Title 42: A 'Catch 22' for Ending Illegal Immigration?

 

With the end of Title 42, the U.S. Border Patrol has reported  1.33 million encounters with migrants attempting to cross from Mexico into the U.S. illegally in FY 2023. The total number of encounters nationwide was a record 1.8 million. The total number just in April 2023 was 211,401 individuals, which included over 28,738 Cubans, Haitians, Venezuelans, and Nicaraguans, all of which were from countries suffering severe economic hardship.

 What is Title 42?  Title 42 was made part of the Public Health Service Act of 1944 as a means of dealing with the anticipated mass immigration coming with the end of World War II. Its purpose was to restrict and expel immigrant individuals from the United States who presented as health risk to the public at large.

It originally came about in 1893 when Congress passed the National Quarantine Law in response to the Cholera epidemic (the fifth since 1817) and as a means to combat other communicable diseases that often accompanied new arrivals. Prior to 2020, Title 42 had only been applied nationally in 1929 when U.S. ports were closed to ships from China and Philippines due to an outbreak of meningitis.

In March of 2020, President Donald Trump applied the law once again, this time in response to COVID-19 upon recommendation from the Director of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Dr. Robert Redfield. It allowed the U.S. Border Patrol to detain and remove all new arrivals from United States who tested positive and to take appropriate steps to reduce the spread of the disease in detention centers.

Opponents of the law (many of whom also happen to favor open borders or easier access into the U.S.) claimed that President Trump was, in fact, using the law as a means to expel immigrants claiming asylum status in violation of U.S. and international immigration laws. They also like to claim that "no one is illegal", which is true. However, their actions may be. That's why we have laws.

They also cited the law and its application as violation of human rights despite being proclaimed a global crisis by countries throughout the world (according to the World Health Organization, as of December 31, 2020, some 1,813,188 individuals had died of COVID related causes. The U.S. experienced approximately 350,831 deaths).  Under Title 42, the U.S. evicted some 2.8 million individuals since 2020.  

Nevertheless, with the COVID crisis having been declared over, Title 42 was allowed to expire on May 11, 2023. In anticipation of the Title 42 ending, Biden stated that he would do nothing to prevent the law from expiring while also adding that he would aid the U.S. Border Patrol by providing more border agents---1,500 more to be exact, but will that be enough?

Biden commented in a interview with NBC News on May 8, that while the Border Patrol needed more personnel to help combat the expected onslaught of immigrants, he added that he wanted to see substantial reform in our existing immigration laws.

Biden said that he wanted to see a quicker path for individuals who came here illegally as children to become U.S. citizens under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and added that U.S. corporations were pressuring the White House and Congress for continuing and expanding the DACA program. Of note was Biden's comment that we needed more farm workers.

The agricultural industry, which includes farming, fishing, and forestry contributes some $175 billion dollars to the nation's economy. The farm industry employs less than one percent of the total number of workers in the United States, or about 2.5 million individuals on private and corporate farms and ranches. Migrants of the sort Biden mentioned comprise roughly 450,000 of that number.  

Currently there is a shortage of around 141,800 farm workers annually on U.S. farms, which represents a decline of about 75% in recent years. As a result, American consumers are finding higher prices, fewer choices, and shortages at the grocery store.

Meanwhile, many small family farms, faced with higher operating costs, are going out of business, leaving the average consumer more dependent than ever on corporate giants like Cargill, Archer-Daniels-Midlands, Monsanto/Bayer and on foreign imports. 

In fact, the U.S. imports 2/3 of all its fresh fruit and 1/3 of its fresh vegetables from Latin America and China. In 2021, fresh fruits and vegetables accounted for nearly 24% of all agricultural imports into the U.S. which amounted to $39 billion dollars. In February 2023, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said that fresh and frozen fruits rose by 10% in 2022 to $19.3 billion dollars. Good news for China and Latin America!

The trouble with corporations like Cargill and Monsanto/Bayer, who control over 50% of the market, is that they are highly automated and need fewer workers.   High operating costs and lower profit margins have forced many family farms to cut back on hiring farm workers, not to mention that the 60 - 100 thousand migrants waiting to cross over into the United States might not have any interest in working on farms or being employed in low wage service or construction jobs for that matter.  

