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 Decline of America May Not Be What We Think

I've been writing about illegal immigration for decades and there still doesn't seem any end to it, but that's on purpose as I'll show you. States along the border with Mexico are being inundated with individuals wanting to come to the U.S., not to gain citizenship, but to obtain---for free--- the benefits available to citizens because they worked and paid into the system through their taxes.

The federal government maintains that it controls the border problem, however it does next to nothing, and worse, it wants states not to enforce existing federal laws concerning illegal entry. Eric Holder, the AG under President Obama, even sued Arizona for doing nothing more than using existing federal laws to halt immigrants from illegally crossing the border (worse, he even allowed Mexico to join in the lawsuit against Arizona as a co-plaintiff).  Now it's Texas.

Some states and cities have declared themselves "open" to illegal immigration under the euphemistic sounding title of "sanctuary". The result has been thousands of individuals heading there and immediately demanding and receiving taxpayer funded government services.

As a result, some of the cities involved have seen increases in crime, homelessness, and a growing demand for public and private services, especially food and medical care. Unable to keep up with the demand, these cities and states have...ironically...turned to the federal government and requested additional federal dollars and aid to cope with the very problems they intentionally created. Did their legislatures, mayors, and governors not think this through?

Currently it's believe that there are some 10 million or more individuals  illegally in this country, The majority of them drawing on services paid for by taxpayers---you and me---that they never contributed  into.  Many have also decided that they have no intention or interest in integrating into society as previous migrants have historically done (other nations, such as Canada and countries in Europe and Asia) face similar problems.

It's as if these immigrants want to keep their  traditions, values, customs, and languages while at the same time relocate to where they can receive "free" resources---food, housing, medical care, child care, transportation, and so forth for nothing. In fact, not just do they "demand" these items (and more), but believe they are actually "entitled" to them!  Worse, they expect us---the citizens--- to conform and adapt rather than them!

Remember, these individuals have not come with the intent of gaining citizenship, few have applied for entry, and few have come seeking asylum. They come because they've been told they would be openly welcomed and provided with freebies simply for showing up. The majority of immigrants are coming north for nothing more than economic reasons---"economic asylum".  Bear in mind that the U.S and United Nations does not recognize "economic amnesty". Even Amnesty International doesn't promote "economic amnesty".

Amnesty can only be granted for ethnic, racial, political or religious  reasons only, and then only if you are in danger of torture, extreme discrimination, imprisonment or death.  Even then international law says they must seek shelter in the next closest stable country...not travel thousands of miles through safe countries and attempt crossing  the U.S. border illegally!

So, who is promoting this migration north? Why is the U.S. seen as the only acceptable destination?  

Many of those headed north are coming for economic reasons, so that seems to be a logical place start. The U.S. and some of its allies have instituted sanctions and/or embargoes against Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba. Of those, Cuba's has been the longest, first imposed on March 14, 1958 by President Eisenhower against the Batista Government to prohibit the sale of arms.

In October 1960, following the overthrow of the Batista dictatorship by the Fidel Castro's led revolution, another embargo was placed against Cuba. This applied to everything but food and medicine. The embargo was expanded in February 1962.

In Venezuela, sanctions were imposed in January 2017 by President Trump, for alleged human right violations, but rumors have persisted that it had more to do with Venezuela's suppressing a U.S. led attempt to overthrow the government. Either way, unlike Cuba, the sanctions helped Venezuela's economy to collapse, causing record level inflation, unemployment, poverty, and crime (Venezuela has the highest rate of violent crime in the world).   

The sanctions resulted in freezing $5.5 billion dollars belonging to Venezuela. Also, there was a 65% decline in the number of international banks willing to do business with them, with 99% of them coming between 2017 and 2019. This has resulted in severe shortages of food and medicine which the country must buy abroad.

It's estimated that some 80,000 HIV+ patients were affected along with roughly 32,000 individuals in need of cancer or dialysis medication or treatment. Some 15% - 20% of the population no longer has access to potable water during the height of the sanctions.

High unemployment (the result of many oil related businesses closing) triggered a serious increase in crime, making Venezuela the most violent crime ridden nations in the world. Presently, the crime rate (as of 2023) in Venezuela is 83.76 per 100,000. The majority of the crime is committed by individuals ages 20-30 years old. By comparison, the United States has a crime rate of 47.70%. So, if you want a reason for the exodus northward, there you go. U.S. imposed sanctions.

Economic issues have affected other countries in the region as well, such as the Caribbean island nations of Haiti, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago. Their problems are primarily the result of inept governments, rudimentary infrastructure, failed social programs and perpetual poverty. 

The result is chronic unemployment and high crime rates (Trinidad and Tobago are ranked sixth in the world while Jamaica is tenth).  Another key factor, not found elsewhere, is the weather. Due to climate change, the Caribbean has found itself in bull's eye of some of the worse tropical storms and hurricanes on record.

Most of these countries have long depended on the tourist trade to pump money into the economy, but the weather and crime has caused tourists to go elsewhere. As an aside, in 2023, the U.S. pumped $110 billion dollars in humanitarian aid into Haiti alone. Without this aid, we'd see a much larger exodus northward toward the U.S. Compare that with $16 billion in aid (humanitarian and military) to Ukraine in 2023 and $3.3 billion to Israel.  

Brazil is one of the most rapidly growing economies in the world. It is a key member of the economic union know as "BRICs" along with China, India and Russia, among others. Few know that Brazil was one the world's most impacted nations by the Covid-19 epidemic . The economy had been growing at a steady rate of 3.3% between pre-Covid 2001 and 2014. But between 2014 and 2020, the economy shrunk by the same percentage of 3.3%.

However, things bounced back by 2021 with growth rate of 5.5% followed by 2.9% in 2022 and 2.6% in 2023. Despite this, Brazil has seen a relatively high crime rate of 23.6 per 100,000 (ranked 9th in the world). It previously had been as high as 30.8. Unemployment is about 7.8% thus far for 2024, Compare that 2.6% in Mexico. The poverty rate is slightly higher than it neighbors at 24.3%.

Mexico, which has borne the brunt immigration crisis, has the 15th largest economy in the world and the second largest in Latin America behind Brazil. However, for the last 30 years, the Mexican economy has underperformed in terms of economic growth, poverty reduction, and the development of a strong middle class according to the World Bank.  

The  Mexican economy grew at just 2% between 1980 and 2022, though in 2023 it saw a growth rate of 3.2%. However, poverty, while dropping from 43.9% in 2020, still remains high at 36.3% in 2022.

Other countries in Latin America are facing economic difficulties due to a slow global economy (bearing in mind that the majority of these countries are rural and dependent of agriculture, mining, forestry, and tourism, not to mention U.S. and international aid. As a result, many of these countries have expanded their trade interests from one based primarily on the U.S. to one based more on China, as well as Asia and the EU.

However, China's economy has cooled somewhat which has had the expected ripple effect on some of its poorer trading partners.  The result has been something of a unbalanced unemployment rate and largely stagnant poverty levels. Relatively high global interest rate and inflation remains a serious problem in servicing debt and public programs. As a result, we see moderately high unemployment along with a reduction in social programs, adding to poverty.

While "economic amnesty" is not recognized, under other forms of amnesty, an individual must seek sanctuary in the "next nearest safe country" . In Latin America, it appears there is no "safe" country. Just varying levels of poverty and unemployment. So, we see possible explanation for thousands of individuals willing to make the long walk to the U.S..

The next big issue is "who" is encouraging these individuals to come to America. Surely they know that illegal immigrants aren't welcome in America. They must know what they'll face when they get to the border. Are they delusional enough to think they'll be an exception? No doubt the drug cartels encourage these people to sell everything they have to make the long and often brutal journey, as long as they make money.

The cartels, using "coyotes" or guides, charge roughly $200 per person (which is a fortune for most of these people). In lieu of money (or even with it), they are often forced to smuggle drugs or other illegal contraband. Sometimes, they are only able to send their children to friends or relatives until they can raise the money to follow. In many cases, there's no assurance the children will reach their destination or that they'll ever see them again.

