How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desertdog

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
1,980
Location
Ridgecrest Ca
It has been done and it can be done again. I really like this idea;
Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.

How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico
By John Dillin
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0706/p09s01-coop.html

WASHINGTON – George W. Bush isn't the first Republican president to face a full-blown immigration crisis on the US-Mexican border.
Fifty-three years ago, when newly elected Dwight Eisenhower moved into the White House, America's southern frontier was as porous as a spaghetti sieve. As many as 3 million illegal migrants had walked and waded northward over a period of several years for jobs in California, Arizona, Texas, and points beyond.

In the Monitor

President Eisenhower cut off this illegal traffic. He did it quickly and decisively with only 1,075 United States Border Patrol agents - less than one-tenth of today's force. The operation is still highly praised among veterans of the Border Patrol.

Although there is little to no record of this operation in Ike's official papers, one piece of historic evidence indicates how he felt. In 1951, Ike wrote a letter to Sen. William Fulbright (D) of Arkansas. The senator had just proposed that a special commission be created by Congress to examine unethical conduct by government officials who accepted gifts and favors in exchange for special treatment of private individuals.

General Eisenhower, who was gearing up for his run for the presidency, said "Amen" to Senator Fulbright's proposal. He then quoted a report in The New York Times, highlighting one paragraph that said: "The rise in illegal border-crossing by Mexican 'wetbacks' to a current rate of more than 1,000,000 cases a year has been accompanied by a curious relaxation in ethical standards extending all the way from the farmer-exploiters of this contraband labor to the highest levels of the Federal Government."

Years later, the late Herbert Brownell Jr., Eisenhower's first attorney general, said in an interview with this writer that the president had a sense of urgency about illegal immigration when he took office.

America "was faced with a breakdown in law enforcement on a very large scale," Mr. Brownell said. "When I say large scale, I mean hundreds of thousands were coming in from Mexico [every year] without restraint."

Although an on-and-off guest-worker program for Mexicans was operating at the time, farmers and ranchers in the Southwest had become dependent on an additional low-cost, docile, illegal labor force of up to 3 million, mostly Mexican, laborers.

According to the Handbook of Texas Online, published by the University of Texas at Austin and the Texas State Historical Association, this illegal workforce had a severe impact on the wages of ordinary working Americans. The Handbook Online reports that a study by the President's Commission on Migratory Labor in Texas in 1950 found that cotton growers in the Rio Grande Valley, where most illegal aliens in Texas worked, paid wages that were "approximately half" the farm wages paid elsewhere in the state.

Profits from illegal labor led to the kind of corruption that apparently worried Eisenhower. Joseph White, a retired 21-year veteran of the Border Patrol, says that in the early 1950s, some senior US officials overseeing immigration enforcement "had friends among the ranchers," and agents "did not dare" arrest their illegal workers.

Walt Edwards, who joined the Border Patrol in 1951, tells a similar story. He says: "When we caught illegal aliens on farms and ranches, the farmer or rancher would often call and complain [to officials in El Paso]. And depending on how politically connected they were, there would be political intervention. That is how we got into this mess we are in now."

Bill Chambers, who worked for a combined 33 years for the Border Patrol and the then-called US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), says politically powerful people are still fueling the flow of illegals.

During the 1950s, however, this "Good Old Boy" system changed under Eisenhower - if only for about 10 years.

In 1954, Ike appointed retired Gen. Joseph "Jumpin' Joe" Swing, a former West Point classmate and veteran of the 101st Airborne, as the new INS commissioner.

Influential politicians, including Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson (D) of Texas and Sen. Pat McCarran (D) of Nevada, favored open borders, and were dead set against strong border enforcement, Brownell said. But General Swing's close connections to the president shielded him - and the Border Patrol - from meddling by powerful political and corporate interests.

One of Swing's first decisive acts was to transfer certain entrenched immigration officials out of the border area to other regions of the country where their political connections with people such as Senator Johnson would have no effect.

Then on June 17, 1954, what was called "Operation Wetback" began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.

By mid-July, the crackdown extended northward into Utah, Nevada, and Idaho, and eastward to Texas.

By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 illegals had left the Lone Star State voluntarily.

Unlike today, Mexicans caught in the roundup were not simply released at the border, where they could easily reenter the US. To discourage their return, Swing arranged for buses and trains to take many aliens deep within Mexico before being set free.

Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.

The sea voyage was "a rough trip, and they did not like it," says Don Coppock, who worked his way up from Border Patrolman in 1941 to eventually head the Border Patrol from 1960 to 1973.

Mr. Coppock says he "cannot understand why [President] Bush let [today's] problem get away from him as it has. I guess it was his compassionate conservatism, and trying to please [Mexican President] Vincente Fox."

There are now said to be 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the US. Of the Mexicans who live here, an estimated 85 percent are here illegally.


Border Patrol vets offer tips on curbing illegal immigration

One day in 1954, Border Patrol agent Walt Edwards picked up a newspaper in Big Spring, Texas, and saw some startling news. The government was launching an all-out drive to oust illegal aliens from the United States.

The orders came straight from the top, where the new president, Dwight Eisenhower, had put a former West Point classmate, Gen. Joseph Swing, in charge of immigration enforcement.

General Swing's fast-moving campaign soon secured America's borders - an accomplishment no other president has since equaled. Illegal migration had dropped 95 percent by the late 1950s.

Several retired Border Patrol agents who took part in the 1950s effort, including Mr. Edwards, say much of what Swing did could be repeated today.

"Some say we cannot send 12 million illegals now in the United States back where they came from. Of course we can!" Edwards says.

Donald Coppock, who headed the Patrol from 1960 to 1973, says that if Swing and Ike were still running immigration enforcement, "they'd be on top of this in a minute."

William Chambers, another '50s veteran, agrees. "They could do a pretty good job" sealing the border.

Edwards says: "When we start enforcing the law, these various businesses are, on their own, going to replace their [illegal] workforce with a legal workforce."

While Congress debates building a fence on the border, these veterans say other actions should have higher priority.

1. End the current practice of taking captured Mexican aliens to the border and releasing them. Instead, deport them deep into Mexico, where return to the US would be more costly.

2. Crack down hard on employers who hire illegals. Without jobs, the aliens won't come.

3. End "catch and release" for non-Mexican aliens. It is common for illegal migrants not from Mexico to be set free after their arrest if they promise to appear later before a judge. Few show up.

The Patrol veterans say enforcement could also be aided by a legalized guest- worker program that permits Mexicans to register in their country for temporary jobs in the US. Eisenhower's team ran such a program. It permitted up to 400,000 Mexicans a year to enter the US for various agriculture jobs that lasted for 12 to 52 weeks.


• John Dillin is former managing editor of the Monitor.
 
Although there is little to no record of this operation in Ike's official papers, one piece of historic evidence indicates how he felt. In 1951, Ike wrote a letter to Sen. William Fulbright (D) of Arkansas. The senator had just proposed that a special commission be created by Congress to examine unethical conduct by government officials who accepted gifts and favors in exchange for special treatment of private individuals.

Let me get this right. Ike didn't come up with the idea. Fulbright did. Ike didn't order any official actions and there is no record of him implementing this policy, but he did appoint Swing who took action. Sounds to me like Ike really didn't have much to do with it, hence no record of it attributed to him. And it sounds like Fulbright and Swing are sort of getting shafted as minor players when it was Ike that was the minor player.

Of course where this is going is the that since Ike was President and supposedly made all this happen, then Bush as President should be able to make it happen as well, right?
 
If we spent half of what we are for politicians to run their campaigns on immigration enforcement instead, this would not even be a topic of discussion.

That article is straight to the point, the cause of this whole problem isn't Mexicans, but corruption within our own ranks.

If it weren't for criminally greedy business owners breaking our labor laws (which actually exist for a GOOD reason) and their equally greedy, downright treasonous political allies protecting them while taking their "fair" share of kickbacks to keep the illegal labor flowing, there would be no incentive for foreigners to scoff at our laws, bleed our economy dry, and otherwise degrade the quality of life of American citizens.

Using boats to drop deportees off deep in Mexico is a great idea.

Strong punishments for business owners hiring illegals is a great idea. But it can't just be the $500 fine like it is now. It needs to be at least on par with the fines local governments face for not moving religious statues that have been present for 100 years, so about $5,000 a day per illegal sounds about fair. Oh yeah, and jail time since this is definately breaking the law and it is definately not a victimess crime.

I would advocate going one step further. Corruption in politics needs to be stamped out once and for all. We have an invasion on our hands that is being ignored by politicians for monetary and poitical gain. We have a > 2500 dead US soldiers, and an American public who is still not sure if the war "was the right thing to do" or just a profit machine for Halliburton and the various defense contractors.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be in Iraq, but I do think that persons in positions of political power should not be allowed to make a profit beyond the office sallary for the decisions they make. Does that not make sense? People intrusted with making decisions for the common good should take every precaution not just to avoid corruption, but to avoid the APPEARANCE and SUSPICION of corruption. People need to have faith in their leaders, and right now I don't trust any of them further than their police records.

I think eventually, when the whole truth of what our trusted leaders are doing to our fair Republic for the sake of personal gain gets out, there are going to be mass public hangings to remind future generations that money isn't everything.
 
Last edited:
Never happen today, even if the administration had the guts, for the simple reason that the Mexican government wouldn't allow us to transport them through their territory.
 
One thing is certain, if the Mexican election comes to a crisis and it appears it will since Obrador will not recognize the Calderon win, we can expect more illegals to flood in..... The story about the 50s is interesting. You also had hard nosed guys like Bill Jordan on the border. Men who really knew their guns and law enforcement. They had fewer rules about being nice to the illegals and much fewer trial lawyers screwing up the country and keeping them from doing their duty......Better days in many ways...How we got from there to the mess we are in today is beyond me.....but it has a lot to do with the corrosive effect of liberalism. :cuss:
 
Boats or bullets, take your pick.

I don't like paying taxes for lifetime welfare recipients, I'll be damned if I'm going to keep doing it for non-citizens too. I mean, what would be the advantage to actually BEING acitizen?
 
it sounds like a good idea..all of it and it probably would work.the fines,the rooting out of corruption and exposing it,shipping them back to lower mexico...all of it.

I dont think itll happen though,theres too much politics and money to be made off them as it is now.theres alot of corruption,political muscle keeping it from moving..exploitation for cash.theyre coming here because they know they can and its easier to than living in mexico,where they dont have welfare programs and other things that we are providing them hush hush...just keep the cheap labor machine going.only problem is..its ruining everything for everyone else.

thats what its about..cash is king.
 
ahoy

Certainly one way to revive our shipbuilding industry. We are definitely moving into the age of the "supertanker," that's for sure.

One way, among many, to reduce corruption is to bar former politicians and bureaucrats from certain jobs. Lobbyist comes to mind. We have a huge industry of people selling contacts, selling "access" to government. Is it any wonder we have the problems we have?
 
The government could find and deport the illegals if they wanted to.

If you don't believe me, imagine how quickly they would find you if you stopped paying your income taxes.

Build a wall and control the border first, then round up the illegals and deport them. The most recent statistic I saw said approximately 50% of illegals are unemployed. We apparently have twice as many as we "need".

If we don't have enough people to pick the cucumbers, then create a guest worker program that is controlled and let them in as needed.
 
I wonder if cash really would be king if one morning America woke up to news reports of hundreds of corrupt politicians and a few CEOs (I'm talking to you Tyson) being found dead in their beds.

Rich people in positions of power have to sleep too. When those they oppress spend their nights dreaming of how things were and how to make things right again, how far behind can revolution be?

Will that revolution be an academic one, or a bloody night of slit throats?
The timetable for change will answer that question, but change WILL happen. If the corruption is targeted before the American public is taxed to the point where the incentive to work is gone, it might happen peacefully.

Given the rate at which America is being outsourced, the rate at which we are being under-educated, the rate at which we are increasing taxes to cover the costs of living for the deadbeat citizens amongst us AND the illegal workforce our illustrious drunk driving leaders have invited here, I don't see an academic revolution in our future.


