices and thinner margins at grocery stores, in trades like lawn maintenance and roofing, etc, forces small businesses to hire illegal aliens; they have to compete or go out of business. And it's pressure from consumers that provide the impetus for that, it doesn't come out of nowhere.

My kid, an accomplished baker, can't get a part-time job baking bread at Panera's, even when they've got a "Help Wanted" sign in the window--they want illegals, so they don't have to pay minimum wage or offer a safe, fair working environment. Very patriotic.

If they charged a buck a sandwich more and advertised that they only hire US citizens, people would go somewhere else. The dollar rules. Look at Subway - their current advertising campaign is "$5 footlong." Why? Because it's tasty? Because it is nutritious? No, because it's cheap. You can blame Panera, but it's not them providing the pressure, it's the consumer.

My step brother owned a roofing company. He complained that he hired only those who were legally allowed to work in the US, but he had to pay at least minimum wage. His competitors would hire illegals and pay them less, and underbid him on jobs. And his biggest complaint? The illegal aliens worked harder and did a better job than his guys, who were lazy Americans who didn't like to work and were constantly getting 'hurt' on the job and claiming workman's comp.

I'm with Joab--penalize the people who are hiring illegals, and people won't come here illegally anymore.

I disagree with this. They come here for jobs. The jobs exist because the public wants them, as you stated. Even when an individual person refuses to hire any illegal aliens themselves, they benefit from and demand the lower prices that result from illegal alien labor. Any company that has to compete on price is susceptible to the power of the consumer to constantly demand a lower price.

Personally, I hire no one to mow my lawn, so I can say I never hired illegal aliens, right? On the other hand, I do buy groceries, and if lettuce suddenly shot up a couple bucks a head, I'd notice that, and I'd be looking to buy lettuce where it was cheaper. That's the pressure to hire illegal aliens. Everyone who buys any good or service on price that is provided by cheap labor is essentially demanding that the current situation continues. You may not think so, but the blame is on us.

 

[Archangel M]

And commesurate with the majority of the immigrant Mexican population to refuse integration, what is bascially occurring is that the southwestern region of the United States is culturally turning into "Northern Mexico".

That's their fault, not ours.

[yt]s6C6IXqVLQM[/yt]

Resulting in things like this guy and his views? Especially around the :45 mark? Top it all off this guy is reported to be PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER in California!

 

[Archangel M]

So should anybody who wants to fly or boat in from ANY nation be given the same consideration?

 

[Cryozombie]

I tried to start my car the other day and it would not start. I won't bother to try ever again; it obviously won't work.

FWIW, I usually try and fix it first, rather than sit and crank on it over and over...

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Fine companies? We have such laws. They're rarely enforced. You could argue that they should be enforced. Yes, but how? Too many companies, too few enforcement officers, not enough money (or will) to perform such enforcement. We could collect all overdue library book fines too; but there is no manpower or will to do so, therefore it does not and will not get done. You can 'want' it all you wish; it's not going to happen. Let's deal with reality.

Arizonans have the political will to do it.

What I find even more frustrating is your political philosophy. It's basically, "Well, since the politicians won't do it, let's just agree to what they will do." This flies directly in contradiction to your past posts in the thread regarding the arrested militia members.

I tried to start my car the other day and it would not start. I won't bother to try ever again; it obviously won't work.

Einstein, a far smarter man then me, said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 also did not create amnesty for all illegal aliens, but only created 'a path towards citizenship' for agricultural workers who had been in the USA 'continuously' since 1982. No one else needed to apply. That meant that seasonal workers and those who came to the US illegally after 1982 could not become legal immigrants under this program, nor could those who came after.

No amnesty is going to end illegal immigration by itself. People come here for work and new generations come of age every year who want to do that. Amnesty for those here now, and a guest worker program for those who want to come here to work in the future, will end illegal immigration.

I understand that. However, we already have what you are asking for, it's called an H-2A Visa Temporary Labor Certification for seasonal agricultural work. Or how about the H-2B Visa for temporary labor for non-agrucultural work. Hell, if you do a Google search for "guest worker program" the first link is to the United States Department of Labor talking about these Visas.

So the United States has in place what you are suggesting. And as you keep decrying us for saying that there is no political will to enforce the laws that are in place, the inverse is true. We have the programs you want, and STILL illegals are coming here. So we KNOW that what you want won't work. Why don't we try something else.

Unless we want to be, as Einstein said, insane.

When people say "it's the principle of the thing," it's never the principle of the thing. It's a common weakness people have for not wishing to face what it is that's really bugging them. I know what it is, because I grew up a conservative in a family of ultra-conservatives, and I know just exactly what they mean when they say those things.

