TalkBaja.com » Baja Mexico Forums » Baja News Wire

As many folks feel that the newly passed law in Arizona regarding illegal immigrants will likely be in part or in whole, ultimately struck down by the Supreme Court, based on prior rulings, the most likely legacy of this legislation will be to jump start immigration reform in Congress. Then, the biggest issue, that has already been commented upon, especially by Republicans is the idea that an amnesty program would be the deal-breaker. I've attached a link to an article that appears today in the LA Times. The author is an Associate Professor at Stanford. Stanford is hardly considered to be a left-leaning institution.

Immigration reform: It must be comprehensive - latimes.com

I suspect you are fishing for a comment.
Who am I to deny you?

It's a pretty good article, makes some good points; some not so good assumptions about the conservative point of view.

The sanest ideas I've read on the subject of reform include amnesty. For all it's warts, there is no practical "solution" without it. You are issued are green card with all it's current regulations, and social security number . No fines, no BS and path to citizenship charades. Focus on that is mice nuts. Yeah, they broke the law, but so did the infamous kid who sneaked into the circus tent establishing the precedent of attractive nuisance. We have allowed ourselves to be an attractive nuisance and this is the result/consequence. To the masses, you need a marketing message of the benefits to them, not the illegals. It's not that most people don't care or aren't compassionate (and it is detrimental to insinuate that they are). You've got border states in economic mayhem. Bringing a large percentage (legal, illegal, and of every color and class I might add) out of the underground economy (which I know in LA is huge) benefits everyone. Find the benefits and the plan can be sold.
As I understand it, the rationale of the last amnesty program was the promise that it would reduce illegal immigration. Obviously it didn't, because laws were not enforced. Immigration needs to develop a cogent plan of border control for two reasons. Not to do so is to be complicit in human trafficking, and, for all the frenzied rhetoric, this is the one that is most clearly a violation of human rights . Secondly without doing so we will be having the same kerfuffle in another 5 -10 years. Those who hate the idea of a fence have to get over it, half of them live behind gates and walls anyway. Practically speaking a whole lot of barrier is required.
The drug problem has to be dealt with more effectively. It's a related issue, but should be managed separately.
I don't know what goes on behind all those closed doors in DC. But they are the lousiest set of problem solvers I've ever seen. Lousy leadership. That's not a criticism of the president except to the extent that I would like him or Napolitano to demand that the Congress provide them with the tools to solve the problem. It's an indictment of Congressional leadership.
With the Long Hot Summer ahead, so comes "riot season". If I were Napolitano I would be on the hill and TV every day to pressure on Immigration reform.

And who said 2010 was going to be a boring year???

Aside from the humanitarian aspects of an amnesty, including the last one, it is also an expedient to the extent that the effort to identify and round up all illegals is a task that would require more revenue and manpower than most people realize. I fundamentally agree with Dusty's post with the exception of the fence thing. Two things come to mind. The first is the symbolism. It would represent something that exists nowhere else in the world with the exception of Israel. (And you know how most of the community of nations feels about that.) But on a more practical level, there's that old question of what it takes to scale a twenty foot high fence. A twenty-one foot ladder. The very fact that the primary migratory routes for the illegals have shifted to insanely harsh desert territory after we decorated the urban areas with walls and fences, tend to support the lengths people will go to when they or their families are starving.

Not defending the fence. Agree about the symbolism I think you are referring to.. The first thing to agree on is that there is no "perfect solution". We'd go for a specific measureable target of illegal entry reduction. A goal, better than now. Barrier, in some areas, is possibly part of that.

"The lengths people will go."...so we work with Mexico to solve that piece of the problem. You know way more about Mexico than I....way more. So, I would trust someone like you to negotiate a non ideologically , non special interest driven solution, developing specific solutions programs that the US helps fund with people and money so that Mexican people can remain in their country and have decent lives. This and the drug thing are tough, really tough. Measureable goals...priorities....solution parts....first steps. It can be done...if politicians stop viewing Latinos as votes, business people stop viewing them as cheap labor, and return to tthe reality of what we both are...neighbors.

As as side note....as a % of GDP, which of us is deeper in debt? (no fair clicking Google)

Given your past complaints about the foundering ship of the economy here, I'd venture a guess that you would not have even posed the query unless the answer was US.

Not quite sure how you can characterize me as knowing more about Mexico than do you. It appears that you live there full time. I have rather been a very frequent visitor for 30+ years. That said, in the event that you may have encountered my rantings here and over at nomad, I have been a fervent supporter of open borders. My model is that of the EU. perhaps right now not the best example. But on the other hand, it will be interesting to see how the current debt crisis plays out. Deep down, I can't help but think that countries like Germany and France are downright apoplectic about the idea of bailing out Greece. and, as an aside, Greece is a wonderful place to visit. But the national work ethic is in the toilet.

My primary focus on the EU as an example is that you have more than two dozen countries which have a common currency and allow free travel among them without visas or passports. It just seemed to me that the crackdown at our Southern border was more about an ill-advised anti-terror campaign than anything else. And the primary result has been to place an enormous burden upon cross-border workers and commerce, virtually eliminate day trips, and destroy the small businesses in Tijuana and similar places.

Would offer that the EU "example" you offer is one with a lot of hair on it... and which illustrates the issues that may be expected under even "legal" immigration of some folks who may not really want the current to accept the current Laws, Religion, and Culture of the County which the immigrants have chosen.

One can mouth the "press" which is put out on this issue, or take a close look at what is happening to a culture, in this case... "Judaeo–Christian"

British historian Hilaire Belloc's book The Great Heresies- 1938

"The suggestion that Islam may re-arise sounds fantastic - this is only because men are always powerfully affected by the immediate past: - one might say that they are blinded by it......"

Current EU legal immigration issues coupled to "human rights"... deal with it... they are..

"Once we solve the burqa problem, we'll still have the problem of polygamy, of praying in the streets of big cities, of banning pork from cafeterias, in short all the sectarian demands the French are confronted with daily," Le Pen said.

"Given your past complaints about the foundering ship of the economy here, I'd venture a guess that you would not have even posed the query unless the answer was US."

Yep, I was surprised when I read that data

"Not quite sure how you can characterize me as knowing more about Mexico than do you. It appears that you live there full time. I have rather been a very frequent visitor for 30+ years. "

From your posts. I've compared myself, living in BCS, to someone who, after living in Alaska or Hawaii for a few years would think they know the US. And, friends have validated that as not a bad comparison.

That said, in the event that you may have encountered my rantings here and over at nomad, I have been a fervent supporter of open borders. My model is that of the EU. perhaps right now not the best example. But on the other hand, it will be interesting to see how the current debt crisis plays out. Deep down, I can't help but think that countries like Germany and France are downright apoplectic about the idea of bailing out Greece. and, as an aside, Greece is a wonderful place to visit. But the national work ethic is in the toilet.

Supposedly resolving the debt crisis right this minute, but that's been promised for weeks. I participate on a couple of financial forums, similar to this based, out of London. The Greeks are apoplectic at Germanys demands. If agreed to and enforced, they change the Greek standard of living for at least a generation. Markets look like they will be a bit volatile when trading starts tomorrow but I don't think "resolution" happens until there's better knowledge of how deep and wide the debt problems are.

"My primary focus on the EU as an example is that you have more than two dozen countries which have a common currency and allow free travel among them without visas or passports."

[COLOR="Blue"]Far as I know it's the only realistic model one can point to. A few would say we do the same by having free travel between our states.(Although there are a couple that if I am going there I make sure my "innoculations are up to date")The common currency and market is one of the key elements of what "sovereignty" is. Maybe this isn't the best time and maybe Greece is forced out of the union...we won't be able to do the same with California, gotta bail 'em. Anyway the Europeans finally decided to stop battling each other and as individuals they would continue to be dwarfed by the US economic machine. With no significant security threats any rational for visas was greatly reduced. And there are so many borders[...Ski over there and it seems like you are in a different country every time you change trams. /COLOR]

"It just seemed to me that the crackdown at our Southern border was more about an ill-advised anti-terror campaign than anything else. And the primary result has been to place an enormous burden upon cross-border workers and commerce, virtually eliminate day trips, and destroy the small businesses in Tijuana and similar places.["

Good point, not completely sure about the "ill advised". The terror issue is real, the nature of both borders is such that we can't secure them completely. My own travel experiences tell me that a terroist from the Mid-East with a religion based motivation would be more likely to enter via our very porpus north border. But if I explained why I think that I risk you accusing me of racial profiling. I think drugs are a bigger issue right now.

Because I live here I have a stronger interest in the Border issues. I also think a lot of the view points on the Baja-related forums are based on very real experiences that provide good perspective. Gives pause for thought about how many people in DC who make our immigration laws and policy and then enforce it, have ever had even a small subset of those experiences. Only a few. There's little knowledge and no political will. But, as much as you and I whack each other with our differing philosophies, I actually believe we could, together, create a plan that would improve the situation, and I think we could sell it to the citizenry. That Washington hasn't is another reason why I am so disgusted with the government. I don't like the basis of the kerfuffle and I don't like demostrations on Wall Street and I sure don't like, that in both kerfuffles, government is being let off the hook.

Our Southwest Border In the last 23 years, since the 1986, Reagan, one-time amnesty, over 27 million illegals have been apprehended, as they crossed the border into our United States.

UNITED STATES BORDER APPREHENSIONS (Source DHS/CBP)

1987 1,190,488
1988 1,008,145
1989 954,243
1990 1,169,939
1991 1,197,875
1992 1,258,482
1993 1,327,259
1994 1,094,717
1995 1,394,554
1996 1,649,986
1997 1,412,953
1998 1,555,776
1999 1,579,010
2000 1,676,438
2001 1,266,213
2002 955,310
2003 931,557
2004 1,160,395
2005 1,189,075
2006 1,089,902
2007 876,704
2008 723,825
2009 556,041

Maybe in the beginning we practiced catch and release?

Good one, would appear so....

Some of the recent decline must surely be a result of increased border security. But, I'd also bet that the fluctuation in numbers reflects fluctuation in the economy.

2000, 2001 and 2002 supports your point.

"Well, as you know, Arizona has passed the strictest immigration law in the country, and in response, the mayor of San Francisco is pushing for a boycott of the state of Arizona. This could be devastating to gay rodeos...

...They're not the only ones boycotting. Today, Mexican gangs are threatening to cut off the state's drug supply." –Jay Leno

Originally Posted by Marty Cortez

...They're not the only ones boycotting. Today, Mexican gangs are threatening to cut off the state's drug supply."

Unintended consequences, eh? ops:

Don't think so.... looks like some forward thinking on the part of these folks...

"Proposed legislation that would tax medical marijuana - if voters legalize it this fall - narrowly passed the state Senate on Thursday thanks to a split among Republicans

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/gilbert/articles/2010/03/25/20100325medical-marijuana-tax-arizona.html#ixzz0miAUnf3q"

Oh. It's only the "medical" stuff! does bring up an interesting problem for the feds as more and more states are adopting legal medical marijuana. Nothing like what's on the CA ballot, however. Besides, having spent considerable time in AZ over the years, both professionally and having family there, I would consider the measure a long shot to pass.

the point was, that they passed a law to tax the crap (in AZ) ...

Tiny point here. According to what you posted, it cannot become law unless a majority of the voters agree.

Was a law passed? it is a rather simple yes or no answer.. speculation on meaning, go for it.. you seemed to have a really great crystal ball.. perhaps you should donate your time..