I know this isn't the most THR comment to make, but some of these politicians just need to stop breathing for the good of the country. If I'm wrong on this, lay it out for me because I don't want to be right about this one.
 
One thing is certain, if the Mexican election comes to a crisis and it appears it will since Obrador will not recognize the Calderon win,
Sounds like the Democrats since the 2000 election.
 
I've grown very tired of the constant drone from the illegal invasion apologists: "We can't remove 12 million people."

Why not?

Boy, Husker, I hear that! And assuming, arguendo, that we cannot remove them all, so what? I don't see any great ground swell from these same apologists to throw up our hands and stop enforcing laws against murder, arson, rape, etc. simply because we can't apprehend and convict all [fill in the number] murderers, arsonists, rapists, etc..

This is a straw-man that needs to be put to the torch every time it is trotted out.
 
Whatever we decide to do

about the 12-20 million illegals currently in the U.S., the first step MUST and can only be "seal the border." Sure, some will always get through. But it won't be the estimated 2-3,000 a day that get through right now.

It's the border, stupid.
 
about the 12-20 million illegals currently in the U.S., the first step MUST and can only be "seal the border." Sure, some will always get through. But it won't be the estimated 2-3,000 a day that get through right now.

We're going to need a new Congress and President before that gets done. Bush will never seal the border. Never.
 
Another point

Bloody good thing my screen name isn't connected to my real name. As a Spanish professor, I'd be tarred and feathered for even entertaining this notion if any of my colleagues found out. But here goes.

Everyone knows that corruption/bribery/etc. are a major problem in Mexico. So significant portions of the Mexican population take graft and bribery for granted. If we set up our immigration policy to restrict people who follow the rules and turn a blind eye to people who break the rules, what will the long-term effect be on our society? Will the rule-breakers who come streaming in every year simply adopt American culture like turning on a light switch? Why are we making it hard for honest Mexicans to come here and making it easy for people who ignore the law?

(PS--I *know* that there are corrupt people in the US. That's a separate issue.)

frayluisfan
 
I've grown very tired of the constant drone from the illegal invasion apologists: "We can't remove 12 million people."

Why not?

You only need to remove two million at most, and the rest will see the writing on the wall and leave on their own. If you notice in the article, there were five to ten illegals leaving on their own for every one apprehended.

longeyes said:
We're going to need a new Congress and President before that gets done. Bush will never seal the border. Never.

It will probably take a serious grass roots effort to solve this problem. Sort of like it takes 4 million NRA members to hold back the gun-grabbers, it would take a large group to push an end to wide-scale illegal immigration.
 
I've grown very tired of the constant drone from the illegal invasion apologists: "We can't remove 12 million people."
We would not have to.

1) Pass a law that if a licensed business is caught with illegal aliens working for them, they will be fined $10,000 for each one, no matter how good their papers look.
2)Give BIG notice that they will begin rounding up suspected illegal aliens on a certain day. This will give people time to return to their home country before the roundup begins.
3)Start making sweeps on the Canadian border the day they say they will, and work their way south. If they find illegals working for a company or farm, fine them the $10,000 per illegal alien as they said they would.

By the time they get to Oregan there should be a great exodus of people leaving the country in all directions.
 
Why is it we can't get it through our thick heads that the taxpayer does not have to pay the costs of capture, detention, trial and deportation of illegals.

THOSE WHO EMPLOY THEM SHOULD PAY THE COST. At that point cost is irrelevant as is time since employers will pay the tab.

Economics created the problem and economics will correct the problem.
 
Everyone knows that corruption/bribery/etc. are a major problem in Mexico. So significant portions of the Mexican population take graft and bribery for granted. If we set up our immigration policy to restrict people who follow the rules and turn a blind eye to people who break the rules, what will the long-term effect be on our society? Will the rule-breakers who come streaming in every year simply adopt American culture like turning on a light switch? Why are we making it hard for honest Mexicans to come here and making it easy for people who ignore the law?

The long-term effect will be to "welcome" la mordida into our society along with, in my view, blood favoritism. We no longer seem to believe in assimilation, and that means in importing Mexicans we are importing Mexican culture, good and bad.
 
Fulbright was "assertive" and quite powerful.

Now I would not be born until 1955, I recall the concerns of the times, and as I got bigger how "assertive" Fulbright was and just how "powerful" he was - became more so.

Folks were a bit concerned with Missles being pointed at us by Cuba. Folks not real happy with Castro and his bunch. Well these same type of concerns were expressed at/ toward a lot of folks coming into the US from other places and "what if " they were spys for governments that wished to do the US harm?

Cold War remember?

Now Art and folks older, folks better at history than I can chime in...hope they will...

Still there was never a problem with folks coming to here in the South, or in the US no ways. Folks contributing as they worked the paperdrill to be US citizens. We accepted, embraced, and supported them.

Same with the folks going about the LEGAL means...a bit concerned about those illegal folks. They shared with us stories of their homeland, govt's and such. Matter how criminals had caused some probems, or scouted ahead for bad matters that happened later.

It is said History repeats itself. Also shared one should learn from history or be doomed by it.

Dunno, seems like a parallel to me. What was going in the Original Post, has happened before here in the US, or somewhere in the World and later criminals caused a bit of a rukus.

Then again I recall seeing the numbers on Jews and how they pitched a fit about Social Security Numbers.

"Never Again" they would say.

Well my Social Security card says "not for the use of personal identification" - on the front of it. Ummm....seems everyone, including newborns are required to have a "personal identificaton number" - or SSN as it is called now.

Just might be best to sit aside any flames, bashing, uncivil thoughts...
Might be best to ask Grandparents or that old Vet, or...
History books are great, then again history being shared one on one is best.

I am not the only one here whom has 'history' local and knows it - Same people, places, events and things are NOT as they history books say they are.

Daisy Bates, Wm Jefferson Clinton, Central HS of '57....
are some I know all too well about having been raised around them places, and all.

We also have some folks that are Now US citizens working down on our farms, ranches and such, that speak Spanish. The kids are born and US citizens, and learn /speak both.

These do not get hassled by the INS ...excuse me ICE folks. These folks speaking spanish, working as they do, were armed and ready for Riots againts hometowns, have served in our Military, and were doing remarkable things for others...folks born and raised here in the South during disasters.

Same as the Philipino, UK, Vietnamese, and other Cultures - that have settled here , worked toward and became US Citizens.

Folks got a Right to be Human - I mean that is what we mean by Human Rights ain't it?

Criminals do not choose to fall under the same law as Legal Folks - why we call then "criminals" and why their crimes are "illegal".

Just something to toss out to cool heels and get some synapsis going is all...
 
Uncontrolled illegal colonization has been in full force since 1986. The first anchor babies born that year are now competing for jobs that we all compete for. They dont want the jobs their parents have, because those jobs pay below minimum wage due to exploitation. Due we need more illegal Aliens to do jobs that no one wants?

That's the big lie the left uses to hammer their issue...jobs that Americans wont do. Guess what? the second generation wont do those jobs either. How long will our economy&infrastructure hold to support Mexico?

The left wants to raise the minimum wage...let the economy dictate the minimum wage. Cut off the flow of illegal slave labor, the wages go up. Simple supply and demand.

No doubt about it...the border needs to be sealed. Mexico needs to take care of it's own deteriorating infrastructure. Even more importantly, the U.S. Mexican border is a National Security issue. If we dont get this done soon, there will be more candle light vigils to follow.
 
Hmmmm

I am apalled by this thread. The hate and bigotry spewing forth here is pretty bad. What happened to human rights? We spout about the Constitution, but the 2nd ammendment is only the 2nd. How about this:

Amendment XIV
1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any
State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws.


Every person (remember the bill of rights?) has equal rights in the US. Who are we to pick and choose which amendments should be followed.

I'm sorry that I am not more eleoquent, but I hope I made my point. If I didn't, how's this:

Before you make yourself a hypocrite, stop and think that maybe you aren't the only person in the world. We live in a free country, not a nazi regime.

Mike
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top