Skip to comments.
Tighter Border Yields Odd Result: More Illegals Stay
The Wall Street Journal ^
| As of Friday, October 10, 2003
| EDUARDO PORTER
Posted on 10/12/2003 6:33:57 AM PDT by tomball
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:50:05 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
STOCKTON, Calif. -- Something unusual is happening among the illegal immigrants who work in the lush fields of the San Joaquin Valley. Instead of leaving after the harvest, as they did for years, they are staying here, settling into lives of poverty and putting new strains on the city.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: illegalimmigrants; immigrantlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-73 next last
1
posted on
10/12/2003 6:33:57 AM PDT
by
tomball
To: tomball
What an odd position. Seems pretty obvious that the solution to the 'conundrum' is not only tighter borders, but to also do a little bit inside the country, say maybe, have police who identify illegal aliens in the course of regular operations turn the information, if not the people, over to the INS.
To: All
I'M BACK!!!
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC
Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY A BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD (It's in the Breaking News sidebar!)
3
posted on
10/12/2003 6:40:47 AM PDT
by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: tomball
Why should they go home? The Democrats will make sure they steal more than enough of the Republican tax dollars to support them (the democrat base pays little in taxes). Heck, with partners in crime like that, why bother?
4
posted on
10/12/2003 6:44:12 AM PDT
by
concerned about politics
(Have you donated to the Salvation Army this week? How have you helped a lost soul today?)
To: blanknoone
"llegal immigrants are still willing to risk crossing the border between the U.S. and Mexico, arriving at a rate of about 400,000 a year, by some estimates. "
If things were stepped up at the borders, 400,000 people wouldn't be here illegally on an annual basis - unless there is money to be made in it. Furthermore, just a few days ago there was a post about a city in the southwest who instructed their law enforcement people to release 200 South American illegals back into the community. After these people are caught and detained, they should be deported. Ted Kennedy's INS is not - nor has it ever - had our national security in the forefront of its function. It is obvious this agency is obsolete, and its leadership inept. 400,000 people coming across our borders annually is not immigration - it is an invasion.
5
posted on
10/12/2003 6:54:09 AM PDT
by
tomball
To: concerned about politics
In all, they say, they earned about $18,000 last year, well under the poverty line of $24,260 for a family of six. U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants have access to the country's social safety net. The Silverios get $650 a month in welfare on behalf of Flor and another $319 on behalf of Cristian. So, are they getting $12,000 in welfare in addition to making $18,000, or is 12 of their 18 from welfare? Regardless, America would be far better off is we sent this unlicensed drunk driver back to Mexico.
To: concerned about politics
The Republican party had better get their heads out of their a$$es and do something about all of the illegals inside this country - as well as tighten the border and crack down on anyone who employs illegals.
This issue, along with the Assault Weapons Ban, are the two issues that will decide my vote this time. Yes, I know that the president is ten times better than any other candidate, but he'd better do something about this if he wants to see this nation get back on track. Enough of the open borders, enough of the world community and free trade - we need to go back to the "America First" policies that the president had right after 9/11. (Note to Karl Rove: You're screwing up - BIG TIME!!)
7
posted on
10/12/2003 7:01:01 AM PDT
by
11B3
(Old enough to remember the real America, young enough to fight to bring it back.)
To: tomball
Hispanics and Middle Easterners are not all that different in physical appearance. Both groups tend to be of swarthy complexion and are fond of facial hair. It wouldn't be all that difficult for an aspiring Mohammad to pass himself off as a harmless Juan and blow up a few buildings. I suppose the Homeland Security Office won't act until this actually takes place. Wouldn't want to alienate any large voting blocs, now would we?
To: gubamyster; HiJinx
ping list ping
9
posted on
10/12/2003 7:04:00 AM PDT
by
Klickitat
To: TruthShallSetYouFree
They're alienating the voting block that put him in the White House - Conservatives. Right now, if a charismatic conservative would step forward with the original party message of a smaller government, enforcing the laws of the nation, and returning to the use of the Constitution as the standard for judging new laws, this person would kick GW's butt.
Ann Coulter would suffice. (Which one would you vote for?)
10
posted on
10/12/2003 7:06:51 AM PDT
by
11B3
(Old enough to remember the real America, young enough to fight to bring it back.)
To: 11B3
No fair. I'd vote for Ann even if she were a democrat. :)
To: Southack; Victoria Delsoul; Marine Inspector; FITZ; Ajnin; Pelham; Travis McGee; sarcasm; ...

Stricter policing of the U.S. border -- begun in the 1990s and reinforced in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 2001 -- was supposed to stem the flood of illegal immigrants arriving in the U.S. Instead, in Stockton and other places, it is having an entirely different effect. Illegal immigrants are still willing to risk crossing the border between the U.S. and Mexico, arriving at a rate of about 400,000 a year, by some estimates. But as the number of border-patrol agents has doubled since 1995, the price of an illegal crossing has roughly tripled to about $1,500 for a three-day trek across the Arizona desert. As a result, many immigrants have cut out much of the back-and-forth travel and decided to stay put in the U.S. < -snip- > "The militarization of the border hasn't stopped the people from coming. It just drove up the cost and the risk," says Mr. Massey. "The response of migrants was to stop going home, and the result was a big growth of the Mexican population here."
This article speaks to the decline in the apprehensions of Illegals in the past couple of years. It's not because there are less of them. So long as 90% of the aprehensions and deportations of Illegals occur within three days of them crossing the border, the borders will not be secure. Both Presidents Clinton and Bush have attempted the borderland band-aid solution, when the problem is internal bleeding. The only way to secure the borders is not through militiarization, it's to secure the American interior, and that can only happen with apprehensions and deportations of long-time Illegals there. Once the process is begun in earnest, they will deport themselves.
|
12
posted on
10/12/2003 7:09:15 AM PDT
by
Sabertooth
(No Drivers' Licences for Illegal Aliens. Petition SB60. http://www.saveourlicense.com/n_home.htm)
To: TruthShallSetYouFree
It would be interesting to see Ann run against Hillary.
13
posted on
10/12/2003 7:22:40 AM PDT
by
11B3
(Old enough to remember the real America, young enough to fight to bring it back.)
To: tomball
The oxymoronic nature of this piece is evident. If we had
perfect border security we would have an infinite number of illegals.
Round them all up and ship them home. Buy up a one-mile-wide strip of border and salt it with land mines.
Let us see what unfortunate result emerges.
--Boris
14
posted on
10/12/2003 7:44:23 AM PDT
by
boris
(The deadliest Weapon of Mass Destruction in History is a Leftist With a Word Processor)
To: blanknoone
" Seems pretty obvious that the solution to the 'conundrum' is not only tighter borders, but to also do a little bit inside the country, say maybe, have police who identify illegal aliens in the course of regular operations turn the information, if not the people, over to the INS." You are exactly RIGHT!
And I might add, that if we tightened the borders AND strictly inforced immegration within, we could easily issue legal temporary work permits for needed farm laborers to come do their jobs, then leave when they are finished. The same concept could work for other industries as well... legal work permits, legal temporary drivers licenses (that clearly say temporary on them)... perhaps even incentives whereby a temporary worker can earn perminant citizenship by demonstrating complying with the laws, paying taxes, supporting his family. I would also add a provision that children of those issued the permits either demonstate the same qualities upon turning 18, or be sent back to Mexico (or whereever).
Problem is that programs like this can't ever work as long as we ignore illegal status.
15
posted on
10/12/2003 7:44:39 AM PDT
by
Apple Pan Dowdy
(... as American as Apple Pie)
To: Sabertooth
The illegal immigration issue is a bipartisan issue. Niether party is interested or willing to do anything about it, even though 70+% of Americans want it to stop.
A a mjority of Americans may be against illegal immigration, but I don't believe thay are passionate about the issue. I don't hear them screaming enmasse.
16
posted on
10/12/2003 7:45:21 AM PDT
by
umgud
(gov't has more money than it needs, but never as much as it wants)
To: tomball
U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants have access to the country's social safety net. The Silverios get $650 a month in welfare on behalf of Flor and another $319 on behalf of Cristian. This is the real reason they stay ---- not the tighter border but because once they get the kids up here and give birth to that welfare-getting anchor baby, they have no need at all in going back. Hard work back home will get the family about $100 a month, but this family already gets ten times that in welfare handouts. Plus there are the free breakfasts and lunches at the free schools, Head Start---- the free babysitting service. They never will be expected to learn English or change from what they were either. It's all too easy and there are millions more packing up to come.
17
posted on
10/12/2003 8:01:41 AM PDT
by
FITZ
To: tomball
At San Joaquin General Hospital, women often wait until they're eight or nine months pregnant to seek prenatal care. End the anchor baby program and end all welfare to these moochers and most of the problem would go away. This guy is a regular welfare baby-maker ---- why should he limit his family size when the government pays him to just keep having more welfare kids? He's got plenty of money for beer ---- enough to get drunk but has no money for car insurance. If one of these guys crashes into you, you're tough out of luck. Welfare is attracting the worst low-lives from the third world.
18
posted on
10/12/2003 8:09:59 AM PDT
by
FITZ
To: FITZ
End the anchor baby program and end all welfare to these moochers and most of the problem would go away. Agree. Babies of women illegally in the U.S. should not receive U.S. citizenship.
19
posted on
10/12/2003 8:25:53 AM PDT
by
dano1
To: umgud
The reason you dont hear screaming is because the media controls the screaming.
20
posted on
10/12/2003 8:31:55 AM PDT
by
winodog
To: dano1
Agree. Babies of women illegally in the U.S. should not receive U.S. citizenship. The only way this will happen is the repeal of the 14th Amedment. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside...."
Intended to give citizenship to ex-slaves, has outlived its usefulness in the present form. Should only require a small change, like adding the requirement of citizenship of a parent prior to the birth.
21
posted on
10/12/2003 8:40:48 AM PDT
by
onceone
To: winodog
I stand corrected. I actually knew that from watching the show. The main poing being that it looked a slow and very painful death.
When they finally start eating you I would imagine you will be wishing you had not abused children
22
posted on
10/12/2003 8:45:53 AM PDT
by
winodog
To: tomball
"Round 'em up, move 'em out...Rawhide!!"
To: John Beresford Tipton
Mr. Silverio ran a stop sign and hit another car. He was fined and still owes thousands of dollars to the other driver's insurance company. But before paying his debt, he went to a used-car lot and bought another vehicle, a 1994 Nissan. But even a drunk driving accident with no insurance and a life on welfare with no bills ever being paid doesn't get this clown deported.
24
posted on
10/12/2003 9:11:53 AM PDT
by
FITZ
To: 11B3
Right now, if a charismatic conservative would step forward with the original party message of a smaller government, enforcing the laws of the nation, and returning to the use of the Constitution as the standard for judging new laws, this person would kick GW's butt. I think the time is ripe for a real conservative to enter the Republican primary (will we even have one in 2004?)
25
posted on
10/12/2003 9:12:27 AM PDT
by
SauronOfMordor
(Java/C++/Unix/Web Developer === (Finally employed again! Whoopie))
To: tomball
That's worth a chuckle.
Pitchforks are for farmin', folks.
26
posted on
10/12/2003 9:34:03 AM PDT
by
dr_who_2
To: boris
"Round them all up and ship them home."
Better yet would be to give them each $500 and a bus ride to Crawford, Texas. Perhaps even a dullard [a euphemism for "idiot"]like Bush would see the light when his neighbors felt the heat.
To: dano1; FITZ
End the anchor baby program ....... Agree. Babies of women illegally in the U.S. should not receive U.S. citizenship.
I agree that stricter standards for U.S. citizenship should be in place. However, changing the citizenship status for "anchor babies" would require changing this:
Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States .....
28
posted on
10/12/2003 9:56:00 AM PDT
by
Polybius
To: FITZ
It looks like this criminal was convicted of all of the following, and is an illegal alien, but still wasn't deported. What gives?
(1) driving under the influence of alcohol (is this a felony?)
(2) driving without license to do so (Can't he get a Mexican license, which would be valid in the US?)
(3) wrekless driving
(4) disregarding stop sign
(5) causing a traffic accident
(6) driving without insurance
And, who will sell this guy a car when he doesn't have a license to drive it? Any clues? Isn't that illegal in itself?
29
posted on
10/12/2003 10:06:45 AM PDT
by
dufekin
(Yassir Arafat? He's a terrorist ringleader extraordinaire. He's "wanted dead or alive"--and now!)
To: tomball
If they all stay in one area it would be easier to collect them for deportation.
Keep illegals out. Return the ones we have.
Keep the borders strong.
Is this a difficult concept?
30
posted on
10/12/2003 10:12:32 AM PDT
by
OldEagle
(Haven't been wrong since 1947.)