Using cartel connected coyotes is very dangerous. Immigrants have often reported being beaten, raped while seeing others murdered. The trip is fraught with other dangers such a injuries and no medical facilities (often the coyotes will confiscate any personal medication), corrupt cops and militias who have to regularly be bribed, as well as the lack of food or fresh water while dealing with the weather conditions and having no shelter other than what they brought with them.  

Aside from drug cartels, there are the various religious organizations, especially Catholic. 57.1% of Hispanics are Catholic. Most are historically highly devout and closely follow the dictates of their parish priest.  In America, Catholics are much more open minded and don't give the same level of credence to the priest's instructions, treating them more like  "suggestions" to be followed...or not at one's own discretion.   

From the 1960's onward, most conservative churches have been dying, especially Catholic, causing many parishes to merge while closing numerous schools and other institutions. In addition, there have been fewer priests and nuns signing up. The average age of a priest in 1970 was 30. Today it's 63. When it comes to nuns, only 1% are under 30 with the average age being 80! 

With the immigration of individuals from mostly Catholic Latin America, it's hoped this trend can be reversed. Thus, they are offered shelter (and presumably legal sanctuary since most law enforcement agencies won't enter a religious institution) once they cross the border, as well as help find housing, a job, help with translations and getting various services at taxpayer expense, and of course, religious services are offered in their native Spanish or Portuguese.  

However, to the chagrin of these churches is that a growing number of immigrants, while taking advantage of the services offered, are leaving the restrictions of the church behind. A good number are converting to Islam faster than any other demographic. In fact, in Latin America itself, Islam has grown by 23% with Shiites outnumbering Sunnis. A smaller, but significant percentage, have converted to Evangelical  Protestantism. So, we find not just Catholic organizations encouraging migrants northward, so apparently are Islamic and Protestant organizations too.

Illegal immigration has become more than a political issue of right versus wrong in terms of following the law. It's become an economic issue as employers seek a cheap work force not dependent on unions and are willing to accept long hours for very little money without complaining, thus forcing the traditional workforce to work for less too.

 Various religious groups are looking to grow their numbers and political clout. Meanwhile, mostly traditional conservative Americans are desperately trying to hold on to an America they see slipping through their hands like Texas sand. Hitler once praised Islam, saying that he wished all Germans were Muslims because Islam makes people compliant to authority.

So why isn't Washington doing anything? Simple. The federal government is on the side of Big Business. They fill their coffers, provide the perks and underwrite their campaigns. Both political parties may pretend to be concerned about illegal immigration, but remember that both the Democrats and Republicans are corporate owned and controlled. In truth, they are only concerned to the level Wall Street is. Meanwhile, Washington and Wall Street will continue to offer smoke and mirrors as our America slowly evaporates before our eyes.  

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 beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

Sanctions during the VenezuelanCrisis

How Sanctions Contributed to Venezuela's Economic Collapse

 

World Population Review: Crime RateBy Country 2024

USAID: Providing AdditionalHumanitarian Assistance to Respond to Rising Needs in Haiti

Foreign Aid By Country: Who's getting the most---and how much?

Latin America economic outlook, November 2023

 

Why are more Hispanics converting to Islam...

 

Turnabout and Consequences: Illegal migrants in Liberal Martha's Vineyard

There's a certain comedic justice unfolding at Martha's Vineyard. Perhaps a better expression would be a comeuppance for the Limousine Class of liberals and conservatives living behind their gated communities on the posh getaway island of the rich and somewhat infamous. 

For those of you not familiar with the situation, about 50 illegal immigrants (the establishment media is calling them "migrants" and "future asylum seekers") were dumped off in front of the homes of some of the nation's wealthiest and most powerful residents, which includes the Obamas, the Clintons, Oprah Winfrey, and the Kennedy's, on Martha's Vineyard, which is an exclusive enclave off the coast of Massachusetts. Somehow, it's just seems appropriate, and why not?   