Talk about projecting. So, somehow, you know that my argument about illegal immigration relating to the legality of the issue is really because I'm racist, and all because you had some family members that were. And having never met me before, it makes it doubly amazing. You should have your own talk show. Why do we even have debates since you are so sure about the answers to life, the universe, and everything.

Come on, you're better then that, aren't you?

we want them here, we love them here; we just ***** about it online, but we love it when they cut our grass and put roofs on our houses and pick our produce in the fields. We love those low prices that can only be achieved by paying next to nothing to unskilled immigrant workers.

I call BS. The market will adjust itself based on supply and demand. The only difference that happened when illegal immigrants took over jobs that were done by citizens is that the pockets of business owners got fatter. The average citizen saw no reduction in cost associated with the purchasing of the products that they produced.

It amazes me how somehow, people were able to afford food, clothing, and shelter before this modern influx of illegal immigration occurred. It must have been a fluke, huh.

Also agreed. But in addition to that, who is picking the produce you buy at the grocery store? Who mows the grass where you work? Who puts the roofs on the news houses going up in the city you live in? Who is canning vegetables, hauling fish nets, and working in packing houses?

Interesting. So unless I want to be homeless and hungry, I am demanding illegal immigrants to come to this country.

This system was around before I had any vote in the matter. It is a system that I am forced to live within, unless I move to another country. But now you are blaming me for it because I need to eat in order to live, even though I'm doing what I can to change the system.

That's some logic for your a** there, isn't it....

Even those who do not love illegal aliens per se do love the end result - lower prices. They'd pinch a purple loaf if they had to pay what it costs to have a union member and certified US citizen pick a head of lettuce. They want the benefits that illegal workers provide, even if they personally do not employ illegal aliens as workers.

Once again, the end result is not lower prices, but massive multi-million dollar bonuses for the corporate executives. There have been few price reductions relative to inflation due to illegal immigrant workers.

Look at Subway - their current advertising campaign is "$5 footlong." Why? Because it's tasty? Because it is nutritious? No, because it's cheap.

Yes. This from the same company where I overheard not two weeks ago a young man saying that he was just hired by the company for $12 an hour. A young Hispanic man. So they're really short changing the immigrants, aren't they.

My step brother owned a roofing company. He complained that he hired only those who were legally allowed to work in the US, but he had to pay at least minimum wage. His competitors would hire illegals and pay them less, and underbid him on jobs. And his biggest complaint? The illegal aliens worked harder and did a better job than his guys, who were lazy Americans who didn't like to work and were constantly getting 'hurt' on the job and claiming workman's comp.

So, once again, based on your anecdotal evidence, we are supposed to believe that this is the way things are everywhere. How about this. It is my experience that illegal immigrants do less work then legals, and there work product is better. So now, my experience trumps yours. Nah Nah.

You see where this gets us. No where..

 

[Joab]

I did. It betrays a lack of understanding of conditions that prevail.

Fine companies? We have such laws. They're rarely enforced. You could argue that they should be enforced. Yes, but how? Too many companies, too few enforcement officers, not enough money (or will) to perform such enforcement. We could collect all overdue library book fines too; but there is no manpower or will to do so, therefore it does not and will not get done. You can 'want' it all you wish; it's not going to happen. Let's deal with reality.

Hire more enforcement officers and get the job done. Fine the companies enough to make it unprofitable to hire illegal aliens. If it costs more in fines than it does to have the cheap labor they won't hire the illegal aliens. If the illegal aliens don't get hired by anyone they will stop coming.



We cannot even get our own economy off it's knees, and you want us sending more money to Mexico? Not only do we not have the money or the ability to restore Mexico's economy, in no way would US conservatives ever agree to such a plan. It's not even a remote possibility.

Well, it's an idea, perhaps not practical, but more compassionate than simply fining companies. I'm hopeful something can be done to improve Mexico's economy so their citizens won't believe they neeed to leave their country for the USA to find a job that pays a living wage.

I said solve the problem, not throw out a bunch of ideas that have zero percent chance of occurring and insisting that they be tried first. That is the same as saying you want the status quo, because that's what will happen; nothing at all.

How do you know they have zero chance of occuring? There not completely outlandish ideas, it's not like I'm suggesting we nuke the border between Mexico or the USA or something.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Arizonans have the political will to do it.

It will be interesting to see if the new law in Arizona passes Constitutional muster. If it does, then I have no complaint about the Arizona law. However, I have some serious doubts that it is going to have much of an effect on the illegal alien problem in Arizona.

