No announcement yet.

There is an enormous number of Americans who have been harmed by the criminals who pass through the nation's open borders. For that reason, this section can only provide a symbolic tribute to the many unnamed victims who have been killed, raped, rob

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    There is an even more enormous number of Americans who have been harmed by the criminals who are US CITIZENS, you xenophobic *****!

    This forum is for those law-abiding people that want to immigrate and make a contribution to this fine country.


    • #17
      Ya RIGHT, of course you could careless about folks killed by those that should not even be here, GET IT, obey our laws and respect the rights of OTHER HUMAN BEINGS and these folks would be alive today. Your selfish and greedy and care only about yourself, we do not need that type here. Nor will you stay ,85% of us CITIZENS are agasint ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, get a clue.

      A friend of mine try to bring his fiancee and she is involving in document counterfeit scheme to help her relative who is now in US visiting, by sending her fake document to help her filing for asylum. Shall i report her to immigration and consulate office in her country since she's still living there ? Where can i call to report her? any idea please?


      • #18

        Deaths of Americans tied to lax immigration policy
        Warning from INS agent to bureaucracy goes unheeded, 7 citizens killed in Idaho
        Posted: July 22, 2003
        1:00 a.m. Eastern

        By Jon Dougherty
        ©Ã‚ 2003

        A seasoned INS agent's prediction that lax federal immigration-detention policies eventually would lead to the deaths of U.S. citizens has come true after his warnings to government officials went unheeded, reports the Idaho Statesman.

        Boise-based agent J. Kent Nygaard laid out his concerns in a pair of memos sent to Immigration and Naturalization Service officials in Washington within the past year, the paper said. Since then, seven people in Canyon and Elmore counties have been killed in accidents or murders allegedly involving four immigrants. INS has since been folded into the Department of Homeland Security.

        Nygaard provided details about his warnings and the resultant deaths of U.S. citizens in a May 29 letter to U.S. Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho. The Statesman reported the four immigrants allegedly involved had been arrested previously on a range of charges, including driving without privileges and drug possession.

        A spokesman for Craig told the Statesman the senator supported the detention of criminal immigrants. The paper also reported Craig is discussing the issue and considering new legislation that would deal with such problems.

        "The real issue here is getting more resources into their hands at many levels," Mike Tracy, Craig's spokesman, told the Statesman. "We're moving as quickly as we can."

        Other immigration-reform experts were critical of the government's policies.

        "This kind of thing happens frequently across the United States: Americans paying the price for our government's continuing failure to enforce the law," Craig Nelson, spokesman for Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement , or FILE, told WorldNetDaily.

        "In a world in which nearly 5 billion people live in countries poorer than Mexico, the United States simply must get serious about enforcing our immigration laws, and the only way to do that is to humanely, but firmly, help illegal aliens return to their homes," he said.

        The Statesman said immigration officials were looking into Nygaard's claims. But federal immigration officials have stated in the past that scant resources make it necessary to detain only immigrants who commit serious crimes like rape and murder.

        A spokesman for the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services told WorldNetDaily the agency "would like to be able" to pick up all apprehended aliens. He also said the agency often fails to pick up "small groups" from local police because it is short-handed.

        "We've got less than 2,000 special agents to carry out our mission," the official, who asked not to be identified, said. "It's a matter of resources, and we don't have them."

        Nevertheless, federal law allows for the deportation of illegal aliens and other immigrants who are in the country legally but have committed serious crimes. Some states and communities, however, have adopted a sort of "catch-and-release" policy, whereby they either provide sanctuary for all immigrants or refuse to observe federal immigration laws .

        The Statesman, which obtained a copy of Nygaard's memos, reported the veteran agent said that the deaths of Maria Evangelina Angie Leon on May 19, Kathlene Walker on April 15, Shawn and Sage Marti on March 6, and Rebecca Ramirez and her two sons in July 2002 "illustrate the impact of releasing immigrants who are arrested for or convicted of committing crimes."

        The paper said Nygaard admitted that deporting the immigrants may not have stopped them from returning to Idaho. But, he insisted, "a much stronger argument is that the arrest and deportation of these four men may have altered history enough so that these seven people would not be dead today."

        "It is an undeniable fact that these types of deaths will continue if INS does not change its detention policies," Nygaard wrote, according to the paper.

        Nygaard said in his 27 years as an immigration special agent around Boise, the number of staff at the local office has remained constant – at seven.

        A report in detailed other crimes committed recently by immigrants.

        In one case, David Montiel Cruz, an illegal immigrant who kidnapped a 9-year-old girl in San Jose, Calif., in June, had been arrested by police for auto theft and was found using multiple aliases. The magazine said his illegal status was known to local officers, but San Jose police forbade cops from questioning the immigration status of suspects.

        In another case in Houston, the magazine said, Walter Alexander Sorto, ticketed several times for traffic violations, stands accused of the abduction, rape and murder of three women. "A 13-year-old girl, Laura Ayala, was abducted just days after Sorto had been charged with failure to appear in court; no arrest had been made. Recent blood evidence has linked him to her disappearance in addition to the slayings he and his associates had already been accused of," the report said.

        "Lax detention policies for criminal aliens has resulted in hundreds of thousands of aliens being released onto our streets, their whereabouts unknown to immigration authorities until they commit a violent crime against an innocent American and it hits the headlines," David Ray, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform , told WorldNetDaily.

        "All aliens who are subject to deportation should be detained and held for their removal hearings. What's paramount in this equation is the safety of the American public, which has been put on the back burner for far too long," he said.

        Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., head of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus , told Frontpage Magazine that the aforementioned criminal incidents were just examples of "what is happening all over the country." But, he told the magazine, "there is no political will" to enforce federal law and repeal sanctuary policies.

        "When immigrants commit serious crimes in the U.S., they have violated their commitment to the American people and have thus forfeited the privilege of remaining in America," Ray said. "They have essentially worn out their welcome and should be sent home, post haste."


        • #19
          Just to show you're not the only web idiot who can cut and paste:

          4.A new report from Global Insight Inc. forecasts that spending by U. S. Hispanics will grow more than 9% year on average to 2020, outpacing the 6% rate for all residents. That should boost the Latino share of the U.S. consumer market to 13% from 7.3% in 2000, the report says. Hispanic spending will grow way above the nation's average in most consumer sectors, including durable and nondurable goods, housing and transportation, the report predicts.

          -- The Wall Street Journal, April 18, 2003.

          5.Legal immigrants - immigrants with green cards - account for 31,000 of the 1.35 million soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines on active duty...They generally enlist for the same reasons as other men and women - to receive job training, secure money for a college education or show loyalty to the United States.

          -- The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, March 19, 2003.

          6."Since passage of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, trade with Mexico has tripled to $135 billion and trade with Canada has doubled to $211 billion. And almost two-thirds of the estimated 550 million people who enter the United States annually come across land borders.

          --Gannett News Service, March 6, 2003
          7."Immigration to the United States began to swell in the 1980s. By the 1990s, it contributed a larger share of the growth in the nation's labor force than at any other time since the end of World War II. Much of it came from Latin America and Asia.
          By the late 1990s, Hispanics and Asians were starting businesses at four times the rate of the general population

          --Dallas Morning News, February 11, 2003
          8."Business people in Illinois who will be honest with you will tell you that these [illegal] Mexicans are indispensable," Illinois' senior senator, **** Durbin, said during a visit to Mexico last month. "A major restaurateur in Chicago said to me that 'If you take the Mexicans out of the restaurants, we will close, and the same is true of the hotel industry.'"

          --Chicago Tribune, January 26, 2003 Sunday
          9.The melting pot is at work, as the survey shows that the children of Latino immigrants are English-speakers and express views closer to the American mainstream than the immigrant generation."

          --Roberto Suro, Director of the Pew Hispanic Center, in a December 17 News Release

          10..Balancing national security with the nation's enviable draw as a center of academic excellence needs to be carefully done. Making foreign students wait...for a long time to hear if their visa has been denied or approved reduces their enthusiasm to study in the US.

          --Christian Science Monitor, November 19, 2002

          11.A total of 78.7 million votes were cast last Tuesday, a turnout of 39.3 percent of all voting age citizens, according to Curtis Gans, Director of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate. That was a slight increase from the 37.6 percent turnout in the 1998 midterm elections. Gans also noted that the increase in voter turnout was uneven, with 30 states recording higher turnouts than in 1998. In addition, he noted that the overall increase in turnout was due to several high profile races and the mobilization efforts at the grassroots level that was undertaken in those states. However, turnout still continues to decline, with occasional interruptions such as the one taking place this year.

          - The Washington Post, November 8, 2002

          12."An estimated three million undocumented Mexicans already live and work in the U.S. Contrary to what critics say about "stealing" American jobs, the truth is that they fill mostly menial slots that Americans would sooner spurn. They are field hands, nannies, landscapers, custodians, bus boys, dishwashers, chambermaids and construction workers. According to the Labor Department, by 2010 there will be more than 20 million job openings for people with minimal education. Mexican workers aren't a problem; they're a solution."- Wall Street Journal, October 16, 2002

          13.Every year, some 15,000 refugees arrive in the U.S. and keep going towards Canada, where they hope to start new lives. (Only about 200 each year come through Canada to seek asylum in the U.S.)

          --Village Voice, September 3, 2002

          14..The U.S. takes more than one million immigrants annually, including illegals. That is one key reason economic growth has averaged 3.7 percent a year for the past decade. Immigrants have supplied crucial technical and scientific talent, founded thousands of Silicon Valley startups, and helped hold down prices by filling low-wage jobs.

          --Business Week, August 26, 2002


          • #20
            12."An estimated three million undocumented Mexicans already live and work in the U.S. Contrary to what critics say about "stealing" American jobs, the truth is that they fill mostly menial slots that Americans would sooner spurn. They are field hands, nannies, landscapers, custodians, bus boys, dishwashers, chambermaids and construction workers. According to the Labor Department, by 2010 there will be more than 20 million job openings for people with minimal education. Mexican workers aren't a problem; they're a solution."- Wall Street Journal, October 16, 2002
            All these jobs pay less then min. wage
            NOW , so we are importing poverty that ,I, who pays taxes will have to support. What are YOU sentening these folks too? You think this is GOOD? These folks will never break out of these jobs.Nice try but all you have pasted here are opinions, not hard facts such as I post.Joe blow said, does not change the FACTS.

            / a d v e r t i s e m e n t
            Who use to do these jobs ? How about the ten million under skilled citizens that use to have jobs.You act like we have had 8 million plus illegals here for ever, not so,they are not in every city in this country the jobs get done like they have for 200 years at a wage you can live on.Explain how these Cheap wages are not so cheap, I the taxpayer have to pay this, get a clue ,you cannot live in this country on poverty level wages, CAN YOU.This has tripled since 1995.

