A few points to ponder about the President`s Invasion reform proposals:
1.I don`t know what putting 6,000 National Guardsmen on the border will accomplish. Let us consider this; according to Wickipedia, the U.S./Mexican border is 1,950 miles long. That means that we can assign 3.26 Guardsmen per mile of border. However, we can`t work these guys 24 hours, so if we divide them into three 8 hour shifts we get, essentially, one guy per MILE of border! I`m not sure how valuable one guy per mile will be.
Furthermore, it doesn`t matter if we have 5,000 Guardsmen per mile if they aren`t going to aggressively prevent crossings. Will the Administration take the risk of a Guardsmen shooting an invader? What will happen if they have to get rough with old Pedro? Will they turn back a pregnant woman seeking an anchor?
There is the gist of the matter; they won`t be for actual enforcement. The President made it clear that their role will be for technical support, intelligence, etc. to aid the Border Patrol. What does that mean? If what we heard was true, the government was giving Mexico intelligence to avoid the Minutemen. Is THAT going to be the Guard`s role? Are they going to help shaft those who are trying to enforce the law? The Border Guards have, according to the President, caught and sent back millions of illegals last year. It doesn`t seem that the problem lies in support; they need more men to make arrests.
2.Of course, the problem is that there is no punishment the invaders fear, because the government has not lifted a finger to stop the onslaught. When caught by INS, they are returned to a spot in Mexico near where they crossed. They move to a different spot and cross over again. Can you imagine if other laws were enforced in this manner? It is as if drunk drivers were taken to the station for a breathalyzer test, then driven back to their cars (with their keys) and left on the side of the road. OF COURSE they`ll drive drunk again! There must be something unpleasant done for punishment, or these people will continue to break the law.
I advocate community service. Anyone caught illegally in the United States should have to forfeit any money or possessions they have and be lodged in a halfway house, where they should be employed during the day doing ``work Americans won`t do``. Have them clean the highways, cut grass in parks, dig ditches and whatnot. Their pay should be used to cover their living expenses while in the halfway house. Make them do this for 6 months or so. If they lose all of the money they would have made working in Mexico, they will think twice about coming here. The 11 million invaders (actually, I suspect there are quite a few more than the PEW Hispanic Center claims) will hot-foot it out of this country!
3.I do not believe that most employers of illegal aliens aren`t aware of what they are doing. The penalty must be severe for employing these people. Bush and his blue blood friends fear this, because they all make out nicely using immigrant labor to clean their toilets and cut their grass. Think about how many scandals we`ve had over the years involving government figures employing illegals. Washington is full of alien maids, gardeners, nannies, etc. The powers that be don`t want to end the gravy train and be forced to pay for labor like a commoner.
Which brings us to the matter of biometric I.D. cards. Now if anybody would care to consider the ramifications of a guest-invader program with Biometric I.D. they would understand immediately that it won`t work; too many illegals will simply claim to have legal status, and you won`t be able to prove otherwise. What this means is that, first, legal aliens will have to have these cards, then we`ll be forced to impose this on citizens, so that we can distinguish between legal and non-legals. In short, this proposal means the end of liberty in America; we will all have a card by which our every action is monitored by the government. (And the Democrats are upset about ``domestic spying`` on Al-Quada?!) We will be forced to carry ``our papers`` like a citizen of the old Soviet Union, and present them wherever and whenever demanded.
We already have allowed our liberty to be circumscribed by our government in ways many and varied; we give all kinds of information to the IRS, we have to have a driver`s license, a social security card, etc. Still, this I.D. card will be the ultimate in government authority over the citizen. It`s not a price I`m willing to pay for 40 cent lettuce and $10 lawn service. No guest worker program means no I.D. card for us all-a small price to pay for liberty!
4.By allowing half of Mexico to work here in these soon-to-be Disunited States we prevent any chance of our Southern neighbor from reforming. Why should Mexico make a decent life for her citizens when America will do the job for them? Mexico already owes us huge amounts of money, which we have lent to them for economic development. Why haven`t they developed? The corrupt regime has pocketed our cash, and pawned their problem off on us-and President Arbusto has been happy to oblige! There is no kindness in what we are doing. This is the same problem we faced with welfare; we are making Mexico and Mexicans dependent on Uncle Sugar.
5.The President and the Republicans have failed to lead on this issue for decades; why should we believe they are serious now? I find it incredible that we are going to make any effort to stop the flow of invaders. We won`t be able to if we legalize the current crop because we`ll need new bottom-tier laborers. President Bush has used up his right to our trust, if you ask me.
6.We will need an agency to keep track of the millions of ``guest-workers``. This behemoth will have to be far larger and more intrusive than the IRS. Do we really want to create such a monster? Are we prepared to fund it? No, and no. We`ll create it, but it will never be funded properly, so the ``guest-workers`` will wander about unsupervised, and we will have the same problems in the future we are having now-with a much larger group of aliens who have no intention of assimilating.
7.The President hemmed and hawed about what we will do, but he did not authorize a border-fence. Furthermore, he argued that we cannot repatriate the invaders. Uh, that`s your job, isn`t it Mr. President? We can`t catch all drug dealers, but we try anyway, don`t we?
8.I also did not hear any suggestion that we change the law to end ``anchor babies``. If the President were serious about protecting our borders, he would have called for legal reform in that area. Why should a child born in a Laredo truck stop be given citizenship-and keep the entire family in the country?
This is an appalling policy advocated by our President, one which, when future historians discuss what brought about the fall of the United States, will stand in the forefront of history`s terrible blunders. How those charged with protecting and defending the United States could stumble about so blindly is beyond me. The illegal immigration issue is evey bit as dangerous to the survival of the Republic as Islamic Jihad. One kills us with bullets, the other with babies. In the end, they both can destroy our nation.
Something must be done to stop this!