After all these individuals have been actively encouraging illegal immigration along our borders for  so-called "humanitarian" purposes for decades. They even symbolically declared Martha's Vineyard to be a "sanctuary destination", apparently assuming no one would actually take them up on their rhetoric. Well apparently no one told Florida Governor Rick DeSantis (R) that it was "BS" designed to win votes and that no one really meant it.

The Florida governor apparently reached out to about 50 "migrants" in Texas and offered them a one way ticket to swanky Martha's Vineyard where they could expect housing, food, and all the usual amenities the Limousine Class promises those who cross illegally into the border states (they also provided them with $10 gift cards from McDonalds).  

Attorneys for the Boston based "Lawyers for Civil Rights", a nonprofit group which represents primarily liberal causes, is currently representing 30 of the 50 recent arrivals (mostly from Venezuela). They claim their clients were "misrepresented" and cite a brochure given to the "migrants" promising housing, food, and cash assistance.  The brochure allegedly originated from an organization run by Governor DeSantis.

It should be noted that Venezuela has been in economic and political freefall  due primarily because of U.S. led economic sanctions. The sanctions result from a pissing contest starting in 2014 between former U.S. President Obama and the late Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez. The resulting sanctions triggered economic and political instability throughout the region (and devastated Venezuela). The meltdown has slowly been finding its way along the U.S. border.

Although numerous reasons have been cited (depending on who you ask), the primarily reason most often mentioned is Venezuela's cozy relationship with America's arch-nemesis, Cuba, which has survived an 59 year old (and largely failed) embargo amid claims of civil rights violations and election fraud by the Chavez Administration (not like the U.S. has much room to talk on the later issues). 

While the above mentioned resources (along with others) are available as outlined in the brochure, they are for those determined by the State Department to be refugees, which is a very specific term and generally applies to those forced to leave their country to evade persecution for political, ethnic, or religious reasons.  It does not recognize "economic refugees" (economic refugees are those seeking to improve their economic condition).

At present, it doesn't appear that any of the 50 individuals who voluntarily undertook the trip from Texas to Martha's Vineyard qualify. As an aside, the attorneys representing these so-called "migrants" expect that some or perhaps all of their clients will ultimately qualify as refugees as defined by the State Department (with the proper coaching no doubt).

The attorneys are also alleging that the relocation program by DeSantis and Abbott violates their client's "rights" under the Fourth and 14th amendments, as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Apparently those having illegally entered the United States are entitled to the same rights as U.S. citizens, which also overlooks the fact that these individuals are, by definition, criminals until a federal court determines otherwise. Therefore, while certain international and domestic laws would seem applicable, their legal protection would be limited. 

But then, who knows? Perhaps the newest way to achieve the "American Dream" is to enter the country illegally (immigration laws? We don't need no stinking immigration laws!"), find some bleeding heart liberal attorneys who are starving for some national notoriety, and sue the state and/or governor!

The old way was just a waiting game. It required the illegal alien to hide under some religious organization's wing until some poll told the president that voters wouldn't oust them out if they granted amnesty to a few million illegal immigrants. It worked for Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Obama!

Governor DeSantis, who is a likely Republican presidential candidate in 2024, said that no laws were broken, despite claims by the Lawyers for Civil Rights. The $12 million dollar program, based a similar program by Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R), is aimed at redirecting illegal immigrants from non-sanctuary cities and states to sanctuary locations.  I guess liberal politicians should be careful what they promise. They just might have to deliver.

Abbott has sent so-called migrants to not only D.C., but also New York City and Chicago.  Arizona's Governor, Doug Ducey (R), has also sent illegals to Washington D.C.  Both DeSantis and Abbott have indicated that they intend to continue to do so despite the threatened lawsuit by Lawyers for Civil Rights for fraud. 

The downside has been that mayors from these "sanctuary" cities (like San Francisco), have asked Washington for millions more in federal aid to cope with the influx of illegal residents. There's something wrong about a city or state which openly decides to blow off federal immigration laws, and then have the moxy to ask for federal (taxpayer) dollars to bail them out of the problem they created.