            Results in Brief In fiscal year 1995, about $1.1 billion in AFDC and Food Stamp benefits
            were provided to households with an illegal alien parent for the use of his
            or her citizen child. This amount accounted for about 3 percent of AFDC
            and 2 percent of Food Stamp benefit costs. A vast majority of the
            households receiving these benefits resided in a few states"”85 percent of
            the AFDC households were in California, New York, Texas, and Arizona; 81
            percent of Food Stamp households were in California, Texas, and Arizona.
            California households alone accounted for $720 million of the combined
            AFDC and Food Stamp benefit costs, with such households representing
            about 10 percent of the state's AFDC and Food Stamp caseloads. Although
            illegal aliens also received SSI and HUD housing assistance for their citizen
            children, data to develop estimates for these two programs were not
            Comprehensive national statistics on any misrepresentation or fraud
            perpetrated by illegal aliens receiving benefits on behalf of their citizen
            children are not available. However, a few California counties' studies of
            AFDC households indicate that the rates and types of potential
            misrepresentation or fraud are similar both for households headed by
            illegal aliens and for the general welfare population. In these studies, one
            of the most commonly cited types of misrepresentation or fraud was the
            underreporting of income. Income is a key factor in determining program
            eligibility and benefit amounts and, when underreported, can result in
            overpayment of benefits. The states we visited had procedures in place to
            verify income; however, officials said that verifying individuals' income
            from earnings obtained through the underground economy was very
            difficult"”for both illegal aliens and citizens"”in part because these
            earnings are not documented or reported to state or federal databases
            used to verify employment and earnings.
            Background An estimated 5 million illegal aliens resided in the United States in 1996,
            according to INS. Official estimates, however, are not available on the
            number of children born to illegal aliens in the United States.6 Illegal alien
            parents may apply on behalf of their children for those federal welfare
            benefits to which their children are entitled as citizens. A household
            composed of an illegal alien parent and a citizen child gains access to
            federal welfare benefits by virtue of the child's eligibility. The AFDC, Food
            Stamp, and SSI programs generally do not provide direct payment of
            6 We recently reported that in 1995, undocumented alien mothers received Medicaid benefits for 78,386
            births in California and 24,549 births in Texas. These births represented 14 and 8 percent, respectively,
            of all births in these states in that year. See Undocumented Aliens: Medicaid-Funded Births in
            California and Texas (GAO/HEHS-97-124R, May 30, 1997).
            GAO/HEHS-98-30 Illegal Aliens and Welfare Page 3

            Hispanic unemployement rate hits 8.4 percent
            By Suzanne Gamboa


            Thursday, July 3, 2003

            WASHINGTON"” The unemployment rate for Hispanics in June was 8.4 percent, higher than the national rate, but little changed from last month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said Thursday.

            Nationally, the rate was 6.4 percent, up from 6.1 percent in May.

            How that affects Texas, where about 32 percent of the population is Hispanic, depends on the health of the industries where Hispanics typically find jobs.

            The Labor Department does not do a monthly breakdown of state unemployment rates, but regional economist Jerome Watters said job losses in Texas have been occurring in manufacturing, where many Hispanics are employed.

            The nation's factories have cut 2.6 million jobs since July 2000.

            Undermining American workers
            Record numbers of illegal immigrants are pulling wages down for the poor and pushing taxes higher.
            By Fred ****ey
            Special to The Times

            July 20, 2003

            T he perils of illegal immigration rattle around in the attic of public policy like a troubled spirit. We pretend not to hear the dragging chains because we don't know how to silence them, but the ghosts will endure, especially in California. Because the nation can't control its borders, the number of illegal immigrants grows by an estimated half-million each year. They come because we invite them with lax law enforcement and menial jobs. Their presence makes our own poor more destitute, creating a Third World chaos in the California economy that we are only beginning to understand.

            Patricia Morena has no time for a philosophical discussion on unauthorized immigration. She lives with it, or tries to. She's a U.S. citizen of Mexican descent, and a motel maid in Chula Vista, six miles north of the border. She's short and heavyset, and dresses with care in tasteful thrift shop. She earns $300 before taxes, when she's fortunate enough to have a five-day week. She's a single mom with three children, all stuffed into a ratty little one-bedroom apartment. The eldest, an 18-year-old boy, has taken to stealing; she thinks it's because he's always been poor.

            Sitting in the pale yellow kitchen light, she looks resigned rather than angry. She has the fear of anyone who's 39, broke and tired: being replaced. If she didn't have to compete with unauthorized workers in the cheap motels that cluster just north of the border, she thinks, she could lift her wages from $7.50 per hour to maybe $10 and bargain for some health insurance.

            But she won't ask for a raise. "If I ask for money, the bosses say, 'I can get a young girl who is faster and cheaper,' " she says. "The bosses have power over illegals. They know they're afraid and not going to ask for overtime, even though I know the law says they should get it." So Morena remains mired, one of 32.9 million people the U.S. Census Bureau says lived in poverty in 2001.

            The 1996 welfare reform act was pitched as a means for poor people to elevate themselves through work. President Clinton said at the time that the act was "to give them a chance to share in the prosperity and the promise that most of our people are enjoying today."

            Well, seven years later, Morena is still poor. Although she never studied economics, she has learned a fundamental economic truth: The only leverage unskilled workers have is scarcity of labor. Morena can't work her way up the economic ladder because the bottom rungs have been broken off by the weight of millions of new illegal workers. The census bureau says the number of illegal immigrants in the country doubled in the 1990s, from 3.5 million to 7 million, the largest such increase in the nation's history.

            So Morena soldiers on at $7.50 an hour, living with a reality that the late Cesar Chavez, champion of the farm worker, understood back in the 1960s. Chavez, says David M. Kennedy, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian from Stanford University, advocated limited immigration to protect the wage levels of the Chicano workers he struggled to unionize. Without such restrictions, demand for labor would fall, and with it the pressure to pay higher wages.

            The people who traditionally benefit from the Patricia Morenas and other low-paid workers are ****her up the economic ladder"”businesses, industries and homeowners. For them, stagnant low wages mean they can hire maids, farm laborers, seamstresses, roofers and carpet cleaners for about the same wages as they paid a quarter-century ago. That helps industries grow cheap lettuce and make down-market shirts. It frees up enough money for homeowners to afford those sports cars whose price tripled even as the cost of getting their lawn mowed stayed the same.

            Yet the relentless flow of illegal labor is now changing life for Californians on those higher rungs too.

            apart from the proliferation of workers standing on street corners waiting for jobs, it's difficult to see that migration from Mexico into California during the past two decades is on a scale that astonishes even those who specialize in making sense out of human patterns. One such expert is Victor Davis Hanson, a professor of classics at Cal State Fresno and the author of "Mexifornia," a recent book that reveals the extent of the changing culture and demographics of California. He says that no immigration in American history even remotely compares to the one underway along the southwest border, which, incidentally, is the longest that has ever separated First- and Third World countries.

            Today, nearly half of California's residents are immigrants or the children of immigrants, and the state's population is projected to increase by 52%, to 49 million, between 2000 and 2025. An estimated 950,000 Mexicans without papers live in the five-county Greater Los Angeles area, says Jeffrey Passel, a demographer at the Urban Institute public policy center in Washington, D.C. They are mostly nested in communities of the 2.4 million Mexican-born migrants. Statewide, there are 1.6 million undocumented Mexicans, and 4.8 million in the country, Passel says. They make up more than half of the 8.5-million-plus undocumented persons of all nationalities.

            The image of migrants popularized by their advocates is of work-tough campesinos who cross the border spitting on their hands and eagerly looking for shovels. That is true to a considerable extent, because a lot of shoveling gets done. As the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says in support of a new amnesty for unauthorized immigrants: "There are approximately 10 million undocumented workers employed throughout the country who are working hard and performing tasks that most Americans take for granted but won't do themselves."

            The second half of that sentence has been accepted as a truth for generations. Illegal immigrants are just doing the work Americans won't. But is it true today?

            In April, I shopped for a contractor to paint my house trim. I got three bids. One was for $1,600, about $400 less than the others. The only condition was that payment be in cash. That wasn't remarkable. Is there a Californian alive who doesn't know they can pay under the table for cheap immigrant labor? You pay cash. There are no checks. There is no tax record.

            But this bargain didn't come from an undocumented worker. It came from an established businessman with good references. I asked why the ethical gyrations.

            He vented: "If I'm going to stay in business, I have to do what the illegals do. They never pay taxes, on profits or on their employees' pay. Right there, I'm at a 20% disadvantage. They'll come in here with about six guys with paintbrushes who work for peanuts, do a fair job, and then they're gone." These competitors have driven every American out of gardening, he added, and are doing it to house-painting, roofing and car repair. He concluded in frustration, "What am I supposed to do?"

            Roy Beck, executive director of Numbers USA Education and Research Foundation, a Washington, D.C., organization devoted to immigration control, says it's not that millions of unemployed Americans "are too lazy and shiftless to bus tables or wash dishes." What the Chamber of Commerce and like-minded business groups really mean, he says, is that "Americans won't work like slaves, like serfs. Americans want to be paid and treated fairly."

            "The National Restaurant Assn., for one, doesn't want their customers to know that this system forces illegal workers to live in abject poverty," Beck says. "It's the serfdom thing. If customers thought about it, they'd say, 'No, I don't want people who are hidden in the kitchen or serving me to be so poor and neglected that they might be TB carriers, and hate my guts for not caring about them.' "

            Terry Anderson, a black talk-radio host in Los Angeles, says he sees similar displacement throughout the African American community. "I defy you to find a black janitor in L.A.," Anderson says. "In the '70s, the auto body-repair business in South-Central was pretty much occupied by blacks. Those jobs are all gone now. They're all held by Hispanics, and all of them are illegals. And those $25 jobs that blacks used to hold in the '70s now pay $8 to $10, and a black man can't get hired even if he's expert. It's absolute discrimination, because there's a perception that a Hispanic works better. Well, he works cheaper. They're in the country illegally, so they have no bargaining power, and the wages get driven down."

            The point he and Beck make is decidedly not a racial one, not black versus Latino or Mexican versus white. Their point is about money. Illegal, powerless immigrants versus relatively empowered American citizens. Who among us could survive if every day, the streets outside our workplaces were lined with people willing to do our jobs for two-thirds or half the pay because in the world they came from, in the world where their money is sent, half of our pay amounted to riches?

