Tag Archive for 'illegal-aliens'

Immigration and the Local Option Enforcement of Our Laws

Published
by
Wilson
on October 28, 2008
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

In all the presidential debates, in all the political commercials, in all the talking points, you don’t really hear much about immigration, or more accurately, the issue of illegal aliens and what to do about the flow of people across our border with Mexico. You may hear a soundbite here or there. Just about every candidate will use phrases like “immigration reform,” or “secure our borders” or a dozen others. What you won’t hear is in-depth, detailed discussion of what this really means? You won’t see finger pointing because the fingers point to everyone. You will not hear anyone say that if elected they will get the fence built. You will not hear national politicians pledge to enforce our laws, punish employers who break it and deport illegal aliens.

The reason you won’t hear much about these issues is because no one wants to lose the Hispanic vote. You won’t hear much because everyone’s position, on the national level, at least, is basically the same: amnesty (code word: immigration reform) is coming, so do not fight it too hard!

Well, that ain’t necessarily so. Last year, a grassroots uprising stopped a bipartisan effort to grant amnesty for illegal aliens. That uprising convinced our Georgia Senators Chambliss and Isakson to change their position from one of support to a vote against the legislation. which side of the issue they had better be on if they wanted to get re-elected. Both of them had supported the Bush Administration and the Republican plan for amnesty.

There are those for whom the fight goes on daily. It will go on every year in Congress until one side or the other is the victor. D. A. King is one of those determined to win. D. A. founded The Dustin Inman Society after a 16 year-old boy, Dustin Inman, was killed in a automobile accident with a driver, an illegal alien, who had legally obtained a North Carolina driver’s license, even though he was here illegally. Sure, similar accidents occur every day that do not involve illegal alien drivers. Nevertheless, it is equally true that if an illegal alien could not get a driver’s license, Dustin Inman would not have died on the day he did.

If the issue on the national level is on hold until after the election, the fight on the local level only intensifies. The fight has become a grassroots effort to do what the national government won’t do: enforce our immigration laws. In this interview D. A. King emphasizes the effort in Georgia and elsewhere to get local law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration laws and undertake efforts to deport illegal aliens.

In 1996 Congress passed Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act which allows the authority to enforce our federal immigration laws to be formally delegated to local law enforcement agencies. Thus, if the federal government won’t enforce the laws, communities that want to do so can obtain that power by compliance with Section 287(g).

Not all communities and law enforcement agencies participate in the 287(g) partnership with the federal government. Some have tried, without success, which is difficult to understand. The Cobb County Sheriff’s Office does.

On the state level, in 2006 the General Assembly passed the Georgia Security and Compliance Act. The Act requires Georgia employers working on public contracts to verify legal status of applicants using the E-Verify database provided by the federal government. It requires the Georgia Commissioner of Public Safety to establish a 287(g) program for Georgia, requires law enforcement officers to make a reasonable effort to determine immigration status of individuals in their custody and to report problems to Homeland Security, and a variety of other requirements intended to deal effectively with the issue of illegal aliens in Georgia.

Some of you may not agree with D. A. I didn’t–at first. In fact, the reason I first interviewed him was to tell him that I thought it was an exaggerated, inflammatory issue, inspired by Republican conservative to get out the vote in 2006.

Well, D. A. changed my thinking by giving me facts, not soundbites. It is not a racial issue, it is an economic issue, and more importantly an issue of law and sovereignty. As D. A. points out, Mexico enforces its immigration laws to the maximum. Why don’t we? For that you will need to think and do some research if you want to find the answer on your own. Check out Numbers USA, GrassFire.org, and The Dustin Inman Society.

If you don’t have time to do the research, I will tell you the simple answer: Corporate power and cheap labor. It is the business community that wants what illegal aliens have to offer, unlimited cheap labor, at the expense of the American worker. The ultimate goal is the free flow of labor across our borders. In the 1990s NAFTA exported our manufacturing plants, leaving us with jobs that could not be outsourced. In this decade the effort has been to outsource the labor, though illegal employees, for the remaining jobs.

Don’t believe me? Your problem, not mine.

 
 D. A. King, Founder, The Dustin Inman Society [29:28m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (18)

Numbers and Immigration: Jobs and the Environment

Published
by
Wilson
on March 24, 2008
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

If you don’t know where you stand with regard to the illegal aliens, maybe you can at least get a handle on the problem with LEGAL IMMIGRATION. Just like your check book, it is all about numbers. Roy Beck has the numbers. And, as we all know, numbers don’t lie - even if we don’t want to believe them!

Now, you can watch the video or read the rest of this post. My advice: do both!

Beck is a former journalist who now devotes his time to educating Americans about the destructive truth of our immigration policies. Roy started Numbers USA in 1997 to carry out the recommendations of the U. S. Commission on Immigration Reform, created by the Immigration Act of 1990 and the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. Some people don’t like him, but all I can say is that he makes a hell of a lot of sense.

Remember, I am talking about legal immigration, those people who enter the US with our permission each year. How many people do you think that is? Would you believe that from 1776 through 1976 the traditional level of immigration to this country was an average of 250,000 people per year.

Roy’s point is that throughout our history when we have exceeded traditional levels of immigration we have always had problems assimilating the additional immigrants. Immigrants have also suffered from high levels of immigration because they are forced to compete for jobs in a market flooded with available workers.

However, beginning in 1959, US immigration policy has taken a wrong turn. After the devastation of WWII, many people wanted to immigrate from Europe to America for a better life. By the end of the ’50s, Europe;s economy had improved and less people were immigrating to America. You may remember this was about the same time a lot of us were being told we needed to achieve zero population growth. Well, the law of unintended consequences went into effect when Congress, apparently fearing we would not have enough European immigrants, began opening the floodgates.

Up until 1965 there were annual immigration quotas and East European countries had the largest quotas. In 1959 Congress invented “chain immigration” so that Europeans could bring their extended family. With chain immigration, the person who is approved for entry into the country gets to bring his relatives with him. In 1965 Congress did away with quotas and allowed immigration from all countries on the same basis. As a result of chain immigration, since 1990 we have been averaging 1,000,000+ legal immigrants a year. This is in addition to a milliion or more illegal aliens entering the country every year.

Do you wonder why immigration hasn’t been a big deal for the last 60 years (since WWII) and now, all of a sudden, it is a very big deal? Well, it’s because when legal immigration is at the traditional level of 250,000 a year, the country has been able to cope with this increase in population. However, after almost 40 years of higher levels of immigration, we are experiencing the pressure of these increased numbers on our utility and transportation infrastructure, our schools systems, our employment rates and wage rates.

According to Roy, there is a relationship between levels of legal immigration and illegal immigration. The greater the number of legal immigrants, the greater the pressure on others to enter illegally.

One of the problems with our immigration policy is that it has been run by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the ACLU. The Chamber and its pro business agenda promotes higher levels of immigration to exploit cheap labor at the expense of the American worker. Naturally, the ACLU is motivated bythe liberal idea that everyone should get to live in Amercia. (While I generally support ACLU principles, like all organizations, they can take the wrong stance on any particular issue. This is one of them.)

The problem with our immigration policy is that it is not guided by the most important question: What level of immigration is in our national interest? Politicians ignore focusing on this issue because of political correctness and voters. They don’t want Hispanic Americans mad at them.

I asked Roy where our presidential contenders stood on this issue of reducing immigration levels. (You can find check out your state delegation here.) All three of the remaining front runners, McCain, Clinton, and Obama, have the same rating: abysmal.

 
 Roy Beck, Founder, Numbers USA [29:36m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (558)

Illegal Aliens and the Dream Act!

Published
by
Wilson
on October 31, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

You may remember several months ago when the bipartisan effort at comprehensive immigration reform (another way of saying “amnesty”) was defeated. Since the defeat, the effort to pass some form of amnesty for illegal aliens has not ended, it just takes on different forms. The latest reincarnation is the Dream Act which was similarly defeated last week by a vote of 52-44. Believe it or not, the Dream Act was first introduced in 2001. It was also included as a part of the comprehensive reform effort. It apparently has 9 lives. Maybe more.

In this interview with Steve Elliott, Executive Director of GrassFire.Org, Steve discusses this most recent effort at amnesty. One of the major provisions of The Dream Act purported to provide a “Path for Citizenship” to illegal aliens that came to America before the age of 16. And how does an illegal alien prove he arrived in America before age 16? Let’s see! An illegal alien does not have papers documenting the illegal entry into the U.S. Under the Dream Act, he just says he got here before he was 16, even if it was actually last month. Further, according to Steve, he can make this claim 10 years from now.

You may recall that the earlier comprehensive legislation was essentially written behind closed doors and was unveiled shortly before the vote in an effort to force a vote without providing either the public or our representatives an adequate opportunity to study and understand the legislation. Well, the same kind of strong-arm tactics continue to the order of the day. According to GrassFire:

Harry Reid and Dick Durbin are using “Rule 14” to push the Dream Amnesty Act directly to the Senate floor — bypassing committee hearings, debate and markup. To invoke Rule 14, Reid and Durbin must get 60 “yes” votes on a special cloture vote.

Our own Georgia Senators, Chambliss and Isaakson, initially supported amnesty and a “Path to Citizenship,” but changed their minds when they realized that most Georgians do not favor amnesty. Last week, they both voted against the Dream Amnesty Act.

Here is how the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU) describes the legislation:

The bipartisan Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2003 (S.1545), or DREAM Act, would also make it easier for immigrant students who have met long-term residency and other requirements to pursue permanent legal residency status. HACU supports this legislation and companion House legislation as the opportunity to open new doors to college for tens of thousands of talented students.

Note that HACU makes no attempt to clarify that “minor” is in the US illegally.

And here is how the National Immigration Law Center describes the “need” for the legislation:

Each year about 65,000 U.S.–raised students who would qualify for the DREAM Act’s benefits graduate from high school. These include honor roll students, star athletes, talented artists, homecoming queens, and aspiring teachers, doctors, and U.S. soldiers. They are young people who have lived in the U.S. for most of their lives and desire only to call this country their home. Even though they were brought to the U.S. years ago as children, they face unique barriers to higher education, are unable to work legally in the U.S., and often live in constant fear of
detection by immigration authorities. Our immigration law currently has no mechanism to consider the special equities and circumstances of such students. The DREAM Act would eliminate this flaw. It is un-American to indefinitely and irremediably punish them for decisions made by adults many years ago. By enacting the DREAM Act, Congress would legally recognize what is de facto true: these young people belong here.

Makes it sound right, doesn’t it! Well, it isn’t. But this isn’t about education for minors. As the NILC article recognizes, the children of illegal aliens are being educated. This isn’t about racism or xenophobia. Pardon me for harping on this, but this is about American sovereignty. When the President of Mexico says that where ever a Mexican is, there is Mexico, I know that our neighbor to the South is nuts. Mexico is a politically corrupt country with a third world mentality and standard of living. Mexico would love to export its problems and its poverty to America and import our money to its economy. They want, and are even demanding open borders so that they have absolutely no barrier between our standard of living and theirs.

We need a sensible and reasonable immigration policy. We need a fence on the border for security. We need to enforce the laws we have. We don’t need to give to Mexico what it wants.

 
 Steve Elliott, GrassFire.Org [28:50m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (265)

We Were Invaded Earlier Today! Do You Understand?

Published
by
Wilson
on September 10, 2007
in Blog
. 0 Comments

Can anyone explain to me why Mexican truckers have unrestricted access to American highways?

Is it really provided for in NAFTA?

Did President Bush really sign an order September 1 allowing this?

This isn’t just about the economic effects of Mexican truckers taking over American jobs. What about the effect on border security? I thought we were in a war on terrorists!

And if you don’t think this is a threat to your health, wait until you meet one of these guys–driving on your side of the road.

When (and it is only a matter of time) they kill you or maime you, who will you sue? Nobody in America! Maybe this is an effort by American companies to avoid all liability for bad drivers.

Do they have insurance to cover their liability for negligence like American truckers do?

Can they even read the damn road signs? What makes you think they can?

Anyone inspecting the vehicles they are driving to determine if it is in good working order? Is it a safe vehicle?

Whether it is the federal DOT or some other agency, the buck stops with George W. Bush, the worst president in the world.

And do you see the connection with immigration reform? Do you see why they don’t want to build a fence? Because the powers that be are determined to undermine our economy even further and create the United States of North America.

I will not vote for or support any candidate for president that supports this kind of crap. It is truly disgusting. I hope everyone is offended by this total breach of security and national sovereignty as I am.

Our government has no intention to protect us from China or Mexico. All the progress we made in the last 50 years insuring that the products we buy don’t kill us is just going down the drain.

Right now, John Edwards seems to be the candidate with a sensible position.

And then on top of that, the news tonight (CNN-Lou Dobbs) is that the Border Patrol at busy crossings like El Paso, TX have been told not to conduct thorough inspections of vehicles entering the U.S. from Mexico. Speed over security!! That is just nuts. Worse than nuts, but I won’t say it, but to myself. Why don’t we just publish a pamphlet for terrorist: “How to Cross the U. S. Border Without any Hassle!”

Interview with D. A. King, Founder, Dustin Inman Society

Published
by
Wilson
on August 9, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

My last post made me realize that in my efforts to get used to my new website format, I had failed to post an interview with D. A. King taken at the time of the vote on the immigration bill. As many of you know, D. A. has devoted his life to making our government do 2 things: (1) secure the borders, and (2) enforce the laws.

I have interviewed D. A. numerous times on the show over the course of the last year. When I started looking into this “problem” it was in the context of Georgia Republicans, like Senator Chip Rogers, sponsoring legislation to make it harder for illegal aliens to get state welfare benefits and force employers to require proper documentation for hiring. I can’t say I thought it was racist, I just thought it was something to stir up the people, the voters, over nothing. Get them to the polls for other purposes. It’s been done before.

I have said it before and I will say it again, I was completely and totally wrong!

I have nothing against immigrants, but immigrants are people who get here legally. Those that came here legally paid a price in time and effort and expense, that illegals did not pay. The reason for coming was essentially the same, the method of arrival was totatlly different.

But more important to me is the answer to this one question: “Do you believe anyone from any place should have the right to enter America at anytime?” I doubt anyone believes this, especially if they have any regard to this country and its future. If you agree the only common sense answer to this question is “No!” then, I suggest you consider the next step. How do you keep them out?

Yes, I believe in a fence. Yes, I believe in the enforcement of the law. Yes, I am sorry that illegal mothers and fathers made the wrong decision and gave birth to American citizens when they themselves had no right to be here. I am sorry that they could be separated but that is their choice if they leave their children here when they return to Mexico. They don’t have to leave them. I feel just as sorry for the children of criminals who are separated from their parents by jail.

We did this immigration reform once in 1986. They, the politicians, promised to secure the borders and enforce the laws. They lied. They did neither. Then it was 2 or 3 million who were forgiven their crime. Now, they want to give amnesty to another 10 million to 20 millions without securing the borders or enforcing the laws, so that in another 5 or 10 years we can do it all again.

Why? Simple. With NAFTA they exported our manufacturing plants to Mexico for one reason: cheap labor. Well, the jobs they couldn’t export (the guy that works on the elevator, the train engineer, the computer operator) are the expensive ones, the ones that make more than minimum wage. Corporate America is tired of having to pay decent, hard working Americans more than minimum wage so that they can have a life. Corporate America wants cheap labor once again in America for the jobs they can’t outsource. Make millions of people legal who would love to earn $10 an hour and the guys getting paid $20 an hour will lose their jobs. Just wait and see! You think is all about migrant farm workers? As the TV commercial says: “What’s in your wallet?”

Don’t believe me! Fine. Then you tell me what the big deal is? Tell me why enforcing the law is what we expect everywhere, except when it comes to dealing with illegal aliens. Tell me why the U. S. Chamber of Commerce is the number one proponent of amnesty if it isn’t because business is just looking for cheap labor. Tell me who makes the money and who loses in this contest. This ain’t about racism. It ain’t about being mean or unsympathetic. This is about corporate America kicking the working American one more time, maybe the last time.

I know there are many of you who don’t agree. I just hope you are facing facts, not propaganda. I am tired of the propaganda.

 
 D. A. King, Dustin Inman Society [28:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (332)

We Need a Fence Around This Place!

Published
by
Wilson
on August 8, 2007
in Blog
. 0 Comments

Dear God, forgive me, but I cannot help myself. A friend of mine sent me an article in the AJC about illegal aliens being victims of crime and being unable (or at least uncomfortable) to report it to law enforcement because of their illegal status. I understand the quandry and will let each of you digest that a while longer.

However, what caught my eye was the quote in the article from one of the Hispanics interviewed who said, “We need more lights and a fence around this place.” I suggest everyone, except Washington politicians, recognizes the inherent value of a fence. Fences make good neighbors!