Opponents of Title 42 argued that President Trump's use of the law was less about controlling the outbreak of COVID as much as it was about providing a legal means to close down the southern border and remove immigrants despite Trump closing the borders with Mexico and Canada. Truth or politics?

The truth is that 189 countries, home to 65% of the world's population, had a complete ban on travel. Another 193 had a partial ban restricting movement into or out of their country (many imposed lengthy quarantine periods). 98 of these countries imposed bans on individuals from specific countries including China, which is believed to have been the origin point of the COVID virus.

As a result, around 91% of the world's population was under some sort of travel restriction.  Thus, Trump's action in activating Title 42 was in keeping with the majority of other nations in order to protect their citizens. It's worth nothing that while Trump closed the border with Canada and Mexico, Mexico was one of the very few countries which refused to close its borders or restrict travel.

The lifting of the Title 42 ban will undoubtedly open yet another floodgate of individuals seeking a new life in America as so many others have before them. The problem isn't individuals wanting to come to America legally. The problem is those who refuse to follow the law like thousands of others do every year. Instead, they want to "cut the line" and bypass all the gates designed to protect them and those already here. Why should they be an exception?  Is there anything we can do to control this, and what about the 11.3 million or so illegal immigrants now living in the United States? 

There will, no doubt, be ample numbers of unscrupulous businesses willing to hire those who slip thorough illegally, employing them in dismal sweat shop conditions for less than poverty level wages. There will also be those organizations (mostly religious) who will defiantly break U.S. immigration law to smuggle people across the border, even if it means working with criminal drug cartels to do so, not to mention hiding them and assisting in "playing the system" at taxpayer expense  because they don't believe the law should apply to them.

While adding more agents on the border is a step in the right direction, ultimately they will continue to come as long as there is a demand. Thus, the most effective way to stifle illegal immigration is to crack down on those hiring, aiding, and sheltering them.

American and Mexican efforts at curtailing the corruptive influence of the drug cartels has been, at most, ineffective. Many remain just as powerful and just as ruthless as they've ever been despite the absence of colorful characters like Pablo Escobar and Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman. Some operate with near impunity within the United States either directly or through various gangs.

They use their assorted drug related connections to smuggle individuals across the border and into the U.S. at $3000 or more a head (no refunds). Others bypass the cartels and come on their own. Some link up with religious or similar groups who provide hideouts from law enforcement. They also help to find safe places to live, work, and ways to work around the system, which includes getting taxpayer based assistance for nearly everything from daycare or school for their children to healthcare and utility assistance.

Unscrupulous employers often take advantage of the situation and the individuals with offers of a job. These jobs are typically very low paying "piece" work in miserable work conditions. They receive few amenities most everyone is used to such as restroom or lunch breaks, and of course, no benefits. The places they work in are often unsafe and miserably hot or cold. As an aside, organized crime is often associated with these type of operations, especially in large cities.

Of course, being here illegally, it's not like they can complain to a union or OSHA.  A few, however, may be lucky enough to find work at legitimate employers willing to look the other way or maybe they can lie their way into a job, but they'll forever be looking over their shoulder out of fear of the authorities.

One key way to cut back on demand is by actively going after these low life employers and imposing hefty fines on each illegal immigrant they employ and suspending their business licenses beginning with their first offense.  Repeat offenses should bring longer and longer automatic jail time along with increasing fines. The goal is to make it unprofitable to engage in this sort of work.

The same should apply to religious and other organizations as well. In addition, their tax exempt status should also be revoked. The fines and suspension of business licenses should extend to companies who employ any of these individuals. Fines should also be imposed on those assisting in any way.

Cities and other municipalities who harbor illegal immigrants under the euphemism of "sanctuary cities" should automatically lose any federal dollars and other assistance. Several have instructed their law enforcement agencies not to cooperate with federal authorities in the arrest or re-arrest of illegal immigrants suspected of a crime. We currently have cities who not only openly defy federal immigration laws, but have actually asked for more federal assistance to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants! Now, that's brazen!

When it comes to labor shortage on farms, there are several things that can be done. First, make it easier for would be workers to apply for a work visa (aka "green card"). We want to make it easier on both the employer and potential employee.