            Anderson particularly despairs of the effect the scarcity of low-end jobs has on poor youths. In May, 6.1 million whites and 1.7 million blacks in the country were unemployed. But of those without jobs, young people took the worst hit. The unemployment rate for whites ages 16 to 19 in the labor force was 15.4%, with 892,000 unemployed; for black teenagers, it was 270,000 out of work, at a scary 35% rate.

            These kids are the millions of potential burger-flippers and mowers of lawns that Beck and Anderson say employers are bypassing in favor of undocumented migrants. "There was this kid in my neighborhood"”good kid, 17 years old, and he goes down to the local McDonald's to get an after-school job," Anderson says. "The manager tells him that because he doesn't speak Spanish, she can't hire him because it would have a disruptive effect on all the other workers who don't speak English. I mean, think of that: Here's a kid trying to get a little ahead"”American born, four generations in South-Central"”who's told he can't sell French fries because he can't speak a foreign language. You want to talk about disillusionment?"

            as cheap, illegal workers flood the labor force, governments and taxpayers are feeling the pinch. Just as one dishonest act often leads to another, illegal labor has led to other illegalities. The most pervasive is the untaxed cash transaction. It has created a surging "underground economy" that has become a hole in society's pocket through which falls many of our democratic values, and a lot of loose cash.

            John Chiang of Los Angeles, one of five members of the state Board of Equalization, California's tax oversight agency, says off-the-books businesses can have a "profoundly dislocating effect" on the economy. It pushes some businesses to compete by also cutting legal corners, and discourages other businesses from coming to California.

            A study last year by the Economic Roundtable, a Los Angeles research group, found that the underground sector in Southern California probably accounts for 20% or more of the economy, says economist Dan Flaming, author of the report. Nationwide, the International Monetary Fund reported in a 2002 issues paper, underground work amounted to 10% of the total economy.

            As the underground sector surged in the '90s, an unpleasant snowball began to gather mass. The amount of tax revenues generated by the economy didn't keep pace with the population growth and accompanying rise in demands for government services. That, in turn, "adds significantly to the tax burden of honest taxpayers," Chiang says. He estimates that the state is losing $7 billion a year in unpaid taxes.

            The state Employment Development Department's estimates are somewhat lower, at $3 billion to $6 billion annually in lost income and wage-related taxes. Any way it's counted, that's a pile of money for a state running a $38-billion deficit that Sacramento is attempting to close by cutting services, raising taxes and borrowing money.

            Certainly, not all of the loss is due to illegal immigrants, and the state, with scrupulous political sensitivity, avoids placing blame there. But Jerry Hicks, whose job until recently was to measure the underground economy for the Employment Development Department, reluctantly agrees that common sense would put undocumented workers at the head of the tax-avoidance list. It's anybody's guess how much fault lies with businesses forced to compete by dealing in cash.

            That loss of tax revenue is key to understanding why unchecked illegal immigration creates a downward economic spiral. Jan. C. Ting, Temple University law professor and former assistant commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, says the swelling population of poor people who have little more than manual labor to offer, and who pay few taxes, will inevitably draw heavily on social services. That drain will, in turn, increase taxes on businesses and homeowners, who may depart for other states, which in turn will drive tax rates even higher.

            An often-cited National Research Council study in 1997 concluded that each native household in California was paying $1,178 a year in state and local taxes to cover services used by immigrant (legal and illegal) households. The demand for such offsetting taxes undoubtedly has increased in proportion to the numbers of illegal immigrants since then.

            What is known is how the tax drain is changing society. As the IMF's issue paper warned last year, the lost revenue can lead to "a deterioration in the quality and administration of the public goods such as roads and hospitals provided by the government."

            Hospitals provide a clear warning signal. Here's how it happens: An illegal immigrant, without health insurance, has a serious health problem and goes to a public hospital, incurring a catastrophic medical cost. At bargain basement wages, that patient has as much chance of paying the hospital bill as paying off the national debt. So the patient scribbles out a passable IOU, and disappears.

            Someone else pays. America's health system draws its lifeblood from private health insurance, and if large numbers of patients have no insurance or can't pay, the money has to be taken from taxes"”siphoned from the state treasury. A robust society can absorb a certain amount of those losses, but if the tax base isn't expanding as fast as the demands placed on it, the system begins to shut down"”as Los Angeles County's has.

            In 2002, 33% of L.A. County residents were without health insurance or were grossly underinsured. The county thinks that rate is the highest in the United States, which helps to explain why the county prepared to close two hospitals last year because there was too much demand and too little revenue.

            Carol Gunter is acting director of county emergency medical services, the person who has to try to run a "business" in which about a quarter of the customers don't have the means to pay for her product, but are entitled to its full service. So just how many emergency room patients are illegal? Federal law prevents her from knowing because hospitals are forbidden to ask about citizenship. What Gunter does know is that, despite billion-dollar federal bailouts, the number of public L.A. County hospitals recently went from six to five, and another is going to close.

            In March, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein announced she had joined other senators in supporting a bailout bill to reimburse state and local hospitals for emergency medical costs incurred by undocumented immigrants. She estimated those costs in California at $980 million in the past year. Celebration over the proposal becomes somewhat muted when we consider that a bailout is"”by sinking-lifeboat definition"”intended to overcome the effects of a leak, and her statement mentioned nothing about patching the boat. Feinstein declined to be interviewed on the subject.

            Jim Lott, executive vice president of the Hospital Assn. of Southern California, puts it bluntly: "We are in a [health-care] meltdown in Los Angeles County to the extent we have never seen before."

            The state can't be far behind. An estimated 20% of patients throughout California are uninsured, with hospitals incurring $3.6 billion in uncompensated care. Fifty-one percent of the state's hospitals operated in the red last year.

            After the "please pay cash" painting contractor left my house, I put pencil to paper on the bids. Considering that his line of work is labor-intensive, if I accepted the above-board bid of $2,000, probably about $1,500 would go toward wages, and maybe 10% of that would go to the government. If I went for the underground bid, I would get off cheaper"”and the government would lose $200. Multiply that by the countless such transactions in California daily, and a lot of hospitals are going to run short, and a lot of potholes are going to grow.

            author hanson describes the practical effect of the massive immigration numbers: "The unfortunate message we give migrants is, 'You can work here, but only undercover, and you can't join our society.' "

            Chiang sees the same ominous divisions. "California is becoming a dichotomy society"”high-wealth, low-wealth; educated, undereducated; and the underground economy plays a large role in creating the unregulated atmosphere that tends to widen those social and economic gaps."

            So the people on either side of the divide go to their corners. The wealthy to West L.A. and its counterparts around the state. The poor? "We have towns in the Central Valley that are"”literally"”100% Mexican, and consist mainly of illegal migrants," Hanson says. "In those towns, Spanish is the only language spoken; there is no industry, and the towns are huge pockets of poverty. We can legitimately fear that this is the California of the future."

            Two small cities of about the same size in Fresno County underscore Hanson's point. The town of Parlier in 2000 was 97% Latino, with 36% of the town living in poverty, and a per capita income of $7,078, Hanson says. The town of Kingsburg, whose population was 34% Latino, had just 11% living in poverty. The per capita income was $16,137.

            The dependence upon agricultural labor, which usually has to be done by hand, puts a low ceiling on what immigrants can earn. That ceiling could be lifted either by stemming the flow of illegal labor, or by mechanizing the farm work. But neither is happening, which suits many farmers just fine.

            Philip Martin, professor of agricultural and resource economics at UC Davis, says farmers could quickly mechanize labor-intensive harvesting if it were not so cheap to hire migrants. "Back in the late '60s and '70s, there was a fear there wouldn't be enough farm workers, so that spurred mechanization research," Martin says. "Then there were 70-some subsidized projects at the University of California aimed at figuring out how to pick oranges mechanically. Today, there aren't any, because there is plenty of cheap farm labor. There is probably a machine available to harvest every crop grown in the U.S., but they won't be used as long as the laborers are available at low wages."

            Martin's point reveals this turned-around truism: Agriculture in Mexico is modernizing, which forces many laborers off their jobs there. Machines are displacing laborers in the cornfields of Mexico, so they come north to the "advanced" United States to pick fruits and vegetables by hand.

            Because the United States makes no real effort to count its undocumented workers, their true impact on the job market is unclear. Common sense does say, however, that if millions of Mexicans are here illegally, they must be working or they would go home. An estimated $10 billion was sent back to Mexico in 2002 by workers in the United States, an increase of $800 million from the year before, says the nonprofit Pew Hispanic Center in Washington, D.C.

            The migrants who come north used to be regarded as sellouts or deserters in Mexican society. Now, they're heroes praised by Mexican President Vicente Fox for the money they inject into that faltering economy. That is also a first, Hanson says. "Mexico is a failing society that stays afloat by exporting human capital. If you shut that border down, in five years you'd have a revolution, because Mexico can't meet the aspirations of its own people."

            there is no question that illegal immigration greatly troubles Americans. The polls show it, both before and after 9/11. They want them to go home. One poll even showed that almost two-thirds want the military to patrol the border. Of course, they never gripe about the cheap hamburgers or the low-cost gardening that migrants make possible.

            Yet, curiously, in a decade of unprecedented illegal immigration, the issue has been put on the back burner by most of society's seers and opinion-formers.

            Illegal immigrants are the people we used to call illegal aliens in a coarser time. Now, to some, even "undocumented workers" is too harsh so they've adopted "unauthorized." To many critics of illegal immigration, this tiptoe nomenclature is part of the problem. They say a debate or consensus on the issue is made impossible by a barricade of political correctness, up against which a critic is in danger of that paralyzing accusation"”racist.

            Most politicians would rather swallow their tongues than talk about illegal immigration, and **** Morris thinks he knows why. Morris, the former political strategist for Bill Clinton, says both political parties, "especially the Republicans, have to know they're running out of white people to split up. Any major politician is facing dodo bird extinction if he or she fails to reach out to Hispanics. It scares them."

            Hanson believes the politics of immigration is about greed and power more than ideology. "It's one of those issues that's backed by strange bedfellows"”on the right, you have big business types who want open borders to make money on cheap labor, and don't care about social consequences. On the other side, you have this left-wing racist"”I think it's racist"”separatist industry of Latino groups and leftist legislators" who want more immigration because it expands their power base.

            Quixotically, on the border south of San Diego, the U.S. runs a version of "Checkpoint Charlie" to keep them out. Operation Gatekeeper started in 1994 to stem the flow of illegal immigration north by clamping down on the main ports of entry in the Southwest. In addition to forcing many border crossers to attempt a dangerous trip across the desert, it has had the unintended consequence of transforming a fluid population that used to go back and forth into one that simply stays here.

