Oh please, the only one who is bloviating is you. I have been living on the border when there were only 3000 border patrol agents in the southwestern region. There are now about 20000 border patrol agents. That being said, ICE is and should prioritize its resources. Capturing, apprehending, and deporting the violent illegal aliens should take priority. Most of the illegals that are caught within 24 hours and within 20 miles of the border are captured and released back to their country of origin. The deportation process, which is a legal, civil process cost too much for the numbers involved. The difference between CBP and ICE is their sphere of jurisdiction. ICE handles the interior while CBP handles the entry points and other stations within 20 miles, generally, of the border. And for the border patrol, their morale is low because the minors that have crossed into the border cannot be released and deported, generally, until age 18. If under 18, an adult in their respective country, or the legal authorities in that country, They are babysitting instead of doing their job, but that is because a GOP congress does not want to provide the funds for HHS to take care of the children until they reach age 18. Imagine that, all because they disagree with a law that was passed in 1998 and modified in 2008. the rest of your post is pure crap.
The purpose of America is defined strictly by the values of the Constitution. Nothing in what you post is based on that belief. To be an American is not strictly defined as where were you were born, but the spirit from which the Constitution is derived. Our strength lies in our diversity, not in its singularity. And as such we must always have a compassionate heart so that we do not make the same mistakes as our ancestors. You seem to have failed to learn from history since you want to blame immigrants for all the ills here.
That is BS. We have a law where a cop can instantaneously determine whether you have liability insurance or not without pulling you over first. That law was passed because it was argued that illegals contribute most to the lack of liability insurance among all Texas, which was 24% at that time. It is now a whopping 22%. Police departments in Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, San Antonio, and other cities have seen their budgets cuts to some degree because crime has decreased overall. This means less patrols on the streets, etc. And if you live in a metro area like DFW, it is rare to even get a ticket, even on the GWB Toll way on a Saturday morning going well above the speed limit.
We don't really know do we as there's never been a good study done showing the net impact of illegal immigration. We know that immigrants on the whole have a very positive impact on the US. There's no reason to believe that illegal immigrants as a subset of the larger group wouldn't also be beneficial.
In 2006, the Texas State Comptrollers Office did a study in 2006 about the cost of illegal immigrants. In that study, illegal immigrants contributed $1.58 billion dollars in revenue while only costing the state $1.18 in services. Most of the local governments bore the brunt of those services. The only reference to that study can be found in articles such as here from the or Houston Chronicle.
Liberals want Illegals here for one reason: to vote the Leftist agenda. Period. They don't care about these people.
The same here in Britain; the right wing hysterics whine about the cost to the state and jobs lost to immigrants yet the conservative government's own figures show that immigrants contribute a net gain to our economy.
This is a good study showing that slowing illegal immigration would benefit blacks and low wage earners. http://cis.org/node/594
Well, that is BS. It was 1986 where a person could still get bail for DUI on their 7th arrest and third time injuring someone.
All studies that I know of with illegals getting welfare include anchor babies. But here is something from the Cato Institute on illegals and welfare.
This isn't a study, it's an opinion. But it seems to indicate that blacks would be adversely impacted by illegal immigration due to the increased competition for low paid jobs and employer's preference (in the writer's opinion) to hire illegal immigrants over Blacks.
No vast racist conspiracy, supply and demand. If there are more low paid workers, the cost will go down for low paid workers.
You maybe be correct , there is a very large debt owed to the Clinton foundation donors , many promises must be kept , and Wall Street is backing the witch !
'Same mistakes'? Our ancestors gave us the standing ground from which to build the best state in the Western Hemisphere. It is very thankfully due to their prudent and careful planning that they were conservative when they needed to be, but also took opportunities(Louisiana Purchase) when we needed to as well. While the U.S in the early 1800's-1940 suffered from depressions, they were but the catalyst for great growth ahead. Growth that only lasted for 10 years, precisely due to the economic and political policies of Mainstream Washington. The programs we have due to suffrage, ironically cause suffrage in the inability to move up the social ladder. Social mobility is dead in the US and is one of the main causes of the crisis not completely abating. Our weakness lies in our diversity. Because we are 'diverse', we are not united. Because we are 'diverse', we must satsify the 'political needs' of political groups in the country, instead of the nation collectively. The greatest States were those that maintained its singularity, and were not fractured by any means. What goes for a military platoon, goes so for the nation as well. Our Founders belief against the sabotage you support. We support legal immigrants(and still do), because they have assimilated into our country. It's not the spirit of the constitution, it is the spirit of the flag. Legal immigrants grow families here, forge connections in the communities, produce jobs and businesses. Illegal immigrants provide cheap labor for big business, all the meanwhile stealing jobs from those LEGAL immigrants. Why even have an immigration system at all? It's unbelievable that the rights of Americans have become second or third rate, just because an illegal might not legally be on the doe(IE: These costs are effectively hidden costs.) so yes, in that sense it's "cheap".
What does it matter; there are FAR fewer illegals making it across the border now than at the lowest point under Bush when he was making deals with Vicente Fox to bus in all the unemployed Mexicans he could.
The arrival rate of those intending to stay on a permanent basis went to nearly zero during the Bush economic crash. They come to work. Those who want a "wall" should have listened. We need several changes - including, but not limited to more wall. The measures we need for controlling this problem are in the bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill that passed the Senate and would have passed the House had Boehner allowed a vote. Ask McCain - an author and senior senator from a border state.
They were not conservative at all. If they were, we would be a monarchy and not a democracy. A democracy was about as radical in those days as Marxism was when it was introduced in the late 19th century. Not stating they are the same, just stating that it is not based on conservatism. During the days of George Washington, there was no such thing as illegal immigration. When a person came into the United States, the only requirement for entry was their "knowledge" of English. In those days, educated persons knew English, French, Latin and maybe Greek. So, a merchant coming from Germany would have some knowledge of English when coming here. And aliens, in those respective states could vote if they owned property. BTW, those first four requirements that the first Alien and Seditions Act became law still applies today. For those who become citizens, they must show "moral character," take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, generally live five years, with some exceptions, in the United States. The United States government does not recognize dual citizenship, their respective country, like Canada, for instance, would do that. Most European countries and some African countries with continuous ties to the Western Europe does that. It was not until the 1872 Chinese Exclusion Act that the word inadmissible alien came into law. Inadmissible alien was the word that defined an illegal alien. And Chinese immigrants because illegal aliens if they entered the United States without inspection. It is the same law that first established the Bureau of Border Patrol. Was this law something that the FF would have supported? NO, it would not because even the alien and seditions act because it would go against the four tests that the FF first envisioned.
After reading 4 different reports concerning immigrants and welfare, the only conclusion that can be made is no one has any real clue how much money Illegal immigrants are costing us in entitlements.
I will see if I can dig up a report that exclusively deals with illegal immigration and welfare with no child, US citizen spouse, or household. I do remember there have been some reports but it was from long ago.
