Immigration violation tips flood ICE line

[AlphaCentauri]

Source: RDF

It's been a banner year for a toll-free tip line that citizens can call to report immigration violations.
Fueled in part by citizens fed up with illegal immigration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials received nearly 100,000 calls to the tip line from Oct. 1 through the end of April.

At this point in the previous fiscal year, the number was less than 64,000, said David Palmatier, chief of ICE's law enforcement support center in Williston, Vt.

"This current fiscal year is likely to be a record for us," he said.

Palmatier attributed the increase to an effective outreach campaign on the ICE website and extensive public service announcements in media outlets.

The tip line was started in 2003 as part of Operation Predator, a campaign to crack down on international child pornography and child sex tourism.

Palmatier said the effort was so successful ICE decided to expand it to cover all customs and immigration-related crimes.

But people calling to report low-level immigration violations, like a neighbor who might be an illegal immigrant, likely are not getting the responses they hope for.



Read more: http://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/sanbernardinocounty/ci_15096483

[customerserviceguy]

1. So, this story is about calls to the tip line being pretty much ignored

and we wonder why Arizona enacts laws to deal with the problem itself.

[EFerrari]

3. So, in your opinion, Federal agencies should act on your priorities not theirs?

I don't wonder why Arizona enacted this law. It's clearly race baiting for their rabid base.

[customerserviceguy]

4. No, in my opinion

when the Federal government does not act on the people's priorities, they will attempt to get a lower level of government involved. The people are the ones who are tired of picking up the burdens of illegal immigration.

[EFerrari]

5. Imagine how "the people" would feel if immigrants picked up and left

in bigger numbers than they have for the last few years. Local economies all over the country would collapse and who would fund all those social security checks? Sarah Palin would have to go back to being booed at hockey games and the Republicans would have nothing to run on.

[customerserviceguy]

7. The people of Arizona, through their legislature

are saying, "Well, let's give that a try."

As for funding Social Security checks, that might just be done by legal workers. And Caribou Barbie will always find a bandwagon to jump on and pretend she's leading.

[EFerrari]

8. Racial discrimination is illegal in the United States.

You don't get to "try" it.

[customerserviceguy]

16. See below for my ideal solution to the problem

Attacking this at the employer level is the only way to abate the problem.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. What burdens?

Do tell. And please include links :)

[customerserviceguy]

13. There are enormous costs

associated with education, hospitals, and the law enforcement/justice system.

You're a teacher, do your own research. Maybe you'll discover how people outside of Kansas have to deal with the problems.

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. I have done research but apparently you have not

I asked for links. See, I know we BENEFIT from immigrants who pay taxes but get little in return. The fact that you posted no proof and only an assumption is quite telling. :hi:

[customerserviceguy]

17. OK, found one for you

http://cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. From an organization that is praised by Republicans and Phyllis Schaffley

:rofl:

[customerserviceguy]

28. Frankly, I guess those sorts of organizations seem to come up

most often in a Google search. Maybe there's a reason that so-called progressives favor illegal immigration, they have an ulterior motive to look the other way when communities and people are hurting from the effects of illegal immigration.

Ok, so besides guilt by association, what countering facts do you have that disputes what I've presented from that site? Do you deny that illegal immigrants have costs to the places where they constitute more than a tiny, almost insignificant minority?

[proud2BlibKansan]

30. Google is your friend

http://www.google.com/search?q=economic+benefits+of+immigration&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[customerserviceguy]

31. A page full of a bunch of individual opinions

I could have cited such a thing in answer to your question, but I chose to go with something a bit more scholarly.

I guess where you live, you just don't seem to have the expenses associated with illegal immigration. I actually lived in a small community in Western Washington that had its hospital clogged with non-paying patients, and it's jails filled with the results of drunken fights. We also had a newspaper that printed the names of all of the arrested and the convicted, and the vast majority of them had a certain commonality, if you get my drift.

I understand where the people from Arizona, and the people who would call into a hotline are coming from. Those here who label them all small minded bigots and racists are simply pushing them into the arms of the Repukes.

[William Z. Foster]

12. not quite

The people all around the world are tired of attitudes like yours and tired of picking up after the messes left by your kind and tired of carrying the burden of supporting your lifestyle.

Do you really want a police state here? Are you completely confident that it will never come back to bite you and yours in the ass?

Another question - have you read anything here at all about this? I cannot see how any rational person could have read about this subject at all and still spout the hateful and ignorant things you are posting. What could it possibly be that would override all common sense, lead one to call for a police state, drive one to take positions in complete opposition to anything even remotely liberal or progressive, not to mention in opposition to all humanitarian ideals, not to mention in opposition to civil liberties and the very principles the country was founded on - the country you want to protect from the evil "them" - other than racism? I am open to an alternative explanation for your position on this.

"They are taking jobs!" won't get it. "It's the law!" won't get it. "They are mooching!" won't either. "They are criminals!" won't fly.

[customerserviceguy]

15. I'd much rather penalize employers as the solution

But when the Federal government turns a blind eye to the problems of porous borders, I'm not surprised when the legislature of an affected state decides to deal with the issue on it's own.

Ever since Simpson-Mazzoli (the last time we were promised that illegal immigration would end) nobody seems to have a problem with "Papers, please" when it comes to getting a job. The only problem is, ID purchased out of the back of a car trunk seems to be just fine for those who employ people where they don't really care about the validity of the ID.

My solution is for the states to make the wages paid to anyone who does not pass e-Verify non-deductible. That eliminates the "police state" aspect that is the overreaction to the Federal government's underreaction to this problem.

[William Z. Foster]

18. punish someone

Employers are being targeted. This is not in lieu of harassing immigrants, it is much worse for them as well now.

Employers cannot legally discriminate against one ethnic group and target them for investigations into their lives, or turn them away from jobs, and we would not want employers to be an arm of law enforcement and snooping on everyone.

Your "they don't really care about the validity of the ID" is simply false.

Amnesty and citizenship solves all of the problems. The only thing it does not do is punish and harass immigrants.

Please do not put police state in quotation marks. If you believe we are not tending in that direction, make your case. But it is too serious a subject to treat lightly or dismissively.

[customerserviceguy]

20. Every employer

for the last couple of decades or so, has been allowed (indeed, required) to ask a new hire for proof of the legal ability to work in the United States. However, e-Verify is considered "optional", since it winks at those who knowingly hire dozens or even hundreds of workers who use fake ID.

Why not make it mandatory to use e-Verify, and have the employer attach certifications to the tax form filed with the individual state?

Amnesty solves nothing. Once you legalize everyone here illegally, employers and farmers will gladly look for new illegal aliens to be a docile workforce that cannot complain to authorities. The newly legalized will simply join the unemployment rolls, or the welfare lines.

My case is that when the Federal government does little or nothing, a powerful counter-reaction is liable to take place. What happened in Arizona is surely going to spread across the red states in this country, as the undocumented get chased out of the places where the citizens have had enough.

[William Z. Foster]

22. sounds plausible

It all sounds plausible - people sneaking around, employers in cahoots, "the citizens" up in arms. Same scenario that has happened again and again, the same rationales that have been used throughout the country's history to persecute various groups of people.

This is entirely illogical and nonsensical - "once you legalize everyone here illegally, employers and farmers will gladly look for new illegal aliens to be a docile workforce that cannot complain to authorities. "

Employers do not "look for illegal aliens" - what nonsense. "Cannot complain to authorities" has been made worse, obviously, by the anti-immigrant hysteria and police state swat team approach to the issue.

Docile? You dare call the courageous and motivated people who travel thousands of miles into hostile territory - where they will encounter people like you - leaving home and doing honest work "docile?" Shame on you.

This "get the employers" nonsense - for some reason on this issue and only this issue are we gpoi9ng to go after business owners, since corporations have FAR more friends on this board than immigrants do - is just cover for expressing bigoted ideas that you would otherwise be called on. Corporations are destroying the planet, and waging all out war on the working class, but it is when a fellow working class person is trying to feed their family that you call for drastic action.

Yeah, more and more and more "illegals" will come, and then welfare! did I mention welfare? And illegal! Don't forget these people are illegal! Let's crack down on everyone., No one to be hired without approval of Homeland Security! No one to be presumed innocent - all must prove that they have a "right" to be here, work or even walk around going about their business! How else could you "catch" all of the "illegals?" Or is it only brown people who should come under this scrutiny and be viewed with suspicion? Or do you want everyone to be under this scrutiny and be viewed with suspicion? Which is it? The first is racist, the second is a call for a police state. Pick one, or stop with your hateful message.

[customerserviceguy]

29. So, what happens

to the undocumented when they complain that the employer is screwing them out of overtime, or even decent working conditions? They get turned in to ICE, that's what. While it seems to be courageous to defy the US's borders and immigration enforcement, when it comes down to it, their very vulnerability is what makes them attractive to tourism businesses and farmers.

I simply don't believe any amnesty scheme will stop the flow of those willing to cross the borders. All granting amnesty every 25 or 30 years will do is just encourage more of the same.

Yes, corporations have a lot of power. Eventually, those states that have the initiative process will need to be the ones who adopt a plan like the one I've laid out. If we stop the incentive to hire labor that is not allowed to be here, we will minimize the problem.

[William Z. Foster]

19. more questions for you

We had millions of "illegals" during Prohibition, did we not? People were breaking the law. Would you have called for ever-increasing law enforcement action, in complete disregard of civil liberties, habeas corpus, the Bill of Rights and so forth? If not, why not?

What caused the violence and problems during prohibition? The law and attempts at enforcing it, or the illegal drinkers? Should everyone have been given random tests to prove they had not been drinking? Should employers have been fined or arrested if they hired drinkers? Should they have been asked to police that? If not, why not?

When you have millions "breaking the law" - be it smoking pot or coming here to work - it is time to reconsider the law, not call for ever more police action. How is immigration different than prohibition or the war on drugs? Innocent poor people coming here to work - is that a bigger threat than drug and alcohol crimes?

Calling for snitching, snooping, spying on and being suspicious of each other, federalization of law enforcement, and the illegal rounding up and detention of people and the suspension of civil liberties, calling for people to be seen as guilty until proven innocent that is the very essence of a police state. Do you not agree? Would you deny that those things are exactly what is happening, and what you are encouraging and calling for?

[customerserviceguy]

21. Comparing Prohibition

whether it involves alcohol or other drugs, to illegal immigration is fallacious. What was clearly the solution to the lawlessness of Prohibition was to legalize and tax, that seems to be the coming wave with marijuana. It might even extend to harder drugs as it is found to be effective.

Will legalizing drugs cause more people to use them dangerously? Probably not. Will legalizing or officially turning a blind eye to those willing to violate immigration laws encourage more of that behavior? Most definitely.

All I'm saying is that when the Federal government is seen to be doing too little, such as not enforcing e-Verify or answering calls to a hot line, the people will find other methods of getting the job done. Sometimes it will bend the limits of what we regard as normal for civil liberties.

Apparently, this is being challenged in Federal court. That's going to get this in the hands of Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Kennedy. If all five of them survive till then, it's going to become explicitly OK to do.

[William Z. Foster]

23. why?

Why is comparing Prohibition to illegal immigration fallacious?

"Will legalizing drugs cause more people to use them dangerously? Probably not. Will legalizing or officially turning a blind eye to those willing to violate immigration laws encourage more of that behavior? Most definitely."

"Sometimes it will bend the limits of what we regard as normal for civil liberties."

Really. Wow. I think you are off the deep end on this subject.

[customerserviceguy]

27. Yes, since you quoted my assertation

regarding the difference between legalizing drugs and legalizing border jumpers, you know what my point is. You just don't get it.

Look, if you're one of those "world without borders" people, who thinks that anyone should be able to come and go as they please, without regard for a country's perceived need to excercise at least a bit of control as to who comes in, how long they can stay, and if they can become citizens, then we have nothing to talk about anymore. We'll just never understand each other's point of view.

There seems to be pretty much only two choices to what to feel about the Arizona state legislature, the governor, and the people who polls show overwhelmingly support this law. One is to call them racists and teabaggers, and simply believe that they're all wrong for not turning over their schools, hospitals, businesses, jobs, and even homes to those who would constitute an invading force in any other time or place. The other is to understand where they're all coming from, and why they feel that way, and that they might just overreact in ways that do bend normal levels of tolerance.

My way is the latter, and I have more of a chance of persuading people to replace overbearing laws with ones that actually get the job done, yours is the way to harden their positions.

[WolverineDG]

32. Probably because like most tip hotlines

like child abuse, 75% of the calls are not only false, but done solely to make trouble for the person being reported.

dg

[EFerrari]

2. I hope people who read this article ask Stephen Wall, the reporter,

why he is using FAIR, A HATE GROUP, to provide input for this article.

His email is stephen.wall@inlandnewspapers. com

ETA: Link

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/12/11/fair-crossing-the-rubicon-of-hate/

[marmar]

6. I saw Br-Br-Brown people at the mall !!!!!

They're Illegulz. They were suspiciously buying smoothies at Jamba Juice. :scared:

[EFerrari]

10. Does Jamba Juice sell orchata?!

We're turning into the United Juices of Mexico! :scared:

[William Z. Foster]

24. of course

What other possible basis could there be for suspicion?

[William Z. Foster]

9. snitching

Rumor, suspicion, scapegoating, score-settling...

The Gestapo relied extensively on this method of "law enforcement."

[KonaKane]

14. This sounds eerily like the way young German kids were encouraged

to rat on their parents to the local gauleiter in the bad old days of Germany. I'm not trying to be as obnoxious as Beckkk by bringing up nazis at every turn, but there is a valid parallel here.