What I find even more frustrating is your political philosophy. It's basically, "Well, since the politicians won't do it, let's just agree to what they will do." This flies directly in contradiction to your past posts in the thread regarding the arrested militia members.

The politicians do not possess the political will to enforce the existing laws because their constituents and major contributors do not want them enforced. Americans, when polled, say we are for more stringent enforcement. Yet we continue to not demand it of their elected leaders, and we reelect leaders who do not introduce legislation to require tougher legislation. We say one thing, but we want another.

We get what we elect.

Einstein, a far smarter man then me, said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

We haven't had immigration reform so far. Just fits and starts. Half-assed attempts that were doomed to failure.

I understand that. However, we already have what you are asking for, it's called an H-2A Visa Temporary Labor Certification for seasonal agricultural work. Or how about the H-2B Visa for temporary labor for non-agrucultural work. Hell, if you do a Google search for "guest worker program" the first link is to the United States Department of Labor talking about these Visas.

That's not for workers, it is for employers. They have to apply in advance of their needs, they have to prove that no citizens would apply for the jobs if they advertised for them (by advertising for them), and they have to pay minimum wage, provide free food and housing for the workers, and it's only for agricultural workers, not roofers, gardeners, and other contractors. About 30,000 such visas are issued, because employers see them as much more expensive than hiring illegals through shill companies that certify them as legal when they're not, providing a pleasant fiction.

So the United States has in place what you are suggesting. And as you keep decrying us for saying that there is no political will to enforce the laws that are in place, the inverse is true. We have the programs you want, and STILL illegals are coming here. So we KNOW that what you want won't work. Why don't we try something else.

No, as I pointed out, we do not have in place what I was suggesting. Nothing even close to that.

I call BS. The market will adjust itself based on supply and demand. The only difference that happened when illegal immigrants took over jobs that were done by citizens is that the pockets of business owners got fatter. The average citizen saw no reduction in cost associated with the purchasing of the products that they produced.

Why do we offshore jobs? Why do we build factories in counties which don't pay competitive wages compared to the USA? Because it lowers the cost of production. Labor has and will remain one of the largest factors in producing goods and services. Some labor can't easily be shipped overseas, such as picking lettuce or roofing houses, so they bring the workers here.

Do markets adjust themselves? Sure, as long as everyone plays along. But that very supply and demand you speak of causes the demand for illegal workers to remain high - all it takes is one competitor in the area who uses cheap illegal labor, to undercut all his competition. Then the others must follow suit or they cannot compete with his prices. The law of supply and demand also means that in a market where low price is the driving force, the lowest price wins. It is just as you describe but fail to recognize; the lowest price causes others to have to do as the low-price leader does. Either by innovation or by copying. There's not a lot of innovation in roofing houses or picking lettuce these days, so they lower prices by hiring cheaper labor. The illegal kind.

It amazes me how somehow, people were able to afford food, clothing, and shelter before this modern influx of illegal immigration occurred. It must have been a fluke, huh.

When did we not have illegal immigration to the USA for purposes of finding employment?

Interesting. So unless I want to be homeless and hungry, I am demanding illegal immigrants to come to this country.

You are demanding the lowest prices - we all do. Demanding the lowest price requires businesses to compete on price rather than quality. They cut costs wherever they can to compete for the lowest price to win our business. Labor is one of the largest expenses there is. I have had not one, not two, but three pay cuts from my employer, while they continue to expand their use of offshore IT workers. Why? They're cheaper, that's why, and our customers demand the lowest price and will choose our competitors to provide it if they have a lower price. I'm not happy about it, but low price requires cost-cutting, and in areas that cannot offshore employment legally, illegal immigration often serves the same purpose. So yes, you're demanding illegal immigrants come here and do the work so your lettuce can be very cheap.

This system was around before I had any vote in the matter. It is a system that I am forced to live within, unless I move to another country. But now you are blaming me for it because I need to eat in order to live, even though I'm doing what I can to change the system.

I'm not blaming anyone for anything. It is what it is. We want the benefits of low-paid workers without allowing illegal immigration, and we can't have both, it's not physically possible. So either we take the one or we take the other. I suggest that the real problem here is not illegal immigration, but securing our borders. We can't do that with millions of people streaming across them in search of employment, so I propose to eliminate that as a problem.

Once again, the end result is not lower prices, but massive multi-million dollar bonuses for the corporate executives. There have been few price reductions relative to inflation due to illegal immigrant workers.

There would be no way of proving that, since we've always had illegal immigrant workers since we started refusing to let them come across at will to work here.

I state that

a) we cannot, no matter what we do, secure the borders in their present condition. It is physically not possible.

b) even if we could, we do not possess the political will to do so (Arizona may be a valid exception)

c) the real problem is not illegal workers, but securing the borders.

d) if we cannot reduce demand (for cheap labor) and we cannot reduce supply (of illegal workers), it is logical to remove the barrier to legally coming here to work.

e) once completed, the only people coming across the border will be the kind of people we *do* want to catch, and they'll be much easier to catch, with all the manpower we currently use to catch illegal workers devoted to that instead.

Now, I propose racism as a basic reason why many people do not want to do this because it clearly fixes the 'we must control our borders' problem, yet they do not want to hear it. They won't even acknowledge it. They say "we must control our borders" and this will do that, but no, that's not acceptable. So their real problem is apparently *not* that they want to control the borders.

Press them on the issue, and they begin to spout other reasons instead. Oh, they don't like the fact that illegal aliens cause crime. They don't like the fact that illegal aliens use social services they don't pay for. They don't like the fact that they come here and have 'anchor babies' who are now citizens. They don't like the fact that they refuse to speak English and that the USA is slowly becoming a spanish-speaking nation.

First, what do those things have to do with securing our borders? Nothing.

Second, many of those claims are overblown hysterical lies which have been refuted time and time again, but which are still circulated via email and posts on discussion forums like this one as if they were true:

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/cost-of-illegal-immigrants/

Third, and this is the kicker, most of those 'problems' would be removed if the illegal aliens were legal workers. They'd be paying taxes, we would have a clearer understanding of their costs to the nation via social services versus their contributions via labor and taxes, because we could track them. They could buy health insurance and avoid incurring costs to the nation by waiting until near death and then visiting emergency rooms as they do now. They could be required to learn English as a condition of remaining here for an extended period. So what's the problem?

Well, when pressed again, those same people simply dig in their heels and repeat the same old mantra. In other words, they don't want ANY solution that allows immigrant workers here legally. It's not about speaking spanish or using hospital services, it never was.

So that leaves us with the question. If the problem is not the above, then what is it?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

How do you know they have zero chance of occuring? There not completely outlandish ideas, it's not like I'm suggesting we nuke the border between Mexico or the USA or something.

Not enough cops. Not enough jails. Not enough political will to do it.

Notice how well we do stopping illegal drugs from coming into the USA. Notice how well we stopped illegal booze from coming into the country during Prohibition. We (the people) want the benefits of illegal migrant workers, and so they come. It won't work because we don't want it to, we don't have the money, we don't have the cops, and we don't have enough places to put them all if we did.

Zero chance of occurring.

 

[Gary Crawford]

I got this in my email a few days ago and I think it might help clarify things.

Absolutely great analysis by an Arizona state senator. We are in trouble.




I'm Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen. I want to explain SB 1070 which I
voted for and was just signed by Governor Jan Brewer.
Rancher Rob Krantz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago.
I participated in a senate hearing two weeks ago on the border violence,
here is just some of the highlights from those who testified.

The people who live within 60 to 80 miles of the Arizona/Mexico Border have
for years been terrorized and have pleaded for help to stop the daily
invasion of humans who cross their property . One Rancher testified that 300
to 1200 people a DAY come across his ranch vandalizing his property,
stealing his vehicles and property, cutting down his fences, and leaving
trash. In the last two years he has found 17 dead bodies and two Koran
bibles.

Another rancher testified that daily drugs are brought across his ranch in a
military operation. A point man with a machine gun goes in front, 1/2 mile
behind are the guards fully armed, 1/2 mile behind them are the drugs,
behind the drugs 1/2 mile are more guards. These people are violent and they
will kill anyone who gets in the way. This was not the only rancher we heard
that day that talked about the drug trains.

One man told of two illegal's who came upon his property one shot in the
back and the other in the arm by the drug runners who had forced them to
carry the drugs and then shot them. Daily they listen to gun fire during the
night it is not safe to leave his family alone on the ranch and they can't
leave the ranch for fear of nothing being left when they come back.

The border patrol is not on the border. They have set up 60 miles away with
check points that do nothing to stop the invasion. They are not allowed to
use force in stopping anyone who is entering. They run around chasing them,
if they get their hands on them then they can take them back across the
border.

Federal prisons have over 35% illegal's and 20% of Arizona prisons are
filled with illegal's. In the last few years 80% of our law enforcement that
have been killed or wounded have been by an illegal.

The majority of people coming now are people we need to be worried about.
The ranchers told us that they have seen a change in the people coming they
are not just those who are looking for work and a better life.

The Federal Government has refused for years to do anything to help the
border states. We have been over run and once they are here we have the
burden of funding state services that they use. Education cost have been
over a billion dollars. The healthcare cost billions of dollars. Our State
is broke, $3.5 billion deficit and we have many serious decisions to make.
One is that we do not have the money to care for any who are not here
legally. It has to stop.
The border can be secured. We have the technology we have the ability to
stop this invasion. We must know who is coming and they must come in an
organized manner legally so that we can assimilate them into our population
and protect the sovereignty of our country. We are a nation of laws. We have
a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our
country and the government which we live under.

I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem, we dare not do
this until the Border is secure. It will do no good to forgive them because
thousands will come behind them and we will be over run to the point that
there will no longer be the United States of America but a North American
Union of open borders. I ask you what form of government will we live under?
How long will it be before we will be just like Mexico, Canada or any of the
other Central American or South American countries? We have already lost our
language, everything must be printed in Spanish also. We have already lost
our history it is no longer taught in our schools. And we have lost our
borders.

The leftist media has distorted what SB 1070 will do. It is not going to set
up a Nazi Germany. Are you kidding. The ACLU and the leftist courts will do
everything to protect those who are here illegally, but it was an effort to
try and stop illegal's from setting up businesses, and employment, and
receiving state services and give the ability to local law enforcement when
there is probable cause like a traffic stop to determine if they are here
legally. Federal law is very clear if you are here on a visa you must have
your papers on you at all times. That is the law. In Arizona all you need to
show you are a legal citizen is a driver license, MVD identification card,
Native American Card, or a Military ID. This is what you need to vote, get a
hunting license, etc.. So nothing new has been added to this law. No one is
going to be stopped walking down the street etc... The Socialist who are in
power in DC are angry because we dare try and do something and that
something the Socialist wants us to do is just let them come. They want the
"Transformation" to continue.

Maybe it is too late to save America. Maybe we are not worthy of freedom
anymore. But as an elected official I must try to do what I can to protect
our Constitutional Republic. Living in America is not a right just because
you can walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility and it
comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution the law of our land which
says what you must do to be a citizen of this country. Freedom is not free.






​

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I got this in my email a few days ago and I think it might help clarify things.

It doesn't, because it is full of half-truths and lies.

As it states in my link to Factcheck.org, 33% of all federal prisoners are NOT illegal aliens. It's a lie. And that's just one of her many mistakes.

And as to her other statements about drug dealers - just as I said - eliminate the millions of illegal immigrants streaming over the fences in search of work, and what remains (drug dealers, terrorists, other criminals) will be MUCH EASIER to catch. How is this difficult to understand?

Here is the basis of her argument, once you strip away the lies and distortions and half-truths:

The border can be secured. We have the technology we have the ability to
stop this invasion. We must know who is coming and they must come in an
organized manner legally so that we can assimilate them into our population and protect the sovereignty of our country. We are a nation of laws. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our country and the government which we live under.

No, the border cannot be secured as things are today. Period. We're trying with all our might to do it and we can't do it. More people, more technology, and more jails, and we still can't do it. And we lack the political will to do it; the people don't want it done (Arizona being a possible exception).

We *can* secure the border if we eliminate 99/100's of the people coming across the fences, by making it possible for them to come through legally.

If the goal is to secure the border, then there is a way to do it.

I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem, we dare not do this until the Border is secure. It will do no good to forgive them because thousands will come behind them and we will be over run to the point that there will no longer be the United States of America but a North American Union of open borders. I ask you what form of government will we live under?

Yep, there it is. It's not illegal workers they fear, but that they speak spanish and bring their ways with them and they change the character of the nation. Fear is the reason. Fear of being a minority, fear of the base of the nation changing. Fear and dislike. Some call that racism.

How long will it be before we will be just like Mexico, Canada or any of the
other Central American or South American countries? We have already lost our language, everything must be printed in Spanish also. We have already lost our history it is no longer taught in our schools. And we have lost our
borders.

Them awful bad Mexicans. Tell me that's not fear, hatred, and racism. Explain that to me.

And of course, even that fear could be alleviated. Make learning English a requirement of continued legal stay in the USA.

By the way, this is the state senator that believes that the earth is 6,000 years old:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/07/06/arizona-is-6000-years-old/

Here's her voting record (some of which I agree with):

http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=28166

Here are her answers to the Political Courage Test:

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=28166

I like some of her stances, because I am after all a conservative; but she also appears to me to be a bit of a nutter. And her reply to why she supported Arizona's new law on illegal aliens is full of untruths that have been proven to be untrue. Sad.

 

[Gary Crawford]

"the people don't want it done" Now there is an outright lie! The truth is the PEOPLE do want it done. Of course my statement holds just about as much water as yours because WE (you and I) do not represent the people, but I can assume the large number of unemployed people (me being one of them) DO want it done. I really don't care what is legal,but if it takes shooting them as they cross the border ILLEGALLY,then so be it!!!!!!!

 

[Archangel M]

The high percentage of Arizona citizens (something like 70%) who support the law and complain about the issues described above say more than a few loudmouths on the net IMO.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

"the people don't want it done" Now there is an outright lie! The truth is the PEOPLE do want it done.

As I have stated, when polled, citizens want the borders secured. So do I.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-05-03-immigration-poll_N.htm

Two-thirds of Americans want the government to do a better job of securing the borders, but they are sympathetic to illegal immigrants who have been working hard and staying out of trouble, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds.


Eight in 10 Americans are concerned that illegal immigrants burden schools, hospitals and other government services, and 77% worry that they drive down wages, the poll finds.



Yet 77% are concerned that stricter laws would mean illegal immigrants and their families who have lived productively in the USA for years would be forced to leave.

Eighty percent of all respondents are very or somewhat concerned that allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the USA might encourage others to move here illegally.

So no, sir, it is not a lie.

The people want a mixed bag. They want the borders secure, but they worry about illegal immigration and it's stress on the economy. They worry that allowing illegal immigrants to stay would encourage more illegal immigration.

And I agree, as I said. Securing the border can be done by eliminating the need for illegal aliens seeking work to climb over the fence - in a word, amnesty. Keeping additional illegal aliens out can be fixed by creating a meaningful work permit program that allows all law-abiding citizens of other countries to work in the USA upon application. Then the border will not be stressed by millions upon millions of illegal aliens climbing the fence. The border can be defended with 99/100's of the people who are climbing over the fence no longer do so.


But is it really about the border?

Of course my statement holds just about as much water as yours because WE (you and I) do not represent the people, but I can assume the large number of unemployed people (me being one of them) DO want it done. I really don't care what is legal,but if it takes shooting them as they cross the border ILLEGALLY,then so be it!!!!!!!

So it's not really about the border at all. It's about you wanting a job. Believe me, I'm not that far from where you are myself. But I don't think that anyone working in a lettuce field has my job. I don't think I want to work in a lettuce field, even if unemployed (although I'll do anything if I have to in order to survive). My threats to my employment come from outsourcing IT work overseas. And that's not about borders either.

So while both of us are concerned about our jobs, it really isn't about securing our borders.

If the concern is securing our borders, there are ways to do that. But when pressed, like you, most who claim to want secure borders really want something else. They just *say* they want secure borders.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

The high percentage of Arizona citizens (something like 70%) who support the law and complain about the issues described above say more than a few loudmouths on the net IMO.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/06/most-arizonans-back-new-immigration-law/

A Rocky Mountain Poll conducted by the Behavior Research Center and released Wednesday found that 52 percent of Arizonans support the measure, with 39 percent opposed and the rest undecided.

A majority, to be sure; but not 70 percent.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05/05/majority-of-arizonans-favor-new-immigration-law/

That's roughly the same outcome that a New York Times/CBS News poll,conducted April 28 - May 2, found nationally: 51 percent said the law, aimed at reducing the number of illegal immigrants in the state, was "about right," while 36 percent percent said it went too far, 9 percent said it did not go far enough, and 4 percent were undecided. A Gallup poll conducted April 27-28 also had 51 percent of those who had heard of the law supporting its enactment, compared with 39 percent opposed.

Oh, wait. I see. Rasmussen Reports:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub..._measure_cracking_down_on_illegal_immigration

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 70% of likely voters in Arizona approve of the legislation, while just 23% oppose it.

The problem, of course, is that Rasmussen has often been criticized for only polling "likely voters" and not the general public. But as always people believe the numbers they like the best.

In any case, a majority of people in Arizona approve of the new law. I'm not at all sure how that is the 'real answer in getting rid of illegal aliens', but I guess we'll find out, eh?

 

[Gary Crawford]

How many polls are there out there? It's a large number,so large that I can spend all day studying them and still have not read all of them. The point is,if you quote polls,you can get ANY number you want to support your argument. The basic facts are that the borders need to be secured somehow to protect us (American citizens) from spending our tax dollars (that we cannot afford) on health care education ect., from drug dealers and terrorist. This is a true threat to our nation,more now than ever before. I have no problem with Mexican people and understand their desire to come here for a better life,but let them do it legally. I do believe the Arizona State Senator knows a hell of of a lot more about what is going on in her own state than some guy in Michigan.

 

[Gary Crawford]

and now for something positive. McCain isn't my favorite person,but he's right on this one-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0lwusMxiHc

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

It will be interesting to see if the new law in Arizona passes Constitutional muster. If it does, then I have no complaint about the Arizona law. However, I have some serious doubts that it is going to have much of an effect on the illegal alien problem in Arizona.

Personally, I don't see how it could not. They aren't enforcing the law in the traditional sense. They are gathering information and turning them over to the actual enforcement agency. I would also argue that the Federal government has handed out this specific power before, therefore making it available for local agency use. But it will be interesting.

The politicians do not possess the political will to enforce the existing laws because their constituents and major contributors do not want them enforced. Americans, when polled, say we are for more stringent enforcement. Yet we continue to not demand it of their elected leaders, and we reelect leaders who do not introduce legislation to require tougher legislation. We say one thing, but we want another.

We get what we elect.

I agree that we get what we elect. Up until now, though there have been few alternatives with the leaders we are allowed to elect. In those states, such as Arizona, where there are real differences, it has been done, hence the Arizona law.

We haven't had immigration reform so far. Just fits and starts. Half-assed attempts that were doomed to failure.

And so will every other one in the politicians need to attempt to satisfy everyone. Even if they attempt your proposal, there will be things in the legislation that cause it to be utterly screwed up.

That's not for workers, it is for employers. They have to apply in advance of their needs, they have to prove that no citizens would apply for the jobs if they advertised for them (by advertising for them), and they have to pay minimum wage, provide free food and housing for the workers, and it's only for agricultural workers, not roofers, gardeners, and other contractors. About 30,000 such visas are issued, because employers see them as much more expensive than hiring illegals through shill companies that certify them as legal when they're not, providing a pleasant fiction.

Understood. The fact of the matter is that there is a process to get migrant workers from other countries into the U.S., and not just for agricultural workers. You can argue that it needs to be reformed, but to say that it doesn't exist would be disingenuous.

But, if I read you right, your plan would be to let them in regardless of whether there are jobs for them. Not only that, but they would be allowed to displace U.S. citizens for jobs. Not only that, but be eligible for the same benefits as a U.S. citizen.

As I said in another thread, what would then be the point of being a citizen of the U.S.?

Why do we offshore jobs? Why do we build factories in counties which don't pay competitive wages compared to the USA? Because it lowers the cost of production. Labor has and will remain one of the largest factors in producing goods and services. Some labor can't easily be shipped overseas, such as picking lettuce or roofing houses, so they bring the workers here.

Yes, and increasing the pocket books of CEO's and other managers. You make the assumption that these cost saving go into price savings at the market. I don't think that is the case, at least when it comes to large businesses.

According to your argument, companies take advantage of illegal immigrants and pay them lower wages than are mandated by State and Federal law. This, in turn, causes the consumer price of the product to be lowered.

However, if we have the worker program that you suggest, companies would be forced to pay the State or Federal minimum wage. This in turn, would cause those low prices that you talk about to rise. So, whether they are staffed by U.S. Citizens, or your new legal migrant workers, the consumer price would still rise.

Unless you are suggesting that we pay migrant workers what we now pay illegal immigrants. Either way, your solution has solved nothing.

Do markets adjust themselves? Sure, as long as everyone plays along. But that very supply and demand you speak of causes the demand for illegal workers to remain high - all it takes is one competitor in the area who uses cheap illegal labor, to undercut all his competition. Then the others must follow suit or they cannot compete with his prices. The law of supply and demand also means that in a market where low price is the driving force, the lowest price wins. It is just as you describe but fail to recognize; the lowest price causes others to have to do as the low-price leader does. Either by innovation or by copying. There's not a lot of innovation in roofing houses or picking lettuce these days, so they lower prices by hiring cheaper labor. The illegal kind.

Yes, but if you prevent them from using illegal immigrant workers in the first place, the problem is solved, and the only price issue that will happen is that of supply and demand.

When did we not have illegal immigration to the USA for purposes of finding employment?

Can't rightly say. However, just because we had undocumented labor doesn't mean it was illegal. It all depends on when such laws were written.

However, we also have to ask ourselves what is the historical effect of thie illegal immigrant labor. I contend that it has become much worse in the last few decades then before.

You are demanding the lowest prices - we all do. Demanding the lowest price requires businesses to compete on price rather than quality.

I do not. I demand the lowest price based on the quality of product that I can choose to buy. That is not the same thing. Sometimes I am satisfied with cheap quality, other times not. I want the price to be competitive within the measure of quality that I desire.

They cut costs wherever they can to compete for the lowest price to win our business. Labor is one of the largest expenses there is. I have had not one, not two, but three pay cuts from my employer, while they continue to expand their use of offshore IT workers. Why? They're cheaper, that's why, and our customers demand the lowest price and will choose our competitors to provide it if they have a lower price. I'm not happy about it, but low price requires cost-cutting, and in areas that cannot offshore employment legally, illegal immigration often serves the same purpose. So yes, you're demanding illegal immigrants come here and do the work so your lettuce can be very cheap.

Yes, and ultimately, when the quality of the service goes down beyond what they are willing to accept, they will no longer procure that service or good, forcing the company to change it's policy.

But, I look at shipping jobs oversea as another problem, though not entirely unrelated.

I'm not blaming anyone for anything. It is what it is. We want the benefits of low-paid workers without allowing illegal immigration, and we can't have both, it's not physically possible. So either we take the one or we take the other. I suggest that the real problem here is not illegal immigration, but securing our borders. We can't do that with millions of people streaming across them in search of employment, so I propose to eliminate that as a problem.

But your solution doesn't solve the problem, as I believe I showed above.

Now, I propose racism as a basic reason why many people do not want to do this because it clearly fixes the 'we must control our borders' problem, yet they do not want to hear it. They won't even acknowledge it. They say "we must control our borders" and this will do that, but no, that's not acceptable. So their real problem is apparently *not* that they want to control the borders.

Soooo, unless they agree with your solution as to how to control the border they must have some ulterior motive based on racism. I don't see it.

Press them on the issue, and they begin to spout other reasons instead. Oh, they don't like the fact that illegal aliens cause crime. They don't like the fact that illegal aliens use social services they don't pay for. They don't like the fact that they come here and have 'anchor babies' who are now citizens. They don't like the fact that they refuse to speak English and that the USA is slowly becoming a spanish-speaking nation.

All of which are valid reasons which do not necessarily have anything to do with racism. These things may be true or not, but it does not necessarily mean that these people believe that they are inherently better then Mexicans, just that there are cultural issues that they don't want in their community.

I wouldn't want to import a group of people that believe in the killing of Black people for sport, the rape of women at leisure, or the beating of women when they disrepect their men as part of their culture. That does not mean that I believe they they are inherently "less" than me.

It's like one of my white co-workers has said: "I would rather live in a community of Black conservatives, than a group of white liberals."

Second, many of those claims are overblown hysterical lies which have been refuted time and time again, but which are still circulated via email and posts on discussion forums like this one as if they were true:

Your post refutes the contents of one e-mail. How about these factual statistics.

75% of all outstanding felony warrants in Los Angeles County are for illegal immigrants.

About 90% of hit & runs in my department which are solved were caused by illegal immigrants.

Roughly 75% of all DUI arrests are committed by illegal immigrants.

And though the country may regard the children of illegal immigrants as citizens, we can also argue that the crimes and problems that the problems caused by some of those same children are a result of illegal immigration. If their parents had not come here illegally, then they would not be here to have committed these problems.

So, although your source states that: "The $2.5 billion figure for Medicaid to such households is quoted accurately, but again, much of this was in benefits for U.S.-born children, who are citizens," they would not cost us even that figure if their parents had not come here illegally. So, illegal immigration is still the source of the problem.

Third, and this is the kicker, most of those 'problems' would be removed if the illegal aliens were legal workers. They'd be paying taxes, we would have a clearer understanding of their costs to the nation via social services versus their contributions via labor and taxes, because we could track them. They could buy health insurance and avoid incurring costs to the nation by waiting until near death and then visiting emergency rooms as they do now. They could be required to learn English as a condition of remaining here for an extended period. So what's the problem?

No they would not. And one reason being is how do you force a legal worker to learn English. Hell, we can barely teach our own citizens proper English.

We could, you are correct in pointing out, differentiate their cost versus their contribution. But knowing that doesn't actually solve any problem.

Well, when pressed again, those same people simply dig in their heels and repeat the same old mantra. In other words, they don't want ANY solution that allows immigrant workers here legally. It's not about speaking spanish or using hospital services, it never was.

So that leaves us with the question. If the problem is not the above, then what is it?

I think that its not that they / we don't want any migrant workers. But, as I already stated, they should be seasonal and go back to their country of origin after the season. Or, they should integrate, which history is showing that they will not do.