The Supreme Court’s Birthright Citizenship Ruling: Constitutional or a Supreme Blunder?

The U.S. Supreme Court has once again demonstrated their fallibility and shortsightedness with their recent 6-3 decision regarding “birthright” citizenship just like their infamous 2010 “Citizens United” blunder, which essentially declared that the U.S. government was “for sale”, which has turned our nation from a democratic constitutional republic into a neo-fascist corporatocracy and surveillance state.  

Originally the 14^th Amendment (adopted in 1868) was intended to offer citizenship to all formerly enslaved individuals in order to aid their full  integration into the society. It was never intended to provide legal cover for individuals attempting to sneak in our country in direct violation of both our immigration policies  and defiance of our national sovereignty or allow individuals born elsewhere to evade the steps to become a U.S. citizen while obtaining legal residency via a child born in the U.S., even if the parents are here in violation of our immigration laws.   

There’s no disagreement that a child born on U.S. soil of foreign parents should be entitled to American citizenship. However, should that still apply if the parents are here illegally, in violation of migration laws, and with no other intent than that of securing citizenship for their child in order to remain in the United States themselves? Thus, it appears the Supreme Court got lost among the trees and failed to see the forest much like it did with their 2010 Citizens United blunder.

America, like every other nation, has a strict immigration policy and process for anyone wishing to settle here. It also adheres to international law when it comes to asylum seekers. It’s worth mentioning that economic immigration (ie: finding a job or a better paying job) is NOT accepted as a legitimate reason to seek asylum.  

The United States also has the legal right as a sovereign nation to establish borders and enforce those borders. No different from any other country, including those from where these migrants originate (which, by the way, are far more stringent and brutal than anything we would impose).

The question now is what, if anything, we can do about it? The most obvious answer would be federal judicial term limits (as well as mandatory retirement at age 65). Restricting the amount of time an individual can remain on the Supreme Court would ensure the justices remained relevant not only of the current laws of this land, but also cognizant of the current political, economic, and social trends, as well as the mood of the country.

One justice latter admitted that a major reasons for the passage of Citizens United was their limited knowledge about money in politics.  I submit they may be equally ignorant when it comes to the cost of illegal immigration and the burden it imposes on the average taxpayer.

 As an aside, in case you were wondering, Congress itself conservatively estimates that the cost of illegal immigration in the United States is $183 billion dollars, up 37% since 2017. To put it another way, that’s roughly $8,776.00 per illegal immigrant annually. That’s how much you and I are paying out in tax dollars. The Supreme Court’s ruling just increased that costs that we must bear.

A second option, aside from mandatory term limits,  would be to transfer the costs of illegal immigration from the taxpayers to the responsible parties. Specifically, that means billing their country of origin the cost of absorbing their citizens. Now, I know some of you cynics out there are probably saying that they’ll never pay it, and you’re probably right.

However, to ensure that they do pick of the cost, we need only to deduct the cost from the foreign aid the U.S. State Department sends them annually. Not only does it keep some of our tax dollars at home, it provides a bit of “encouragement” for them to address the issue of illegal immigration from their end.

As an example, Mexico, which is the country of origin for most illegal immigrates, receives about $200 million dollars in foreign aid (remember again, that’s our tax dollars). Of that, $45.5 million goes directly to humanitarian aid which is supposed to address the immigration issue. By offsetting the cost to U.S. taxpayers, we would save that $8,776.00 we spend on each illegal immigrant, we also give them an added incentive to do more to prevent it on their end.

 As an aside, Nicaragua gets about $30 million each year in U.S. foreign aid. Honduras receives bout $200 million of our tax dollars annually in foreign aid  while El Salvador gets $230 million.  That’s a whole lot of money we---the American Taxpayer---could save by offsetting the costs.

Of course, we could impose a fine of the parents and require them to enter into a mandatory citizenship program which also requires that they learn English, and obtain gainful employment though a "Green Card to Citizenship" program, otherwise face deportation. Unfortunately, given today's political climate, this is unlikely to happen.   

Regardless of whether judicial term limits are imposed or we start passing on the cost illegal immigration back on to the country of origin, one thing is for sure. The American Taxpayer can not continue to bear the costs for governmental incompetence. We are not their “cash cow” to use whenever and however they want.

Issues like illegal immigration should be addressed by voters at the ballot box, along with other long term tax matters. Government (as well as both political parties) are supposed to represent us. Instead, it serves Wall Street. It’s past time that we remind them of that. What do you think?

 

The Cost of the Border Crisis Testimony to the House BudgetCommittee…May 8, 2024

Birthright Citizenship

Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship on Constitutionalgrounds

Justices Reject Trump’s Effort to End Birthright Citizenship

Birthright Citizenship Under the U.S. Constitution

The Quiet Invasion: Illegal Immigration Under President Biden

Not much has been said or written about illegal immigration lately. We've been focused on inflation, the war in Ukraine, the growing aggression of China, the "Great Resignation", and gas prices. However, none of that, as severe as they may be on their own, replaces the issue of illegal immigration which goes back to at least the presidency of Ronald Reagan, and yet we're hearing very little about it.

Illegal immigration is "the quiet invasion". Currently there is an estimated 11.7 million illegals currently living in the United States. 53% are believed to be Mexican. 16% are from Asia (mainly China, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Korea), followed by El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. About 4% or 430,000 illegal residents are from India.

However, 17% or about 2 million are from elsewhere, such as Russia, Africa, Middle East or Europe. Most come from "south of the border", however, Canada has become an important crossing point due to its largely open and thinly monitored border. Amusingly, there's an estimated 70,000 Canadians living in the U.S. illegally. Most of those are thought to be residing on either coasts. California and Texas saw the biggest influx with a combined 40% of all illegal immigrants. 

Other crossing points includes U.S. coastlines which are typically unmonitored and typically close to large cities.  The good news is that the border patrol usually intercepts up to 2/3 of those attempting to enter illegally. A record 210,000 were arrested in March 2022; a 24% increase from March 2019. 

During President Trump's Administration, illegal immigration dropped  off significantly due to his crackdown, starting with a wall along the Texas/Mexico border. 2017 saw a 46 year low; down 25% from 2016, although still well less than under the Obama Administration's high of 298,000 arrests in 2009 compared to Trump's high of 143,000 in 2019. Nevertheless, President Biden promised to undo many of Trump's immigration policies.

As promised, on his first day in office Biden signed six executive orders reversing portions of Trump's immigration policies. He also sent Congress a comprehensive immigration reform bill. Biden has taken steps to boosting refugee admissions (and expanding the requirements to qualify as a refugee), protecting so-called "Dreamers" or those who came here illegally as a minor alone or with their parents, and expanding Obama's "DACA"  or "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" program.

It should be noted that under United Nations guidelines, refugees are considered those fleeing their country due to war/conflict or ethnic and/or religious persecution. UN guidelines state that refugees must go to the next nearest safe country, not traverse the continent to find one of their liking.  However, per the UN, those seeking economic betterment do not qualify as refugees.

Biden's proposals ignore that exception since most individuals seeking entry into the United States are doing so to improve their economic status. Biden has stated that the U.S. is committed to settling some 20,000 refugees, particularly from Latin America, and most notably from Haiti. He is also resuming the Cuban Family Reunification Parole Program which will allow reunification of Cubans with their American relatives (a similar program will be made available for Haitians). 

He also decided not to enforce the "public charge rule", denying green cards to those who would use them to obtain taxpayer backed benefits such as Medicaid and Social Security, as well as food stamps. Biden also supports legislation to allow the estimated 11.5 million here illegally a means whereby they can remain legally, and even obtain citizenship over a eight years period.  

69% of those issued a green card are based on pre-existing family ties here in the United States. 14% are issued for purpose of obtaining legal employment. 8% are given to refugees while their application for permanent residency is being processed under the Temporary Protection Program.  Another aspect of Biden's loosened immigration policy is broadening standards needed to obtain a H-1 Work Visa, especially for highly skilled or agricultural workers (which comprised 22% and 24% of the visa's issued). 

Another change made by the Biden Administration has been the restructuring of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (or better known as "ICE"). From now on, it will restrict its immigration enforcement to those who pose a threat to U.S. national security such as felons and recent illegal immigrants (thus excusing the so-called "Dreamers").  It would also reprioritized  to lower status those with older non-felony criminal records.

In the last 11 months of the Trump Administration, an average of 6,000 illegal  immigrants were arrested  monthly by ICE. Under Biden, that number has dropped by half for the first 11 months of his administration.  Biden also moved to halt Title 42, which was the last effective legal mechanism for deporting illegal immigrants.

Title 42 was a public health order which provided government the power to deport an immigrant for health reasons such as the spread of contagious diseases like STDs or Covid. This was to have gone into effect in May 2022. However, just prior to being halted, a federal judge in Louisiana blocked the move which means immigrants can still be deported for spreading certain diseases...for now.

Also among those whose arrest have been reprioritized  are illegal females who are pregnant, recently given birth, or are currently nursing, along with those currently hospitalized, under doctor's care, attending a public function like a wedding or funeral, attending a religious function, or is at a social services facility. Children at school or on a playground may not be apprehended (including their parents or other relatives). The idea appears to be to create a softer and more compassionate immigration enforcement agency.  

ICE raids of businesses are known to strike fear in the hearts of illegal immigrants out of fear of arrest and deportation, while proving to be an annoyance to employers who are often fined but rarely arrested, face the loss or suspension of their business license, or serve time.  Between 2000 and 2020, there were nearly 30,000 arrests of employees as a result of these raids but fewer than 75 managers.  

Now, under Biden, such raids have stopped. In addition, now the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are actually encouraging illegal employees to rat on employers for "exploitative" or unsafe employment practices in exchange for legal protection and deferred deportation status (in other words, DHS looks the other way while they're given a head start to get out of Dodge and find another job). 

Lastly, the Biden Administration ended the family separation program, which was begun under the Obama Administration, but for which President Trump was blamed by the media. In conjunction, Biden also ended the long term family detention program which had been in effect since 2001.

So, what does all this mean? As a result of the changes discussed above, the border patrol has stated that they are anticipating as many as 18,000 attempted illegal border crossing per day. Yet, despite the changes, Biden didn't change the funding for DHS or ICE in FY 2022.  But for FY 2023, he is requesting $56.7 billion for Homeland Security, which includes an 80% increase in funding for immigration courts.

However, Biden is also asking for a 8% reduction in funding for ICE's Enforcement and Removal program while funding of the Border Patrol is expected to see a 13% increase over the previous funding. This increase calls for the hiring of an additional 300 border agents.

More technology will be added to border protection, which will increase to $309 million. It includes funding for additional watch towers, personnel sensors,  aircraft/drones, and aircraft monitors to detect incoming planes. Lastly, funding of ICE's detention operations will see a drop by about 25%.

This represents a decrease from 34,000 beds to around 25,000, meaning that ICE will not be capable of holding as many detainees, which in turn, encourages fewer arrests and more rapid processing. Overall, Biden's FY 2023 budget, as it pertains to containing and curtailing illegal immigration isn't much different than President Trump's. Critics of the budget are already chiding Biden for "more of the same". 

With just under two more years remaining in office, it's unlikely Biden will do anything dramatic. It's also just as likely that, given his consistently poor approval rating (which is currently at 36% for the fourth straight week), that Biden will see a second term (not to mention his declining mental health). There's also an increasing likelihood that the Democrats could lose control of at least one chamber of Congress in the midterm elections this November.

Overall, his FY 2023 budget appears more of a readjustment of both Obama's and Trump's immigration policies rather than anything new. Having said that, the ongoing situation in Ukraine will likely result in more refugees being accepted than expected.

Afghanistan too is continuing to unravel as the Taliban slowly try to re-impose its version of Sharia law despite assurances to the contrary. This has been particularly hard on female professionals who had begun to thrive during the American occupation as they had during the pre-Taliban era. The same thing applies to females being able to attend school. 

In addition, there were thousands who aided the U.S. military in various capacities that were left behind. The number of these individuals applying for emergency refugee protective status will grow and for the most part will be granted.  The situation in Syria for the Kurds and Yazidis who face severe ethnic and religious discrimination, and in some instances, attempts at genocide, will worsen as will their applications for emergency refugee status. Additionally, there has been an increase in illegal immigration from countries in Asia facing unstable political situations, not to mention the growing threat of war due to China's growing aggression.   

Finally, there will be continued mass migration from South and Central America due to growing economic instability, increasing violence, and political corruption (which tend to include the police and military).   Thus far, most of it is stopped at the Mexican/U.S. border. However, the influx has put a tremendous strain on Mexico's resources, despite increased U.S. aid (the State Department confirms that in 2021 we gave $321 million dollars to Mexico and Central America in humanitarian aid). This money covered refugees, asylum seekers and other migrants, and is expected to increase under Biden.

It's worth nothing that while amnesty isn't on the table this go around, the Biden Administration has switched gears when it comes to businesses hiring illegal workers. Now, under Biden's revised plan, ICE agents would "look the other way" in exchange for employees ratting out employers, meaning more illegal workers will remain in the country rather than be deported.  

Also not on the table is what to do about individuals and groups who undermine U.S. immigration law by illegally bringing illegals into this country and providing them with housing, jobs, and other forms of assistance (most of these are religious groups who believe they're exempt from the law). 

Like with businesses, those caught could face fines, loss of their tax exempt status, and/or jail time. Taxpayers pay out an estimated $113 million dollars a year to support these illegals, not including what they unknowingly give in the way of donations to certain churches and religious institutions. Apparently, there will no change in the existing laws unless forced by U.S. citizens. 

Until the political class in Washington and around the country develops the fortitude to put an end to illegal immigration while simultaneously proving aid to legitimate humanitarian needs, illegal immigration will remain a growing problem and will lead to a destabilization of the U.S. economy, as well as the political and social structure of this nation. This will require the American voters to reward and punish those politicians at the ballot box and to call them out at every public venue possible.

 

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!  

 

Biden Administration moving to protect Dreamers after Texascourt ruling

2022 Changes to the Public Charge Inadmissibility Rule andImplications for Health Care

Key facts about U.S. immigration policies and Biden's proposed changes

Biden Advocates More Legal Pathways to Reduce IllegalImmigration

 

Biden at the One-Year Mark: A Greater Change in Direction onImmigration Than Is Recognized

President Biden's Executive Actions on Immigration

Judge blocks Biden Administration from lifting public healthorder

How border apprehensions, ICE arrest and deportations havechanged under Trump

 

Children on the Border: Facing Illegal Immigration...Again

I find myself puzzled about the continuing waves of illegal immigrants showing up on our border, despite knowing they aren't welcomed. When I say "not welcomed", it's not racial, ethnic, or even class bias. It's because we're a nation of laws. We expect those wanting to come here to live to abide by those laws.