            An unauthorized worker probably would prefer to work in this country and return home as often as possible, preserving his Mexican roots. Gatekeeper, however, has cemented that worker's feet in the U.S. It's not hard to understand his hesitancy to go home for a holiday or family event if he knows there's a good chance he'll be caught on his return. So, he does the obvious thing: He hires a coyote (outlaw immigrant trafficker) to bring his whole family north, often one member at a time.

            so, what are the options? close the borders and kick out the undocumented as some arch-conservatives want? Or, on the other extreme, open the borders completely, as libertarians and some Latino groups tend to favor? On both counts, forget about it. Not going to happen. And you can trash amnesty at the present time, too. The War on Terrorism and the tension it has caused between Mexico and the United States, plus a sour remembrance from the results of the 1986 amnesty law, closed the book on "regularization," as Bush and Fox euphemistically called amnesty in the fond days of their mutual affection a couple years ago. A 2002 poll by Zogby International, a polling firm, showed that 65% of Americans opposed a new amnesty.

            When the nation tried amnesty 17 years ago, the whole idea was to combine it with a crackdown on hiring illegal workers. Guess what? The amnesty worked for 2.8 million migrants, putting them on the track for citizenship; the crackdown did not, as the rising numbers of illegal crossings demonstrate.

            The first amnesty seemed likely to only lead to another, and then another. An advocate of controlled borders is Cecilia Muñoz, vice president of the National Council of La Raza, the group considered an arch defender of illegal migration. Muñoz says undocumented immigration is bad for both the country and the workers, so she supports amnesty to make them legal, calling it "earned legalization." Her enthusiasm flags, though, when asked if the government should crack down on subsequent illegal immigration that undoubtedly would follow a new amnesty.

            But her convictions don't falter. "We are going to ultimately succeed because we're all complicit in this system. We don't like it, but we benefit" from it, and therefore should grant the laborers amnesty.

            The last-gasp alternative to amnesty seems to be a "guest-worker program." The guest-worker idea had two antecedents, one from 1917 to 1921, and another, known as the bracero program, from 1942 to 1964. Each was started in response to farmers' complaints of wartime labor shortages. After studying both, professor Martin is convinced that "there's nothing more permanent than temporary workers." He realizes the folly of inviting a poor laborer into a comparative worker's paradise, and then expecting him to run along home when the job is finished.

            David Lorey, author of the scholarly "The U.S.-Mexican Border in the 20th Century," says the lesson of the bracero experience "is that guest-worker programs encourage migration." He adds, "There were horrible conditions in the migrant camps, and a lot of abuses that resulted from this neither-fish-nor-fowl program."

            In retrospect, the lasting effect of the bracero program was to draw workers north to the border and give them a taste of American wages. For example, in 1940, Mexicali, a Mexican border town south of El Centro, had a population of less than 20,000 people. In 1960, it was 175,000. The programs succeeded in drawing workers, especially in agriculture, but also left a legacy of exploitation and ineffective regulation that has made bracero a dirty word in the lexicon of Mexican migration.

            Memories of the abuses leave Hispanic groups skittish to the idea of guest-worker programs. But Brent Wilkes, executive director of the powerful League of United Latin American Citizens, says that his organization might support such a program provided the workers have labor rights equal to those of American laborers, and have an inside-track to eventual citizenship

            However, law professor Ting calls a guest-worker program in any form unworkable. "It's camouflaged amnesty. No one wants to use the word 'amnesty' because the American people recognize it for what it is"”admitting defeat of our immigration system. So, they say, 'Let's call it something else. Let's call it a 'guest-worker program.' "

            The vacillation over how to effectively control illegal migration drives a senior immigration investigator right up the wall, because he believes the bureaucracy has the answer in its own hands. The investigator has more than 20 years' experience with the INS. Still, he believes he must remain anonymous for fear of retribution.

            Currently, he explains, the law requires an employer to make a good-faith effort to ascertain that applicants have valid identification. However, he considers that law a political con job because it gives unscrupulous employers an easy out: They can't be held responsible for not having the expertise to identify illegal or forged documents, so anything short of those being written in crayon can pass muster. The biggest abuses, he says, are of forged immigrant registration cards (green cards) and Social Security cards.

            What frustrates him is his conviction that a procedure is already in place that would "immediately identify 70% of the illegal workforce." He explains that as a part of the 1986 immigration law, a voluntary employee verification pilot program was established, and is still operating. Under the program, the validity of Social Security cards and green cards can be quickly checked on all new employees by phone or online. He says the system could easily be expanded into a mandatory nationwide computer hookup by cross-indexing the data bases of the immigration service with the Social Security Administration. The effect would be that honest employers could instantly ascertain the legality of their workforce, and dishonest employers would have no excuse for hiring undocumented workers.

            Bill Strasberger, a spokesman for the immigration service, says the pilot program is considered successful. "Employers using it are pleased, and so are we. It provides verification with confidentiality." Asked if it would be expanded or made mandatory by Congress, he laughed briefly, then said, "It really is the direction we need to move in."

            Why, then, aren't we doing it? The investigator says that Congress refuses to make the program mandatory so as not to offend big agribusiness and other industries that freely employ illegal workers. These industries then take some of those profits and give generously to members of Congress.

            Beck's organization, which advocates immigration control, plans to push for a mandatory employee-verification law. "The American people would not stand for a massive deportation, so what we need to do is use this program to dry up the jobs, then most illegals would gradually go home." If such a law was enacted, he says, the end result would be American workers gravitating to those jobs for slightly higher wages. "You'd end up paying 25 cents more for a hamburger and a dime more for lettuce. Big deal."

            This affluent society can certainly afford more expensive hamburgers, but can it afford the hidden costs that currently make those burgers and fries dirt cheap? As Beck asks, "How many unskilled illegal migrants do we allow in? Forty million? Fifty million? What is the end point?"

            Fred ****ey last wrote for the magazine about Indian gaming in California.'There was this good kid, 17, who goes down to the local McDonald's to get a job,' says Terry Anderson, a talk-radio host. 'The manager tells him she can't hire him because he doesn't speak Spanish. Here's a kid trying to get a little ahead"”American born, four generations in South-Central"”who's told he can't sell French fries because he can't speak a foreign language. You want to talk about disillusionment?"There is probably a machine available to harvest every crop grown in the U.S., but they won't be used as long as the laborers are available at low wages,' says Philip Martin, professor of agricultural and resource economics at UC Davis. Yet, in Mexico, machines are displacing laborers in the cornfields, so they come north to the "advanced" United States to pick fruits and vegetables by hand.

            Various interest groups are pushing for the Social Security
            to sign a "Totalization Agreement" (TA) with MEXICO that would entitle

            With Social Security and Medicare in crisis, this is so irresponsible,
            one's breath away. Originally, TA's served a useful function. Large
            corporations, both in the United States and abroad, often assign
            to work in an overseas office for several years. During these years,
            personnel are "double taxed" - they pay both Soc. Sec. and the
            tax in their native countries.

            In these cases, the respective governments sign a TA that allows the
            SSA and
            foreign agencies to give credit under one system toward retirement.
            makes sense when it involves a limited number of persons working here

            Currently, the U.S. has TA's with twenty countries. This is NOT the
            the TA proposed with Mexico. This agrement, unlike any of the others,
            cover illegals.

            will be added to the system, causing a financial crisis. The 2000
            show over 11 million illegal aliens living in the U.S. If even one
            third of
            become eligible for Soc. Sec., it will devastate the system. Soc. Sec.
            are weighted to give higher proportional benefits to lower-wage

            Most of these illegal aliens are very low wage earners, so they would
            far more in benefits than they could ever pay into the system. Joel
            from "The National Review", has estimated potential costs at $345
            DOLLARS! It will be a bookkeeping nightmare. Many illegal aliens
            false Soc. Sec. numbers, use the Soc. Sec. numbers of others, and share
            false and "borrowed" Soc. Sec. numbers with many others who use them

            Determining a verifiable work history will be impossible. Worse of all,
            rewards lawbreaking and encourages further illegal immigration.

            Congress must act and act now. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of
            has introduced legislation, H.R. 1631, that would forbid any Soc. Sec.
            credits for illegal aliens or work in violation of the terms of a
            would emphatically not affect those who have a legal right to work,
            such as
            legal permanent residents or those who have valid work visas.

            Please educate your friends and relatives about the proposed
            Agreement" with Mexico, and encourage them to ask their
            representatives to
            sponsor his legislation, H.R. 1631. We must stop this reckless
            the Social Security Trust Fund on behalf of those who broke the law to
            this country.

            Call Any Rep., Senator, Committee in Washington, DC on TOLL-FREE
            877-762-8762 or 800-648-3516
            Call Pres. Bush (White House Hotline) 202-456-1414


            • #21

              Skilled Workers -- Or Indentured Servants?