Illegal immigration and border crossings have largely dropped off the establishment airwaves given that so much time needed to cover Trump, although there is a sprinkling here and there about the crisis in Ukraine, rising inflation, Putin's impatience with the EU and pending dual economic and social disasters with cutting off gas and oil shipments to Europe just as winter approaches, the climate change situation, China's  growing imperialistic aims, Biden's and Harris's pathetic approval ratings, and expected Democratic butt kicking at the midterm elections in November.

Nevertheless, illegal immigration remains a serious problem, and few can doubt that much of it is the result of U.S. foreign policy. At present, there is an estimated 14 million individuals living in the United States as of 2021 who are here illegally. Of course, no one knows for sure.

According to FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform), one of the nation's largest monitor of illegal immigration, these 14 million or so individuals cost taxpayers around $143 billion dollars annually, which is up by $9.4 billion over 2020.

That's money which could be used to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure such as roads or bridges, our antiquated and vulnerable electrical grid, our failing schools, and so forth.  Instead, it's going to support those who refuse to follow our immigration laws and apply like any other law abiding individual wanting to enter our country.

True, many take jobs that most Americans don't want, but if they weren't there, employers would be forced to raise wages and offer benefits to fill those positions. Instead, they offer low wages and few, if any, benefits. They force employees to work in unsafe and unhealthy conditions, long hours without so much as a restroom break because they know these individuals, whom they hired illegally, can't do anything about it.

Few speak the language and fewer still know the first thing about U.S. labor laws. They're desperate for the money and the employers know it. Besides, where else are they going to go? These low life employers who use the argument that they're holding down prices are using the argument that plantation owners used about slave labor. Cheap prices based on human suffering is nobody's bargain.

If they get busted, the employees lose everything, and get deported (or possibly face jail time) while the employers barely get an slap on the wrist. That's not justice regardless of how you feel about illegal immigration. At the bare minimum the employers should lose their business licenses, face minimum fines and jail time. Religious groups should face the same as well as lose their tax exempt status.

What governors like DeSantis, Abbott, and Ducey are doing may not be the right thing, but then they are forcing individuals who want others to deal with their decisions to step up and take responsibility for the political games they play with other people's lives. It's one thing to say "let 'em in" when it's someone else's yard but quite another when it's your backyard. Meanwhile, those who are being sent here and there are pawns caught in a political game.

The majority of our problems with illegal immigration are the result of poor foreign policy decisions. Most of these decisions are the outcome of a handful of very wealthy individuals and corporations attempting to gain greater shares of markets or control of assets and resources. People are a inconsequential byproduct; chattel to be used and discarded. What, I often wonder, would happen if the wellbeing of people was the priority rather than profit?

America is a nation of immigrants. As the country grew, it developed laws pertaining to immigration just like every country on the planet has. It is our right as a sovereign nation just as it is for every other sovereign nation. There's a popular sign at pro-immigration rallies which reads "No One is Illegal", which is true. But a person's actions can be. That's why there are laws, and laws are meant to be enforced until such time as they are changed.

Playing economic and military chicken for the sake of power and wealth makes absolutely no sense. In the name of acquiring resources, we disrupt and destroy the most precious resource of them all--- human life.  How does that benefit Humanity? How does that create a more productive and sustainable planet?  

Sudden mass and unregulated shifts of population typically result in conflict, be it cultures, laws, values, traditions, and incompatible religions. Ultimately, it sets the stage for the annihilation of one or the other under the euphemistic term of "multiculturalism". 

When population shifts are gradual and relatively small, there's an opportunity for absorption of cultures and everything migrants bring. When the influx is large and unexpected, there is no time for a "cultural courtship" to take place. Conflict occurs as one (usually the incoming group) attempts to assert itself. Not all conquest are at the tip of a spear or bayonet, but they are conquests nevertheless.

Martha's Vineyard is, in the short run, a minor blip in the news cycle. But the accumulative affects of these "minor blips" are how empires fall and civilizations vanish into the dustpan of history.

 

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! 

 

Migrants who landed on Martha's Vineyard were tricked by misleading brochure, lawyers say

Migrants flown to Martha's Vineyard file class-action suit against DeSantis

Martha's Vineyard is a magnet for millionaires, CEOs and celebs...

 

Why Hollywood hides at Martha's Vineyard

Celebs on Martha's Vineyard

International sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis

United States embargo against Cuba

How many illegal aliens live in the United States?

 

 

 

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

National Hispanic Heritage Month: Integration or Balkanization?

Did you know this is National Hispanic Heritage Month? Well, it is. Each year, from September 15 through October 15, is set aside to acknowledge the contributions of Hispanics, ranging from the arts and culture to social activists and professionals. National Hispanic Heritage Month is an outgrowth of President Johnson's proclamation in 1968 of Hispanic Heritage Week. It was enlarged by President Ronald Reagan in 1988. In addition, according to the official National Heritage Month website, the start of the month, September 15, is an important date in Hispanic history. It marks the independence day of five Latin America countries, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Nicaragua. Also, Mexico and Chile celebrate their respective independence days on September 16.

According to a 2016 Pew Research Report, here are approximately 57 million Hispanics in the U.S. as of 2015 (that figure may not included those who are here illegally since those individuals don't always respond to US Census inquiries). That's 18% of the total U.S. population. From 2000 to 2014, Hispanics accounted for 54% of the U.S. population growth, with Mexicans making up 2/3 of the total Hispanic population. Of that 54%, Southern states received the lion's share with 46% growth in population. This was followed by 24% in Western states, 18% in the Midwest, and 12% in the Northeast portion of the U.S. California has the single largest population of Hispanics (around 15 million) while Texas (which has near 12 million) has seen the fastest growth rate. Never the less, Hispanics immigration, once the largest demographic group, has now been over taken by Asians.

Hispanics are also the youngest cadre among immigrants with an average age of 28. Among just Hispanic Millennials, that number drops to 19 years of age. The Pew report went on to say that in any given year, some 800,000 Hispanics turn 18. Not surprisingly, 55% of all Hispanics are Catholic. However, what was surprising was that the number of Hispanics who at least know some English is increasing; 68% from ages 5 and up speak English. Perhaps as a result of more Hispanics learning English and greater integration, especially among U.S. born Hispanics, there are fewer high school dropouts. As of 2016, only 10% of Hispanics dropped out high school (in 1996, that rate was 16%). Furthermore, college enrollment among Hispanics is also seeing an increase with some 47% are enrolling. This is an increase of 15% over 1999 levels.

In terms of voting, some 27 million Hispanics were eligible to vote in 2016 with Millennials making up the largest percentage of that number with 44%. Historically, Hispanics have strongly favored the Democratic Party (with the exception of Cubans, who've traditionally supported Republicans). Despite this, 57% of all Hispanics polled before the 2016 election felt that the nation was headed in the wrong direction. Out of that, 63% of those born in the U.S. felt that we were headed in the wrong direction. Interestingly, 63% of U.S. born Millennial Hispanics said that they were voting for Hillary Clinton as a anti-Trump vote rather than one in favor of Hillary. However, among non-Millennials (those over 35), 65% said they were voting for Hillary and not against Trump. Based on election results, 66% of Hispanics voted for Hillary Clinton. Ironically, this contrasts with Barack Obama who received 67 which compares to Obama's 77% Latino turn for his second term (by contrast, Trump received just 28% of the Latino vote compared to 31% for McCain in 2008 and 27% for Romney in 2012). What are the key political issues affecting Hispanics? Surprisingly, it's not immigration. The chief concerns of most Hispanic voters are education (55%), employment (52%) and healthcare (43%) and Immigration (32%).

In a recently poll by Pew, dated September 28, 2017, Hispanic unemployment has also on the downswing at 4.7% (the national unemployment rate is 4.2%, although that number doesn't include those working temp or seasonal jobs, part time jobs, underemployed or those who have simply stopped looking). Still, those are good numbers for Hispanics in general. Hispanics born in the U.S. and speak English have led this curve. Currently, 17% of the workforce is comprised of those who identify as Hispanic; up from 13.5% in 2006. Not unexpectedly, those born in the U.S. have done the best in terms of finding employment. Again this appears to be a result of their ability to speak English and integration into U.S. society. Another positive sign is that Hispanic women, especially those who are U.S. born, have done well and even outpaced Hispanic males in terms of employment. The poverty rate among Hispanics has also shown a drop with a new low of 19.4%. The flip side to that figure is that Hispanics have a higher percentage of severe poverty when compared to other populations.

So, overall it appears that things are looking up Hispanics, especially among native born and those who are Millennials and/or female. Nevertheless, we need to at least mention the "elephant in the room", and that is illegal immigration. While Hispanics, and Mexicans in particular, make up the largest share of illegals immigrants, other ethnic and racial groups are mixed in with those numbers. At present there are approximately 11 million individuals here illegally. Some are here on expired visas, be it for work or school, the majority are simply here because they made a conscious decision that they didn't want to go through the immigration process.

Some will tell you that they are simply interested in finding work and not in becoming a naturalized citizen. In fact, most who find employment send a percentage of their earnings back home to aid family members. For many of them, it's often dirty backbreaking jobs in agriculture as field hands or working in processing plants. As few may find employment in at race tracks as hot walkers, muckers, or groomers. Maybe some will find work on cattle ranches or dealing with other livestock (including slaughter houses). Others end up in construction as painters or roofers, while others windup in the food industry, while women, who may also work in these fields, also end up in sweatshops doing piece work. Of course, a percentage will fall in with drug cartels and criminal gangs, in which case their life expectancy is often short. Regardless of which area they find work, their pay is usually very little; working conditions are terrible (and since it's illegal, is not covered by the EEOC or OSHEA), while personal housing is often in dilapidated houses, sheds or garages with no running water or electricity, and they are always looking over their shoulder. A steep price for trying to jump the line.

In terms of costs to the American taxpayer, some estimates put illegal immigration as low as 3.5 million (per a May 2013 Heritage Foundation report) while others put that number as high as 12.5 (based on a September 2017 Federation for Immigration Reform or FAIR report) plus 4.2 million children of illegal immigrants. The difficulty is lack of adequate documentation and that most illegal immigrants try very hard to stay below the radar; avoiding surveys, Census workers, and so forth. However, it appears that the higher numbers are most accurate based on reported factors such as education, hospital and emergency room reports, and crime reports. While the costs obviously vary from city to city and state to state, when both federal and cumulative state numbers are added together, the cost to taxpayers is in the neighborhood of $135 billion dollars. This includes a number of factors, such as healthcare, hiring Spanish speaking tutors, welfare payments, various local, state, federal subsidies, and so forth. Of course, there is the cost of incarceration and deportation.

FAIR breaks this figure down to $8,075.00 per illegal alien family. Nevertheless, that's not to imply that all illegal immigrants don't pay taxes in some form or another. Many do, either through purchases or use of stolen social security numbers. One estimate, based on research done by FAIR, estimates that illegal residents paid in $18,968,857,700 dollars. However, when offset by what legal residents (i.e. taxpayers) pay in, the total net costs of illegal immigration to you and me is $116 billion dollars. I've included a link to FAIR's website and specifically their page The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on U.S. Taxpayers (https://fairus.org/. I've also included a link down below to the Heritage Foundation report for those who would like to compare reports.

To wrap this up, Hispanics appear to be integrating into the American melting pot, albeit somewhat slowly, especially by older adults and recent arrivals. Those born in the United States are the best integrated as one would expect. Hopefully their experiences will aide older members of this demographic group adopt to a full and rewarding life in America by teaching them the customs, traditions, values, and especially an at least conversational English. It used to be a matter of personal pride of earlier immigrants to America to be able to speak our common language. In fact, the majority of immigrants almost immediately identified as "Americans" so complete was the separation of their ties to their former country. Hopefully, this trend towards integration will continue.



Hispanic Heritage Month Official Site


Key facts about how the U.S. Hispanic population is changing


Hispanic dropout rate hits new low, college enrollment at a new high


Hillary wins Latino vote but fell below 2012 support for Obama


The Fiscal Costs of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer