Double Crossing at the Rio Grande

Special to FreeRepublic ^ | 18 November 2003 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[Congressman Billybob]

This is a break from the usual columns. Instead of attacking what is, it suggests what ought to be, in protecting America's borders and saving American jobs.

Flame away.

[gubamyster]

ping

[Tax-chick]

A very interesting and cogently reasoned proposal. I don't find anything to criticise as far as it goes. But aren't you assuming that the income from the fees would be used productively by our government? And isn't that a risky assumption to make :-)?

INS is not using its current budget effectively, because of both simple incompetence and political pressure. You don't seem to address the interests in the U.S. who are determined to perpetuate the status quo - employers being the biggest, but also "minority activists," career welfare-mongers, and the huge population of illegals already here.

(NC ping?)

[TopQuark]

Your idea is very appealing but shows, unfortunately, why this is complicated.

but they, too, would have an immediate and real financial incentive to do their jobs on their side of the border, so we do not have to mop up for their mistakes on our side of the border.

The fee would be imposed on citizens, specifically business owners, not governments. The governments would still lack incentives to incur huge and unpopular expenditures on keeping their citizens in.

There is an even bigger problem: except for the communists, NO COUNTRY has ever kept its citizens in. And yet this is what you suggest they do. (Note that it applies to your remark regarding the Mexican police jeep: those policemen had no duty --- in fact, no right --- to interfere because no Mexican laws are broken by the Mexicans crossing into the U.S.) We certainly do not want to advocate the measures for which we dispised the Soviet Union so deeply. Nor will it ever gather support for the same reason.

Further, your fee is a tax on services and will be probably deemed illegal by the courts.

I am afraid there is no other way but to deal with the problem straighforwardly: it's our border to protect, and we should incur the corresponding cost. If the tiny Israel can do that, so can we. And it does not have to be a cement wall. The Soviet Russia had the borders incorably longer than ours are, and yet their borders were impenetratable even forty years ago. We have sufficient means to protect our border electronically. The only thing we lack is will.

[MeekOneGOP]

Click here or on the pic for the full article

Pelosi Wants Citizenship for Illegal Aliens

[JustPiper]

Ping ;) The Gubya is back at full speed, yeah!!!

[FITZ]

NO COUNTRY has ever kept its citizens in.

But have we ever before seen a leader of a foreign country so hell-bent on finding his citizens new homes in our country? It seems we could tell Fox to get lost and fix some of the problems over there instead of even wasting any time with him --- let him head over to Canada to work on some of his immigration accords over there --- or anywhere else. For some reason we seem to be his only target.

[FITZ]

Its top was down, and in it were either two or three federales, or Mexican national police. Those policemen saw the Mexican citizens about to make a run for the border, but they said nothing, did nothing, and did not even slow down.

The Mexican police and army are all over the border for some reason --- one illegal told me our agents are professional and respectful and that if they're right on the border and they see the federales or Mexican army guys coming after them from the south and they see the US border patrol coming after them from the north, they'll go to the US border patrol --- there's no telling what the Mexican agents are up to.

[TopQuark]

But have we ever before seen a leader of a foreign country so hell-bent on finding his citizens new homes

Sure: Britain, Holland, France, Spain...

[FITZ]

Yeah ---- and look what happened to the Indians because of it. There is something to be said for staying in your own country and making it better --- the Founding Fathers weren't happy --- so they didn't leave --- they fixed things up, changed the system to what they did like.

[archy]

There is an even bigger problem: except for the communists, NO COUNTRY has ever kept its citizens in.

Nazi Germany certainly did so.

-archy-/-

[MissAmericanPie]

That is a fine idea. The cost of the ten billion is easily covered by ending the export of ten billion+ a year from illegals back to their families in Mexico.

Income from illegal immigration is Mexico's single largest national income. Monies taken out of the US economy and stolen south, while they demand the ability to raid our Social Security Fund.

[TLI]

Use those two figures to calculate the Transit Security Fee on each truck. With the figures given, that would be $1,000 per truck per crossing. Set the Transit Security Fee at 25% initially, or $250, with the possibility of raising it if the twin problems continue to get worse. The Fee would be recalculated annually with respect to all foreign nations. What would be the logical results of this?

This is a very good idea, but I would suggest that the reduced fee be based upon a direct ratio of the % of capacity THAT truck was filled to with illegal mexicans being returned to Mexico. A small, accessable database would container the information based upon VIN and trailer ID as to the percentage of capacity on that trucks last southbound crossing.

pay the $1,000.00 refundable fee to get into the database. Then..

25% capacity = $250.00 credit, or rather... a $750.00 additional fee, non-refundable

50% capacity = 500.00 credit on the southbound crossing, $500.00 additional on the northbound leg.

75% capacity headed south will result in a mear $250.00 norbound crossing fee. Crossing southbound with a full load of wetback earns THAT TRUCK a free crossing headed north. All trucks in the program are searched north and southbound. The owner/operator or smart company owner can cross the boarder for free. Just have the driver swing by the closest BICE lockup and grab a load headed south.

If the owner sells the truck, send in a letter (registered and notarized) that the truck is pulling out of the program and the BFBC will issue a prompt refund of the initial $1,000.00 entry fee.

TLI

[Brian Allen]

<< American jobs are crossing that river into Mexico and setting up shop in factories along the Mexican side of the border. >>

Cowplop!.

Sorry, Bubbah but you lost me right there.

How are the jobs leaving? By rail, maybe? Or by the shipload and backloading 747s like the ones flying off to "china" and sailing away to India?

<< With the figures given, that would be $1,000 per truck per crossing. Set the Transit Security Fee at 25% initially, or $250, with the possibility of raising it if the twin problems continue to get worse. The Fee would be recalculated annually with respect to all foreign nations. What would be the logical results of this? >>

Be a totalitarian and make every one a criminal until he proves otherwise, you mean!.

And impose yet another direct tax on the Americans who would thus be forced by your taxes to pay more for the goods we buy.

A tax surely and certainly, like every other totalitarian's tariff/tax, to cost the jobs of the millions of Americans otherwise freed to do other than the tedious factory jobs their fathers and grandfathers graduated into.

From picking lettuce.

Just close the bloody borders, as we have proven with the USSR and North Korea and every other tyrant state we have ever opposed that we have the unmatched competency to do -- and begin the deportations!

Best ones -- Brian

[Congressman Billybob]

Nothing I am talking about makes anyone "a criminal." Taxes and fees are all civil matters, not criminal ones. And nothing that I suggest would directly cause anyone not to cross a border. Instead, it is designed to get the Mexicans to start paying attention to what's happening on THEIR side of the border.

One point you make is correct. What I suggest would cause the price of goods in the US to rise. The reason is that more Americans would be employed at American wages to produce goods, rather than America being awash in the cheapest possible goods -- but produced overseas.

Alexander Hamilton, in his seminal work "On Manufacturing" recognized just such a process for the purpose of protecting American businesses and jobs. We cannot continue to have it both ways -- cheap foreign goods without limit, plus protection of American jobs. More of the former necessarily means less of the latter. This is a basic, public policy choice that Congress has, so far, avoided making.

John / Billybob

[Gritty]

I like your idea. Like any good idea, it has a monetary component which addresses the market as well as the court.

Speaking of monetary and political incentives, it has long been my belief we should not be deporting illegals to the nearest border town. If they're Mexican, we should be putting them on board ships and dropping them off on the far side of the Yucatan Peninsula, say on the beach at Cozumel or Cancun. From there it is a loooong way back to the US border. It would greatly discourage a re-run, or at least a hasty one. Plus, the Mexican government certainly wouldn't want the embarrassment, the costs and all the tourists inconvenienced (lots of dollars involved there).

Whatever. Something effective has to be done about this problem and soon. The politicians seem to be too gutless to do it. These problems are gutting our country. It just isn't worth it to get lettuce picked at 10 cents a head cheaper or jeans for $12 instead of $15.

[fire_eye]

Whether or not this specific solution is the correct one, it is of the correct type. It attempts to make the Mexicans *want* to control emigration to America.

We may or may not be able to stop the influx ourselves by whatever measures we take on our side of the border... but if we want to Mexicans to take action to stop it, the only way we will get them to do it is if they find it to be *in their interest* to do so.

That could consist of threatening to send the Texas Rangers over the border, restricting tourism into Mexico, whatever... but it has to be something which causes them to *want* to stop the invasion. Hitting them in the pocketbook is probably the best option for the moment.

[Eva]

bump for later