Laws can't stop all illegal immigration

[AlphaCentauri]

Source: baxterbullentin

LITTLE ROCK (AP) — Neither laws nor increased vigilance along the Mexican border can completely stop illegal immigration and narcotics trafficking into the United States, a former State Department liaison to Congress said Wednesday.

"We have to get away from the feeling that there's something magical about a piece of paper. 'Let's pass a law against something. Let's pass a law in favor of something.' That doesn't make it a reality," former diplomat John A. Ritchie told the Arkansas Committee on Foreign Relations.

Reality, Ritchie said, "has to do with internal economic dynamics in Mexico and demand and dynamic ups-and-downs in the U.S. economy."

Ritchie, who began working for the State Department in 1976, served as the consul general in Monterrey, a city in the northern Mexican state of Nuevo Leon. Like other areas of the country, Nuevo Leon has seen increasing violence from drug cartels. President Felipe Calderon has sent more than 20,000 soldiers and federal police nationwide to combat drug gangs, blamed for a wave of assaults including killings, beheadings and grenade attacks.

Ritchie said increased policing of the border and drug arrests have led to higher prices in the U.S. market as demand remains steady for narcotics.



Read more: http://www.baxterbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080612/NEWS01/806120357/-1/NEWSFRONT2

[napi21]

1. I agree! Lots of people keep talking about fences, and arming

the border, and seem to ignore the base cause for both illegal immigration & drug trafficking....SUPPLY & DEMAND! If employers IN THE US were stopped from hiring any illegal immigrants, there would be no jobs and no reason for anyone to want to break our laws to get here. If drug usage were drastically reduced, the products would lose their market!

We need to adress the CAUSE not the problem!

[Phred42]

2. Arrest all Employers of Illegals, heavy fines and Jail time mandatory

No jobs - No Problem

[damntexdem]

10. And no economy.

Where undocumented workers have been scared away, it has HURT local economies.

[Phred42]

26. Bullshit. Employers would have to pay American wages to Americans

And the Illegals could go home and Fix the problems in their own country's rather than run away from them and participate in adding to ours

that'd be a damn shame , wouldn't it!

[Honeycombe8]

52. You know, people forget that before the illegals had those jobs, our citizen neighbors did.

Not that I hold it against illegals for trying to better their situation in their own countries. But that's not what they are doing, is it? They are NOT trying to improve conditions in their own countries. They have decided NOT to do that, but to go to another country and get money to send back to their country. In the course of doing that, unfortunately, they put citizens of the other country out of work.

Do I feel for the illegal immigrant who lives in the shadows and works hard for wages to send back to his home country? Yes, I do. But I feel MORE for the man whose job he took. That man whose job he took lives in this country; his family doesn't pay Mexican prices for food; HIS family must pay American prices for food, for insurance, for rent.

[Zorra]

51. Yeh, the solution is really pretty obvious and simple, isn't it?.

I don't get it; it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.

[Zavulon]

3. Laws can't stop all crime, either.

Should we simply throw in the towel and disband our police forces?

I say crack down on employers AND illegals. Employers aren't the only ones who should be punished. Draconian penalties for both.

[atreides1]

4. Why not for everyone

If you really want Draconian penalties, then it would only be fair to apply those penalties to all not just select groups.

Personally I'd enjoy seeing how long people like you would actually last under Draconian laws that you want see applied to others!

[Igel]

7. However, his point remains unchallenged.

Laws against X will never eliminate all X, no matter how strictly enforced; therefore dispose of enforcement of those laws, if not the laws themselves.

Let X = illegal immigration, and there's agreement by some.

Let X = rape, and there's outrage.

Let X = corporate fraud, and there's outrage.

Let X = illegal drugs, and there's agreement by some.

What's at issue isn't the principle--it's true that laws against X will never eliminate all X, whatever X is--whether incest and cannibalism or jaywalking. However, when people dislike a certain law, they prefer to only accept the principle when it supports their opposition to that law. Not only are they engaging in a fallacy, they're being hypocritical in how they apply their fallacy. However, for laws they like, because they dislike the behavior that's banned by the laws, they want draconian penalties. "My morality is right, and deserves being imposed; your morality is wrong, and should be punished."

Illegal immigration? Dispose of the "illegal" part by making it legal immigration. Corporate fraud? Frog-march the perps before the cameras, no punishment is too harsh.

[AlphaCentauri]

32. His point is the populist "We are a nation of laws"

I don't see any reference in that point of view to justice and freedom, his point is where totalitarianism and demagogy converged.

[Zavulon]

8. And your suggestion would be?

Just wondering.

[damntexdem]

11. End the hysteria about undocumented workers.

Welcome them as important boosts to the U.S. economy.

End NAFTA and practices that undermine local economies in Mexico.

Work with groups in Mexico to develop small-scale local industries, so that families are not broken up when young adults leave to find work to support their families.

[Zavulon]

13. "Undocumented workers?"

Does everyone here illegally have a job, or are you only suggesting that course of action for employed illegals?

Either way, I have no sympathy for anyone here illegally. I'm on board for Draconian penalties for both illegals and their employers. Since I'm here legally and don't employ anyone, I'm not worried about being subject to them myself.

[Carnea]

20. I personally know three contractors that replaced the african americans and Irish

with all illegal crews. Should I ask them if they feel boosted?


"End NAFTA and practices that undermine local economies in Mexico"

Why don't we end policies that undermine working class Americans. This open border is an attack on Unions, African Americans and poor whites. It is a classest and racist feel good attack on hard working Americans of every color including native born Hispanics.

[AlphaCentauri]

31. you must work for ICE otherwise I don't see any other way for you to know

who is "illegal" and who is not, any options to make that classification?

Let's say,

Brown skin
Speak spanish
music
culture
family

How can we determine if a latino is illegal or not, Cubans and Puerto Ricans look like Mexicans.

[Carnea]

37. It's fairly simple actually to tell if someone hired and illegal.

Do they receive a check or cash?

Is it off season for strawberries and they stayed to do day labor.

If the contractor says I don't know and I don't want to know when you ask them.

Cubans and Puerto Ricans don't look like Mexicans. Cubans tend to drive a Lexus and fix peoples teeth for a living for one thing. Actually the workers are from Central America not Mexico. And yes I've chatted with them they are understandably shy but very hard workers. I feel for the African Americans who cannot get hired because they are here but I have no animosity toward them personally.

[AlphaCentauri]

40. it's pure speculation

Not all cubans drive lexus, many sell ice creams, tortas cubanas, work in the construction..


Lets play jeopardy, which of this beauties is Puerto Rican and Who is Mexican?

[Carnea]

43. First of all the little beauty queens have sashes with the names on them.

I don't live in Miami I live in Pinellas county. There are Cubans whose family have been here since the war. And are rich landowner and professional types and there are some (But not that many) hispanic farm workers that drifted in from the strawberry fields out east and the tomato farms down south. The tend to be very short have dark skin and speak Spanish. The Cubans have a lighter complexion are taller and don't speak Spanish. (Some of the don't even know Spanish the shock) It isn't rocket science to tell them apart. It's like finding the Italians in Scotland.

[AlphaCentauri]

46. I don't expect a person who is exposed to the sun's heat have a pale skin color

Cubans some are blond and some not

[JeanGrey]

41. ABSOLUTELY and it has to stop. Fining and shutting down

employers who employ illegals is the ONLY way, along with enforcing the laws we already have on the books AND tightening our borders.

[Runcible Spoon]

53. Putting some restraints on umbridled neoliberal global capitalism HELPS American Labor!

The vicious cycle goes like this: outsource labor to China/India, import cheap Chinese goods and give Americans no domestic competition, pay agricultural labor wages so low that welfare remains a wiser decision for supporting a family in poverty. American laborers are fucked at every step.

By standing up to China, bringing production back to the USA and reducing the amount of plastic SHIT we all buy, and putting a leash on the ability of corporate power to cut out all worker benefits for the sake of a fat bottom line, we can bring back/boost domestic labor, improve the quality of consumer products, and give incentive to Mexico to keep their OWN production localized. Create ethical and fair trade agreements among nations, and what we have is a framework for a more sustainable global economy.

Will this hurt initially? You bet your ass; strikes, boycotts, embargos, demonstrations...but sometimes in order to heal we need to bleed out the infection.

Putting up a fence never kept anyone out of anything, it just made the journey longer.

*edited for a spelling error

[nodehopper]

55. who would strike in that scenario? I think unions would be all for that!

[Runcible Spoon]

56. I would think so, but I'm just covering all possible scenarios...

:wave:

[primavera]

24. What an exceptionally intelligent idea

I don't know where Americans get this belief that the only effective responses are coercive ones. With us, it's always about punish, punish, and then punish some more. Put more people behind bars. What's so amazing about it is that, in the majority of cases, apart from being inhumane, those repressive measures don't work. But we've got this whole biblical eye for an eye thing going on that blinds us to any possibility of exploring the root causes of a problem and trying to address the underlying disease as opposed to its superficial symptoms. So we just keep bashing away with out hammer and, not surprisingly, the problems grow worse instead of better. Gosh, now who could possibily have anticipated that? Well, any thinking person with an IQ greater than a turnip, I would have thought, but evidently not.

[Phred42]

5. BINGO! Agree

[depakid]

16. Typical American response

Rather than address the root causes, PUNISH PUNISH PUNISH

And build an even LARGER and more expensive prison system.

With thinking like this so rampant, is it any wonder that the country is in such sorry shape?

[Zavulon]

18. So, enlighten me.

Would I be correct in assuming that your solution would involve no punishment for illegals (or their employers) at all? Whatever your answer may be, do allow this typical American to benefit from your wisdom and depth.

[depakid]

21. Look at the larger picture

and start with the larger questions.

Like: why are people migrating to the states? And

What policies would provide appropriate incentives and disincentives for people to stay in their own countries?

The Clinton policies were a disaster. For example, Operation Gatekeeper tried to wall off portions of the border and in general made it much more difficult, risky and expensive to cross. As sometimes happens, the law of unintended consequences reared its head:

Instead of migrating seasonally for employment and returning home, workers sent for families and extended families instead- because of fear that they'd be cut off from their income. So, instead of dampening migration, the policy actually contributed to a substantial increase, along with qualitative changes in the demographic that placed additional burdens on state and local services. (INS stats back this up).

As to NAFTA, this pretty well sums it up:

* NAFTA, by permitting heavily-subsidized US corn and other agri-business products to compete with small Mexican farmers, has driven the Mexican farmer off the land due to low-priced imports of US corn and other agricultural products. Some 2 million Mexicans have been forced out of agriculture, and many of those that remain are living in desperate poverty. These people are among those that cross the border to feed their families. (Meanwhile, corn-based tortilla prices climbed by 50%. No wonder many so Mexican peasants have called NAFTA their 'death warrant.'

* NAFTA's service-sector rules allowed big firms like Wal-Mart to enter the Mexican market and, selling low-priced goods made by ultra-cheap labor in China, to displace locally-based shoe, toy, and candy firms. An estimated 28,000 small and medium-sized Mexican businesses have been eliminated.

* Wages along the Mexican border have actually been driven down by about 25% since NAFTA, reported a Carnegie Endowment study. An over-supply of workers, combined with the crushing of union organizing drives as government policy, has resulted in sweatshop pay running sweatshops along the border where wages typically run 60 cents to $1 an hour.

So rather than improving living standards, Mexican wages have actually fallen since NAFTA. The initial growth in the number of jobs has leveled off, with China's even more repressive labor system luring US firms to locate there instead.

But Mexicans must still contend with the results of the American-owned 'maquiladora' sweatshops: subsistence-level wages, pollution, congestion, horrible living conditions (cardboard shacks and open sewers), and a lack of resources (for streetlights and police) to deal with a wave of violence against vulnerable young women working in the factories. T

The survival (or less) level wages coupled with harsh working conditions have not been the great answer to Mexican poverty, while they have temporarily been the answer to Corporate America's demand for low wages.

With US firms unwilling to pay even minimal taxes, NAFTA has hardly produced the promised uplift in the lives of Mexicans. Ciudad Juarez Mayor Gustavo Elizondo, whose city is crammed with US-owned low-wage plants, expressed it plainly: "We have no way to provide water, sewage, and sanitation workers. Every year, we get poorer and poorer even though we create more and more wealth."

Falling industrial wages, peasants forced off the land, small businesses liquidated, growing poverty: these are direct consequences of NAFTA. This harsh suffering explains why so many desperate Mexicans -- lured to the border area in the false hope that they could find dignity in the US-owned maquiladoras -- are willing to risk their lives to cross the border to provide for their families.

There were 2.5 million Mexican illegals in 1995; 8 million have crossed the border since then. In 2005, some 400 desperate Mexicans died trying to enter the US.

NAFTA failed to curb illegal immigration precisely because it was never designed as a genuine development program crafted to promote rising living standards, health care, environmental cleanup, and worker rights in Mexico. The wholesale surge of Mexicans across the border dramatically illustrates that NAFTA was no attempt at a broad uplift of living conditions and democracy in Mexico, but a formula for government-sanctioned corporate plunder benefiting elites on both sides of the border.

More: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0425-30.htm

CAFTA will only make this worse for all involved (including Mexico- a destination for Centeal American migrants too).

[Zavulon]

25. Still, since you're so against punishment,

are you saying there should be none for illegals and their employers?

You can slam NAFTA all you like and at the end of the day I'll probably agree with you, but if government policies produce poverty in major urban areas that doesn't give residents the right to make up for the difference with criminal acts.

What are you recommending for those who break the law? Amnesty?

I'm for punishment. Republicans are the ones who decide which laws they deem worthy of following, I think all of them should be followed - or changed if they suck, but followed until they're changed.

So, again, what do we do with those who break the law? Give them incentive to stop, keep up with failed policies of catch-and-release, or just give everyone amnesty?

[depakid]

27. I mentioned incentives and disincentives

which in some cases involves retributory actions, used appropriately and proportionately as part of a much larger mix.

Unfortunately, most Americans have difficulty with larger pictures, due to simplistic, manichean thinking and a predisposition to loaded language and emotional reactions, as opposed to rational and systemic problem solving.

Hence: the world's largest and most expensive prison system, "zero tolerance," and hostility toward funding responsible and effective social and rehabilitation services.

[primavera]

29. Bravo!

Very well said! :applause:

[UndertheOcean]

30. Well said, this and your previous post!

[AlphaCentauri]

33. I can't say "emotional reactions"

nobody cares how much people in other countries suffer

[Zavulon]

36. Well since a "typical American" like me is

prone to "having difficulty with larger pictures, due to simplistic, manichean thinking and a predisposition to loaded language and emotional reactions, as opposed to rational and systemic problem solving," I thank you for your attempt to correct my obvious mental deficiencies. However, I'm still for removing all incentives for people being here illegally and for making sure that if you're here illegally, your life is destined to suck.

I would have no problem with streamlining the immigration process to increase LEGAL immigration, but I will never have any sympathy for illegals or anyone who employs / shelters them - despite your demonstration of clear superiority over "typical Americans" like me.

[Rage for Order]

38. Which specific "retributory actions" do you support? n/t

[primavera]

28. Change the laws

I agree one shouldn't be breaking laws, but at the same time, there are one hell of a lot of godawful stupid laws on the books, written by total morons, acting upon flawed information, fear, and petty prejudices, that should never have been passed into law. Libraries are filled with such laws. Should those laws be broken because they're stupid? Well, no, I guess not, but I do think it provides some mitigation.

[AlphaCentauri]

34. totally agree

stupid laws have killed many people around the world and we have not learn that from history.

[Zavulon]

35. Fine change them...

...but I'm one who expects compliance until they're broken.

As for illegals, I want not only all incentives removed for being here illegally, I want serious reasons not to do it. I have no problem with an increase in LEGAL immigration, but I have no sympathy for illegals.

[High Plains]

47. These people aren't your enemy.

They're just trying to make a living.

Yes, they are not in compliance with the law. Sometimes the law is an ass, and this is one of those occasions. Our immigration law does not reflect reality: Foreign workers play a big role in our economy.

What we need is comprehensive immigration reform. You know, the kind of thing that was killed last year by all the Mexican-haters.

[bjb]

49. Trying to make a living

My brother and his wife have a two person landscaping business and were making a decent living. Most of their accounts have been lost to companies that use illegal labor. Is this okay with you? Why do you think it is okay that American workers wages go down so someone who is here illegally is "just trying to make a living".

[primavera]

22. Sure, but that too is a balancing act

We don't execute jaywalkers. We don't imprison people for running red lights. Why not? The end conclusion of the argument you're making is that we should mete out heavy punishments for all violations, regardless of whether they be egregious or slight. We already have the largest non-military force under arms patrolling our border. Hundreds of people die every year trying to evade capture along the border. Our border patrol already arrests and detains in prisons countless people for attempting to cross the border illegally. We're building walls at huge expense to keep out immigrants, which serve the unintended secondary purpose of disupting migratory routes of animals and disturbing already fragile ecosystems. Immigrants who do successfully cross the border are forced to live underground, living in constant fear of being picked up, prey for exploitative US companies eager to acquire cheap labor. We've passed border security laws which give the Seretary of Homeland Security the authority to waive, at his personal discretion, any law - any law at all, mind you - he personally deems necessary to preserve the security of the border. We summarily deport people, many of whom are lawfully present and, in some cases, are even US citizens, in our zeal to get rid of illegal immigrants. We've introduced national ID cards with biometric security devices and created vast databases in order to monitor who is and is not here legally. The point is, we're undertaking quite a number of draconian enforcement measures in order to enforce these laws and where has it gotten us? Illegal immigration plugs along uninterrupted. What next, do we create a Berlin Wall around the country and adopt all of the repressive police state tactics that go along with that, just in order to keep out some immigrants? Wouldn't that be sort of overkill? Just how much closer to a police state are you willing to bring us in order to punish illegal border-crossers looking for shitty jobs?

[Zavulon]

39. As long as the laws are strictly applied to people here illegally and

to people who employ them, I'm all for instant deportation. I'm for withholding federal funding from "sanctuary cites," I'm for removing water stations from the desert, I'm for making it clear that if you're not here legally, you're not welcome.

I'm completely without sympathy for people here illegally. My feeling: streamline the immigration process and increase LEGAL immigration, but do not cut illegals any breaks at all.

By the way, I think your response was reasonable, but if you're attempting to imply that we've actually taken serious measures to stop illegal "immigration," I disagree. Republicans promised their fence in 2006 to try to get votes, and all this time later they've built two miles of said fence. The idea that Republicans would sincerely try to stop their flow of cheap labor honestly makes me laugh (no offense meant here). The measures you describe are largely for appearance, and - as you said - the flow continues uninterrupted.

[primavera]

42. Look at it from their point of view

First of all, some history: the pattern of importing labor en masse from Mexico was one we established, through the bracero program. Beginning with World War II and continuing on afterwards for decades, we brought millions of Mexican workers to this country to work in agriculture and other sectors of the economy. Of course, simply because we initiated a program doesn't mean that we shouldn't ever be able to extricate ourselves from it. Nevertheless, I think it's worth noting that the migratory pattern you're lamenting came about as a direct result of US policies.

Secondly, you may not welcome immigrants, but there most certainly are those who do. Ironically, many border crossers are met a mile or two this side of the border by welcome wagons, waiting vans with food and water, ready to whisk arrivals off to safe houses and jobs with meat packing companies, farms, textiule companies, hotels, etc.. In the most extreme cases, specifically Tyson's Chicken and, allegedly, Marriott Hotels, US corporations hired coyotes to recruit workers across the border and smuggle them into the US to work for them.

Third, the Mexican government actively encourages illegal immigration, as it alleviates their domestic unemployment problems and produces infusions of cash into their economy through the remissions sent home by immigrants working in the US.

Fourth, the only thing they are trying to do is precisely the same thing that every single American, excepting those of Native American ancestry, has done themselves. All of us came here as immigrants, looking to build a better life for ourselves and our families and to help build this country. That is all that today's immigrants are looking to do, in that respect they are no different than we are.

So, in sum, the situation a prospective border crosser faces is their own country telling them to go, US companies telling them to come, a huge weight of historical precedent legitimizing migration, and the opportunity to make more in a single day here in the US than they can make in a week south of the border. Against all of that, they're balancing US immigration laws, many of which are conspicuously unfair and racist. So, yeah, there's no denying it, they are breaking laws, and they do so knowingly, but there are a lot of factors encouraging them to do so and, in the eyes of many on both sides of the border, the laws that they're breaking don't really deserve to be honored. Think back to the underground railroad. Those people knew only too well that they were breaking every law in the book, but they nevertheless slept well at night, knowing that they were doing the right thing. And history now considers those lawbreakers to be heroes and rightly so. Okay, so the analogy's a bit thin - I don't seriously expect history to vindicate alien smugglers in years to come. All I'm saying is that people can and do exercise their own independent judgement with respect to the merit and integrity of existing laws and frequently reach the conscious and rational decision to break laws they perceive to be unjust, and they are not necessarily entirely without justification in doing so.

[Zavulon]

44. I welcome immigrants who

come here legally. As for your post, which I admit is mostly reasonable with the glaring exception of your thinly veiled and inaccurate "Secondly, you may not welcome immigrants...", I'm afraid we're going to have to agree to disagree. The guy who broke into my house in 2005 probably didn't have a lot of alternatives, but he still wasn't welcome.

I know immigration law is complicated, convoluted and quite frankly shitty - but that doesn't mean that we should be ignoring or excusing violating the law just because it's convenient. That's what Republicans do.

Lastly, it's not as if all illegals come from south of our border. Excuse Mexican lawbreakers all you like, but you act as if I'm sitting here saying "Yeah, let all the Chinese and Irish stay, but get rid of those damn Mexicans." Nothing could be further from the truth. I have no sympathy for any illegal, regardless of country of origin.

[primavera]

45. Sorry, my bad

I didn't mean to insinuate that your motivations were racist, I understand it's the illegality of these people's entry that is concerning you and I can certainly respect that. My main point was simply that I believe there are some extenuating circumstances which to some extent mitigate the individual guilt of many illegal immigrants.

If I may offer a further thing to think about, you might want to consider that there is by no means a consensus that undocumented labor actually consistutes a harm to the economy. Because we are a large country with a large population of illegal immigrants, the presence of illegal immigrants is highly visible and everyone has an anecdote about how illegal aliens are taking jobs that American workers might otherwise be performing. But anecdotal evidence isn't very reliable and, if you look at the overall statistics, most respectable scholars agree that the intuitively plausible supposition that illegal workers take jobs from US workers isn't actually born out in reality. As you no doubt know, immigration being an emotionally volatile issue, there is a wealth of alleged data on the subject, but not all of it is equally reliable. There are host of "studies," particularly those published by the Federation for American Immigration Reform and its affiliate the Center for Immigration Studies, which employ, to put it dimploatically, unorthodox methodologies to arrive at conclusions regarding the alleged costs to the economy of undocumented labor. Put more bluntly, they engineer their methodologies to ensure that they reach the conclusions they want to reach, relying heavily upon push polls, selective definitions, unproven starting assumptions, and eliminating standard statistical corrections. If you bend your methodology enough, you can prove that the moon is made of green cheese, but that don't necessarily make it so. Anyway, I'm sure you're aware of all of this already, I just wanted to make the point that there's an awful lot of manufactured data floating around out there and it's far from clear that undocumented labor poses the threat to the economy that some organizations would have you believe. Since you used the analogy of a person breaking into your house, it may be relevent: if the person breaking into your house in fact posed no threat to you or your family or property, that might be another factor to consider in weighing the severity of his crime.

[High Plains]

48. God, what hatred!

You would prefer that people die in the desert? That's pretty fucking harsh. No sympathy for you.

By the way, the Border Patrol has increased by thousands of agents in recent years. Do you want a fucking cop every six feet along the border or what?

[Zavulon]

50. Actually, I would prefer

that people don't make the attempt to cross illegally, which is why I want the water stations gone. If people ignore that, let it be at their own peril. I don't expect or want sympathy from you, especially since I have no sympathy for people crossing the border illegally.

As for cops every six feet along the border - if that's what it takes to stop the flow, then that's EXACTLY what I want.

[loyalsister]

6. Immigration study

The League of Women Voters did an intentisive study on illegal immigration and developed a position paper. There is plenty of information on the background, etc. Agree with it or not, they did a thorough investigation.
As a matter of fact, they agree with Ritchie about the fact that laws won't prevent immigration.
The solutions are different however.

LWVUS Position on Immigration - Apr 01, 2008

The League of Women Voters believes that immigration policies should promote reunification of immediate families; meet the economic, business and employment needs of the United States; and be responsive to those facing political persecution or humanitarian crises. Provision should also be made for qualified persons to enter the U.S. on student visas. All persons should receive fair treatment under the law.

Position paper

http://www.lwv.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=LWVUSImmigrationStudy&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=11176

[damntexdem]

12. Much better than the hysteria and racism we see all too often.

Including on DU.

[loyalsister]

14. Thanks

I'm glad to see that someone is receptive.

[damntexdem]

9. Completely stop? They can't come close! Thank goodness -- the economy's already in bad shape.

If the U.S. truly wants to slow undocumented immigration, it could stop undermining local economies in Mexico.

[depakid]

17. Step #1 repeal NAFTA

and stop dumping subsidized corn and other ag products onto Mexican markets.

[galledgoblin]

57. yes

why do people dump all their blame on the immigrants, and never stop to think what drove them from their homes in the first place?! :mad:

[treestar]

15. Too true. Common sense. Migration is a natural force.

Make them legal and they can demand equal pay and treatment. Keeping them "illegal" is only for the purpose of being able to exploit them for less than minimum wage or under illegal conditions.

They wouldn't come if there wasn't someone willing to employ them and the fact that conditions are so bad at home means they are willing to work under substandard conditions. All we have to do is give them a pass to go back and forth across the border and they can go home for part of the year and for medical treatment. The way we do it, they have to stay or they can't come back (without a lot of trouble, as coming over illegally is not as easy as Lou Dobbs, etc. would have us think).

[Carnea]

19. Thjat law against suicide is pretty ineffective though there is a lack of repeat offenders nt

[LeftyMom]

23. Hence the "illegal" part.

Duh.

[nodehopper]

54. let's not forget how those internal economics in Mexico are influenced by NAFTA and IMF

eom