Next, extend the length of employment at the discretion of the employer based on industry. Some jobs, like dairy, poultry, or beef are year around work while others, like fruit or vegetables, are seasonal. Allowing tax credit for hiring seasonal workers (migrant or not) to small farms is another way to help keep the family farm going.   

Additionally, provide for a English languages classes. It benefits no one if they can't be understood. In   Czarist Russia during the 1860's and 70's, student intellectuals called the "Narodniks" would go to the countryside to teach the peasants how to read and write. Colleges and universities could offer similar programs to help migrants learn to read and speak English in exchange for class credit hours.

The next thing that can be done is offset the cost of hiring workers. In many cases, these individuals lack transportation, so the employer has to pick up the cost. The creation of co-ops and working with unions such as the United Farm Workers could be a way to cut down on the expense of transportation.  Lastly, open up avenues for these individuals to stay and become citizens if that's what they want to do. If they want to work, so why not let them stay?

Lastly, of course, is reforming existing immigration laws. President Ronald Reagan was the first to offer amnesty in 1986 to the estimate 5 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. The result? More came in the hopes of another amnesty program, and they will keep coming. Amnesty isn't the answer. 

The U.S. must make it clear in as many way as possible (including the use of commercials on Latin American radio or TV) that illegal immigration is not acceptable and they will be deported. If they want to immigrate, contact the nearest U.S. embassy to do it correctly. Return immigrants at the expense of their native country by offsetting the foreign aid we send them. Require new immigrants to speak, read, and write a minimal amount of English as well as have a basic understanding of our laws. It will only make their life easier.

Secondly, we need to stop meddling in the internal affairs of other nations. Many of the immigrants on our southern border are there due to sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S. Government. Stop it. Not everyone wants to be like us or even do business with us. The sanctions and embargoes only makes their lives unbearable (not the government's) and forces them to come here.  

We also need to stop installing or propping up corrupt governments. Many of these tinpot dictators take the aid we send and use it as bribery or sell it. Their corruption contributes to immigrants fleeing to our border. We also mustn't forget that 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck or that we have the widest wage inequality of any industrialized nation in the world. Why?

COVID may be over, but there will be others like it. Illegal immigration and the problems it brings aren't going to go away.  As Albert Einstein once said, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result". If that's the case, we're being led by the insane..   

 

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out 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 anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

As Title 42 lifts, Biden says border authorities 'need more agents'

Agropoly: A handful of corporations control world foodproduction

New American Economy: Agriculture

CFR: Ten Graphics That Explain the U.S. Struggle WithMigrant Flows in 2022

What is Title 42, why is it ending and what's happening now at the border?

Closed borders, travel bans, and halted immigration....

How Title 42's expiration reshapes immigration policy at the U.S.-Mexican border

U.S. imports of fruit and vegetables up in 2019, USDAreports

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

Coming to Terms with Immigration, DACA, and Illegal Immigration

There's been so much in the news lately about so-called "Dreamers" and DACA, illegal immigration and so forth (DACA stands for "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" and was aimed at buying them additional time to become citizens and to make the process easier). Some even want to hold the US federal budget hostage over it'; delaying government payments to disabled and retired veterans, people on Social Security disability, low income families or individuals getting their WIC payments, not to mention no unemployment benefits, funding for school meals and other programs.

Of course, no payment for the US Military or funding for active duty or veterans needing surgery or medicine, which may be the worse slight of all. Imagine these men and women fighting and risking their lives, and not getting the near poverty level wages they earn the hard way. All this over individuals who are here illegally, either as the result of their own self-interest and disregard for our laws, or was it because they were too lazy to take the steps necessary to become legal? These individuals, somehow, seem to believe that although they've known for decades about their status, seemed to think that if they did nothing; took no steps whatsoever, not even the baby steps provided for in Obama's DACA program, they would just be waved through with a wink and a nod. I guess they were hoping that Hillary Clinton would be coroneted as planned, and they would be rubber stamped.

Now we're seeing protests, often with their faux-indignation, as if they all happened suddenly; a big ole surprise. I love some of the signs that are manufactured for these organized spontaneous events such as "No Person Is Illegal" or simply "I Support Immigration" among others which all essentially say the same thing. What is so interesting about these signs is they're lies of omission, aimed at getting people to accept them at face value in order to (hopefully) persuade people to change their minds or think (even for a moment), "hey, I agree with that". So, let's think about these signs for a moment.

First off, they are, at least on the surface, correct. Let's take the first one---"No Person is Illegal". Well, that's actually pretty true. No human being, at least in the West, is "illegal". Perhaps the closest thing to being "illegal" was slavery, which officially ended in the West close to 200 years ago (1820/1864 in the US, 126 in France, 1833 in the UK, 1818 by Spain, Holland, and Portugal). So, no person is illegal. However, an individual's actions may be illegal if they don't comply with existing laws. That's why we have a legal system, complete with law enforcement, courts, judges, bailiffs, and a jail or prison system. It's also why we have legislatures at the state and national level---to create laws.

When someone violates one or more of those laws, it's a crime, and crimes come with various forms of punishment such as fines or incarceration. In the case of immigration, it includes deportation. Every country has immigration laws, which are designed to protect and secure their borders for a wide range of reasons. Borders are part of what establishes a country's sovereignty. There are, of course, exceptions, such as escaping political, racial, ethnic, or religious persecution. Occasionally, exemptions are given for economic or health reasons. But regardless, the reasons must be compelling and irrefutable; that is, there must be external proof.

Most people who come to the US illegally exhibit none of these prequalifications. They just simply don't want to wait in line with those who are doing it legally. Of course, most of these individuals aren't coming here illegally in order to become American citizens. In fact, their illegal status precludes their ability to do so. So why are they here? Basically, for a job. Where many of these people come from, there are few good paying jobs, and competition is often stiff due to the large populations (not to mention subsequent corruption needed in getting and keeping a job). As an aside, the countries where many of these people come from lack a large or stable middle class. Why you wonder?

While the reasons are numerous, the primary reason stems from the early upper class and church authorities (mainly Roman Catholic in Latin America and parts of Asia and Europe) desire to keep the lower classes essentially poor and uneducated, and thus easier to control while leaving them in charge (historically, the middle class has come from the more successful lower merchant class, which also became more educated, and elevated their family's circumstances). Those who decide to violate the law, as I previously said, mainly come for a job. However, they again don't go through the process of obtaining a work permit. They, therefore, seek to work "under-the-table", either using a stolen or forged Social Security Number when necessary, or simply taking jobs which pay cash. While this is illegal from the employer's side too, some are more than willing to take advantage of these individual's situation.

They can lie about withholding taxes (and possibly pocketing the money), force them to work long hours without a break, avoid clean, safe, or healthy working conditions, and pay them next to nothing, not to mention treat them as near serfs. What are they going to do? Go to the police or other authorities? Where many of them come from the cops are worse than the crooks; as often as not, they're one in the same! Of course, if caught and convicted, employers can be fined and even arrested, although this rarely happens; many times, especially in some industries like hospitality, construction, and horse-racing, its gets by with wink and smile from the politicians, employers, unions, and the police.

Another part of this conspiracies of lies, are various social (and often religious oriented ) groups who believe they have a right or duty to ignore laws, and provide temporary shelter, clothing, food, and even help with finding them jobs, housing, and showing them how to violate laws, and guidelines in order to get taxpayer funded social services. Of course, this is illegal too and carries its own punishment. So, while no one is "illegal", their actions are, and often those actions affect others who are dragged down in the widening web of lies, from those attempting to do the right thing and are forced to wait even longer, to shady employers and misguided social zealots.

Now, what about the other signs like "I Support Immigration"? On the face of it, signs like these makes perfect sense. America is a nation of immigrants; we are a country built on immigrants. Perhaps no nation on earth has had such diversity other than ancient Rome. One could argue quite convincingly that every nation, ethnic group, race, and religion is represented in America. In 2016, there were 43.7 million first generation immigrants living in the US. If you include their US born children, that number increases to 86.4 million, or 27% of the total US population. Most came from India, followed by China and Hong Kong. Mexico and Cuba round out the top five according to the Migration Population Institute's February 8, 2018 report.

