Well, here we go again. I looked at the TV and there's that Raza group, protesting AGAIN. I am really tired of their protests. Apparently this time, some ILLEGAL aliens were actually deported. They were on a trolley, which makes absolutely NO difference in their status as ILLEGAL. It makes no difference where they are, they are still illegal and subject to deportation.

The fact is, the US is in an economic mess and the last thing we need is more unemployed persons.

And PLEASE, do not bring up that sorry, tired old story about 'California' used to belong to Mexico. Let's take a world tour. There was a time when Germany had control of most of Europe. Spain ruled Mexico (so carrying on in the vein of 'used to', all Mexicans should be Spanish). In Africa, there are thousands and thousands of people who have been ruled by various regimes. So, STOP IT. It is old, it is tired, it is written in a treaty.

Protesting is useless and annoying when the facts are facts. TV needs to quit catering to these protestors. And, the signs in Spanish are such a waste. The people they want to influence speak ENGLISH. People who enter this country via any means other than legal are here ILLEGALLY. It is that simple. They break the law, they deserve to be deported. There is no gray area. The law is quite clear. I would also mention that if the US was serious about this issue, then our Congress should adopt the same laws as Mexico. Read these:



http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14632 " Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico."

It has also been suggested that the USDA take over the problem of ILLEGAL immigration as they have proven they can isolate one cow in tracking down a disease! It's amazing.

I recently became acquainted with a lovely woman and her husband, visiting from the Middle East, legally. She was studying for her citizenship exam which she took and passed. She truly wanted to be a US citizen.

That is the type of person that the US wants, people who want to be Americans. No one wants to take away heritage, tradition, etc., but it seems that more and more people arrive with the only notion being to live here. They do not seem to care about America or our traditions, unless it involves food, shelter, medical care. In fact, it seems our Puritan heritage causes us to go out of our way to accept them instead of the other way around.

So long

More like this:


shizzyfinn May 24, 2009 @ 1:33 p.m.

DelawareBob, you seemed concerned about the economic costs of the employment of undocumented immigrants. But you don't seem concerned about the direct costs and indirect costs of the solution you suggest.

IT WOULD COST A HELL OF A LOT to round up and deport the 20 million or so undocumented immigrants. I have no idea what the total cost might run, but the logistics are mind-boggling and WOULD BE INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE. And I'm just talking economically. I have to imagine that the systematic deportation of 1 of every 15 people in the U.S. would also have A SUBSTANTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE MORALE OF THE REST OF US.

And then you have the indirect costs, which would likely be even more overwhelming. For example, MILLIONS OF UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS PAY TAXES to U.S. governments, ADDING UP TO BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF REVENUE for U.S. governments. YOUR PLAN WOULD REMOVE THESE BILLIONS from American coffers.

And then we must ALSO CONSIDER THE TAXES PAID BY EMPLOYERS who currently employ undocumented workers. After losing their undocumented immigrants, these employers would have to HIRE NEW WORKERS AT HIGHER COST, OR NOT HIGHER NEW WORKERS AT ALL. In either case, the EMPLOYERS WOULD MAKE LESS PROFIT AND THEREFORE PAY LESS IN TAXES. Another cost.

Finally, think more about the BROADER IMPACT TO THE U.S. ECONOMY if your plan became reality. As the removal of undocumented immigrants rippled through the economy, many BUSINESSES WOULD BE FORCED TO RAISE PRICES OR FORCED TO SHUT DOWN ALTOGETHER. (Some stats from the Pew Hispanic Center: 20% of all cooks in the U.S. workforce as of 2005 were "unauthorized migrant" workers, as were 17% of all "food preparation workers" and 23% of all dishwashers. Think restaurants might suffer from your plan?)

Overall, given how fragile the economy has appeared lately, seems like a shock like yours could lead to ALL-OUT ECONOMIC DEPRESSION, though it's impossible to know exactly how bad things could get.

Personally, I believe that debate over your idea of mass deportation, like debate over any new idea, MUST ACKNOWLEDGE THE COSTS AS WELL AS THE BENEFITS. Here's some material for further consideration:

"Colorado's new law banning state spending on illegal immigrants has cost more than $2 million to enforce - and has saved the state nothing." http://www.denverpost.com/ci_5081255

"Towns Rethink Laws Against Illegal Immigrants" http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/26/nyregion/26riverside.html

"SSA records indicate there may be as many as 17.8 million discrepancies in name, date of birth and citizenship status information records and, of those documents with problems, nearly 13 million belong to U.S. citizens." http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705266482,00.html

"Feds wrongly deport citizen living in North Carolina" http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1507200.html


auntsandiegospeaks May 24, 2009 @ 3:59 p.m.

