Forgot your password?
Type your email address below and click the sign up button to create an account.
BTW Ernie thats 30% of the FEDERAL PRISON population. Think it has to do with their status?
You got me all wrong Ernie, I am not for open borders and have pretty much said that in all the threads for about three years now.Mr. Bazan and Mario were examples of this city of Victoria not being worried about the legal status of its citizens. It fit in with my my friends opinions, remember I mentioned shrugging shoulders? What I’m trying to say is, not all of Victoria is in the mole of Lou Dobbs, Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly. A lot of us don’t think we’re in crisis mode yet, and cooler heads can prevail. Had nothing to do with success stories versus population. Had more to do with the importance of this issue six years ago.I was not comparing borders, but merely making a security statement and the fact that commerce trumped security.In one the GOP debates on Fox, the moderator said illegal immigration, only accounts for 1% of our health care crisis. According to the RAND Corporation.The point I will try to make was that proposition 187 was the catalyst for the Democratic House and Senate seats takeover in California. Arnold found out he had to compromise in order to stay in office. Hate radio rhetoric is going to serve the same purpose in 2008 on the national level.You must not have read my blog, because I chastised the ones that did not want to compromise on the immigration reform bill. The opponents of the bill could have had 18 months, a border enforcement only can we would be well on our way to solving this issue. But no, we would rather be arguing over the definition of amnesty.What I want is a Comprehension Immigration reform bill that has border security first documentation of everyone in the United States, and a compassionate deportation plan.Homeland Security was setting up temporary detention establishments in order to deport the whole family. Keep the family together. Hate radio heard of this and immediately started vilifying this program, so it was stopped. I thought since the companies, United States and the immigrants were all equally guilty; this program was not out of the question.About two years ago, I said that I wish I could convince the 12 million illegal immigrants to go back to the country of origin with their dignity intact. I could become a union shop steward and bargain; whenever the United States came back begging for cheap labor. That is the only way people will find out how much these people contribute to our economy. Like I said, I know we have an aging workforce, and I have read every page of the defeated immigration bill, so I don’t come into the debate of illegal immigration completely in the dark. I have seen it from both sides.
"Even when the GOP controlled all three branches of government they never talked about amending the 14th amendment and I am sure the Dems wont,so it’s not gonna happen."I'm not trying to predict whether it'll happen or not, Mike, just saying that, IMHO, it should."it was common practice for people to enter this country illegally;live and work here for five to 10 years, and then apply for citizenship."What's that old saying? "Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Times change. Situations and conditions change. And they certainly have changed over the last 62 years. What used to be a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" commonplace occurrence is now threatening the fabric of our society. I realize too that the biggest waste of paint known to man is making speed limit signs in Texas. Doesn't mean I'm not going to sue the SOB that rear ends me because my 65 in a 65 wasn't fast enough for him."People like Mr.Bazan came here illegally built Tortilla King and was honored with a layout in the Victoria Advocate, and man named Mario of Marios’s Bodyshop had a similar story. "Two success stories, an estimated 20-30 million illegal aliens. Not such a good ratio it seems t' me. Obviously there are those who immigrated here, legally or not, and made a go of it - often even realizing at least moderate success, but can we reverse throwing out the baby with the bathwater and simply accept that 30% of the prisoners in the US are illegal aliens because, hey!, Victoria got a new body shop outta the deal?"I think it's pretty scary that we have 12 million people living in the states ,that are not documented. We also have 2000 miles of unprotected borders to our north. "So do I but I *also* think it's worrisome that we have 30 million "undocumented workers" - no, let me revise that because they are NOT all "workers" at all. Many are criminals, thugs, gang members, drug smugglers/dealers and assorted other ne'er-do-wells. As for our northern border, I don't see a multitude of Canadian workers abusing our system - yet. Although perhaps we should be cautious. After all, look where the same "laissez faire" attitude from the south go us. "It's probably more to do with the 87% increase of healthcare costs over the last five years,"I argue about this situation with my wife, who works in healthcare, on a regular basis. Without going in to all the details, I agree that this is an unwarranted inflation of medical costs but, as my wife argues (and she's right), ONE of the big reasons for the inflation in medical costs is that the industry has to attempt to recoup their expenses from non-paid and under-paid services rendered and a big part of *that* shortfall is non-insured illegals. It's similar to our having to pay an extra fifty cents for our Fruit of the Looms, Mike, because the store has to make up the losses for the twenty packs that were shoplifted last month - only on a much more massive scale. What's really odd is that those Canadians mentioned above are crossing the border to take advantage of this overpriced health care (and actually *paying* for it) because they can GET it here. Then most of 'em are going back home. :)"Go back and read some of the legislation that Arnold is pushing now,he sounds like a Democrat."Actually, he sounds to me like someone who's more interested in policies and legislation that will benefit his constituency, not whether it's Republican/Democrat or conservative/liberal. Which is what my position has been all along - that we have to get OUT of this Super Bowl 2008 mode and figure out what's best for our country, not what's Democratic or Republican, liberal or conservative.So you're advocating that we make our southern border as open as our northern one and just let the status quo continue? The fallacy of that policy is that when the next election rolls around in Canada there won't be much changed. In Mexico the candidates for office will likely be the only residents still there.Ernie
Okay Ernie, I think we are making some progress now.Even when the GOP controlled all three branches of government they never talked about amending the 14th amendment and I am sure the Dems wont,so it’s not gonna happen.Now for a little background .I was born inVictoria 62 years ago and it was common practice for people to enter this country illegally;live and work here for five to 10 years, and then apply for citizenship.People like Mr.Bazan came here illegally built Tortilla King and was honored with a layout in the Victoria Advocate, and man named Mario of Marios’s Bodyshop had a similar story. In fact whenever I meet my own friends and when one would bring up the subject, we would just shrug our shoulders and say “what's the big deal”. I was stationed in El Paso, Texas for a year and I saw the flow between the two sister cities without any commotion over legal status. Are you following me? This only became a problem about six years ago. It had the same status as jaywalking. Today it is a federal misdemeanor.The immigration reform legislation is the issue, because the format is the same one we used in 1986. We will just add or subtract from the same piece of legislation.I think it's pretty scary that we have 12 million people living in the states ,that are not documented. We also have 2000 miles of unprotected borders to our north. . A commentator for CBS news asked a border adgent at the Saint Lawrence Seaway ,why we had so little protection for so much traffic ; his answer "it would disrupt commerce”. I agree with all parties border security first but the “no amnesty zealots” turned down the 18 months border security only.Don't get all upset just because I don't take talk of a Mexican takeover of the United States Southwest seriously, no matter what the source, because that myth has been around for years. Now it might have something to do with NAFTA.Now, Victoria County and the surrounding area do not have the industry to support a large amount of immigrants,so our medical services are safe from them. It's probably more to do with the 87% increase of healthcare costs over the last five years, stagnant wages, so the person now making 30 to $40,000 simply cannot pay their bills. DeTar Hospital was in all the medical journals because of a hospital dumping case several years ago. But that's another topic.Go back and read some of the legislation that Arnold is pushing now,he sounds like a Democrat.Ernie, in today's Houston Chronicle is a story about job seeking teens trend going down. In 2006 43.7% of teens nationwide between the ages of 16 and 19 were looking for work according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics that's down from 52% in the year 2000. So it doesn't matter if you I worked in our teens. That's why I say it would be a massive deprogramming.
"First let's get a constitutional matter out-of-the-way. The "anchor baby" is a United States citizen under the 14th amendment that emphasizes all humans born in this country are United States citizens. I have yet to see a legislator try to repeal it."That's a mistake that can and should be corrected. The 14th ammendment was included in the Constitution to insure that the children of people who immigrated to the US would automatically be citizens of the new republic. As with many of our laws passed many years ago, it has become not only outdated but a source of flagrant abuse. We've repealed many laws and ammendments that have outlived their usefulness. This should be the next one. It's not a constitutional matter that has been gotten out of the way..... but it should be!"Second point, if we pay an illegal worker subpar wages why should we insist that they spend that money in this country?"We shouldn't and couldn't. In the first place, he/she shouldn't even be making it since it's illegally gotten gain from the get-go. Why make laws if we're just going to selectively enforce the ones that are convenient? Hence my point about *really* enforcing our laws and giving the scofflaw corporations significant penalties for breaking them. One has to know too that any dollars those immigrants *do* spend here are taxed so no, I don't overlook what positives there are. I do believe though that the negatives deserve at least equal time and are summarily ignored by the pro-immigration factions. And not to beat a dead horse, but it *is* illegal."nor do you visualize the intangible benefits of illegal immigration."What intangible benefits are those? "Your problems and solutions just target the Mexicans."Well, one has to start somewhere and since the Mexicans comprise 25% of the LEGAL immigration and an estimated 70% (because no one really knows exactly how many there are - it's kind of in the job description. One doesn't normally register as "illegal immigrant" on the census forms.) of the illegal immigration problem, I figured "Hey, why not start with something significant."About 60% of the problem, so are you satisfied with the other 40%?"Nope. But see above. And so far, I haven't seen any want ads requiring applicants be bi-lingual in Farsi."What stats did not cover were these 6 million that came over here legally but overstayed ; our homeland security does not know where they are."And that *is* a problem because as 9/11 showed us, some of these are taking advantage of what they know to be a problem to subvert our national security. But national security wasn't the issue we started on. Six million over-stayed Visas hardly compares to 20-30 million illegal Hispanics. Ostensibly we issued those Visas originally because those people had a legitimate reason to come to this country. Admittedly some of those were almost certainly pleasure trip visas but a large percentage were work visas. Again, my efforts would seem more efficiently spent on 20-30 million people who swam the Rio Grande in the dead of night than the on the mechanical engineers and doctors who simply forgot or were to busy to renew their visas. "Question have you read the defeated immigration reform plan? It is a detail piece of legislation that accounts for a high turnover rate, dismissed employees ,sickleave etc."Yep. It's *too* detailed if you ask me (although no one did, to their discredit.) My biggest sticking point was the amnesty (or as the liberals call it, "the guest worker") clause. It provided forgiveness for previously illegal acts. Kind of a reverse "ex post facto" law. The Constitution states one can't be prosecuted for having done something prior to a law being passed that made the act illegal. In this case, we would have not only have forgiven a prior illegal act but actually rewarded it by either awarding the perpetrator legal status "ex post facto" or at least giving them about a ten step head start on those who are or were attempting to follow our laws. Either way, a losing proposition. At any rate, the bill was not passed. It's a non-issue. Let's move on to the next one remembering that I'll no more back a good piece of legislation with unacceptable parts than I would approve a measure to stop all but the most selectively chosen abortions if it contained an "earmark" for another bridge to nowhere that cost a gazillion bucks. Yet another hoorah for the line item veto provision."it does not dwell into state and local problems. Schools, hospitals and public assistance is a state matter."Then why was Proposition 187 overturned on the grounds that regulating immigration is a national matter, not one for the states to decide? *Public* Schools and hospitals and public assistance all receive federal monies unless, of course, the hospitals or schools are *private* institutions, in which case, try to send your kids to a private school or get your appendix removed at a *private* hospital without paying tuition or having insurance. Let me offer a subtle hint: It ain't gonna happen! My wife works at the local for-profit hospital and believe me, if you show up there with a non-life-threatening condition AND no way to pay for treatment you're likely to be sent to Citizen's, the county/federally funded hospital that has a gratis quota to meet to get state AND federal funding. We're fortunate in Victoria in that, so far, those cases haven't threatened the existence of Citizen's. Whether that's because we have fewer charity cases in Victoria or because of the largesse of the county or nation with my tax dollars I couldn't say. For some odd reason they won't let me see the books over there... :) But try to sell that argument to the 23 hospitals that closed in California between 1995 and 2000 that cited, as two of the contributing factors in a study commissioned by Bill Lockyer, AG for CA as reported by James Lott, Executive VP of the Southern CA Hospital Administration, "non-insured and underinsured patients" and "unbridled demand for unreimbursed services." The study went on to mention that 11 additional hospitals have closed since publication in 2001 and many more are likely in the "near future." A large majority of the closed or soon-to-be-closed hospitals are in LA and the surrounding area AND add in the fact that an estimated 30% of the general population served by these hospitals are Hispanic and/or illegal immigrants.... Am I the only one making a connection here??"I will leave the Patrick Buchanan Mexico invasion theory for another day...lol Mr. Buchanan admitted he has a problem with browning of America."Mike, Mike... you disappoint me. I didn't take you for one to use trite catch-all issue-dodging talking points to dismiss intelligent discussion. The statements I quoted weren't from dismissable left- or right-wing fanatics. They were from the head of the CA Democratic Party, a noted professor at one of Texas' most prominent institutions of higher education and one of Mexico's premier author/intellects. I'm not a racist but we have a serious problem in this country with illegal immigration and the primary source and most significant sector contributing to that problem is our neighbors to the south. Ignoring that simple fact in the name of being PC is no less futile than attempting to dismiss my argument with the old "some of my best friends are Mexican" gambit you attempted elsewhere. Some of my best friends and co-workers ARE Hispanic. Hispanic AMERICANS."Proposition 187 made California a permanent Democratic state."A big problem with absolutes is that they almost never are. Last I heard Arnold Schwartzenegger was still governor, still a legal immigrant and still Republican. Kinda blows that statement all kinds of outta the water...."Although I see your point about a country mired in debt taken on more deat but it falls on deaf ears of many because we have a trillon dollar war and we are cutting taxes while continuing our massive spending."I agree. Almost 100%. We need to end the war in Iraq... now... one way or another. We need to focus FIRST on the most pressing problems AT HOME. I tend to believe illegal immigration and massive federal waste of our tax dollars are two of those very pressing problems that need our immediate attention."Making the illegal workers the scapegoat for all our ills is not taken very seriously."While illegal immigration *is* a pressing domestic concern, there's no way even that many illegal aliens could be responsible for ALL our problems. Nice try but no cigar, my friend. But it *is* a problem and ignoring that it is or attempting to dismiss it in hopes that it'll just go away is disingenuous at best, tragically harmful at worst."Two things wrong with teenagers replacing the illegal workers. 1. Employers would rather have in the adult unskilled worker that will keep his mouth shut."1. Yet another reason to fine the hell out of 'em or seize their assets. Thanks for bolstering my arguments. 2. I can picture the massive reprogramming of the parent/teenager so they can convince the kids and themselves that working in a meat processing plant is really what they want to do."2. Hockey puck. I used to pick up returnable pop bottles to make my spending money when I was in elementary school. (Hey! I was green before green was cool!) I bagged groceries at a Gibson's Discount (Walmart predecessor) while in college because my parents weren't affluent. A far cry from the engineer I eventually became. My wife picked asparagus, cherries and wine grapes in WA state's Yakima Valley while and even AFTER getting her bachelor's degree in Community Health at Central WA State. She did it as a side job to earn money to pay for her education and, after college, to take trips to Europe, Egypt and Asia because she (and I) love travelling and broadening our horizons. On the other hand, many a high school kid started flipping burgers at Mickey D's and moved on to become regional manager, even VP of the bloomin' company. The re-progamming needs to be in the area of teaching our kids that if they want that pair of $100 of "Chic" jeans instead of the $20 WalMart Wranglers they can pick up the aluminum equivalent of retrunable pop bottles to pay the difference instead of mom saying, "Ok. I'll work a few hours more overtime (thus further neglecting your parenting even more) and *give* you the difference so you can hang out at the mall with your friends some more."How sadly misplaced our priorities are.... Ernie
Hello Ernie First let's get a constitutional matter out-of-the-way. The "anchor baby" is a United States citizen under the 14th amendment that emphasizes all humans born in this country are United States citizens. I have yet to see a legislator try to repeal it.Second point, if we pay an illegal worker subpar wages why should we insist that they spend that money in this country?Your stats are one-sided ,a lot of debits no corresponding credits nor do you visualize the intangible benefits of illegal immigration. Your problems and solutions just target the Mexicans. About 60% of the problem, so are you satisfied with the other 40%? What stats did not cover were these 6 million that came over here legally but overstayed ; our homeland security does not know where they are.Question have you read the defeated immigration reform plan? It is a detail piece of legislation that accounts for a high turnover rate, dismissed employees ,sickleave etc. it does not dwell into state and local problems. Schools, hospitals and public assistance is a state matter. I will leave the Patrick Buchanan Mexico invasion theory for another day...lol Mr. Buchanan admitted he has a problem with browning of America.Proposition 187 made California a permanent Democratic state.Although I see your point about a country mired in debt taken on more deat but it falls on deaf ears of many because we have a trillon dollar war and we are cutting taxes while continuing our massive spending. Making the illegal workers the scapegoat for all our ills is not taken very seriously.Two things wrong with teenagers replacing the illegal workers. 1. Employers would rather have in the adult unskilled worker that will keep his mouth shut.2. I can picture the massive reprogramming of the parent/teenager so they can convince the kids and themselves that working in a meat processing plant is really what they want to do.
Success! Well, at least partial success. Evidently cut and paste doesn't import the sentence and paragraph spacings. :( Sorry it came in all in a bunch like that but... it'll have to do.Hope you can make sense of it.Ernie
Not to worry. I think I saved it in Word, just in case. Let me see if I can cut 'n paste....
Both sides have acknowledged that we have an illegal immigration problem. How could they not? The Federation for Immigration Reform estimates it costs the American taxpayers $12B a year to provide elementary and secondary educations to illegal immigrant children and another $17B to provide the same for "anchor babies." And while federal law *requires* hospitals and clinics to treat illegal immigrants without charge, Medicaid earmarks another $1B per year to reimburse hospitals and doctors for their services - an amount ALL hospital staff and administrators say is far below their actual costs. An estimated 3000-8000 illegals cross our southern border EVERY DAY - far more than enter our country through legal channels. But as you say, the problem is in arriving at a workable solution that's agreeable to both sides. I believe that is, in large part, because both parties are working on the wrong end of the problem. We throw billions in tax dollars now at attempting to stem the flow of IA's into the US in the form of increased border security (per Bill Clinton in '96), increased sanctions against businesses that employ them (per Regan in '86) and paying INS agents to seek out and deport IA's that will simply skip back across the border usually within less than a month of being hauled, at taxpayer expense, back south. We simply MUST stop working on the supply side of the equation and start focusing on removing the enticements that lured these people here in the first place; jobs, housing, medical care and money to send back home. For just as surely as it "rains in California in the summertime," as long as there is a profitable demand, the supply WILL be there. As clever as we think a forty foot concrete wall might be, it's not going to be much of a deterrent to someone who spent the last 3-6 months braving jungles, mountains, wild beasts, the environment and often hostile political climates on foot to get to it. As long as getting across the border is easier, less dangerous and more immediately gratifying than attempting to fix their own problems at home, they'll just keep coming. And they have plenty of support once they get here. The beleaguered citizens of California tendered the infamous Proposition 187 in 1994 and overwhelmingly passed the measure denying medical care(except emergency treatment), social services and public education to residents who could not prove their legal status. It was almost immediately restrained and ultimately overturned by a federal court on the grounds that states could not govern on the national concern of immigration. Sen. Art Torres who was then head of the CA Democratic Party termed Prop. 187, "the last gasp of white America in California." Mario Oblado who was given the Presidential Medal of Freedom by then-Pres. Bill Clinton stated that within 5 years (from 1996) California would be an Hispanic state. When questioned about his statements he admitted making the statement and added that if anyone didn't like it they could "go back to Europe where they came from." One of Mexico's premier intellectuals (sorry, I can't spell her name correctly) stated, "Mexico is recovering the territories ceded to the US using migratory tactics." Even some of our fellow Texans feel the same way. Jose Angel Guittierezz (sp), a professor at the UT Austin has said the US is Mexicans' "own homeland" adding, "We are not immigrants, we are migrants. We belong here." Californians attempted to address the demand side of the equation with Prop. 187 but until similar legislation becomes FEDERAL law, other states' similar attempts as in AZ, OK and TX will likely be similarly thwarted. Our federal government, constitutionally required to protect our national borders and the citizenry within them, simply MUST adopt similar legislation applicable to the entire country. Why should a citizenry already mired in a seemingly bottomless bog of national debt continue to foot so many of the bills for those who move here illegally with the intent to take full advantage of the largesse of our current policies and laws while sending the profits of their illegally gotten gains back home, further depressing our economy as much as their labor aids it? Since 1970 the US Census Bureau shows the US population growing from 203 million to the current almost 300 million. Counting only LEGAL immigration, our population has grown by 1/2 yet half of that growth is attributable to immigration - and again, LEGAL immigration. Internal population growth stemming from the baseline population of 1970 is approaching a static level yet Census Bureau estimates put the US population near 400 million by 2050. Nearly 80% of this growth is projected to be from LEGAL immigration of which Hispanics comprise approximately 25%. The US currenlty accepts about one million legal immigrants per year. Without even counting illegal immigrants, our country has had to build twice as many schools, pave twice as many roads, staff twice as many hospitals and provide twice as much other infrastructure than it otherwise would have since 1970. It has been postulated that, at the present rate of illegal influx, California alone will have to build one new school every day to stay ahead of its educational needs. And who will pay for it? Legal American Taxpayers. Imagine the workers we could have paid living wages with that excess? You state that you get the inclination that we *need* those additional 20 million workers but what about the 4-5% of unemployed LEGAL citizens we have now? Four percent of 150 million (I don't know the exact demographics but we'll assume half of US residents are of employable age) is six million American Citizens who could have jobs. Now without getting on another soap box, that means we could put another, say, five million teenagers to work part time and during the summer months at some of these unskilled postions learning the value of a dollar and the benefit of honest labor instead of figuring out how to locate the latest cheat codes for Halo3 on the internet....or hanging out over on Liberty St. getting shot at! Ernie http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...
I did not remove it Ernie ,but I never saw it.
HeY! Didn't I leave a post here last night? Where'd it go?