Of course, these are individuals who did it the right way, so there's obviously no bias against immigration, and certainly not any based on religion or skin color. However, like every nation, the US operates on a quota system (PEW Research has an interesting article on the history of US immigration which I've linked below). Now, what about illegal immigration? The two best sources of information are the Department of Homeland Security and FAIR (Federation For American Immigration Reform). Best estimates place the number of illegal immigrants at around 13.5 million (this is in addition to the numbers above, which represents legal immigrants). That number doesn't include the approximate 4.2 million "anchor babies" or children born in the US by illegal immigrants, but does include some 800,000 DACA recipients). The reason why the number isn't more precise is simply because those here illegally don't want to counted! So, what does this cost us? You'd be surprised.

In terms of our tax dollars, illegal immigration costs US taxpayers an estimated $134.9 billion dollars (federal, state, and local money). Also, bear in mind that the average American pays 30% of their income to taxes. Here's another factor to look at, crime. According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, just over 1/4 of all prisoners being house in federal prisons are here illegally, with just under 300,000 incarcerated on state and local jails. That's about $1.6 billion for their upkeep at the federal level and $8.6 billion at the state and local levels. Most are held on violent crime charges by the way.

Let's also not forget that unlike legal immigration, where immigrants undergo a health screening, illegals do not. Therefore, we have many entering this country who are infected with diseases and illnesses which we haven't seen in decades, such as various infectious diseases (like tuberculosis, measles, typhoid fever), plus HIV/AIDS, STDs, severe drug and alcohol addiction, and mental illnesses. Simply put, illegal immigrants put ordinary Americans, especially seniors and our aging Babyboomers, children, and those with compromised immune systems at high risk (I've included a really interesting article from Psychology Today on the topic below).

So, are Americans opposed to immigration? Clearly not; at least not based on government or independent statistics and research at least. I think it's obvious that most of us support immigration too, as long as it's legal. Race, religion, or ethnic group are rarely a factor for most Americans. However, we do have an issue with those who willfully decide to ignore our laws; we have a real concern with supporting those who pay little or no money back into our social safety net; and we have a serious problem with those who commit crimes.

This country was intended to be a "melting pot" where all cultures blend together in order to create something new---"E Pluribus Unum" or "Out of Many, One" as it says on our National Seal. However, it is language which binds us together; it's the thread which binds the nation, and that thread is English. Without it, we become a hodgepodge of disunited peoples. In no country will you find the native population purposefully surrendering its identity to a new culture, religion, or language. In no country will you find a country willingly default on its sovereignty. America is no different.



Timeline of the abolition of slavery and serfdom



MPI: Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the United States


PEW: How U.S. immigration laws and rules have changed through history



Psychology Today: Do Illegal Immigrants Pose a Health Risk to Us All?



DHS: Immigration Data & Statistics


Federation of American Immigration Reform

Playing "Chicken" With American Lives: The 2018 Government Shutdown

Once again, Washington politicians have shown a complete disregard for the lives of ordinary Americans living out here in "Flyover Country". This time the shutdown was the result of some 44 Democrat politicians playing a game of "Chicken" over approving a budget to keep the government going without a deal on amnesty of so-called "Dreamers". "Dreamers", in case you don't know, are individuals who were brought here by their parents; parents who came here illegally and thus are generally considered to be criminals.

Now before you start tearing up about these "poor little children caught in the middle", know this. These individuals are mostly adults. They have know all along they were brought here illegally, and thus by extension, are illegal as well. Nevertheless, despite knowing this for years or even decades, very few have taken any steps to become legal residents. Now, facing the possibility of deportation, these "Dreamers" are suddenly getting their panties in a bunch and crying "poor me".

Both political parties have known darn good and well that amnesty for illegal immigrants of any sort is and has been a non-starter from the outset, and yet the Democrats are going to try and hold those who depend on the federal government as hostages. Who am I talking about? How about the millions who receive WIC or federally funded pre-school or after school care? How about people drawing unemployment? How about those on Social Security, military or VA disability? Government employees, including those who are retired? It also includes VA hospitals and low income housing. Then there are the men and women serving in the military as well as retired military. Let's not forget those going to school using a federal grant or GI Bill. Somehow, I'm not surprised that these same politician are exempt, as are all the nations worldwide that we prop up. Regardless, Congress is a millionaires clubs to begin with (especially the Senate), so they don't have to worry about paying bills or buying groceries do they?

From my perspective, every time the federal government does a shutdown, it usually means that Congress and the President are about to do something that ordinary Americans aren't going to like. However, all sides will fall back---throw their hands in the air--- and exclaim that it was the best deal they could manage and how grateful us worker bees should be. Of course, this time it was the Democrats who stepped in it. In times past, it was just as often the Republicans, so neither side gets to point the finger at the other.

Normally, I would say something like "why doesn't Congress listen to their constituents? They know that Americans overwhelmingly oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants". Well, the truth of the matter is that Congress does listen to their constituents, at least the important ones; those corporate paymasters who finance their campaigns and pull their strings. Everyone should know by now that our Constitutional Republic is nothing but an illusion, just as the notion of a republic was under Augustus or Tiberius Caesar. The truth is that we are an Oligarchy; a plutocracy with its growing police state mentality. If these "elites" didn't want this to happen, be it a shutdown or amnesty for "Dreamers", then you can bet it wouldn't happen.

So what would be the reason for amnesty? Obviously it has to be something which benefits our Corporate Overseers. The best I can figure is that it increases the numbers of those seeking jobs, which on one hand is a good thing, but on the other, the more people competing for limited jobs drives down wages and benefits (simple supply and demand economics). With ordinary Americans more concerned about getting or keeping a job, we are much less likely to be focused on what Washington is doing.

Of course, unions could benefit as there is a strong likelihood that some of these individuals will seek employment in a union shop. However, that too is a illusion. Unions have been on the decline since the 1960s. Few have any real clout---economically or politically; most are hand-in-pocket with management, willingly or not. Their marching orders are to keep workers on assembly lines and off picket lines. Therefore, all this does is help fill the coffers of cash strapped unions.

Another advantage is that is gives the Democratic Party talking points for the next election. They are hoping that by holding Americans at gunpoint, these "Dreamers" or others seeking amnesty will either register or vote Democrat in future elections (the majority of American voters are registered Independent, and that number is growing while those registered Democrat or Republican are declining).

Of course, they are counting on America's notoriously short attention span and lack of long term memory to forget missing their retirement or disability checks; their paychecks, WIC payments, unemployment , or healthcare. Who knows? They may be right on that point. After all, the Left has been on a witch-hunt (is that a politically correct term?) over alleged cases of sexual abuse or sexual assault (often happening decades ago), and yet conveniently ignore the fact that one of their modern political icons is an acknowledged sexual predator!

The last thing amnesty does it that it cheapens the value of our borders and the meaning of American Citizenship, which, interestingly, has long been the goal of so-called "globalists" or "internationalists". These groups want to do away with borders, countries, and even the notions of nationalism or patriotism. For them, the ideal world is one global government interlocked with global corporations to create a single open and managed economic and political marketplace. People in Chattanooga will be competing for jobs with people in Bangalore and so forth. Once, being an American carried with it a sense of pride. If you came here from another country, you did everything you could to become "an American", from becoming a citizen as quickly as possible, learning and speaking English to adopting our customs and traditions. You didn't lose your heritage. You added it to the "Great American Melting Pot".

I don't expect this government shutdown to last very long. Just long enough to scare most Americans into accepting anything just in order to get on with their ordinary lives (fanned to near hysteria, of course, by the corporate media). In fact, I believe both corporate owned political parties and their puppets are counting on it. There is no real reason---no honest reason---that certain essentials remain funded and outside the scope of their political gamesmanship. I'm talking of course about social security and disability payments, healthcare and housing costs, paychecks for the military, WIC and unemployment (of course, suspending the pay and benefits of the President and Congress should be a no-brainer). It's high time that we as Americans put a stop to this. If you want to see who voted and how, I've proved two links below. I strongly encourage you to contact the appropriate representative and tell them how you feel---really feel---about this.



How Every Senator Voted on the Government Shutdown



How senators voted on the government shutdown

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.