Bush Plan a Magnet | Immigrants cite lure of border proposal

Status
Not open for further replies.

w4rma

member
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
724
Location
United States of America
By Joe Cantlupe
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
and Gregory Alan Gross
STAFF WRITER

January 23, 2004


WASHINGTON – More than half the people accused of using phony documents to sneak through the San Ysidro port of entry in recent days said they were trying to get into the United States because of President Bush's proposal to give temporary legal status to millions of illegal immigrants.

Of 162 people stopped for using phony documents at San Ysidro since Bush announced his plan on Jan. 7, 94 said they were trying to enter because of the proposed new work program, according to sources present at a Wednesday meeting of a border-security working group in San Diego.

Border Patrol officials have reported a 15 percent increase in the use of phony documents at the San Ysidro port compared with the same period a year ago.

Bush's plan, designed to match willing workers with willing employers, would provide temporary legal status to illegal immigrants working in the United States and to others outside the country if they can show they have a job offer.

His proposal has been widely publicized in Mexico. In some quarters, it is being characterized as an amnesty, despite Bush's contention that it is not.

Some U.S. border enforcement officers and immigration policy experts have predicted that just talking about the proposal would encourage more people to try to get into the country.

"We're getting a lot of people asking about this," said senior border agent Sean Moran, who works in Imperial Beach. "They're asking what they need to do to qualify."

Many of the immigrants are "first-timers," said Moran, who also serves as spokesman for Local 1613 of the agents' union, the National Border Patrol council.

"At the Imperial Beach station where I work, I've noticed a definite spike in apprehensions," he said. "We're also catching more women and children, which we haven't in awhile. We're catching a lot of the same people every day."

Department of Homeland Security officials said the increases began in October, well before Bush unveiled his proposal.

"We were starting to see increases in the beginning of the fiscal year," said Mario Villarreal, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security.

The Border Patrol's San Diego sector headquarters reported 31,204 apprehensions of illegal immigrants between Oct. 1, 2003, which was the start of the fiscal year, and this week. For the same period a year ago, the number was 22,375.

Moran said he saw a surge last fall, but has seen another since Bush's announcement.

"There were a handful compared to several dozen now – an eightfold increase, and it all started with Bush's announcement," Moran said.

"These people are mostly volunteering the information. We are asking them, just out of curiosity, why they are here and they are asking how they qualify for this amnesty."

Wayne Cornelius, director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at UCSD, said he isn't surprised by an upturn in illegal immigration.

"It's not huge, considering the saturation publicity this has gotten in Mexico," Cornelius said. "It's predictable. This will continue until the new rules of the game are crystal clear ... maybe once Congress gets around to acting on the Bush proposal a year or so from now. We're looking at a fairly long period."

Talk of any amnesty-type program "attracts more illegal immigrants and that's not surprising," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington.

"The news doesn't necessarily spread accurately in Mexico or even among illegal aliens in the U.S.," Krikorian said. "They suspect there's an amnesty in effect. This is just attracting more illegal aliens and demoralizing our law enforcement personnel."

Immigration lawyers and immigrant rights groups say they, too, are getting inquiries from immigrants hoping to take advantage of Bush's proposal. "News travels quickly," said Angela Kelley of the National Immigration Forum, "and people are yearning for a better life."

Christian Ramirez, of the American Friends Service Committee in San Diego, said his group got at least 50 calls the day after Bush unveiled his proposal, "and it's been a constant flow ever since."

So far, Ramirez hasn't noticed any great influx, but as the immigration debate continues, he expects more people to head for the United States.

The confusion in Mexico about Bush's statements is understandable, Ramirez said, because of the differences between the way government works in Mexico and the way things are done in the United States.

Most Mexicans grew up under a government in which a proposed new policy from the president's office was treated as law.

"Bush made certain allusions, and some media outlets have characterized this as an amnesty, which plays on people's hopes, when in reality there's nothing there for them to grab onto," Ramirez said.

That has happened before, and not exclusively with Mexican migrants.

In the wake of Hurricane Mitch, which left thousands dead in Central America in late 1998, U.S. immigration officials announced that Hondurans and Nicaraguans already in the United States illegally would be granted a temporary legal status.

However, what was meant as a humanitarian gesture from Washington affecting immigrants already here was widely misinterpreted in Central America, especially in hurricane-ravaged Honduras, as a blanket amnesty for the hurricane victims.

Thousands poured across the border through Mexico, heading for the United States, only to be told at the U.S.-Mexico border that they had made the long, dangerous journey in vain.

Members of Mexico's Grupo Beta, which patrols the Mexican side of the border, said it's too early to tell if Bush's announcement is having a major impact on crossings in the Tecate and Mexicali regions.

"These are typically months when a lot of people are crossing," said Marco Antonio Caballero, an agent who works out of the Mexicali region.

Caballero said he recently ran into a migrant who mentioned that he was hoping to work under whatever plan Bush came up with.

But after being caught three times trying to cross the border, being robbed and losing weight, the migrant decided to go home and wait until the plan takes effect.

Dmitri Papademetriou, an analyst with the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C., said that by making a public announcement of its intended plans, the United States created "all sorts of expectations across the board."

"The U.S. and Mexico should engage in a public service announcement," he suggested, "explaining there's no advantage to coming across the border illegally."
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/fri/news/news_1n23magnet.html
 
great, think of all the new cheap labor!!!.


on a related note, a Dominican woman I work with was telling me her community is very disturbed by the proposal. Legal immigrants are scared stiff that they will lose thier $8-9/hr jobs to the illegals being brought in by the Federal temp agency at $4-5/hr. It's being viewed as a huge set back for those who followed the rules, came here to work hard and in most cases are working 2-3 jobs to make ends meet. She's predicting violent clashes between the 2 forces if the proposal goes on as described. They will fight for their rights and thier jobs.
 
Does this shock anyone? I mean, really?

You remove the last obstacle to legal order and people start breaking the law. Hmmm. Chaos ensues.

You CANNOT have open borders and a welfare state. Time will show that you cannot support a welfare state either. 9/11 (among other things, i.e. California) shows us that open borders are suicide. Any questions?
 
As much as I hate to agree with one of w4rma's cut and paste smear jobs, I have heard of a marked increase in illegals coming over the border here in Arizona. Several friends with civilian border defense groups report these criminals "flooding" across in "groups of twenty to fifty." This increase began with Dubya's announcement.
 
Anyone think a Demo wouldn't have sprung the same BS?









"The U.S. and Mexico should engage in a public service announcement," he suggested, "explaining there's no advantage to coming across the border illegally."


Yeah, right. :rolleyes:

I guess the chance to earn money and not live in a 3rd world craphole aren't advantages.
 
Anyone listen to Hannity's radio show the other day when he interviewed Tom Ridge? Ridge defended Bush's "immigration" policy & said that HSA was in the process of upgrading surveillance of the border. However, he wouldn't make any committment to increasing interdiction or enforcement on the border. And Hannity was gushing over him like a prom queen on the quarterback's arm... :barf:

Bush knew what would happen. This just gets more cheap labor (from many nations, not just Mexico) in the country to take away American jobs & reduce what businesses pay in salaries (American citizens are just TOO expensive to keep employed...:fire: ) Not to mention just who ELSE can slip across that porous border on a whim. And he just doesn't care & won't listen to his conservative base... :cuss:

Tom Ridge doesn't DESERVE to be head of HSA. And George W. Bush doesn't DESERVE to be President any longer...:cuss:
 
The only people to whom this would come as a surprise--and they are willingly deaf, dumb, and blind--would be a) Karl Rove and b) any brain-addled Leftist.

I'll add my two cents on this subject for the hundredeth time. We have had a de facto open border with accelerating illegal immigration for TWO DECADES. This is the time to be STANCHING the flow through hard and serious action--i.e. sealing the border--not looking at ten million illegals now here and EXPANDING the influx.

We need a tourniquet, not a bigger wound.

Rove has spoken ex cathedra and Bush has Made Up His Mind (mantra: "because it's the right thing to do"). The only thing that will stop this insanity in its tracks is a broad and powerful grass-roots message that rivals the classic civil rights movements of the past.

Yes, this is about civil rights, the civil rights of extant American citizens, not the purported civil rights of aliens here illegally or Mexican nationals who should be taken care of by Mexico, not America.
 
Re Ridge on Hannity:

Yeah, I heard that segment, seeker. Hannity keeps talking about national security, as if THAT were the only issue germane to the illegal alien issue. It's not by a long chance, important as that may be. There are many other aspects of this, social, culural, and, of course, economic that we simply cannot afford to ignore.

Ridge is a "company man;" he is carrying the message from his masters, that's pretty plain. As he said, flat-out, with Hannity, "We are not going to deport eight million people" and "These people need to be validated." Well, now there's a solution for ya.

What I don't get, as I said in an earlier post, is why, having already a huge problem with eight million here (and I think that's likely to be grossly understated for political reasons) our potentates are talking about hugely increasing this number. There can be no logical explanation for this, since it does not addres the current problem, only exacerbates it.

It's clear that this isn't seen as a problem but rather as part of a long-term strategy to radically transform the American labor market and, to my mind of equally great importance, the cultural life of the United States.

If we let them get away with this, we might as well dig up the Founding Fathers and take them with us to another plot of land somewhere and start over.
 
We export jobs to third world countries we import uneducated 3th world labor,
with a disappearing middleclass makes a recipe for disaster. Perhaps we will
become Mexico north, who knows. we can only hope.:mad:
 
long, it's just a proposal. It must pass both chambers of Congress and then be signed by the President. People, at least some on the Internet and some who have walked into my office here in foofooville, believe that it is the law.:rolleyes:

Of course, maybe someday soon the Supremes will hold that the President may rule by edict--for the children, or to fight "corruption.":uhoh:
 
Thought that was what you meant. Of course, you are right, it's just a proposal. What's worrisome is that we seem to have a true believer in the White House and a cynical political strategist at his right hand. This proposal will show us, I think, exactly what kind of a President we are dealing with. In other words, can he listen? And I don't mean to an inner voice. I mean the vox populi.
 
Well, maybe there is some kind of master plan afoot, but it seems to be the stupidest plan ever devised.

It could be just plain a mindless lack of vision thing reenforced with a gutless inabiblity to take control of the situation, while trying to profit politically.

Bush and Ridge are failing to faithfully execute the laws of the United States, which Bush swore to do at his inauguration.
 
How so? Why would you flood your nation with unknown millions of low educated and low skilled (for the most part) people who cannot speak the language and who have a track record of being second and third generations that are little better off financialy than their immigrant parents?

At the same time you have a welfare state, and allow the children of illegal aliens to become "anchor" babies and American citizens.

We already got plenty of low educated and low skilled citizens of our own.

So, I don't get it if there is some kind of master plan. Maybe I am the one who is stupid. :rolleyes:
 
As I've said a million times...the intifada is coming. All those Mexicans coming here hoping for amnesty under the Bush plan are going to be mighty ticked off if it doesn't make it through congress.
 
POTUS takes an oath to protect the US from Enemies. Any illegal immigration in violation of our border and out laws, whether military or not, is still an invasion. The immigration is killing the economies of southwestern states. It is taxing other sectors, such as hospitals and social services. There are large sections of the southwest where borders, language and culture no longer matter. That is a threat to the US.
 
What 7.62 said and failing to execute the laws of the United States. Border jumping is illegal. First offense is technically a misdeamnor. Second offense is a felony. This has happened and continues to happen, and the only thing the POTUS has to offer is a quasi-job fair and illegal amnesty for illegal aliens.

Is that what we pay our taxes for?

Of course, Congress has a part to play in this too by providing the funding so the appropriate revenues are provided for border enforcement and employer inspections, and round up and deportation, especially the 400,000 missing illegas under court ordered deportation
.
Then again, the POTUS undoubtedly has the authority to guard the borders with the military without Congress's express permission. Probably be political firestorm though. Tough.
 
long, it's just a proposal. It must pass both chambers of Congress and then be signed by the President. People, at least some on the Internet and some who have walked into my office here in foofooville, believe that it is the law.

Of course, maybe someday soon the Supremes will hold that the President may rule by edict--for the children, or to fight "corruption."

Unfortunately for the nation (& your point), the President does have two options...

1. Refuse to enforce the law as written--like what is being done now...:fire:
2. Make it an executive order & dare Congress to repeal it (which they won't have the courage to do...:banghead: )

Bush has made his will clear...& he'll do it no matter what anyone else thinks about it--including the voters...:cuss:
 
One point about an executive order, too implement his guest worker program for unknown millions of illegal aliens and their families will require a huge and expensive bureaucracy in addition to what is already there to implement the policy.

That bureaucracy would have to draw up a mission plan, regulations, forms and ID cards, reporting locations and penalties. It would take a long time to ramp up. It cannot be done cold turkey and will require a large appropriation which only Congress can provide with the approval of the Senate and POTUS.
 
Anyone think a Demo wouldn't have sprung the same BS?

Exactly. This is a "career politician" problem, not a D or R issue.

I believe that even though illegal immigration is one of those issues that an overwhelming number of Americans want something done about, it not one of those "hot button" issues like gun rights, abortion, or taxes.

It doesn't "make or break" most elections, and therefore both the Dems and Repubs can just ignore the will of the people and go on with business as usual. (Course, if Bush gets turned out, who can say that this won't be a big reason. Why he insists on going after votes he can't ever win is beyond me!:banghead: ).

The solution is to get rid of both the Ds and Rs best typified by Teddy "watch me shake my head no at every one of Bush's propasals" Kennedy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top