Thanks for your comments Mindy1114, DelawareBob & shizzyfinn.

First, shizzyfinn, the Colorado & NY articles are from 2007, & both state one of the biggest concerns lies with defending lawsuits (usually brought by ACLU). This is strictly a US problem where anybody can sue anybody for anything at any time (except for Statute issues). So, the cities, counties, states, etc. end up footing the bill for the Court to rule on constitutionality of a law. Also, I never mentioned rounding up 20 million people & sending them home. I do think there should be an enforceable E-verify system in use for ALL employers. If some of our costs go up, so be it.
The Desert News article deals solely with the possibility of errors in the E-verify program. Gee, I don't know about you, but I am human and I make errors. So does everybody. It is not the end of the world & errors will be made. Period.

The NC article deals with just that, a mistake. I would agree that was awful and should not have happened. But the same problems occurred in Mexico & elsewhere. Just for kicks, take a look at the Mexican Immigration Laws. Now that is eye opening & they are serious about enforcement. Aliens cannot work in Mexico!!

My animosity about this issue is solely an issue of ILLEGAL immigration. There are legal ways to enter the US. And what about the costs of food stamps, medical care, schooling, etc.?
Despite your assertion to the contrary, very few ILLEGAL aliens pay taxes. And many border crossers are also entering the US for the sole purpose of delivering a baby who is automatically a US citizen. That law needs to be changed.

Our economy is in a turmoil right now, lots of us have lost money & I could not find anything specific on a decrease in illegal immigration due to our economy.

Now, as for allowing one & all in would make America stronger, I absolutely disagree with that concept. Resources are finite. We do not have enough room (land), unless you want it to look like Tijuana shanties or those in India.

I do not know where you got the information that the birth rate will not sustain the aging baby boomers. Please read: "http://www.susps.org/overview/birthrates.html" "http://www.susps.org/overview/numbers.html" The US ranks third in the world in population, behind China and India. Believe me, I do not want to live where there are masses of humanity crowded into small spaces, without electricity (we are faced with shortages), water (severe droughts), food (thank you we can & should pick our own). The US also has a HUGE trade deficit (is there anything not Made in China?). So NO MORE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is something I believe strongly in. Follow the rules and enter legally.


shizzyfinn May 24, 2009 @ 9:37 p.m.

Mindy, I have to thank you for "We've shared America enough"...a lot of people I know will get a kick out of that. And I know a lot of other people really feel that way, but would never actually put it into words. Personally, I gotta disagree...I think it's pretty hard for the richest country on Earth to run out of room to share.

Auntie, you seem to think population growth is a bad idea. This is probably the main source of our disagreement over the immigration issue. In my humble view, we all are better off by having more of us...I tend to think humans are generally good, and tend to do wonderful things, and more humans only results in more wonderful things, such as longer life expectancies and higher standards of living for the average person.

I'm pretty sure all of human history to date confirms this, as life expectancy and standard of living have tended to increase right along with population over the centuries. But perhaps we must agree to disagree here.

It's too bad, because I would also hypothesize that, of all the people we would want to welcome to our country, we would certainly welcome those who are willing to come here and work menial jobs - sometimes more than one - to support not just themselves, but their families. A strong work ethic and a commitment to family are qualities you build a nation on. If you welcome these people as citizens, our country gets to fully harness the contribution from them and their families - which we're going to need as we go up against China and India, not to mention everyone else, in the decades ahead.

Anyhoo, on birth rates, I wasn't satisfied by your source, "susps.org," which from what I can tell is an anti-population-growth website created by some guy. But here's the NY Times on U.S. birth rate, which in recent years has indeed surprised experts by touching the replacement level of 2.1 kids per woman: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/health/19birth.html

The articles I shared were responses to DelawareBob's zero tolerance idea. My main point there is that drastic anti-immigrant laws have backfired, hurting businesses while not saving any money - because it is a myth that undocumented immigrants take more from an economy than they give to it. And also that E-Verify would not necessarily be simple, and might actually require the support of a large and costly bureacracy, and might occasionally result in really unfortunate things happening to legitimate American citizens.

As for America not having enough inhabitable land, well, take a cross-country flight, or even a hot-air balloon ride across San Diego County, and look down. You'll see lotsa land, Auntie! Heck, these days, we've even got lots of empty condos and houses sittin' and waitin' for occupants!


shizzyfinn May 23, 2009 @ 11:12 a.m.

Auntie, do you feel any angst toward the American employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants? 'Cause in the end, if there weren't willing employers up here, there wouldn't be people coming from down here. The current economic downturn has proved this fact: as jobs in the States have dried up, immigration from Mexico has decreased dramatically.

So what's your true concern - fighting the problem of undocumented immigration, or bashing on easy targets? If it's the former, I'd suggest you point your pen (or your keyboard) at the real root of the problem, which is the fact that American employers can and do hire undocumented workers on a massive scale. Be ready for a tough battle, though. George W. Bush, in an uncharacteristically noble move, tried to cut back on illegal hiring by American employers. But even he couldn't get anywhere, and he was a guy employers loved.

Thinking longer-term, our country needs immigrants, by the millions. As the baby boomers hit retirement, they're tilting the American demographic scales such that our ratio of retirees to young workers is increasingly out of wack. American citizens aren't having enough children to re-establish a healthy balance, so the only route to that balance is welcoming new citizens from other countries, by the millions.

Overall, Auntie, I hope you'll rethink your animosity toward undocumented immigrants, if only for the selfish reason that, by sharing America, we help America grow stronger.


DelawareBob May 24, 2009 @ 6:03 a.m.

I can't say the ILLEGAL ALIENS are completely to blame for the shape of our economy, but they are a BIG part of the problem. The ILLEGAL ALIENS send BILLIONS upon BILLIONS out of this Country every year, money we will NEVER see again. Does this help our economy?

How about the BILLIONS the American taxpayers fork out for the ILLEGAL ALIEN BABIES, the schooling of them, the medical care and the list goes on, and on, and on.

How about the MILLIONS upon MILLIONS paid to jail ILLEGAL ALIENS for the crimes, then the cost to deport them. Does this help our economy?

Then you have these activist groups, the Catholic Church and the ACLU that want AMNESTY for these ILLEGAL ALIENS. It would be absolute suicide for this Country if AMNESTY were granted to the 20 million or so ILLEGAL ALIENS. We have more and more people out of work everyday and they want to add another 20 million to this Country? I say, "NO"!

If AMNESTY were ever granted to these 20 million ILLEGAL ALIENS, you can bet big money that 3 years from now, there would be ANOTHER 3-5 million ILLEGAL ALIENS demonstrating on our soil for AMNESTY.

An end MUST come to this illegal immigration. The perfect tool we have so far is E-Verify. It MUST be used by ALL businesses and Government Social Services. EVERY employee must be checked! If they are illegal, they are to be dismissed!

I believe it is time for all 50 States to pass a State law, like Arizona, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina and a few others. It is time for these ILLEGAL ALIENS to go back to their home Country and get out of this Country. The problems they are causing will not go away until the ILLEGAL ALIENS are out of this Country.

It's time for ZERO TOLERENCE with these ILLEGAL ALIENS. It's time for them to get back to their own country where belong. They don't belong here!


DelawareBob May 25, 2009 @ 7:42 a.m.

Reply to shizzyfinn:

Do you think America and the American taxpayers are resposible for the povery in Mexico or anywhere else for that matter?

Do you think American taxpayers should pay for the ILLEGAL ALIEN children born here? Go to link since you like links.

You say you can deport 20 million ILLEGAL ALIENS. Funny, when it comes to deporting them, the figure is high, when it comes to putting them on a path to citizenship, there is 10-11 million. What would you say if it were found out that there were possibly 30 million ILLEGAL AIENS in this Country?

How do you feel about human trafficing? How about stolen identities? Is this good? How about forged documents? Surely you think they are OK. How about fake green cards? Yes, I bet you like them. Do you agree that ILLEGAL ALIENS should drive a car without a license or car insurance? Yes, what's wrong with that? Do you think it's OK to harbor an ILLEGAL ALIEN? Do you feel the American taxpayers should school the ILLEGAL ALIEN children? I'll just bet you think, YES!

You say State Immigration Laws don't work. Try tis link if it's still working.


There is no doubt that there are two sides to this illegal immigration. I will not change your mind and you definately will NOT change my mind. NO ILLEGAL ALIEN HAS A RIGHT TO BE IN THIS COUNTRY FOR ANY REASON. I have no problem with LEGAL immigration. Maybe it should be cut back a little in these times of poor economy.

And before I close here, maybe you check out the Legislators For Legal Immigration link. You should enjoy this.



shizzyfinn May 25, 2009 @ 10:25 a.m.

Good stuff, DelawareBob. I'll be back with more later, but for now, wanted to provide some updates to your USA Today article, which mentions anti-immigrant laws in Hazleton, PA; Oklahoma; Arizona; and Georgia:

"On July 26, 2007 a federal judge, James Munley, struck down Hazleton's Illegal Immigration Relief Act as an unconstitutional ordinance pre-empted by federal law."

"In June 2008, an Oklahoma City federal court held that the Oklahoma immigration law’s employment provisions shouldn’t be enforced because they violated federal law."

"Two years later, the only thing all sides of the debate over Georgia's unilateral crackdown agree on is they don't like how the law is playing out. Opponents of illegal immigration say the law isn't being enforced. Contractors affected by the law complain they're being forced to play immigration cops."

"Only 15 percent of Arizona companies are using the federal E-Verify system, which the state law requires them to use to determine electronically whether the people they hire are in this country legally...Companies can use E-Verify only to check new employees and not those already on the payroll. Firms that have not hired anyone since the beginning of 2008 have no need to sign up."


shizzyfinn May 25, 2009 @ 2:10 p.m.

Some more thoughts, DelawareBob. First, I can and do change my mind on issues like this, when I'm presented with convincing evidence that my view is incorrect. For example, I used to think guns should be banned in the U.S., but after thinking it over and absorbing some arguments from the other side, I'm over gun control. So keep on workin' it!

To answer a few of your questions: yes, I do think Americans should pay for school for the children of undocumented workers. Most of these children will grow up to be productive U.S. citizens, and the investment in them will pay off handsomely. Of course, it would pay off even more if our schools were properly funded, and if programs like Head Start were expanded, to give assistance to families with children in those ever-so-important first few years of life.

As far as 20 million for the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S., I got that number from your first post. I don't know what it really is, but probably somewhere between 10 mill and 30 mill, right? Even if it's 10 mill, that's 1 in 30 people in our country...aka a heck of a lot of people. If it's 30 mill, that's 1 in 10 people, and your zero tolerance policy becomes even more impractical.

Glad to hear you are not opposed to legal immigration. This may be where we are on common ground. I agree that, ideally, all immigration would be legal, and U.S. employers would not hire people who could not prove their citizenship.

Maybe the difference between us is that I think the best way to get closer to the ideal is to focus on the employers, and not the employees. The economic downturn has proven that fewer jobs means fewer people immigrating illegally. And stopping illegal employers is much easier than stopping illegal immigrants. But employers have money and influence, while the immigrants have neither...that's why the easy fix has not become reality.

On human trafficking, fake green cards, stolen identities, driving without license or insurance: I definitely think that stuff all sucks. What did you mean by asking?


shizzyfinn May 25, 2009 @ 2:25 p.m.

Some numbers. If you want the source of a particular quote, stick the quote in Google and you'll get there.

"The Center for American Progress estimates it would cost at least $206 billion over five years to deport 10 million undocumented workers."

In contrast, "a Congressional Budget Office review of the 2006 Senate immigration [amnesty] bill found it would raise $66 billion in federal, state and local taxes over 10 years.

"The Internal Revenue Service estimates that undocumented immigrants contributed nearly $50 billion in federal taxes between 1996 and 2003."

"Undocumented immigrants pay the same real estate taxes—whether they own homes or taxes are passed through to rents—and the same sales and other consumption taxes as everyone else. The majority of state and local costs of schooling and other services are funded by these taxes.

"The U.S. Social Security Administration has estimated that three quarters of undocumented immigrants pay payroll taxes, and that they contribute $6-7 billion in Social Security funds that they will be unable to claim"

"In 2003, over 90 percent of undocumented men worked—a rate higher than that for U.S. citizens or legal immigrants"

"Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and most other public benefits"

"Two-thirds of all children with undocumented parents (about 3 million) are U.S.-born citizens who live in mixed-status families."

"Nationally in 2000, only 1.5 percent of elementary schoolchildren (enrolled in kindergarten through 5th grade) and 3 percent of secondary children (grades 6-12) were undocumented. Slightly higher shares—5 percent in elementary and 4 percent in secondary schools—had undocumented parents."


shizzyfinn May 25, 2009 @ 2:33 p.m.

Auntie, you had mentioned that you were unable to find word of the recent decline in immigration, caused by the economic downturn. Here ya go, in a mainstream article from about a week ago:

"The recently released data show that about 226,000 fewer people emigrated...during the year that ended in August 2008 than during the previous year, a decline of 25 percent"..."The net outflow of migrants from Mexico — those who left minus those who returned — fell by about half in the year that ended in August 2008 from the preceding year."

"Mexican and American researchers say that the current decline, which has also been manifested in a decrease in arrests along the border, is largely a result of Mexicans’ deciding to delay illegal crossings because of the lack of jobs in the ailing American economy."



shizzyfinn May 26, 2009 @ 8:23 a.m.

Hmmm, first you didn't like the 2007 date of some of my articles, but then you offer one from 2004? Ok, I guess. But the article was on "rense.com" which is apparently the website of a radio personality (who has quite an interesting hairstyle!).

I prefer mainstream, reputable sources - and in this case, I decided I'd like to have a look at the study itself. So I Googled a bit, and here it is: http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

Two important things about the study: it was produced by the Center for Immigration Studies, which is a lobbying group that is in favor of cracking down on illegal immigration. And the study is not based on hard data, but on a lot of assumptions about who is illegal, what they contribute, and what they use in government services.

Interestingly, the study reveals the inaccuracy of the prejudices held by folks like Mindy and DelawareBob:

"The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work."

"It is worth noting that our findings show that only a tiny fraction of households headed by illegals receive cash welfare programs or Social Security benefits."

"With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services."

Here's the study's key finding:

"On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households."

But there are some questionable assumptions that lead to the study's calculation of costs of illegal households. For example, the study assumes that uninsured illegals use the same amount of health care as uninsured citizens, which is highly dubious. And the study does not attempt to factor in any positive economic benefits from undocumented workers:

"Like most studies of this kind, including the NRC's, ours does not consider how illegal immigration or immigration more generally might affect public coffers indirectly by its impact on the economy. There simply is no consensus on the economic impact of immigration."

So this study is interesting, and good fodder for discussion. But the study is not from a neutral source, and its assumptions are disputable. So it is not an undisputed breakdown of the costs of illegal immigration.


auntsandiegospeaks May 27, 2009 @ 12:23 a.m.

Hey shizzyfinn, thanx for keeping my blood pressure up! No, didn't mean that, just want to keep you on your toes.

There are thousands of numbers in thousands of studies. They can be (& usually are) manipulated to make the point of the person presenting them.

I have personally witnessed the excessive use of the medical system. Often an ambulance will bring in ssssomeone with the flu or a cough. That is a HUGE drain on the hospital budgets. There are several hospitals near the border that lose money due to providing maternity services. And this problem is compounded by the fact that the patient has had NO prenatal care, making the delivery high risk.

So, we can agree to disagree. I have made this point hundreds of times: ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL. Enter properly or stay home.

I don't see any mention of the Mexican Immigration Laws. They are precisely what we need to do. Read it!

ILLEGAL aliens use the hospitals as private doctors as doctors will not treat them, usually. I could go on, but need to post today's blog.


shizzyfinn May 27, 2009 @ 8:24 a.m.

OK, I'm just about ready to let this thread go. Thanks for starting up and maintaining a good discussion!

Just one more thing from me, on the Mexican immigration laws. You say that Mexico's immigration laws are very strict. I'd respond that their laws have no bearing on our laws. For one thing, our country has more resources than Mexico, by an order of magnitude. For another, we shouldn't make our laws based on the lowest common denominator...we should make our laws based on what we think is right.

And I happen to think that welcoming immigrants is the right thing to do, not just because it's in our national interest, but because it's also the morally proper thing to do.

In fact, given that many U.S. citizens say they live in a Christian nation, I was thinking of closing with an excerpt from Jesus's Sermon on the Mount, where he pretty much says "you gotta help out those who have less than you." But no need to go religious to get this point across. Here's how it's written on the plaque inside our Statue of Liberty:

A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand Glows world-wide welcome... "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!


auntsandiegospeaks May 28, 2009 @ 1:29 p.m.

This is my last comment on this subject. The Statue of Liberty is over 100 years old (1886). At that time there were wide open spaces, infinite resources, lots of land for farming, grazing, building. That is gone. Do you REALLY want to live shoulder to shoulder, begging for food, water, shelter?? I don't. We do welcome plenty of Immigrants every single year. It's the ILLEGAL ones that are the problem. I just used the Mexican Immigration Laws as one example/comparison, since the biggest ILLEGAL population comes from Mexico. That's it. Now I have to go fight the good fight with Cox!


Sign in to comment

Win a $25 Gift Card to
The Broken Yolk Cafe

Join our newsletter list

Each newsletter subscription means another chance to win!