Published: Sunday, June 30 2013 6:25 p.m. MDT
The fence was to be 710 miles long, it still needs over 300 miles. The rest is
finished, and forcing most people into Arizona and Texas.We
don't need 20,000 at the border, we need them doing interior enforcement.
Immigration is not broken, it's been unenforced since 1986.
That's the problem, to solve it, we need enforcement.
The border enforcement enhancements agreed to in the Senate have ABSOLUTELY no
chance of ever being implemented. They were, and are, merely a ruse to get RINO
Senators to vote for the bill. Sure, they MAY implement some of them. Then
there will be "budget reductions". Guess what gets cut first?Mr. Bonner is correct though in saying interior apprehensions (both employers
AND illegal trespassers)would be much more cost effective.Problem
is: Mr. Obama COULD have been doing that for the last 4 yrs. Why didn't he
if he's REALLY as concerned with securing the border that he claims?BTW - the Border Patrol is telling Congress just the opposite of what he
is alluding to in the article. They say illegal trespassers are flooding
through at an unprecedented rate. Might that have something to do with a
possible "amnesty" for any/all that manage to make it here?
"Instead, the goal should be to cut off the "job magnet" that draws
nearly all illegal immigrants to the United States."Exactly
true, but that would impact business, and those on the right will refuse to make
that a centerpiece, regardless of how much sense it makes.Ask
yourself. WHY do people come to the US from the southern border. The answer is
obvious, and so is the solution.
@JoeBlowThis actually seems to be the approach the House wants to
take (greatly strengthening E Verify) which leads me to say something I find
harder than Fonzi saying "wrong" (really dating myself with that
comment).The House Republicans appear to be the voice(s) of reason
I do applaud the house for pushing e-verify.I guess that I
don't see it as their centerpiece. I feel their first priority is military
on the border.While I am not for amnesty for 11 million people, any
form of amnesty seems to be the houses main problem.I cannot
understand how one can advocate "deporting" a guy who has been in this
country for 30 years as a productive member.
I believe that money talks louder than words. There is boat lodes of drugs and
money going back and forth. sounds like some people feel entitled to it.
Foolish people could concentrate all of their efforts on repairing water damage
from a broken sewer before repairing that sewer break. Congress is
foolish. They will throw billions of dollars down a rathole before fixing the
cause of the problem. Fix the fence. Stop illegals from crossing the border
FIRST, then fix the damage that those illegals have caused.
I tire of our officials who are to incompetent to control immigration, so they
propose to go after an easier target, employers. Why not include everyone who
aides and abets illegals? Stores, landlords, realtors, car sales, etc. We could
jail most of our citizens.
What kind of company shuts out customers? If people want to come here and work,
I say let them in. I've never seen people work harder than the folks from
south of the border who work on farms, construction, landscaping, hotel
services, etc. All they want is a chance and they do a great job. I say give
them an entrance ticket and let 'em in. I'm sorry, but I'm
convinced that the right-wingers who oppose this measure are racists at heart,
as they have always been.
@Irony Guy – “I'm sorry, but I'm convinced that the
right-wingers who oppose this measure are racists at heart”Probably true for some but I doubt that is the driver of most people’s
anxiety over immigration. I think it’s much more an issue of economics and
the negative impacts on everything from the domestic labor market to social
service to education to housing/overcrowding, etc… The fact is
any country has only a finite capacity to absorb immigrants, especially those at
the bottom end the economic spectrum, without degrading the entire system. I have much less anxiety about expanding immigration for the educated
and entrepreneurial, although even there we should have limits lest we begin
depressing wages at the upper end too… something that business would be
happy about, by the way.It’s a complex issue and your
diagnosis is far too simplistic…
Mike Richards said: "Foolish people could concentrate all of their efforts
on repairing water damage from a broken sewer before repairing that sewer
break."Nice analogy comparing the border to a sewage leak. Irony
Guy seem to be correct.I agree with Joe, stopping the demand is the
only solution, or outlawing ladders taller than...However I think a
militarized zone here at home is attractive to the right.
@IronyGuy "I'm convinced that the right-wingers who oppose this measure
are racists at heart..."I'm sure this insulates you from
having to think about other points of view.
I have a cheaper alternative. Put up towers with snipers in it every few miles.
Give the invaders a warning shot, then immobilize them with the second shot
(leg shot or something like that so they don't die, but go back).How many people would be wounded before the illegals began to re-think their
method of entry into the US?
Irony Guy,You ask... "What kind of company shuts out
customers"?Answer... A company (or Country) that is based on the
"Rule-of-law".---Our country is based on the
Rule-of-law. When you BREAK the law to come here... it shows you don't
get what our country is about, and what makes it such a GREAT country. When
you take a job illegally... you show aren't with us on that rule-of-law
thingy. When you commit identity theft to continue working and getting payed
here... you prove that you are NOT a "good risk" to be allowed into our
country to continue building on our "Rule-of-law" based society.Come here LEGALLY... GREAT! Come here ILLEGALLY... NOT so great. If
that makes me a "Racist" in your mind...---IMO the
first question on the Citizenship Application should be... 1. Do you
understand the "Rule-of-Law"? 2. The second... Do you believe
YOU should obey they law?3. Do YOU obey our laws?If they
answer "no" to all 3.... they are NOT a good candidate for Citizenship
IMO.You don't break the law to get here then change IF caught.
The jobs magnet needs to be cut off with regards to independent contractor work
too. GA has a law on the books which takes away the wage tax deduction if you
don't use e verify for this work too. Furtermore birthright
citizenship is another huge magnet for illegals to stay. Nothing has been said
on when or if that's going to be fixed. This is a good part of the reason
ss / medicare / aid is going broke a lot faster then it needs to be.This bill was tweaked to appeal to the GOP Senators but it has too much
language in it that makes it up to the head of homeland security and not
Congress to certify when / if things happen. This is how we got lied to in 1986
so Congress needs to take control and make sure the American people are not sold
another amnesty and no enforcement bill. We need enforcement first and make
sure its working before any talk of amnesty is mentioned.
2 bits said: IMO the first question on the Citizenship Application
should be... 1. Do you understand the "Rule-of-Law"? 2. The
second... Do you believe YOU should obey they law?3. Do YOU obey our
laws?I guess your rules would only apply to "New" citizens,
since I share the road with what seems to be the majority who Don't
understand the "Rule-of-Law" who Don't believe THEY should obey the
law. So obviously they don't obey OUR laws, can we kick them out too?Red, Really shoot them, Wow, how Christian of you. Guess I was right
about the conservatives wanting a militarized zone a little closer to home.
To "Happy Valley Heretic" what should we do to secure the border?
Nobody wants to put up a fence, and nobody wants to enforce the border laws.
The only option is to militarize the border, and the cheapest military solution
is to treat the illegal immigrants as an invading force.We already
have record of terrorists trying to enter through the souther border, we should
secure it by force, if necessary.How would you feel if your child
was injured by a terrorist attach perpetrated by a terrorist that came through
the southern border? Would you want it left open so more terrorists could come
Happy Valley Heretic,I believe our passion for the "Rule-of-Law"
in the United States is the main thing that makes us Great and prevents
Americans from being ruled by tribes, war-lords, gangs, and groups like the
Taliban.I believe in the Rule-of-Law. That's why we
don't behead people if we don't like a court decision, or a cartoon of
a church leader.You can play the traffic game, but I think we are
even best off when people obey the Rule-of-Law on the road (and I think for the
most part people stop at stop lights, stop signs, etc, though they may not
control their speed closely enough for your liking).But why is
Illegal Immigration about the ONLY place where Americans seem to be totally
willing to just throw out the Rule-of-law???I keep hearing people on
the left saying... If Illegal Immigrants haven't broken any laws they
should be able to become Citizens. Well... How did they get here ILLEGALLY if
they haven't broken any laws???Is it OK to disregard the
ruleoflaw if the LEFT thinks its more convenient??? or it wins VOTES?
RedShirt said: "We already have record of terrorists trying to enter through
the souther border, we should secure it by force, if necessary."and the rest of the story is... illegal immigrants turned them in at the
border, as they tried to blend in.Red: "How would you feel if
your child was injured by a terrorist attach perpetrated by a terrorist that
came through the southern border? Would you want it left open so more terrorists
could come in?"Not worried about it, or a shark attach in Utah
Lake either, about the same odds....and since the 911 terrorist came
across the Canadian Border isn't that where the wall or militarize zone
should be?2 bits, I appreciate your answer, but America is number 1
in Incarceration rates which would tend to disagree with your "Rule of
law" theory. Symbol of Freedom or #1 in prison population, we're
aiming for the later.
Heretic,I didn't say Americans obey the law. I said our society is
based on the rule-of-law. That doesn't mean we all obey they law... it
means we EXPECT people to obey they law. And when they don't there is
punishment. That would explain our incarceration rates. As a society we
respect the law... which means there is punishment when you don't respect
the law.People who cross our borders illegally, don't respect
our law. People who break our law every day they are here, don't respect
our law. People who commit identity theft to get a job, don't respect our
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments