That's okay if people call those of us racists who would like to build a fence along the entire 1,951 miles of the US-Mexican border. That's just because they can't think of any logical points to argue.
There are 1,951 miles of border between Mexico and the US. Hordes of people are crossing that border for 'greener pastures'. Pretty much all of them are heading north. Something is wrong in Mexican Denmark. The problem is NOT solved by having all their people come to the United States. The comparative per-capita income gives a hint as to the severity of the problem.
In an effort to solve the problem, we should build a fence along the entire 1,951 miles minus the little bit (11 miles) that has already been done near San Diego. It has been estimated at the upper bounds that it will cost $8 billion to build the entire fence. Most people (51-37%) in the US want it. And that's saying something considering that probably about 10% of people old enough to answer the poll question are here illegally. So let's do it.
Glenn Beck made an interesting comment the other day about this issue. In essence he said, it makes no sense unless you realize that the people in power, apparently including the two Senators and at least 2 of the 3 Congressmen from Utah, don't want the problem solved. Almost a year ago, Congress passed a law to build 700 miles of that fence. They allocated $1.2 billion. That comes out to $1,714,285 per mile. Surely you could find even 10 contractors to build 70 miles each. Is it done yet?
According to this point of view, Bush is subverting the fence project. That's become obvious. The most recent bill that crashed and burned in Congress would have been more palatable, but amendments to require more from immigrant sponsors and to actually build the fence they already promised to build failed.
It is not racist to want order. It is not racist to want to manage a problem before it becomes a catastrophe. It is not racist to oppose a clearly ineffective immigration bill that will not work unless we first build a fence. It can't possibly cost more than the money it would save from not having to give services to people who do not contribute to our society, whether they're white, brown, black, or yellow.
It's just logical.
So go ahead, call me a racist all you want. Whatever. I still want a fence.
Well, I suppose we could build a 2,000 mile fence except (1) it will cost more than $8 billion because you still have to guard and maintain it and (2) it won't work.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we could enforce the law against employing undocumented workers (or those with fake documents). I noticed that none of the Swift & Co. execs went to jail.
Some have argued that without any hope of employment, many illegal immigrants might leave the USA. Sounds crazy I know!
I wouldn't call fence supporters racist so much as misguided.
ReplyDeleteThe fence would never earn it's price, and I believe we could better spend our money in dealing with the immigration problem.
I never understand why the fence debate became so heated and emotional, instead of just asking the question "would it do any good?" I understand the idea of fences and walls resounding as a throwback to East/West Germany, and something you would expect more to see in the Russia of 1980, but other than that, the "heat" of this debate has eluded me.
Statistics, even from those who dreamed up the foolish plan, have only concluded in either "we're not sure" or "it is unlikely" when the question of effectiveness arises. That alone is reason to spend the money on the same problem in a more useful way.
So I don't find it racist, only bad planning, and ineffectual as a solution.
Richard,
ReplyDeleteYes, we should prosecute the employers. But the problem will only become more unenforceable as more illegals come across. The odds of getting prosecuted are already so low that it is laughable. We already have border guards, and maybe we would need more, but we wouldn't need nearly as many more if we had a fence to do most of the work for us.
Jason,
Your fence comparison is not apt. Germany and Russia were trying to keep people in--the comparison would be correct if Mexico was the country contemplating the building of the fence. The "heat of the debate" is that many places are floundering because of too many illegals that contribute nothing to the upkeep of the infrastructure and services that they use.
Why not legalize those here through an application process, (they must have clean record)s, have them pay the fines and the application fees? All employers would sign on and register all SS #'s of all employees. Anyone new coming across could not get employment if they did then the boss gets to spend a weekend in jail and his company pays big fines.
ReplyDeleteWP,
ReplyDeleteI agree. I've discussed that in a previous post. But I've always been of the opinion that the first step in rounding up all the cows that got out of the barn is to close the barn door.
Is it a fence or a wall?
ReplyDeleteA wall, actually.
ReplyDeleteThe last I heard, planners expect to build a double fence. In theory, a breach of the first fence could be detected and border guards would reach the scene before the second fence could be breached. I'm skeptical. Certainly, this plan would require more border guards than we have now.
ReplyDeleteFrank, tell me about the logistics. You understand the challenges of supply, transportation and manpower to move an army around. How do we move 12 mil+ back to Latin America? Does Southwest fly them, maybe we take all of the school busses in the US for a couple months and drive them back to Peru, El Salvador, Equador?
ReplyDeletePlease someone, other than Mitt or Orrin, tell me how we do this whole thing without amnesty, logistically speaking.
In the meantime who is going to keep my room clean at the Marriott?
WP,
ReplyDeleteDid you hurt yourself jumping to that conclusion?
I didn't say anything about forcing everyone to go back to where they came from. Did you read the post?
It's assumptive conclusions like yours that make meaningful debate difficult.
Sorry, but I saw your comment about the first step in "rounding up the cows." Using that metaphor in reference to the undocumented was a trip wire for me and put you in the same basked as Hatch. I will go back and read your post.
ReplyDeleteWP,
ReplyDeleteSorry for my inapt metaphor. I wondered when I posted the comment about "rounding up the cows" whether that was the correct choice of words.
Blogger Brian Angliss convincing estimates the cost of fencing the entire US-Mexico border at $30-50 billion.
ReplyDeleteAnd he doesn;t think it will work, any more than I do.
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fscholarsandrogues.wordpress.com%2F2007%2F06%2F18%2Fno-fence-physical-or-virtual-will-ever-control-the-border%2F
Richard,
ReplyDeleteOpinions come a dime a dozen (mine is at a premium however--11 cents)....
But I disagree with Brian and you. Rather, I agree with the empirical results as quoted in Comment #6 in the Raw Story article you link to.
I used to be FOR giving Illegal Aliens citizenship. Then, I stumbled across this website.
ReplyDeletewww.IllegalAliensGoneWild.com
This is not porn but an eye opening account of what the news media fails to highlight when talking about this issue. I am now for deporting them