              Once Confined To Lower Rungs Of The Workforce, Abusive Treatment Of Workers On Visas Is Spreading To Legions Of White-collar Employees
              In 1998, Mohan Kutty, a Malaysian-born doctor who has practiced medicine in Hudson, Fla., since he immigrated to the U.S. more than 20 years ago, decided to open five clinics in rural Tennessee. To find physicians to take such hard-to-fill posts, he sponsored work visas for 17 doctors from a variety of countries, including India, Pakistan, and Romania. But when they showed up for work, Kutty paid them just half the $80,000 a year he had promised -- and fired several after they hired a lawyer to help them out. Last fall, a Labor Dept. judge ordered Kutty to pay the doctors a total of $1.04 million in unpaid wages. The clinics have since closed, and some of the doctors have found work at other Tennessee health-care providers. "The violations were serious and pervasive, and there is little evidence of good-faith efforts to comply with the law on the part of Dr. Kutty," the judge said in her ruling. Kutty has appealed the decision, saying the law was unclear, but was unavailable for comment. Through their lawyer, the doctors declined comment. CAUGHT IN THE CRUNCH. Such stories have become increasingly commonplace these days. Immigrants have long complained about employers who cheat or abuse them and threaten to have them deported if they protest. Generally, the problem has been confined to the lowest rungs of the workforce, such as Mexican farm hands who enter the country illegally. Nowadays, however, the weak economy has sparked an outbreak of abusive treatment among the legions of white-collar employees who flocked to the U.S. on perfectly valid visas during the late-1990s boom. Usually, theirs are cases of employers who don't pay full salary or benefits. Often, like Kutty, the employers are immigrants, too, so they know how the system works. Indeed, labor law violations involving workers on H1-B visas, which are designed for skilled employees, have jumped more than fivefold since 1998, according to the Labor Dept. Back-pay awards for such employees have soared by more than ten times. LESS WILLING TO QUIT. In response, agency officials have stepped up H1-B investigations. They agree there could be thousands of H1-B workers who don't file complaints because they fear the loss of their visa. "We take very seriously this fear about coming to the government to complain," says D. Mark Wilson, deputy head of the Labor Dept.'s Employment Standards Administration, which enforces labor laws. The spreading problems stem from the stagnant economy, officials say, which is driving some companies to cut costs by unscrupulous means. At the same time, the scarcity of jobs has left many skilled immigrants more dependent on their employers and less willing to quit if trouble starts. The abuses have been particularly widespread in high tech, which used H1-Bs to bring in tens of thousands of programmers and other professionals when companies were desperate for help during the boom. But with the jobless rate among computer scientists and mathematicians at 6%, vs. a mere 0.7% in early 1998, many workers are more vulnerable. SEARCHING FOR SPONSORS. Experts point out that the U.S. work-visa system gives employers tremendous power over immigrants. More than a million people are employed in the U.S. under visas for skilled workers. While the rules for each visa type differ, all require immigrants to get a U.S. employer to sponsor them. So if employers yank their sponsorship -- which they can do for almost any reason imaginable -- the immigrant often must return home and try to find another sponsor -- an arduous task. "They don't have the usual rights that U.S. workers have," says Eileen Appelbaum, a professor of labor economics at Rutgers University. "You're essentially an indentured servant." That's pretty much how Ekambar Rao Kodali felt when he ran into problems with his job as a systems analyst. The Hyderabad (India) native felt lucky to score an H1-B visa in 1997 that allowed him to move to the U.S. and work for Atlanta-based Softpros Inc. The high-tech consulting firm paid him $4,400 a month, but by the time the economy soured in 2001, his paychecks had already started to come in late, and Softpros didn't keep up its payments on his health insurance, Kodali says. He finally quit in frustration late that year but was forced to move back to India with his wife and three-year-old when the job he had been offered at another company fell through. "YOU'RE GOING BACK." In February, Kodali returned to the U.S. after finding work with yet another high-tech consultancy. But the new position -- and his H1-B visa -- expire at the end of the year. He left his family in India, where he will have to return unless something else turns up. "I worked for [Softpros CEO Chand Akkineni] as hard as possible, but he took advantage of me," says Kodali. Akkineni, also a Hyderabad native, concedes that he sent out paychecks late, but he denies that he failed to keep up insurance payments. An H1-B worker's options are few. For example, federal law prohibits employers from forcing H1-B workers to take unpaid leave, yet experts say the practice has become widespread. "You're told, 'If you don't want to do it, fine. You're going back,"' says John W. Steadman, president-elect of the Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers. Vigorous law enforcement would help, but until the job market improves, skilled immigrants will remain at the mercy of their sponsors. Note: This story originally appeared in the June 16, 2003 issue of BusinessWeek

               E-mail Author
              Send to a Friend
              " target=_blank>Print Version

              July 17, 2003, 9:35 a.m.
              Unemployed in the U.S.
              Guestworker amnesty not wanted, not needed.
              By James R. Edwards Jr.

              he Chamber of Commerce crowd and its liberal immigrant-advocate buddies just don't get it.

              Unemployment has risen to 6.4 percent, the highest unemployment rate in nine years. Businesses cut 30,000 jobs in June alone, mostly in factories.
              America's manufacturing sector lost 95,000 jobs in April. Forty-eight thousand other jobs disappeared the same month.

              The combined elimination of American jobs in February and March was 477,000.

              Almost half a million people each week file new claims for unemployment benefits.

              The average workweek has fallen to 34 hours. That means American wage earners' paychecks have shrunk.

              Today, more than 18 million Americans can't find full-time employment.

              We have nine million officially unemployed individuals who each week seek jobs and find nothing. About two million of those have been out of work for more than half a year.

              Another four million have dropped out of the labor force. They couldn't find work, so they stopped looking. They aren't reflected in the official unemployment rate.

              About five million are working part-time because they couldn't find full-time jobs.

              Unemployed Americans hurt worst have no more than a high-school education.

              All this bleak economic news means that, on average, more than 41,000 people in each congressional district can't find full-time work.

              Between the layoffs, unemployment, and underemployment that have characterized the American labor market the past few years, one would think that this would be among the worst possible times to import more foreign workers.

              But the unpatriotic business lobby and its strange bedfellows of anti-Americanism keep pushing their Faustian bargain: a mass amnesty of illegal aliens that's dressed up as a "foreign guestworker" program.

              Washington-based agriculture lobbyists are pushing as "urgent priorities" "adjustment of status" (a euphemism for legalizing illegal aliens) and foreign agricultural guestworkers. For instance, the National Council of Agricultural Employers wants Congress to "allow experienced farm workers who are out of status an opportunity to become documented."

              Amnesty has numerous problems. Mainly, any amnesty rewards lawbreakers for their lawbreaking. And amnesty always results in encouraging more illegal immigration.

              Another problem is that amnesty of illegal aliens feeds chain migration. Chain migration occurs when the initial immigrant brings additional relatives beyond his nuclear family of spouse and minor children. Under the current immigration system, you end up with one person's immigration resulting in 20-30 distant family members coming to America on no other basis than having a relative here.

              Chain migration causes the long separation of spouses from one another and small children from having both parents to raise them. It's fundamentally unfair to split apart close family members in the name of "family reunification." It's all the more galling to prolong this separation by rewarding lawbreakers.

              We already have nine million illegal aliens in America. Every year, we admit more than one million legal immigrants, while another one million illegal immigrants push their way in. Most come as chain immigrants, lacking education and job skills.

              Plus, we admit thousands more temporary foreign workers each year. Many of these "adjust status" to immigrant categories and start their own family chains.

              Thus, there are literally millions of foreigners coming to America, adding to our labor pools. Flooding the labor market with cheap foreign labor, especially of the unskilled variety, does the same thing as flooding any market with an excess of a product or service: It drives down prices.

              That may sound good at first, but in the labor market, mass immigration speeds up a deadly spiral of wage depression. And it depresses wages on up the sectors.

              If you legalize today's illegal agricultural workers, after they get their amnesty they'll climb the "career ladder" of the unskilled to, say, driving a cab or working at a convenience store. Those currently working in other low-skilled sectors experience greater and greater wage pressure, as more workers in that market compete for the same or fewer jobs.

              This wage depression and job displacement are already happening, because of cheap foreign labor, across U.S. job sectors. News reports such as one March 10 in the Washington Post illustrate the perverse consequences of mass immigration.

              Under the headline, "Feeble Economy, Tighter Borders Don't Stem Immigrant Tide," the Post reported that those new arrivals "are finding jobs." "The number of employed immigrants rose by 593,000 from 2000 through the end of last year, while the number of U.S.-born workers declined by 1.5 million, said a new report by the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University."

              In contrast to unscrupulous businesses' Washington mouthpieces, America's Main Street small businesses don't want a guestworker program and oppose amnesty. The National Federation of Independent Business finds in member surveys that small business owners by nearly 3-to-1 oppose "temporary guest worker programs to ease worker shortages." And only 16 percent of business owners actually favor "amnesty to illegal immigrants who have worked in this country for a specified number of years" that business lobbyists in Washington are pushing.

              Congressmen should pay more attention to businesses in their own districts and especially to the interests of their 41,000 unemployed or underemployed constituents instead of harming their employment prospects by rewarding foreign lawbreakers.
              "” James R. Edwards Jr. is coauthor of The Congressional Politics of Immigration Reform and an adjunct fellow with the Hudson Institute.


              The decline of the nation's manufacturing sector has been visible
              for decades. But the trend has accelerated swiftly in just the
              past several years, economists report.

              o Since the beginning of 2000, more than 1.9 million factory
              jobs have been lost -- about 10 percent of the sector's
              work force.

              o Fifty years ago, one-third of U.S. workers toiled in
              factories -- but little more than one-tenth of them do so
              today, while four-fifths are employed in the service

              o Manufacturing jobs are increasingly being moved abroad as
              companies take advantage of lower labor costs and position
              themselves to sell products to a growing market abroad.

              o The consulting firm estimates that 1.3 million
              manufacturing jobs have been moved abroad -- primarily to
              Mexico and East Asia -- since the beginning of 1992.

              Many economists agree that the trend is healthy for manufacturing
              and the overall economy in the long run.

              "It's good for us to displace low-wage, manual kinds of labor
              with higher-skill, higher-tech, higher-education-content labor,"
              says Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis president William Poole,
              who compares what's happening with the decline in agricultural
              employment in the early 20th Century.

              Top of Form 1

              Bottom of Form 1
              Previous | Next | Back to Messages


              • #22
                Never mind. I'll leave you to keep talking to yourself


                • #23
                  Mexico is dumping there problems on the citizens of another country ,Illegaly, do you get it yet????

                  Mexican jobless rate soars
                  Mexico's jobless rate shot up in June to its worst level in nearly five years, as the effects of the stubborn slowdown in its massive northern neighbour hammered its economy.
                  According to the government, the base unemployment rate in June was 3.17%, up from 2.72% in May and 2.39% in June 2002.

                  The figures - much worse than expected - are thought to be the result of persistent low demand in the US, with which Mexico does much of its trade.

                  Many so-called "maquiladora" factories - plants just across the US-Mexican border - sack workers at the first sign of a downturn, which may have contributed to the high jobless rate.

                  "The result is a combination of factors, with one of them being that the motor of growth in the US is not firing on all cylinders," said Fernando Losada of ABN Amro Bank in New York.

                  The rough situation for Mexico's workers could add to the pressure on President Vicente Fox, who broke the Institutional Revolutionary Party's 71-year grip on power in the election of 2000 with promises of growth and new jobs.
                  Cross-border slowdown

                  The 3.17% rate almost certainly massively understates the real situation in the country, economists say.

                  The government definition encompasses anyone over 12 years old who has looked for work but has worked no more than an hour in a given month.

                  But the trade figures published by the US government tell a story of sharply sliding cross-border business.

                  The first three months of the year showed a steady gain after the traditional slump in November and December, since much of the pre-holiday season manufacturing happens earlier.

                  But in April overall trade slumped 3.5% from the previous year's figure, and May's 4.3% fall was even worse.

                  The North American Free Trade Agreement, signed in the late 1990s between the US, Canada and Mexico, has seen trade soar till recently thanks to lower tariffs.

                  But critics charge that in Mexico in particular, Nafta has brought mainly low-wage jobs at the maquiladora factories which put together goods for export, which make the country vulnerable to the vagaries of its neighbour's economy.

                  Story from BBC NEWS:

                  Published: 2003/07/23 12:13:58 GMT

                  © BBC MMIII


                  • #24
                    Greedy selfish folks, why should you diplace folks who are trying to do it right,why do you have MORE RIGHT THEN THEM ?WELL lurker???10% of illegal aliens are hewre to commit crimes, that is 800,000 to 1 million here to victimize the folks in this countrty, that is why we have a law ,a health check and a background check, is that TOO MUCH TO ASK???

                    One-Third of "Legal Admissions" Are Illegal Aliens Already Here
                    July 24, 2003 - Washington, D.C.) Almost a third of all legal immigrants being "admitted" to the United States are, in fact, illegal aliens adjusting their status, show new numbers released by the Department of Homeland Security.
                    Section 245(i) functions as a mini-amnesty, allowing hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens to pay a $1,000 surcharge and remain in the country, subject only to a cursory U.S. and foreign police record check before receiving permanent legal status. This means they do not first return to their home country and undergo a more thorough background check there-particularly worrisome in today's security-conscious environment.

                    Illegal aliens adjusting status under 245(i) accounted for 32 percent of all "green cards" awarded in 2002, the latest year for which figures are available (340,605 of 1,063,732 admissions).

                    "Illegal aliens aren't just crashing our borders-they're also storming our legal immigration system and displacing people who are playing by the rules and patiently waiting in line," says FAIR executive director Dan Stein.

                    The 245(i) program has been suspended since the end of 2001, but immigration authorities are still working through the enormous backlog of adjustment applications caused by this backdoor route to immigrant status. When adopted in 1994, Section 245(i) was supposed to be temporary, but Congress has extended it several times, and there are continuing calls from both Congress and the Bush Administration to make the program a permanent feature of our immigration policy.

                    "With today's national security priorities, we can't afford to have programs like 245(i) undermine immigration law enforcement, circumvent the normal screening process, and reward illegal immigration," says Stein.

                    Contact: David S. Ray @ (202)328-7004

                    (Click here to view this press release on the FAIR website.)


                    • #25
                      By Marisa Taylor
                      UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

                      July 25, 2003

                      For almost seven years, U.S. immigration officers struggled to keep Adrian Camacho out of the country.

                      Four times they ordered him deported to Mexico because of his lengthy rap sheet. He always managed to come back.

                      The last time U.S. authorities caught him on Jan. 28, 2002 they decided to charge him with re-entering the United States after deportation, a felony.

                      But instead of appearing in court, Camacho somehow disappeared.

                      He avoided U.S. law enforcement until June 13. On that day, he was arrested and accused of pistol-whipping and then killing Tony Zeppetella, a 27-year-old Oceanside police officer who had pulled him over on a traffic stop.

                      Border Patrol officials, who had custody of Camacho before his disappearance, refused to discuss the case in detail, citing a continuing investigation by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General. But federal law enforcement officials familiar with the case believe Border Patrol detention officers mistakenly released him into Mexico, giving him yet another opportunity to return to the United States.

                      To find out how Camacho eluded federal prosecution on the felony charge, The San Diego Union-Tribune reviewed government documents and interviewed federal law enforcement officials. The picture that emerged revealed gaps in the system set up to handle federal prisoners who, like Camacho, are drug users or need medical treatment.

                      It also reminded federal agents of a more sensational case involving an accidental release by the Border Patrol. In 1999, agents in Texas released convicted serial killer Angel Maturino Resendez, even though he was on the FBI's most-wanted list. Maturino went on to murder four more people.

                      Camacho's criminal record was far less serious than Maturino's, and no one could have predicted Camacho would end up accused of murder. But if his federal case had been handled differently, Camacho might have been in prison June 13.

                      "This was one big screw-up," said one official familiar with the case, who spoke with a reporter on the condition of anonymity.

                      On Wednesday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein sent a letter to Asa Hutchinson, the U.S. undersecretary for border and transportation security, demanding that steps be taken to prevent similar mistakes in the future.

                      "The failure of the Border Patrol agents to follow procedures may have, in part, led to the shooting of Tony Zeppetella ... " she wrote. "I ask that you personally undertake a review of this incident to determine why Camacho was not detained for criminal prosecution."

                      One of thousands

                      When Camacho first came into contact with immigration officials in 1995, he was among the thousands of immigrants who are in the country legally but who have become eligible for deportation because they have committed crimes. Last year, for instance, immigration officers deported nearly 10,000 immigrants who fell into that category.

                      Camacho had lived in the United States legally since he was 5. But by the age of 19, when he was picked up for deportation, he had been convicted of drug offenses and accused of attempted murder as a juvenile, though that charge was later dropped.

                      Government lawyers asked a Los Angeles immigration judge to set a $10,000 bond for Camacho's release while he waited for his deportation hearing. Instead, the judge released him on a $2,500 bond, and Camacho disappeared, said Jesse Moorman, his attorney at the time. Camacho was ordered deported in absentia.

                      Camacho was eventually picked up again, and in 1996, immigration officials succeeded in deporting him to Mexico. But he came back to San Diego, and in 1998 was ordered deported a third time.

                      Again, Camacho returned to San Diego, where he committed more crimes, including evading an Oceanside police officer. After serving two years of a four-year prison sentence, he was ordered deported for a fourth time Jan. 22, 2002.

                      A week later, agents caught Camacho jumping the international border fence 17 miles east of Tecate. He told them he wanted to find work in Oceanside, where his family lived.

                      At that point, authorities decided to prosecute Camacho for re-entering the United States after being deported. The crime carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison, but many defendants plead guilty in similar cases and receive only 18 to 30 months in prison.

                      Federal prosecutors in San Diego handle more than 1,500 such cases each year. That is merely a small percentage of the people who are repeatedly apprehended by the Border Patrol; prosecuting them all would overwhelm the federal court system.

                      Camacho represented the type of repeat offender Border Patrol agents want prosecuted.

                      On Jan. 29, agents took him downtown to the federal Metropolitan Correctional Center, or MCC, where prisoners become the responsibility of the U.S. Marshals Service and are held until arraignment. The prison, however, refused to take Camacho because he said he was high on heroin.

                      The MCC has a long-standing policy of turning away prisoners who need drug or other medical treatment because it doesn't have an infirmary, said Traci Billingsley, a spokeswoman with the U.S. Bureau of Prisons. Of the nation's six comparable facilities, only the newest prisons in Miami, Houston and Los Angeles have infirmaries.

                      Camacho was also ineligible for the prison across the street from the MCC, a private facility operated by Wackenhut Corrections Corp. The Marshals Service contracts with Wackenhut to house prisoners with medical needs, but prisoners must first be booked into the MCC, which had turned Camacho away without booking him.

                      At that point, the Border Patrol had to assume responsibility for Camacho.

                      Agents took him to the Alvarado Parkway Institute, where they guarded him for four days while he underwent detoxification, said Angel Santa Ana, a Border Patrol spokesman in San Diego.

                      Until the late 1990s, Camacho could have been arraigned at a facility such as Alvarado and placed under the supervision of the Marshals Service, which has a well-established system for tracking prisoners. But federal officials say the court stopped hospital arraignments because of a concern that defendants might be too sick or too drugged to understand their constitutional rights. That left the Border Patrol and other law enforcement agencies, which had little experience guarding and transporting prisoners after their arraignment, with new duties.

                      Federal prosecutors voiced concern about the policy change, saying they feared that prisoners who weren't turned over to marshals might become lost in the system. The prosecutors worked with judges and defense lawyers to set up their own tracking system, but with so many people being processed and no single agency in charge of monitoring the prisoners' whereabouts, they feared people could still slip through.

                      That's apparently what happened to Camacho after he was released from Alvarado on Feb. 4, 2002.

                      Although prisoners released from detox are supposed to be taken to the MCC, Border Patrol officers took Camacho to the Campo Border Patrol station, about 55 miles east of San Diego, federal agents said.

                      Unanswered questions

                      No one has explained why Camacho was taken to Campo. His original immigration file, which might have offered clues, apparently has been lost.

                      "Your honor, I don't know where my client is," Camacho's lawyer, Michael Berg, told a judge on the day his client disappeared. "He's vamoosed."

                      Deana Bohenek, the federal prosecutor who had filed the charges against Camacho, told the judge that she, too, had tried to find him. With Camacho gone, the judge agreed with Bohenek that the case should be dismissed.

                      "We're unclear as to whether he was removed to Mexico inadvertently," Bohenek said.

                      Documents obtained by the Union-Tribune support that theory.

                      In internal memos written Feb. 11, 2002, to Sim Sharpe, at the time a Border Patrol supervisor, several officers tried to explain what had happened.

                      Detention Officer Herman Tapia, who was assigned to pick up immigrants at the Campo station that day, wrote that he counted 20 immigrants in a large holding tank when he arrived.

                      He said he asked an officer assigned to the station if all the detainees were "voluntary returns," who were supposed to be returned to Mexico, or "keepers," who were supposed to remain in custody until they could be prosecuted.

                      "He said that they were all voluntary returns and that he had no keepers," Tapia wrote.

                      Tapia said he went outside, unlocked his bus and waited for the detainees to be escorted out. After the immigrants were loaded onto the bus, Tapia said he headed to the Otay Mesa Port of Entry, where he dropped off the group to be released.

                      In another memo, Border Patrol supervisor Lisa Callaway said the officer assigned to compile the hourly log of detainees that day reported at 3:30 p.m. that 22 not 20 immigrants were slated for release into Mexico.

                      "This information is inconsistent with the amount of voluntary returns that Officer Tapia transported," Callaway wrote.

                      The officer in charge of the log also reported that two more immigrants were at the station one who was headed to immigration court and another who was scheduled for prosecution.

                      Sources familiar with details of the case said the next accounting of the detainees, taken after Tapia left, showed that only one detainee remained in custody the one who was supposed to appear in immigration court.

                      The unnamed detainee who was supposed to be prosecuted presumably Camacho was gone.

                      Michael Lasater, the prosecutor in charge of the U.S. attorney's border crimes division at the time, said he couldn't divulge what the Border Patrol told his office after Camacho's disappearance because that information isn't part of the public record.

                      Lasater said he has reviewed the Camacho file and believes his office handled the case appropriately.

                      End of the trail

                      The paper trail documenting Camacho's passage through the federal court system apparently ends with the memos sent by Tapia and Callaway.

                      Sharpe, the supervisor who received the memos, died of a heart attack six months after Camacho's disappearance. Original copies of the memos were in Sharpe's desk at the time of his death and were packed into boxes with his other papers, federal sources said. Those boxes were opened and the memos found after Camacho was arrested in the slaying of Zeppetella.

                      Border Patrol spokesmen told the Union-Tribune that supervisors in the agency's San Diego sector wouldn't be available for comment this week. However, they defended their officers' actions.

                      "We did everything by the book," Border Patrol spokesman Santa Ana said.

                      Tamara Faulkner, a spokeswoman with the Office of the Inspector General in Washington, D.C., which is investigating Camacho's disappearance, said she couldn't comment on the pending case.

                      But Alex Loebig, Camacho's attorney, said his client recalled being accidentally returned to Mexico on the day in question. "He had no idea why he was released," Loebig said.

                      Prosecutors, defense attorneys and federal agents interviewed by the Union-Tribune believe more can be done to track prisoners who are hospitalized.

                      Their suggested solutions include resuming the practice of arraigning prisoners at hospitals, seeking federal funds to build an infirmary at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, and allowing prisoners to be booked at prisons with infirmaries.

                      Some propose a simpler solution: that the law enforcement agencies themselves set up a better tracking system.

                      Mike Poehlman, Oceanside's police chief, said a Border Patrol assistant chief called him shortly after Zeppetella's slaying to apologize.

                      "You can say, 'If only this didn't happen' or 'If only that didn't happen,' but it did happen and we can't change that now," Poehlman said. "What we can do is make sure that the system is changed so this doesn't happen again."

                      Marisa Taylor: (619) 293-1020;


                      • #26
                        12."An estimated three million undocumented Mexicans already live and work in the U.S. Contrary to what critics say about "stealing" American jobs, the truth is that they fill mostly menial slots that Americans would sooner spurn. They are field hands, nannies, landscapers, custodians, bus boys, dishwashers, chambermaids and construction workers. According to the Labor Department, by 2010 there will be more than 20 million job openings for people with minimal education. Mexican workers aren't a problem; they're a solution."- Wall Street Journal, October 16, 2002

                        Lurker , nice of you folks to enslve these folks then yell reciest, get a clue.
                        After ten years in the United States, the average amnestied illegal alien had only a 7th grade education and an annual salary of less than $9,000 a year, $500 of which gets sent to his homeland. (Report on the Legalized Alien Population, Immigration and Naturalization Service, M-375, March 1992)


                        • #27
                          You have alot of nerve! You speak of people who come to this contry whom YOU say are killers,rapist, robbers and what not. Well lets talk about the Americans who have killed raped and robbed. I can tell you that the numbers of Americans who commit these crimes far out number those that cross that so called border.Also lets talk about that border... If memory serves me correctly The American Indians were here first, then the white man migrated here. So when you think about it that makes the white people the ones who dont belong here! But as luck would have it I believe that everyone should be free to come and go as they feel fit. I feel sorry for you and any children you might have. To be raised in a home where you think you are better because of the color of your skin is a shame. I hope you one day dont have to disown one of your children or other family member because the chances are that some one close to you will marry into another race.


                          • #28
                            Oh I forgot to mention the illigals who work in this wondeful land. Where do you think all those taxes that they pay and never get back go?The U.S. keeps the money. You dont see them crying for it. Unlike the millons of Americans who cry welfare.
                            I just dont get this whole thing, people who have blood running through their viens are dying to get here who does this contry think they are to put so little value on a human being just because of where they were born.


                            • #29
                              African-Americans being hurt most by joblessness
                              The employment picture is bleak. Nationwide, nearly 2.6 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since July 2000. -- And that statistic has hit black Americans hard. --- "Blacks basically command more labor market power, whereas Latinos cannot because of their immigration status," says Dr. Raul Hinojosa, a professor at UCLA. "Therefore, the wage pressure is kept down on Latinos making them more exploitable, and, therefore, more employable. There is really no subtle way to explain the point." 

                              You resort to name calling right off, I will stand for my follow Americans who have been KILLED by those who should not even be here, I CARE NOT WHAT COLOR OF SKIN THEY HAD!! Who will speak for them ???I will and others do also. THAT IS OUR LAW, JUST LIKE MEXICO HAS ONE TOO, GO TO MEXICO AND BREAK THERE LAW, . AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU. We ask that you enter legally, too much HUH If the law is wrong we have a way to change it, RIGHT it is our system and our way, but for all of us to act this way and obey what laws you like and screw the rest, well is that how you want all of the USA to act? Sure will be a hellhole HUH, you know we only have 1 police officer per 385 people in this country, for this society to work we have to do the right thing without a cop on every corner, so this means we must obey the laws of this nation, we have background CHECKS FOR A GOOD REASON NOT ALL ARE HERE TO BE CRIMINALS ,30% OF FEDERAL PRISONERS ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS, 10% OF THE 8-11 MILLION HERE ILLEGALY ARE HERE TO PRAY UPON ALL OF US, THAT IS ONLY 800, 000 TO 1 MILLON THAT WHAT TO VICTIMZE US, HAY NOT BAD HUH. AFTER ALL WE HAVE MORE THEN OUR SHARE OF CITIZENS WHO ARE CRIMINALS AND THAT MAKES IT OK FOR ALL CRIMNALS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD TO COME HERE ILLEGALY TOO BECAUSE WE HAVE CRIMINALS too ??? HMMM DON'T GET YOUR LOGIC???
                              Costing native taxpayers 70 billion per year, poverty level jobs do not pay taxes, read the last article and please get your head out of you know where and get the facts before running off at the month, these folks are going to be sentenced to a life of slave labor brought on by our politicos who pander for votes, they could less about the living conditions , work conditions just like Fox who pawned his own people off to another country for the money they send back, put the blame where it belongs HA.

                              YOU MIGHT WANT TO READ THIS TWICE SO YOU GET IT. After ten years in the United States, the average amnestied illegal alien had only a 7th grade education and an annual salary of less than $9,000 a year, $500 of which gets sent to his homeland. (Report on the Legalized Alien Population, Immigration and Naturalization Service, M-375, March 1992) Low skilled means low pay, THESE DAYS add the no education in and you have a permanent or close too, slave labor for his life and probably the next 4 generations. Blue collar jobs are far and few between and they have depressed the wages in those.
                              We cannot help these kinds of numbers , look at the states with high numbers, schools broke, hospitals broke, state is broke, that is why we have a law and a number we can handle for third world immigration, WE KNOW IT COSTS TAXPAYERS MONEY TO HELP THEM GET GOING HERE,$7000 PER CHILD PER YEARTO TEACH ENGLISH TOO OVER AND ABOVE THE COSTS OF $5000 TO TEACH AN ENGLISH SPEAKER PER YEAR, AVG. SIZE FAMILY IS 4= $28,000 PER YEAR, WHAT was that about taxes, I have no problem paying this if they respected me ,like they want me to respect them , they came legal, then welcome, if your screwing me, your screw this country and its proud immigration history, the genoese in the world, nobody takes in more then US and pays more to get you going so WE ALL CAN HAVE A BETTER LIFE, BUT THIS SEEMS TO BE A LOT ONE SIDED.YOU DECIDE WHICH LAWS YOU LIKE AND WE THE NATIVES FOOT THE BILL hmmmm OH DOES Mexico receipted all that we do??? They get 30 billion of our wages that should stay in country to help our economies, but hay, screw the USA.

                              For Mexico: Adherence to its own Migration Rules
                              In general terms, the United states must press Mexico to begin enforcing some of its own elaborate laws on immigration and trans-border travel that have become virtual dead letters over the decades. Mexico should become as vigilant of its northern border as it is of its southern frontier. An appalling double standard now exists. Such urging will not be well received or easily acted upon. since the 1950s Mexican spokesmen have disingenuously claimed that the government cannot abridge the constitutional right of its citizens to leave their country.15 But Mexico's constitution and laws, as do U.S. laws, prescribe the conditions under which Mexicans must enter and leave the country "” conditions that are now ignored by millions.
                              Migration of Mexican citizens is governed by the Ley General de Poblacion of 1974 (General Population Law), most recently amended in 1990. That law forbids surreptitious entry into neighboring nations. Article 11, Chapter 5 states:
                              International transit of persons through ports, airports or borders may only be effected through the places designated for it and within the time periods established for it, and with the involvement of the migration authorities.
                              Article 78, Chapter 4, of the General Population Law requires Mexicans intending to emigrate to meet the following conditions:
                              Identify themselves and provide personal data to migration officials.
                              Present proof that they meet all entry requirements under the laws of the country of their destination.
                              Obtain for presentation to migration officials at the port of departure documentary proof that the intending emigrant is not a fugitive from justice or subject to a court order.
                              If emigrating to work, be in possession of a work contract with adequate salary approved by the local labor board. Migration officials must have the conditions of employment in writing, approved by the Consul of the country of destination.
                              Other provisions require the possession of Mexican passports for most categories of Mexicans traveling abroad. Certainly, a strong statutory basis exists if the Mexican government opts to control border flows with greater rigor.
                              Transborder Cooperation in Enforcement
                              The Mexican government in recent years has cooperated sporadically with American authorities on law enforcement concerns that affect immigration control. Consistent with past cooperation and in keeping with the closer relationship signaled by the Free Trade Agreement, the United States should seek continuing and consistent cooperation from Mexico in the following law enforcement concerns:
                              Assistance in detecting and apprehending "Coyotes", smugglers of illegal aliens. who violate both nations' laws through greater sharing of information. coordinated police work and cooperation in prosecution. A sizable percentage of all illegal entries of Mexicans and other Western Hemisphere citizens is now smuggler-assisted, resulting in widespread exploitation of vulnerable travelers and serious corruption of law enforcement officials.
                              A crack-down within Mexico on wholesale counterfeiting of U.S. identification and work authorization documents, and greater information sharing about document forgery rings in Mexico and Central America. Also needed is greater Mexican vigilance against forgery, fraud and imposture in the use of its own passports and other Mexican travel and identification documents.
                              Aid from Mexican officials in discouraging reentry into the U.S. of Mexican citizens and third country nationals who have been deported from the U.S. Reentry into the United States after deportation is a felony offense. Yet reentry of criminal aliens, who have been deported after serving sentences in U.S. penal institutions, remains a serious law enforcement problem for state and federal authorities. For non-criminal Mexican aliens deported or given voluntary departure from Mexico, there should be greater Mexican commitment to directing them to jobs in Mexico, particularly as employment expands with free trade.
                              Pre-clearance and Interior Repatriation. Mexico should resume its earlier practice of allowing the u.s. Immigration and Naturalization service (INS) to return apprehended illegal aliens to areas near their homes in the interior of Mexico. Mexico's permission is needed as well for INS "pre-clearance" of travelers at major ports of departure within Mexico.
                              Tight curbs by Mexican officials on the transit of Central Americans and other third Country illegal aliens through Mexico. The record of Mexican cooperation against the traffic in Central Americans has improved under the Salinas administration. The U.S. has provided modest funds to Mexico to assist with the cost of deportation.16 Curbing Central American illegal immigration into Mexico will become increasingly important for Mexico itself. Central America's population and labor force growth is even more rapid than Mexico's and migrants from those countries will be increasingly attracted to the relatively higher paying jobs in Mexico created by the expansion of free trade with the United States.

                              The Statue of Liberty's intent to inspire people to build their own democratic societies is even more important now that the planet is home to over six billion persons. The huddled masses cannot all be saved by immigration to America. The rescue paradigm of immigration is clearly no longer appropriate, if it ever was. The numbers of needy poor worldwide are simply too high.
                              In fact, the "wretched refuse of your teeming shore" threatens to become a permanent underclass, since even the most basic educational standards in selecting immigrants have been disregarded. Because of the emphasis on "family reunification," one-third of current legal immigrants have not graduated from high school -- hardly the ideal newcomers to a modern society in the 21st century.
                              Each of those immigrants without a high school education will consume an average of $89,000 in services beyond what is paid in taxes, according to a National Academy of Sciences study.
                              Our immigration policy has worked well for 200 years , I am so tried of those that want to fill this country up with poverty level illegal immigrants who they "think" they can control and get votes from, attack it and say it is "Broken". The reason it is broken , 11 million plus illegal aliens have decided to break it. They have overrun our enforcements agencies and put all citizens at risk .One of the aims of the 1996 welfare reform law was to reduce immigrants' dependency on welfare handouts. That worked initially. But by 2001, immigrants were consuming more welfare

                              o The report found that 21.9 percent of households led by
                              immigrants relied on at least one welfare program in 1996.

                              o That fell to 19.7 percent in 1999, but by 2001 it had
                              climbed to 22.7 percent.

                              o Moreover, in 1996 immigrants accounted for 14.2 percent of
                              households relying on welfare -- which climbed to 17.9
                              percent in 2001.

                              o More than three million immigrant families were enrolled
                              in a welfare program in 2001 -- with about 2.4 million
                              families being led by legal entrants and 663,000 led by

                              The study also reported that education levels are a key indicator
                              of whether households will rely on welfare. Some 42 percent of
                              households led by immigrants who dropped out of high school use
                              welfare. But only 10 percent of immigrant households led by some
                              one with a college education are on welfare.

                              "You can't cut immigrants off of welfare," claims Steven A.
                              Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies. "You're going to
                              have to accept the fact that they are using a lot more programs,
                              or you're going to have to change immigration policy," he adds.


                              The federal government began legalizing almost three million illegal aliens 10 years ago, on May 5, 1987, wary of the fiscal liabilities of opening more public assistance programs to a population with high needs and low taxpaying power.

                              To ease the burden on the states, Washington closed some programs to the newly legalized for five years and reimbursed the states nearly $3.5 billion for some of their aid costs. Was the concern of Congress, the White House, and many state and local leaders justified? A review of the evidence a decade later confirms that legalization indeed carried a high fiscal price tag ÷ a total 10-year cost of $78.7 billion ÷ with the indirect and downstream costs still accumulating. In the ten-year period ending in 1996, the amnestied population:

                              Accounted for an estimated $102.1 billion costs in current dollars in twenty federal, state, and local assistance programs and services.

                              Paid total taxes of $78 billion, for a ten-year fiscal deficit of $24 billion in the public assistance and services portion of the budget.

                              These are estimates of the direct costs only. There were, and will continue to be, significant indirect costs associated with the legalization of 2.7 million persons:

                              Job Displacement: About 1.66 million legalized workers, 70 percent of them unskilled, displaced an average of 187,000 citizen and settled immigrant workers from jobs each year. Costs of public assistance to those displaced totaled $9.9 billion for the decade.

                              Citizen Children: Women in the legalized population had an estimated 1.25 million U.S. citizen children between 1970 and 1996. Public education and three major public assistance programs to citizen children 18 and under amounted to billion in the decade since amnesty.

                              School Costs of Undocumented Children: Remaining in the households of legalized population, or joining them subsequently were some 400,000 illegal immigrants by 1996, up from 177,000 in 1987. Costs of providing public schooling for them was $8.56 billion.
                              Five-Year Prospective Education Costs: Public education costs for U.S. citizen children of legalized aliens are projected to claim an additional $29.4 billion in the five years from 1997 to 2001, mostly from state and local budgets.
                              Total direct and associated indirect costs of the legalized population after taxes reached $78.7 billion in current dollars for the decade.
                              Large numbers of the legalized began to naturalize starting in 1995. According to the U.S. commission on Immigration Reform, 1.4 million spouses, children, and parents of amnestied aliens now on immigration waiting lists, will gain immediate entry as relatives of citizens. The costs of public education for the young people of this population and medical care and income support for the 900,000 aging parents is expected to be formidable.

                              Measuring the Fallout: The Cost of the IRCA Amnesty After 10 Years The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 set the stage for the country's first and so far only experiment with offering amnesty to a mass population of illegal aliens. The paperwork ÷ the actual adjudication of more than three million applications for legalization began a decade ago, on May 5, 1987. The choice of "Cinco de Mayo," an important Mexican holiday, as the starting date was a recognition that the amnesty would be a predominantly Latino affair. More than 85 percent of the 2.7 million ultimately legalized were from Latin American countries. Mexico and Central America alone supplied nearly 84 percent of all legalizations. Fears of Red Ink Justified What Lessons, If Any? In ten years the United States has paid out $156.7 for the! direct and indirect costs of the legalized population, but has received a little more than half that back in taxes ÷ $78 billion. That figure would be substantially higher if expressed in 1996 dollars. The total fiscal deficit of $78.7 billion amounts to a government subsidy to each member of the 1987 legalized population of $29,148. A subsidy of that amount would have enabled most amnesty seekers to establish a farm or business and remain in their home countries.

                              Since the legalization, the pool of illegal immigrants in the country has continued to grow and now exceeds five million (now 11 million and growing) ; the INS estimates that 420,000 new long-term illegal aliens arrive each year. The churches remain the most outspoken interest group now demanding a new amnesty. So far Congress and the Executive have shown little warmth toward the idea. This new realism is encouraging. In the debates leading up to the 1986 IRCA, a sizable minority in Congress opposed any amnesty until the border was under control. They were overridden.


                              STICK AND CARROT

                              July 14, 2003

                              Out of curiosity, I run my old 2002 TurboTax (the results attached below) for a fictitious 2 + 2 (a married couple with two kids) family with a total annual income of $21,100. To my great surprise, although I made them free of any tax withholdings, it turned out that they qualified for a federal tax refund of $1,074. Of course, that does not include the additional child tax credit of up to $1,000 per child for low income families that is being currently deliberated by the U.S. Congress, which, if passed, would increase the "refund" for the above family to up to about $3,000 on the 0 (zero) taxes they paid.

                              As much as one can be delighted or outraged with this form of federally mandated charity, it must also have its unavoidable long-term impact on this nation. Since our free society, and embedded in it market-driven American economy, correctly responds to fiscal stimuli, Americans will get the message and move in the direction of carrot, while avoiding the stick as much as possible. My prediction is that, if the current taxation policy is continued, during next 10 years the percentage of American residents eligible for the carrot (i.e., a "refund" on the taxes they didn't pay) will increase, while the percentage of those who deserve the stick (carry a bulk of the tax burden, that is) will shrink. That, obviously, will have its devastating effects on the quality of life in the U.S. and will further worsen already visible dysfunctionality of publicly funded institutions.

                              That rewarding failure (giving away to the poor) and punishing success (taxing the rich) discourages progress in a society that is based on the idea of free enterprise, is only half of the bad news that comes from the current federal tax system. The other half comes from our federal government's inability, or unwillingness, to control American borders and, as a result, to foresee how many prospective beneficiaries and of what nationality will take advantage of the federally sponsored giveaway program. Here is what a couple of illegal aliens who sneaked thorough the American porous border can do. Have two kids right away, with pre- and post-natal care provided free, compliments of American taxpayers. (This, in addition to other benefits will, due to currently prevailing misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment, make you the "parents of American citizens".) Out of all "under the table" wages that you have received, make sure to report $21,100 to the IRS This will make you not only eligible for a handsome "refund", but also will make you belong to the category of "taxpayers", or, in other words, persons fully eligible for free public services, social security protection, Medicare, and other goodies funded from the actual taxpayers money.

                              It is estimated that currently at least half a million of "migrants" a year is illegally crossing the American-Mexican border in the North direction, in search for a carrot, or a better life, if you will. Now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what will happen to this number (hint: it will skyrocket) when the news of even bigger carrot, a federal income tax "refund", spreads South of the border. If you were a poor, uneducated Mexican you had to be stupid, or unable to jump the border, to not take an advantage of it. So, they will. And the American underclass, eligible for these benefits, will keep growing until that system collapses unable to support indefinitely increasing number of those who cannot support themselves. And for those who naively hope that the poor masses of border jumpers and their numerous children will learn how to succeed in America, just look at the alarming high school dropout rates among descendants of Mexican "migrants" (a.k.a. "Hispanics").

                              I suggest that the name of the "1040" federal form be changed to the "U.S. Individual Income Tax and Welfare Form" to better reflect its actual purpose. Moreover, it should contain a clear indication that the "welfare" part (a.k.a. "refund") applies to everybody who has managed to put his/her foot on American soil. At least then we will know what are the rules of the dangerous game the Feds and the IRS are playing.

                              Check the math yourself - and get angry.


                              • #30
                                You know that thing we call our Constitution, The Bill Rights and its Amendments, you should learn about them, they are the reason every body wants to come here. But they are trampled into the dirt with the corruption this has bought from a country that is totally corrupt and its victims are its people, so I understand how things are down there, but do you want them the same way here, I am an activist on this issue, that's what you do here in this country when you do not agree with what your government is doing, this is my/our country not our elected to do as they please, So our Ist Amendment is FREEDOM OF SPEECH BUT YOU SEEM TO WANT TO TAKE THAT WAY BECAUSE I HAVE DIFFERENT THOUGHTS THEN YOU , THEN YOU CALL ME A RACIEST AND ALL THOSE OTHERS WORDS THAT FOLKS USE AGASINT THOSE THAT ARE EXCRISING THEIR RIGHTS, I HAVE SHOWED THE RESPECT ON THE BOARD TO THOSE THAT ALSO RETURNED THAT KINDESS TO ME, WHICH IS FADING FAST IN THIS COUNTRY. Do you see how the corruption is spread, I may not agree with WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY, BUT I WILL DEFEND YOUR RIGHT TO SAY IT TO THE DEATH, and WHO SAID THAT?


                                Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

                                Home Page

                                Immigration Daily


                                Processing times

                                Immigration forms

                                Discussion board



                                Twitter feed

                                Immigrant Nation


                                CLE Workshops

                                Immigration books

                                Advertise on ILW



                                About ILW.COM

                                Connect to us



                                Immigration Daily