We're not asking for anything unusual or out of the ordinary. The same countries where these individuals come from have similar laws when it comes to immigration. If there's a difference, it's that their laws are harsher when dealing with illegal immigrants than ours.

Nevertheless, how do they not understand that they aren't welcomed to the United States as illegal immigrants? It's no secret. The U.S. has made it abundantly clear for over a century. If they sneak in, they'll be forever looking over their shoulder. If caught, they will be detained and quite likely deported. They risk losing everything, from their cars, furniture, and whatever else they may have. They may face prison time before being deported. Is this the life they want for themselves or their children?

Some ten thousand young adults and children are currently on our border, hoping to enter. Why just kids? It's because they hope that by being here without their parents, the media will run tear jerk pieces about them. They think we'll feel sorry for them and let them in despite our laws.

Of course, what we're not suppose to know is that once they've gained entry, they can request that their parents and family join them. That means not just mom and dad, but their brothers, sisters, grandparents, aunts, and uncles. So for each individual who enters, you might end up with ten others.

As an aside, of those ten thousand or so young adults hoping to enter the US, some critics claim that up to 50% are positive for the COVID virus (the actual percentage ranges from 5% to 50%. Of those actually tested about 7% have been positive). Nevertheless, they have the same access to COVID vaccines in their native country as they would in the US.  But why would we allow anyone who tested positive or couldn't provide proof of vaccination into this country anyway?

Speaking of which, according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), illegal immigrants bring a disproportionate amount of other infectious diseases with them due to the lax immunization requirements in their home country; most of which have been eradicated in this country.

These highly contagious diseases includes TB, mumps, measles, smallpox, influenza, leprosy, and polio. Other diseases commonly include syphilis, cholera, and chickenpox, and that's just to mention a few.  The Border Patrol reported spending over $700,000 on medical cost for 2018 alone.

So, you and I will find ourselves having to support these kids and ultimately, their families with our tax dollars. Most Americans are already taxed to the breaking point, and yet we're being expected to pay more?  So, why are churches, religious institutions, social group, and businesses  encouraging all these thousands of individuals to come here illegally?

I'm sure some believe their actions are motivated  by good intentions or that they have some "moral" imperative which supersedes national or even global laws. Meanwhile, others are looking at self interest such as cheap and disposable labor; a way to bypass labor, safety, health laws or minimum wage (if they're here illegally, who are they going to complain to?).

From a political perspective, Democrats have been the most vocal supporters of illegal immigration. Despite their high minded claims about compassion, their true motive is all about building up their numbers into a undefeatable majority; one that will all but deny Republicans public office at the national level, and quite possibly even the state and local levels as well.

Of course, that means not just getting them into the country, but giving them the right to vote. Some states with Democratic majorities have already started moving in that direction by allowing illegal immigrants to vote at the local level such as the nine metro governments in Maryland and in San Francisco California. Meanwhile, two states, Arizona and North Dakota, allow illegals to vote in non-federal elections.

Meanwhile, efforts by the Democrats to give illegals already in this country "amnesty" goes on nonstop in the hope they'll register Democrat. Ironically, it was the Republicans under President Reagan which was the first party to extend amnesty to illegals already living in the country back in 1986.

Currently, just under 70% of eligible Hispanics are registered as Democrats while 83% of blacks identify as Democrats. Asians on the other hand, tend to register non-partisan or Independent. However, they lean Democrat when they vote, depending on the local majority. 

By the next presidential election, there will be an estimated 32 million Hispanics eligible to vote, which is about two million more than the number of potential black voters, making Hispanics the most important minority demographic in the country. Additionally, around 11 million Asians available to vote. However, about 13% of Hispanics don't vote. Why?

They are simply here for work; not to vote, become a citizen or even learn the language. They just want a job and earn enough money to send part of it home to help their family there. This money is critical in keeping local economies going, which, in turn, actually helps to prop up the national government.

Some estimates indicated that approximately 15% of the money earned by these individuals is sent home (the average check is about $250-$300, which doesn't sound like much, but given the cost of living in some countries, $250 could spend like $1000). The most recent study shows that local communities receive as much as $150 billion dollars yearly from this informal "foreign aid".

It's worth nothing too that while roughly 13% Hispanics don't vote, the second largest minority, blacks, do, and they turn out in high percentages. Combined, black, Hispanic, and Asian voters will make up just under half of all eligible voters in America by the next presidential election.

This is compounded by the fact that in states where the Hispanic vote is growing the fastest include states with largest number of Congressional representatives like California, Texas, Florida, and New York. Other key states are New Mexico, Nevada, New Jersey, Colorado, Arizona, Illinois and Georgia. The end result? More bang for the buck...or vote.

There's another interesting perspective to consider. Independents are the country's largest voting bloc, followed by Democrats and  Republicans. Politically appointed committees and boards go to the largest voting bloc, Independents are denied their fair share of seats at all levels of government. Not exactly "fair and equal" elections is it?

On state and local levels, illegal immigrants usually find themselves on taxpayer funded programs. Many are coached by various religious or church backed organizations on how to sidestep local, state, or federal laws and avoid the authorities. Others learn by word of mouth. Either way, they end up getting taxpayer based services they are neither entitled to or paid for through their tax dollars.

The group most adversely affected by this (aside from taxpayers), are existing low income families who are citizens, either by birth or naturalized. Since there is a fixed budget, the increasing numbers of illegal immigrates, by virtue of their numbers alone, redirect services to them and away from U.S. citizens.  Just how does illegal immigration cost taxpayers?

Because of different reporting requirements, it's difficult to give a precise answer. However, the best estimate is around $116 billion dollars a year though estimates go as high as $135 billion when you factor in lost revenue from payroll and property taxes, medical cost, etc. The residents of Florida, California, and Texas,  pay the lion's share of that with $6 billion, $23 billion, and $11 billion respectively. Rounding out the rest of the top ten states are New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia. However, no state is unaffected.

So, the issue of young adults and smaller children on the border is just the tip of the iceberg. There is so much more to consider. Most of those wanting to enter the U.S. admit they are doing so strictly for economic reasons.

The United Nations does not recognize economic migration as a legitimate requirement for anyone seeking "asylum" (neither does Amnesty International for that matter). Those seeking political or religious asylum are required, by international law, to go to the closest non-hostile country. Unless there's something happening in Northern Mexico, that isn't the United States.

We also face integration issues by those coming here who refuse to integrate. By integration, we are talking about use of the English language, and the adherence of our laws, customs, and traditions. In short, becoming Americans. That creates divisions in this country. Do we really want that? If you go elsewhere as an immigrant, you're expected to integrate. So why not here?

Another potential problem is obviously health issues. Many of  these individuals bring with them diseases which have long been eradicated from this country. Those entering illegally are not screened, which presents a serious national threat.

While political parties use these individuals as pawns in their partisan power grab game, religious institutions use them to increase their membership, and hopefully their coffers, as well as their political clout. Essentially the same as some cash strapped unions, forgetting that these are flesh and blood human beings. Unscrupulous businesses see warm bodies trapped and unable to do anything but work low paying jobs. 

Immigration is the right of every individual. So is seeking sanctuary due to ethnic, racial, or religious persecution. However, there are laws and guidelines to follow. America has always been a welcoming country. We are a nation of immigrants. Nevertheless, like every other country on this planet, we expect our immigration laws to be adhered to. Coming to this or any other country illegally is not just wrong. It also shows a disrespect for that country, its laws, and its people.  

 

Remittances matter: 8 facts you don't know about the money migrants send back home

Mapping the 2020 Latino Electorate

Key facts about Black eligible voters in 2020 battlegroundstates

Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Report: Illegal immigration costs taxpayers $116 billion annually....

Crimes by Illegal Immigrants Widespread Across the US...

Infectious Diseases Making Border Crisis Worse

Still on the Illegal Immigration Merry-Go-Round: Federal Judge Upholds DACA

Well, here we go again with illegal immigration. It seems to be a never-ending pain in America's rear end. This time, U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates ruled on August 3, 2018 that the 2012 Obama backed program known as "DACA" would stand despite efforts by the Trump Administration to end the program. "DACA", or to give its official name "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" for those unfamiliar is the program, was implemented by then President Obama for the children brought to the US by their illegal immigrant parents and was aimed at allowing them to remain in the country. This also made it possible for these children to openly seek employment, go to college (often at in-state rates and with taxpayer funded assistance), although it did not provide a path for US Citizenship as the "Dream Act" does.

DACA, and the notion of whether these children should bear any of the responsibility of the crimes committed by their parent sparked a huge national debate which continues to this day. DACA, however, is not to confused with the concept of "anchor babies" in which pregnant mothers who weren't citizens would seek illegally across the US border in order to give birth in the US. Based on an antiquated US law, any child born in the United States, regardless of the mother's legal status was automatically a US Citizen. The obvious benefit is that allowed the parents of the child to remain as well. Recent legal interpretations have allowed for members of the immediate and in some cases, extended family, such as aunts, uncles, and grandparents, to enter the country as well.

I'm not going to discuss the validity of illegal immigration in this issue of Another Opinion. It's a topic I've covered at length over the years, but for those unaware of my position I strongly oppose illegal immigration or the ability of those here illegally to make use of taxpayer based services except in the case of an absolute emergency. I have also believe that instead of US taxpayers bearing the costs of housing illegal immigrants or paying for their transportation to wherever they came from, I believe they should be dropped off at the nearest embassy or consulate of their country of origin. Let them deal the problem which was of their making instead of US Taxpayers.

I also believe that any and all groups engaged in aiding illegal immigrants in entering this country or providing them with shelter or assisting in obtaining employment, taxpayer based services should be severely fined and its officers jailed, starting with 30 days for the first offense and going up to six months for the third and all subsequent offenses. This includes for profit and non-profit organizations including churches and other religious organizations. In addition their business license and/or tax exempt status should be revoked along the same lines except that with the third offense, they may no longer receive any taxpayers based aid nor, in the case of businesses, may they obtain or keep any federal, state, or local contracts.

If someone wants to sponsor someone for the sake of employment, no problem. Feel free to help them obtain a "green card", however, that employer is responsible for that individual, which means verifying their name, address (domestically and back home), obtaining next of kin contact. No one with a criminal record may be employed and must be reported to ICE immediately. I would strongly recommend making use of the E-Verify system. Another thing, by sponsoring an individual, they are also guaranteeing that their employee is paid a living wage, has safe working conditions, and works a fixed set of hours. In order words, serf like work conditions are not permitted.

Currently illegal immigrants have no legal protection when it comes to wages, hours, work conditions, or pretty much anything else. Mandatory sponsoring with strict and enforced laws would go a long way to stop this. While I'm at, so-called "sanctuary" cities, communities, and states should have all federal funding revoked. If they want to pick and choose what laws they want to enforce, then they need to put on their big boy or girl underwear and deal with the consequences of their actions. Don't say they're going to ignore one federal law while encouraging additional illegal immigration and then in the next breath hold their hand out for federal money to pay for the increased crime and social services. If their residents want it, let them pony up the taxes to pay for it. Otherwise, get rid of the idiots in office and start enforcing immigration laws.

For anyone who mistakenly think this has anything to do with race, ethnic origin, or whatever, I will be perfectly clear---no. I couldn't begin to care any less about their race, religion, ethnic group or any other box you want to check. We are a nation of immigrants. We are also a nation of laws. We should welcome those who want to come to America and make it their home. That means adapting to our laws, our culture and traditions, and our language. Unfortunately, as a nation, we have some critical skill set shortages, like engineers of all sorts, computer professionals, and trades people. Those individuals with those skill sets should be high on the priority list being and encourage to come to America. We don't need more individuals coming here who aren't trained to do a job and just want to live off the taxpayer's dollar. So, if you can't do it legally, don't come.

Now, that should make my position of illegal immigration crystal clear, so let's address this recently ruling shall we? The question at hand is actually pretty simply. Should the children of those who've committed a federal crime (and possibly other crimes) be held responsible for the actions of their parents. For those who like a Biblical twist to their political and social arguments, let me borrow from the King James Bible's interpretation of Deuteronomy 26:16 which states "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin". Either way, we're asking the same question. Should the boys and girls brought into this country illegally be denied the opportunity to remain?
In my opinion, the answer is yes. First off, these children were all pretty young; most were under 15 and all were under 18 years of age.

The vast majority of these individuals were in the 7 to 14 range. They had no choice but to accompany their parents (unless, of course, their parents wanted to leave them behind with relatives or friends). These children (and they were children) came with their parents, and it was their parents who knowingly and willingly chose to break US immigration laws. It would be like someone intending on robbing a bank and leaving their kids in the getaway car. Therefore, I don't see where these kids, most of whom are now young adults, should suddenly be booted out of the only country they've really only ever known. They've grown up in the US, they speak English, they went to school in the US, make friends, gone to work and/or college or trade school; in short, they've put down roots and have in practically every sense of the word become "Americans".

If there's a "villain" in this story, it's their parents for putting them through this regardless of their excuse. The reason I say that is because their parents understood what they were doing was wrong. If they want to enter this country legally and avoid all the legal hassle, they could have applied for a work permit (or green card). If they felt they were in danger and wanted to apply for amnesty, there is a US embassy and consulate (usually multiple) in every single country. They could have easily applied there which would have been much easier and certainly less dangerous.

Nope, these parents were looking to cheat the system. They were looking for a quick and dirty shortcut while gambling on not getting caught. These parents were trying to cut in line and just ahead of the thousands who were trying to do it the right way. They knew that if they were able to sneak into the US like rats on a cargo ship, they may be forced to continue to live like rats in living conditions which weren't fit any human being while working in sweatshop conditions, and they were willing to put their children through this when instead they could have simply done the right thing and applied for a work permit. However, in no way should these kids, now young adults, be punished further by being kicked out of the only country they've really ever known.

Of course, how do you keep the child and not the parent? You can't. While I can see having both parents and their siblings, allowing aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins, and whomever seems going a bit too far. But, we have to remember (though not necessarily agree with), is that in many cultures, such as Asians, entire generations live together and support each other. In many cases, parents support their parents, and in some cases, aunts, uncles, etc. At what level do we cut them off? There certainly has to be one otherwise for the sake one or two kids you could bring ten or twelve relatives with them and guess who ends up supporting them? Yelp, US Taxpayers. We need to ensure that only those who are immediately related and who have a medical or health need should allowed in.

Meanwhile, that brings up another issue---what to do with the parents who originally entered illegally after their children become adults. After all, unless they've become US Citizens or obtain their "green cards", they're still criminals. Of course, busting them creates another problem, which is what to do with any dependant family members? In some cases, these children are now parents and depend on their parents to help with caring for their grandchildren, or the parents have become either financially or medically dependent on their children? Oh the wicked weave we web when we try to deceive others!

The reason I mention this is to explain just how quickly this issue can become complicated. The action of one or two individuals can quickly affect dozens or even hundreds of others---churches and religious associations, employers, schools, the medical community, a host of taxpayer provided services, friends, families, and of course, the children. Now, multiply that by the estimated 8+ million illegal immigrants in this country and you begin to see how serious the problem is for illegal immigration, and that doesn't even address the issue with the violent drug cartels and associated gangs. For those who say "No Human Being is Illegal", they are right. No human is illegal, but certainly their actions...or that of their parents...are.



Judge rules that Obama-era DACA program will stand

The Cost of a Border Wall vs. the Cost of Illegal Immigration

New FAIR Study: Illegal Immigration Costs 116 billion Annually


Coming To Terms with Immigration, DACA and Illegal Immigration

America's Achilles Heel: Stopping Illegal Immigration

There's been a lot of talk---perhaps far too much--- of late about the recent influx of illegal immigrants and the "alleged" separation of children from their parents. Most of this "outrage" has emanated from the political Left and has been directed at President Trump. Perhaps that's because of the continuation of the anger and disbelief of Trump's victory of the Presidency and the denial of the obvious coronation of Hillary Clinton.

Certainly there can be no denying that the Left has been on a bender of sorts since the election. it seems every news broadcast, every headline or lead story, and every talk radio or TV show starts and ends with some alleged wrong doing by the Trump Administration. They've even tried to tag the enforcement of immigration laws, which call for the temporary separation of children from their parents "Trump's Policy" when they know good an well that it has been in effect for decades.

I've even heard a few commentators point out the attempts to discredit Trump's White House via alleged bribery charges, Russian collusion, vote buying, and just about everything else you can think of allegation just simply hasn't stuck no matter how much the Left wishes it to. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton's known criminal behavior has been completely ignored. Do you think that perhaps the two are connected somehow?

Just recently, the corporate media, still trumpeting its "anti-Trump" tune, has been claiming that these individuals were there to "seek asylum", which may...or may not be true. The reason I say that is that it's not logical that people would bring their families (including young children and teenagers) hundreds of miles just to illegally cross into the US and then, after being arrested by the Border Patrol, saying they intended to enter the US in order to seek amnesty. "Why" you ask? Because the US maintains consulates and embassies literally everywhere in the world. But since these individuals are coming from Latin America and Mexico, let's stay focused on them for the sake of argument.

Mexico has a US embassy in Mexico City, which is the country's largest urban center. In addition, there are nine consulates scattered all through Mexico. Colombia, which isn't a very large country, has an embassy in Bogotá, the nation's capital. Honduras, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Panamá, El Salvador, and the rest of the countries which make up Central America all an American Embassy in their capital city as well. As for South America, Brazil (which has the fewest number of illegal immigrants attempting to enter the US), has an embassy in Brasilia and three consulates; Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, and Recife.

Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay, Colombia, Peru, and all the rest in South America also have one US embassy each, which are all located in their respective country's capital city. So, again I ask---why could you tote your entire family hundreds, if not thousands of miles along dangerous roads full of all sorts of bad guys (especially those working for the drug cartel), illegally crossing borders and risking the loss of everything they have, including their lives, just to knowingly and willingly break US federal law to enter the US and ask for asylum when they simply just needed to go to their country's capital city and apply? Even initially, US officials will mail out the paperwork to get them started! Thus, I have to wonder if their actions make any logical sense? For me, the answer is clearly "no".

Of course, the next obvious question is why these individuals are seeking asylum in the first place? None of the countries south of the border are engaged in any ongoing military action. Each has a relatively stable government, at least as far as our State Department is concerned since the US doesn't officially provide aid to any "terrorist" or "terrorist sponsoring" state (of course, "terrorism" is in the eye of the beholder as we all well know), but let's look at that too for just a moment. Given that the majority of illegal immigrants come from Mexico, we'll start there.

According to USAID, Mexico, with a population of 131 million, receives $87 million dollars from US taxpayers. Next is Honduras, with a population of about 50 million, takes in $325 million. El Salvador gets $75 million while Costa Rica and Nicaragua receive $15 million and $31 million respectively. Paraguay cashes in with $22 million dollars of our money. Uruguay gets a paltry $837,000 (obviously they need a better lobbyists). Brazil cashes our check for $15 million each year as Argentina, which has one of the worst economies in Latin America as a result decades long poor economic policies, gets $2.1 million of our tax dollars, and the list goes on. In short, each of these countries benefit mightily for US taxpayers to help prop up their governments. Of course, none of these figures include the peripheral benefits of US trade or military bases.

If we look at the their economics, we find that most are doing ok; nothing to write home about (though sending money back home seems to be acceptable). As I said earlier, Argentina has perhaps the worse economy due to decades of pursing poor economic policies which has resulted in hyperinflation, severe unemployment, and, naturally, a lot of civil unrest. Nicaragua too has had some major economic troubles, especially since the death President Manuel Noriega. Brazil, on the other hand has done well economically, however, that prosperity hasn't been equally spread out. The ruling 3% or 4% elites have made a great deal of money off of the country's developing economy while the remaining majority live at or below poverty level.

Of course, the same thing can be said of most of Latin America countries, Mexico included. The problem goes back centuries where wealthy clans bought up huge tracts of land, which they, in turn, used to invest in various industries. Naturally, their wealth allowed them to control the various governments which have come and gone and ride out the periodic "People's revolutions", either through bribery, extortion, and old fashion murder. A middle class never really got a chance to take hold. Peasants were kept largely uneducated and ignorant, mostly with the active support of the Catholic Church, which received large kickbacks from the wealthy elites. In fact, it wasn't until relatively recently (post 20th Century), that any assemblance of a middle class has started to develop. Nevertheless, the elites remain in control of the government and more importantly, the military.

About two decades ago, there was a brief attempt to change the social and economic face of Latin America through a reinterpretation of the Catholic/Christian message called "Liberation Theology" which provided a more "socialist" take. The message was highly popular among the poor, especially in underdeveloped rural portions of the various countries, especially sense it promoted social justice. The message was promulgated primarily by individual priests and lay leaders, who spread the message primarily by word of mouth as they ventured from village to village (the best known of these was Gustavo Gutierrez).

It wasn't long before the ruling elites and the Catholic Church officials clamped down hard on this modern day "heresy". Anyone promoting "Liberation Theology" face dismissal from their parish and even excommunication! Thus, it too was consigned to the "dustbin of history" as Trotsky once said of the opposing Mensheviks. What's of interest, however, is that out of this there seems to have developed movement to bring individuals from these poor South American countries to the United States regardless of whether they broke US immigration laws or not.

These groups, which tend to be liberal and religiously oriented, as well as highly organized. They tend to hide behind their traditional "untouchable" status to secretly transport, house, feed, and support these families. They are also actively engaged in helping these individuals navigate or actually circumvent US laws to obtain taxpayer based social services such as healthcare, housing, and even jobs through various programs and church based connections, and when necessary, to even evade immigration officials.

The other group directly involved with smuggling illegal immigrants are (not surprisingly), drug cartels who are often paid up to $10,000 per person. These cartels often make use of corrupt politicians and individual in the police force and military. In some cases, such as we're now experiencing, these cartels will "borrow" children from those working for them or who may owe them money, and randomly pair them with an adult to create a "family", which is then used to aid these individuals in crossing the border illegally, believing that families get preference. Of course, the media loves a good "family drama", which gets overdramatized and politicians can't keep away from anything which smacks of good "PR" (the same thing can be said of Hollywood Liberals, who are always looking for the latest social "fad").

As we're now seeing, many of these kids are spilling the beans once they're interviewed separately by immigration agents, but that's not all of the story. In some cases, parents are legitimately sending their children north in order to link up with relatives already in the US. However, authorities from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have reported that, when contacted, these relatives often seen to vanish, leaving the kids abandoned, which creates a whole other problem---what to do with these children? At present, HHS officials are trying to place these kids with foster families while they continue to find either their actual families (who also don't want to be found for fear of prosecution) or an actual close relative willing to take the child.

Lastly, perhaps the worst offender in my opinion, are those who encourage these individuals to illegally enter the country with the promise of jobs. In reality, these are typically dirty, unclean, underpaid, unstable, and often unsafe jobs (obviously with no benefits). They are subject to whatever treatment the employer wants to dish out without recourse. What's worse, there's no one for these individuals to complain to. Some say these individuals will do the work US citizens won't, which is untrue. American's will work these jobs, but only if working conditions are improved and they're paid a realistic salary. No more paying pennies and pocketing dollars!

My solution to at least some of these problems is fairly simply. Illegals caught in the US should be deported ASAP by depositing them at the nearest home embassy or consulate; let them find a way to send their citizens back home. We should deduct the costs of handling these individuals from the millions of dollars in taxpayer aid being sent to their home country. We should, however, make it easier for those with a needed skilled to obtain a work permit and enter the country (with a mandatory minimum English fluency requirement). We should end the "anchor baby" provision; requiring that at least one parent to be a US citizen. No access to any taxpayer based services, including healthcare (unless it's deemed an medical emergency). All US taxpayer funded documents should be printed in English only, however, English language classes should be made available.

To reduce the supply, we must eliminate the demand. Any business or institution, including churches, aiding, employing, or assisting illegal immigrates should be subject to a substantial mandatory fine for the first offense; an increasing fine for the second offense including a 30 day suspension of their business license or tax exempt status along with a 30 day jail sentence (which includes the president/CEO and members of the board). For the third and additional offenses, a larger fine, permanent suspension of their business license or tax exempt status and up to one year in jail.

As mayors or governors who want to thumb their noses at federal laws, that's fine. However, they should also be willing to accept responsibility for their decisions and forego federal money to their state or community as well. You shouldn't be able to flip someone off with one hand and beg for money with the other. In short, we need to make it impossible and/or unprofitable to continue with this business as usual attitude and not expect consequences for their actions.

The US should and will continue to welcome immigrants to this country. It's what have made America the greatest country the world has ever known. But we can't continue to accept illegal behavior. We are a nation of laws, and we must not allow some to blatantly ignore the law just because it's convenient or makes us feel good. Maybe most importantly, it's not fair to those who have taken the time and made the effort to do the right thing; who are attempting to follow the law.





USAID: United States Agency for International Development

Children on the Border: Pawns in the War on Illegal Immigration

Some reports are claiming that as many as 45 a day are being separated, with as many as 2700+ already "caged". What am I talking about? I'm talking about the children of illegal immigrants caught attempting to cross the border. Their latest tactic is to bring their children, then claim human rights violations and "racism" are being perpetrated by Trump's clamp down on illegal immigration, but is it true? Is this a case of racial discrimination? Are there violations happening of their basic human rights?

Well, the short answer is "no". First, this really isn't a "Trump Policy". Separating families has been a long standing policy of suspected illegal immigrants or (and this the key part), immigration officials have reason to believe the children are not who they're identified as. That is, they aren't the children of the individuals who claim to be their parents. A number of individuals attempting to cross the border illegally have been falsely told that if they come with children, they will be given a pass by Border Agents. Of course, that's simply not true; they're treated just like everyone else. Secondly, many of the children, especially ages ten and up, are sent here unaccompanied; often with the aid of drug dealers, with their families paying out some serious money---often up to US$10,000 per individual for the privilege.

So, what happens when these individuals are caught? Typically, the family is kept together until they are placed in a holding a facility where any adult males are separated. Children are transferred to a Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) facility within the first 72 hours (ORR is part of the Health and Human Services Department). The children are held until it can be determined that they are, in fact, legitimately accompanied by their parents and/or if there are any adult relatives legally living in the country who could take them while their parents are processed (the parents are kept notified). If not, then they're placed with a temporary foster care home.

The problem with this latter procedure is that there simply isn't enough available Hispanic speaking homes. In fact, the system has far exceed capacity to the point where many government officials are declaring it "broken" like so many other government programs. As of June 2018, some 11,000 children were being held in ORR facilities awaiting placement. President Obama's solution was simply to release the children back to the parents, who were released together while awaiting a hearing before a federal judge. Obviously, few if any ever showed up in what was called "catch and release" program, which was a tremendous waste of resources.

However, it should be pointed out that very few of the children are separated or, if so, for very long. 60% were released back to their parents while 99% were released to a close relative. As for those who were contacted by ORR and didn't respond, officials point out these individuals appear to have purposefully disappeared and choice not to respond. One can only guess at their reasons. Meanwhile, for the small percentage who were sent here unaccompanied or for whom their nearest relatives have chosen not to take them, immigration officials are seeking permission to place these children in transition care housing while efforts to find their parents or relatives continue. Obviously it's a sad situation to see these young children used as pawns or abandoned by their families.

Meanwhile, through this process, the adults are proceed through the criminal justice system. First time offenders are usually released fairly quickly (assuming they wave trial and plead guilty). Many federal judges hear over a 1000 cases a day; often lined up en-masse and proceed assembly line style. The adults are then usually reunited with their children (which, by this time, have been verified), and immediately loaded on a bus and deported back across the border. If they are caught a second time with their children in tow, the results are generally much more severe with the parents being sentenced to some jail time.

Those arriving and seeking asylum face a similar ordeal. They are processed in a similar manner, with the children being removed to foster care, which the parents are interviewed and go through the screening process to determined if their claim for asylum has any merit. If so, the children are usually reunited with the parents as soon as possible. If not, then they face a similar deportation procedure as those who entered the US illegally. However, once again while ICE seems to be able to handle everything from apprehension to judicial review, sentencing, and deportation of necessary, the recent mass influx of children has caught them off guard. They are used to dealing with adults, but not so much with minors.

Therefore, there has been and continues to be problems within the system for quickly reuniting the children. This is especially compounded by children sent here unaccompanied by the parents or close relatives. In many, if not the majority of cases, those claiming to be their parents were simply matched up along the way by those working for the drug cartels. Very often they know nothing about the children except their first names, which makes finding their actual parents (who are obviously trying to evade authorities) difficult at best. As for the children, the odds are better for the older ones (though many have been instructed by drug couriers and/or their parents not to say a word under threat of violence befalling them or their family). Again, we have children being used as pawns.

There's another point we need to examine, which is being ignored by the corporate media. The parents or those bring these children here illegally, regardless of their ages, are committing a criminal act. It's no different than bringing your child with you while you shoplift or try to rob a store. Do you think the police or court system are going to allow you to keep your child with you in jail? If you get sentenced to prison, do you think you're going to have a special cell just for you and your offspring? Do you think that husbands and wives are going to be kept in the cell, let along even the same prison complex? They'll be lucky if they're prisons are in the same state!

Trying to sneak into the United States without proper documentation is a federal crime. It's serious business. Those who try to use these children as a free pass or some sort of legal shield are making a grave mistake, not just legally, but morally. If these individuals want to come to America to seek a better life, fine. We have no problem with that. All we ask is that they do it legally. They can start by applying for a "green card" or work permit and go from there. By trying to come illegally, they are not just jeopardizing their chances of legal admission at some point, but possible deportation six months or 20 years down the road. Is that worth it?

As illegals, they really have few rights. Employers who hire illegals are doing so knowing full well that they're committing a federal crime and face fines and possible jail time. Do you think they care how they treat someone here illegally or their working conditions? Do you think they're concerned that they're paying them below minimum wage or that they have no benefits? Those who aid illegal immigrants face the same criminal charges. Why would someone want to put others in the same legal peril? Besides, what does this say to all the thousands of individuals trying to come to America legally by trying to jump ahead of them? For US taxpayers, we're socked with billions of dollars---an estimated $135 billion to be exact---in extra taxes to pay for these individuals. Is that fair to us?

Another aspect to consider is that while the Liberal Left scream and yell about how illegal immigrants are handled by the US Justice System, let's consider for a moment how US citizens (or anyone else for that matter) would be treated if the situation was reversed. Those entering Mexico illegally for any reason risk literally life and limb. In some situations, it's not uncommon for the local police to rob and beat suspected "undocumented" individuals. According to one civil rights organization, the Washington Office on Latin America, those fleeing their home countries in Central and South America, and pass through Mexico are preyed upon by corrupt politicians, law enforcement, and, naturally, drug cartels.

Some of these survivors have reported severe physical abuse, no food or fire wood, no money and so forth (all of it stolen or paid out in bribes). A few have reported that gang rapes, kidnapping for ransom, and murder are common, and why not? Think being separated from your children for a few weeks is bad and placed in air conditioned or heated housing is bad? Being given showers, clean indoor plumbing, amble food and something to drink, even medical care is "abusive" or "unfair"? How about having your children taken away and sold? Gang raped and turned out as forced prostitutes? Forced to work as virtual slaves? Does that sound better? Because that's what happens to illegal immigrants south of the border. Who are they going to report it too---the same people committing the crimes? Those who are arrested are tossed in one of Mexico's infamous local jails, often without trial and held until some type of "bail" (bribe) is paid. Filth and violence seems to be the two overriding descriptions.

For the luckless few who end up in a Mexican federal prison, it's downright brutal; medieval to the point of being equivalent to a Turkish or Russian prison! Inmates get a lice infected mattress and a very well worn prison uniform (some have claimed that they were still caked with feces and blood stains). Meals are a bare minimum; not above starvation rations. Anything more, and the prisoners family has to pay for it out of pocket. Violence rules inside the prison walls. The guards are there just to keep the prisoners inside, and to take bribes. Our jails and prisons are considered almost resorts by comparison, which is why drug gang members aren't in the least bit afraid or deterred.

So to be clear, separating parents from their children is tough for everyone concerned, but then again, the parents or those accompanying the children were knowingly and willingly breaking the law, which has been in place in decades. They are criminals, so what do they or the Left expect? As for the children, they are very well taken care of (as are the parents), and assuming everything checks out, are reunited with their parents 99% of the time. Even if the parents are deported, their children go with them (following a complete medical physical for both the parents and kids). For others, every effort is made to at least united them with a close relative; assuming that relative wants to be found and is willing to step forward. It's not an ideal situation for anyone, most of all for the children, yet our system is better by far than illegals can expect in Mexico or elsewhere. Lastly, if they really want to be here, there is a legal process to make that happen, and without adversely affecting the children. However, the blame is not on Trump, ICE, DHS, or the Border Patrol. It's on the parents and those who chose to use these innocent kids as pawns, which includes the corporate media.



The Trump administrations separation of families at the border, explained

Treatment of immigrants in Mexico much worse than any other country


How Mexico Treats Illegal Aliens

It's Time For the 'Dreamer's to Wake Up: The End of DACA?

DACA. The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program which was put in place by then President Barack Obama as a temporary measure to deal with dependent children brought here by their parents or other relative illegally, and whom themselves were entering the country illegally. DACA has received a lot of attention lately after President Donald Trump stated that he would not renew the stopgap measure. Numerous groups, including membership and dues strapped unions, to various single topic special interest groups such as VoteVets as well as dozens of pro-illegal immigration and Hispanic groups.

At the time of its creation in June 2012, DACA permitted individuals who were brought illegally to America as a minor with a two year reprieve from deportation along with eligibility to apply for a work permit. The result was that approximately 800,000 individuals, known as "Dreamers" after the Dream Act Bill of 2001, out of an estimated 11 million illegal aliens became eligible for the program. In addition, this permitted a path for individuals under DACA to take steps to become legal citizens of the United States. Meanwhile, the Dream Act, under which DACA was created, allowed individuals temporary and conditional residency leading to possible permanent residency status. To be eligible for conditional residency, individuals must not have entered the country on a non-immigration visa; show proof that they were 16 years of age or younger; provide proof that they've been in the country a minimum of five years and be between 12 years and 35 years of age at the time the Act was implemented; have graduated from an American high school or possess a GED Certificate; be of "good moral character" and pass a criminal background check.

Those seeking permanent residency needed all the above plus attended a college, university, or two year (minimum) technical school or served at least two years in the US military and received an honorable discharge. Lastly, they must pass a more detailed criminal background check with no felony arrests. If the conditions were not met, then the individual was subject to a possible deportation. To help with the academic side, many colleges and universities dropped state residency requirements. All individuals applying would be afforded instate tuition. President Trump's refusal to renew DACA kicked the issue of illegal residency of so-called "Dreamers" back to Congress with instructions to creation legislation to more clearly deal with the topic of illegal immigration, especially as it pertains to those who were put in this position of possible deportation by the parents or other relative.

Of late there has been a great deal of teeth gnashing and finger pointing at the Trump Administration, and at Trump in particular, but is it justified? Many have and are arguing that it's "not fair" to deport individuals to countries which may be places of their birth, but of which they have little or no memory. These individuals call America home, and have for years if not decades. Many see themselves as Americans in every sense of the word. Should they be held responsible for the crime committed by their parents or other relative? What, if any, responsibility lays with Congress for its decades of failure in dealing with the issue of illegal immigration? Certainly, one could justifiably argue that these protests are aimed at them just as much as the President.

First, I think we have to understand a key fact that is unalterable. The law, regardless of the issue at hand, is not fair. It doesn't care what your race, ethnic group, religion, or sexual orientation or gender is. It is immune to emotional outbursts no matter how many tears are shed. The law also isn't interested in providing justice. The law is interested in facts only, and it renders its decision based on those facts. If "justice" is served, then that's just a happy coincidence. Lawyers and judges debate the nuances of the facts as they see them and how they apply to a given law. Legislatures, such as Congress, create bills to address certain issues in a generic and broad based language in order to include as many scenarios as possible while leaving room for possible interpretation by state legislatures, local councils or assemblies, and by the courts.

In this case, we have adults who, for a variety of reasons, make a conscious decision to break international sovereignty law as well as US federal law by entering the United States illegally rather than doing so legally, such as applying for a "Green Card" in order to live and work here. In addition to their decision to break the law, they brought along their young children, which is understandable. Nobody wants to leave their children behind if at all possible. That's just human nature. Yet, it was their decision to commit a crime that put the stability of their family at risk. So, when various groups scream and shout about "breaking up" or "destroying" families, remind them that it was the decision of the parents that made this a reality. No one but them is ultimately responsible for the outcome (some love to hold up signs which read "No Human is Illegal", which is true. However, their actions are, which includes violating immigration laws). Although it has no bearing on this particular situation, other nations, especially south of the border, have much m stricter laws dealing with their illegal immigrants. For instance, first offenders head off to prison (our prisons look like Sunday School by comparison) and face a stiff fine. Anyone caught aiding an illegal immigrant is punished with jail time and a hefty fine.
Secondly, President Obama was very clear that DACA was a temporary measure. Why then, did these "Dreamers" wait or simply fail to take the proper steps to legalize their immigration status?

With the election of a conservative President and the GOP taking both houses of Congress, did these "Dreamers" simply assume the issue of illegal immigration would go away? Were they counting on Hillary winning the election and, again, assuming that she would automatically renew DACA? I wish I knew the answer to these questions. I really do because now they are about to learn the price of their inaction, and no amount of "safe space" is going to help them (you know, there are times when I think we should start referring to the Millennials as the "Linus Generation" for his use of a security blanket). Then there's another possible catch to the issue here. I strongly suspect there will be a mad dash to get in line to update their immigration status. However (and I've not seen the form, so this is a guess based on other federal and states forms I've seen), there may be a requirement to list a next of kin. If they list their parents or other relative who is here illegally, that may cause a whole new set of problems once the form is reviewed (I don't know who, if anyone, from ICE will or can have access to these forms). Of course, all of this could have been avoided if these "Dreamers" took advantage of the extra time Obama granted them through DACA. For those who claim that DACA didn't provide a route to citizenship, they're mostly right, but then it wasn't supposed to. It was to meet much of the qualifications required for citizenship and extended the timeframe in which to being the process.

There you have it my friends. DACA was intended to be a short term "band-aid" to just deal with one aspect of the illegal immigration problem. Obama took further steps to circumvent our immigration laws by hindering ICE and the Border Patrol such as reducing their budget and restricting what could be done, while AG Eric Holder broke federal laws by illegally engaging in gunrunning (Operation Fast and Furious); selling weapons to drug cartels, which resulted in the deaths of US agents and citizens as well as Mexico citizens. President Trump, as hard as it is to believe right now, did the right thing by not renewing DACA and kicking it back in the lap of Congress with instructions to fix the problem like they were supposed to have done going all the back to President Reagan (Reagan signed another quick fix bill allowing illegal immigrants currently in the United States at the time amnesty). While it solved the immediate problem, it also encouraged others to come illegally in anticipation of another amnesty or that Washington, with the attention span of a two year old, gets distracted by another issue and the whole matter shifted to the back burner and just forgotten. If that's what they expected, they were seriously wrong.

Illegal immigration has been a serious problem for decades; costing taxpayers approximately $113 billion a year. Building a wall or strengthening existing emplacements will help, but only some. At best, it will only slow illegal crossings down some. Human ingenuity knows no bounds. Illegal immigration is first and foremost an economic issue. Mexico and other Latin American countries lack what we would consider a middle class. Because of social and religious constraints, these countries developed along the lines of an underclass, which was poor and a wealthy upper ruling class. Over the centuries, there have been numerous revolts and revolutions along class lines in Mexico and Latin America, but nearly each and every time, the rich ultimately win (usually through bribery, extortion, and good old fashion political coups and assassinations).

Most of these people come here seeking a better life (unlike the Europeans, very few do so for political or religious reasons). The problem, is that they are also not coming here to assimilate. They are not wanting to become Americans. They are here for the money; a large portion of which gets sent back home to support family and relatives. Therefore, they don't bother learning the language, traditions, or values (while liberal politicians and groups bend over backwards to accommodate their cultural arrogance). Many groups, especially the Catholic Church , AFL-CIO, the National Council of Churches, United Farm Workers, actively (and illegally) provide temporary housing, as well as help find permanent lodgings, jobs, and navigate the system to get taxpayer based services, healthcare, and school enrollment for their children (which has spawned another problem, namely taxpayers provided tutors and translators).

Therefore, since this is basically a "supply and demand" problem, we know that trying to eliminate supply is a hugely
difficult and expensive problem to stop, we should focus on demand and enforce existing laws. By that, I mean we should focus on those who house, employ, and aide illegal immigrants. Any group or religious organization which hides, shelters, or otherwise aids illegal immigrants should face loss of their tax exempt status for six months plus a thousand dollar fine per individual with their first conviction; one year and $2500 per person with their second convection along with 90 days jail time for the individual or individuals involved, and permanent loss of their tax exempt status after that plus $5000 per person with six months jail time for the person or persons involved. For companies which are not tax exempt, their business license should be suspended along the same lines.

In addition, any government contracts would be automatically suspended or revoked. Individuals should face the same fine and jail time---no exceptions. In addition, no tax payer services should be used without proof of citizenship. All documentation paid for by taxpayers should be in English only. If we eliminate the demand part of the equation, we will reduce or perhaps come close to eliminating the supply portion. However, we should encourage those who want to come here, to do it legally. We should make obtaining a work permit easier; extend its duration, assign a special work permit number whereby they can contribute to Social Security, obtain unemployment insurance, and so forth. We also need to make English mandatory and provide expanded free English classes for everyone who wants it (school age children will be taught in English only. Those who do not speak English, or speak it well, will be required to attend a English comprehension class. In terms of costs, illegal immigration costs taxpayers $52 billion dollars).

As for those "Dreamers" who blew their two year opportunity to legalize their status, they should be given the opportunity over the next 90 days to get their act together and get legal with Uncle Sam. To help streamline and expedite the matter, allow as much as possible to be done by mail or internet. Meanwhile, Congress needs to come up with solution ASAP, like within 90 days for instance; none of this moronic partisan BS, plus they've had decades to produce a solution. That means acting like big boys and girls and doing their jobs for a change. If they can't (or more likely, won't) do it, then Trump needs to "pull an Obama" and ram one of his own through by Executive Order.

Regardless, this whole situation is embarrassing. It's embarrassing in that for over 30 years a critical issue---illegal immigration--- hasn't been resolved. It's embarrassing in that these "Dreamers" didn't take advantage of the opportunity afforded them and now they are panicking while trying to blame anyone else but themselves. It's embarrassing to see just how broken the political situation in this country is as each side blames the other. But then since we are an Oligarchy nowadays masquerading as an illusionary Constitutional Republic, I have no choice but to conclude that regardless of how incompetent Washington looks, "someone" is making bunches of money off these individuals. If they, that is the ruling Oligarchy, were opposed to illegal immigration for whatever reason, but can bet your last nickel that Congress would have acted a long time ago.


The Dream Act


Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals

The Fiscal Burden of Illegal immigration on United States Taxpayers

5 facts about illegal immigration in the U.S.