To: tomball
Several good points made here. I also think we need to put some intense heat on DHS Secretary Tom Ridge to close the borders. Without control of the borders, the Dept. of Homeland Security is just another government fraud.
Once we control the borders, then we need to start making sweeps of illegals and tossing their butts out. If they don't have a fundamental respect for our borders, how can we expect them to respect our laws?
All of the INS hearings and other bureaucratic BS that takes place before an illegal immigrant can be deported is more government mumbo-jumbo. Catch'em and send'em back, no questions asked, no answers taken. Catch'em again and put them in a prison (reopen Alcatraz, for example) fro no less than 10 years, THEN toss their butts back across the border. Catch'em a third time and it's automatic death by firing squad, no appeals.
We are the only nation in the world with such porous borders and such lip service paid to their control. I think it's time to start lighting fires under Bush and Ridge to close them NOW and let Vicente Fox go cry himself to sleep at night!!!!
To: Sabertooth
The only way to secure the borders is not through militiarization, it's to secure the American interior, and that can only happen with apprehensions and deportations of long-time Illegals there.
Yeah! National ID cards and databases! Even more paperwork requirements to land a minimum wage job! Woo hoo!
32
posted on
10/12/2003 10:24:29 AM PDT
by
dr_who_2
To: dr_who_2

|
Yeah! National ID cards and databases! Even more paperwork requirements to land a minimum wage job! Woo hoo!
That's silly and alarmist. It's nothing to set up sting operations at "day laborer" sites. It's nothing to pick up folks using false Social Security numbers at their places of emploment. It's nothing to seek out Illegals using matricula consular ID cards. It's also nothing, and no infringement on the liberties of any citizen or legal resident, to set up a mug shot and fingerprint database for the hundreds of thousands of Illegals that are apprehended every year. Later, if those prints show up on some Illegal with false papers, they can be ID'd through the database on Illegals. Finally, it's nothing to declare that all Illegals will never be permitted to obtain guest worker status, or permanent residency. One strike and they're gone.
|
33
posted on
10/12/2003 11:08:56 AM PDT
by
Sabertooth
(No Drivers' Licences for Illegal Aliens. Petition SB60. http://www.saveourlicense.com/n_home.htm)
To: SauronOfMordor
I think the time is ripe for a real conservative to enter the Republican primary (will we even have one in 2004?)
This is madness.Putting a conservative up against "W" will only split the vote and hand the presidency to Hitlery or Dean or Clark.Now in 08 that's a different story depending on the economy and the war there may be an oportunity to put a real conservative on the ballot.
34
posted on
10/12/2003 11:55:11 AM PDT
by
edchambers
(Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?)
To: tomball
What kills me is that this reporter can manage to find plenty of admitted illegals to interview but he can't or won't turn them in to the Border Patrol.It's like these reporters that keep interviewing members of Hamas OK fine get the interview but tip off the IDF so they can blow them up after you've got your "exclusive".
35
posted on
10/12/2003 11:59:48 AM PDT
by
edchambers
(Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?)
To: blanknoone
What an odd position. Seems pretty obvious that the solution to the 'conundrum' is not only tighter borders, but to also do a little bit inside the country, say maybe, have police who identify illegal aliens in the course of regular operations turn the information, if not the people, over to the INS.That's what I was thinking. If they become a static population then it is easier to identify and deport them. Maybe the border tightening is working better than it appears.
36
posted on
10/12/2003 12:10:41 PM PDT
by
Oatka
To: bjcintennessee
Read later.
37
posted on
10/12/2003 12:15:56 PM PDT
by
bjcintennessee
(Don't Sweat the Small Stuff)
To: Sabertooth
Bump
38
posted on
10/12/2003 12:48:17 PM PDT
by
RnMomof7
To: concerned about politics
Illegal Alien
39
posted on
10/12/2003 2:25:50 PM PDT
by
GeronL
(Please visit www.geocities.com/geronl)
To: edchambers
Join the Free State Party!! I want to have a party, so I am starting one =o)
40
posted on
10/12/2003 2:31:39 PM PDT
by
GeronL
(Please visit www.geocities.com/geronl)
To: boris
Round them all up and ship them home. Buy up a one-mile-wide strip of border and salt it with land mines. Let us see what unfortunate result emerges.
Bob Grant on the radio suggested landmines and sharpshooters.
To: blanknoone
Or at least give him a vasectomy
To: FITZ
End the anchor baby program and end all welfare to these moochers and most of the problem would go away. This guy is a regular welfare baby-maker ---- why should he limit his family size when the government pays him to just keep having more welfare kids? He's got plenty of money for beer ---- enough to get drunk but has no money for car insurance. If one of these guys crashes into you, you're tough out of luck. Welfare is attracting the worst low-lives from the third world. And what do you think the kids will probably grow up to be? The boys will be gangbangers and the girls whores on welfare who along with their gangbanger boyfriends will pop out another generation of gangbangers and whores. They will also hate America and anyone who isn't Mexican, cheer the likes of Cruz Bustamante, but would never return to Mexico. Oh, no, they live so much better in America, even if on welfare, though they'd never admit it.
To: edchambers
This is madness.Putting a conservative up against "W" will only split the vote and hand the presidency to Hitlery or Dean or Clark. No, it will NOT "split" anything. If W is beaten in the Republican primary, then W will not be on the ballot in November as the Republican candidate -- whoever beat him will. There would be ONE Republican candidate versus whoever the Dem is
44
posted on
10/12/2003 4:30:15 PM PDT
by
SauronOfMordor
(Java/C++/Unix/Web Developer === (Finally employed again! Whoopie))
To: Sabertooth
We better hope they decide to deport themselves, sure doesn't look like the Fed ever will.
To: SauronOfMordor
Sorry I was thinking of some kind of third party "conservative" but I don't think there will be much of a primary. I think it would be silly to go against a sitting president of the same party and I just don't see it happening.
46
posted on
10/12/2003 5:54:12 PM PDT
by
edchambers
(Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?)
To: SauronOfMordor
Sorry I was thinking of some kind of third party "conservative" but I don't think there will be much of a primary. I think it would be silly to go against a sitting president of the same party and I just don't see it happening.
47
posted on
10/12/2003 5:56:28 PM PDT
by
edchambers
(Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?)
To: GeronL
Didn't you guys pick New Hampshire for your free state?I applaud the idea but I'm spoiled it was 82 degrees here today in central CA. not bad for October.I hear NH gets cccold in the winter besides the political climate is just too exiting these days in CA.Thanks for the offer but I think I'll stick around.
48
posted on
10/12/2003 6:54:40 PM PDT
by
edchambers
(Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?)
To: *immigrant_list; A Navy Vet; Lion Den Dan; Free the USA; Libertarianize the GOP; madfly; B4Ranch; ..
Tighter Border Yields Odd Result: More Illegals Stay This title presents a totally false premise. From the article:
One local charity reports that demand for Christmas food baskets has tripled in the past two years
settling here has become easier
"We haven't done workplace enforcement for years," says Robert Logazino, head of the Border Patrol's Northern California sector office in Livermore. "We're in the process of being closed down here." Priorities have shifted in law enforcement.
"The houses violate the city code," says Gary Podesto, Stockton's mayor. "But if we chase them out, they will only go live by the river."
They know with certainty that they couldn't have afforded the treatment, which ran into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and for which they paid nothing at San Joaquin General.
U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants have access to the country's social safety net. The Silverios get $650 a month in welfare on behalf of Flor and another $319 on behalf of Cristian.
The nonprofit Council for Spanish speakers, known as El Concilio, says the number of baskets with food distributed at Christmas jumped three-fold in the last two years, to about 1,500.
Medi-Cal, the state and federal health-insurance program, covers illegal immigrants only for emergency treatment, prenatal care and some cases of long-term care in nursing homes.
Moreover, when Medi-Cal won't pay, the burden often falls to local health-care systems. San Joaquin General, which faces a $9 million overall deficit this year, last year lost an average of more than $75 for each patient who visited its emergency room. The ER lost $3.7 million.
It isnt enforcement of the border that is keeping the illegals here. It is the lack of enforcement of our immigration lawscoddling of the illegals and all the free handouts the illegals receive at taxpayer expense.
To: tomball
The smuggler, his fees high on account of the added difficulty, charged them $1,200 each. They were robbed twice on the way Not that I want to give any of our unhappy with their situation in life neighbors to the south, but...
Couldn't they for $1200 buy some new clothes and a plane ticket and fly into LA as touristas???
Come on, muchachos, let's start thinking outside the box, here.
You might stumble on to a way to improve your life at home.
50
posted on
10/12/2003 7:53:31 PM PDT
by
ohmage
(918-222-7241)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-73 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson