Latina Lista: News from the Latinx perspective > Palabra Final > Immigration > Is House committee review of 287 (g) program the first sign of immigration reform?

Is House committee review of 287 (g) program the first sign of immigration reform?

LatinaLista — One of the most controversial components of local immigration enforcement is the 287 (g) program. It is a program that partners local law enforcement with ICE. Federal officials train selected police personnel to enforce federal immigration law.

According to a page on the ICE website that hasn’t been updated since August 18, 2008, more than 840 officers have been trained and certified through the 287 (g) program. It is the main weapon of the infamous Maricopa County Sheriff in his daily hunts for undocumented immigrants.
While on the surface this program looks like it’s a boon for the nation’s security, it has failed local taxpayers because law enforcement authorized to implement 287 (g) spend less time responding to common crimes committed against their own citizens.
Well, tomorrow 287 (g) will be given the review that is long overdue by the House Committee on Homeland Security. For the first time since the program has been implemented, officials will look to see what are the costs versus the benefits of the program.
Such a move signals some hope that immigration reform is underway, if only in baby steps.

Evaluating the 287 (g) program may be an easier task than congressional representatives think. There is tangible evidence that the costs of the 287 (g) program has taken a toll on city coffers and public safety.
One of the first objective sources of the disparity over the real benefits of the 287 (g) was found in an Arizona newspaper series that chronicled Sheriff Arpaio’s actions. In Part IV of the series Reasonable Doubt, East Valley Tribune reporters found:

Response times, arrest rates, investigations and other routine police work throughout Maricopa County have suffered over the past two years as Sheriff Joe Arpaio turned his already short-handed and cash-strapped department into an immigration enforcement agency, a Tribune investigation found.
Response times on life-threatening emergencies have slowed across the county, with residents on average waiting 10 minutes or more in most patrol districts. The County Board of Supervisors has set five minutes as the expected standard.
Detectives’ arrest rate on criminal investigations plunged, from 10 percent in 2005 to 3.5 percent last year.

These are common complaints of those cities where local law enforcement opted into the 287 (g) program.
The Immigration Policy Center released a report today entitled Local Enforcement of Immigration Laws Through the 287(g)Program: Time, Money, and Resources Don’t Add Up to Community Safety where a detailed analysis of the true impact of the 287 (g) program on local communities is weighed against what the original intent of the program.
Among their findings are:

Prince William County, VA had to raise property taxes and take from its “rainy day” fund to help fund their 287(g) program. Their local law enforcement of immigration, which cost $6.4 million in its first year, is projected to cost $26 million over five years. They eventually slashed $3.1 million from the budget that was intended to buy video cameras for police cars to protect themselves against allegations of racial profiling.
287(g)’s have “created a climate of racial profiling and community insecurity” in communities across North Carolina. Law enforcement officials have stated time and time again that trust with immigrant communities is crucial to preventing and investigating crimes and leads to safer communities. Anecdotal evidence from North Carolina points to undocumented residents being less likely to contact law enforcement to report crimes.
Justifying 287(g) agreements as a crime-stopping measure does not hold water. Some localities claim they need a partnership with ICE to combat rising crime rates. However, Justice Strategies found that 61% had a violent crime index lower than the national average, and 55% witnessed an overall decrease in violent crimes from 2000 to 2006. Furthermore, 61% had a property crime index lower than the national average, and 65% saw an overall decrease in property crimes from 2000 to 2006.
Justice Strategies found that 87% of the jurisdictions with 287(g) agreements had a rate of Latino population growth higher than the national average.

Tomorrow’s full committee hearing is called “Examining 287(g): The Role of State and Local Law Enforcement in Immigration Law”
From its title, it’s easy to see that there will be a showdown between both sides of the issue over the effectiveness of the program but there is one factor that clearly points to the failure of the program — the fact that:

…while the 287(g) partnership program with DHS was intended to target immigrants convicted of violent crimes, human smuggling, gang/organized crime activity, sexual-related offenses, narcotics smuggling, and money laundering, the federal/local partnerships are actually being used to “purge towns and cities of ‘unwelcome’ immigrants.”

It is a sad reality that we see repeated in towns like Farmers Branch, Texas to Maricopa County Arizona and throughout the nation. Undocumented immigrants are being stopped and detained on pretexts of committing minor crimes just so they can be brought into the jails to determine their legal status.
It’s not known what the House committee plans on doing with their findings – whether they will make recommendations for greater accountability from local law enforcement for each arrest they make and greater oversight from ICE officials or recommend that the program be scrapped.
But one thing is certain — undocumented immigrants, not guilty of serious crimes, are being targeted. In the process, so are Latino Americans. A better way to get the real criminal element off the street is needed without compromising the Constitutional rights of the Latino citizens.
It’s time for a program that while enforcing the law exercises not only good judgement, but operates in good conscience.
The hearing on the 287 (g) program takes place at 2 p.m. EST and will be live streamed online.

Related posts


  • Liquidmicro
    March 3, 2009 at 8:44 pm

    “a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case found that “an officer did not need independent reasonable suspicion to question an individual about her immigration status during the execution of a search warrant,” and the rule applied in this case as well.
    Inquiring about a person’s name, date and place of birth, or immigration status does not constitute unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment, she said.
    Lisi said the trooper had a right to inquire about immigration status after all but four of the occupants of the van “had failed to provide any identification and Chabot’s suspicions reasonably escalated.”
    She said that under two Supreme Court decisions, “It is permissible for officers to inquire into the immigration status of individuals without triggering the Fourth Amendment or requiring independent reasonable suspicion.”
    The men in the van said they were going to work in Westerly, and immigration was contacted only after learning that most people in the van lacked documentation.”
    So as you can now see, 287(g) is not mandatory for law enforcement to merely have justified suspicions of someone being within the United States without authorization. As Judge Lisi states

  • Horace
    March 4, 2009 at 5:55 am

    “While on the surface this program looks like it’s a boon for the nation’s security, it has failed local taxpayers because law enforcement authorized to implement 287 (g) spend less time responding to common crimes committed against their own citizens.”
    I haven’t heard that it is a failure. I have heard that some hard pressed communities are dropping it because of budget cuts, but not because it’s a failure. Your statement is less one of fact than a common and specious assertion by illegal alien advocates that have as their agenda discouraging communities from cooperating with the federal government on immigration. These advocates make disingenuous arguments of concern like Marisa just expressed.
    Why would any American with honorable motives wish that our local and state authorities not cooperate in the enforcement of our constitutionally enacted laws is beyond me:} After all, all levels of government cooperate on all kinds of non-immigration crimes every day. For example, would anyone advocate that the federal government not cooperate with the state and local authorities on a murder case? I think that we know the real agenda of Marisa and other advocates; to break the chain of cooperation between the our enforcement authorities. This is what Laura calls a ploy, a not very subtle one at that.

  • Sandra
    March 4, 2009 at 9:45 am

    It truly saddens me that we have citizens in this country who want to stifle the mutual cooperation of law enforcement in the investigation of ANY crime, includiing immigration violations for their own selfish, ethnocentric interests. We are no longer united as a country for the common good and it just sickens me.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 5, 2009 at 12:26 am

    Wow! Micro. I cant believe you are here too! Im so excited to see you here! I thought our discussions at would have been enough for you. 287(g) stinks because its obviously being abused and not being utilized for its original intentions to catch the really, really bad guys instead its become the license for finding the workers. Our country is going through a national crisis with drug smuggling, human trafficking, kidnappings and on our border you cant recognize the real criminals from the workers enticed by job promises on our side from employers. Anyone who is watching the news can see the drug war in Mexico is errupting right on our border. Micro knows my thoughts on how to get a grip on this problem. Its a simple 3 step solution called BCI/1)Border Security-We need to recognize the bad guys when they show up at the border. We cant if they mix migrant workers with them while they sneak through. 2)comprehensive immigration reform-We need to get all the migrant workers documented with tamper proof ID cards. Get them out of the shadows and send them on a path for citizenship.(Always liked Mccain on this one!) Now open the legal immigration system and make it reasonable so we know who comes in. Economic factors have governed and always will govern how many workers enter the country. 3)Inforce labor laws-this is the magnet that got us into trouble. The current system we have has undocumented workers not protected by US labor laws therefore employers have access to a cheap labor force. This has cost the American worker their jobs and lifestyle. This is the only system that is realistic.

  • Texano78704
    March 5, 2009 at 10:46 am

    Wow, even the Wall Street Journal is weighing on this.
    Last week, Justice Strategies, a nonprofit research group, said in its own report about the program that enforcing immigration has distracted local police from their mission of tackling crime and keeping communities safe. The report also said that the ICE program placed a financial burden on states and localities that participate.
    Comprehensive immigration reform, which Congress has failed to pass, should be the goal of the Obama administration, according to the report. The 287g program “amounts to a local and state bailout of the failed federal immigration enforcement business,” the report says.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 5, 2009 at 11:25 am

    To state that Deportable workers are not covered by employment laws is a no truth argument. All workers are entitled to labor law coverage, whether they are illegal or not. I suggest you do some research before making and stating what you think is a fact.
    Illegal Sues for Higher Pay—And Wins!
    Actually Mary, I have been posting here and on various other blogs for quite some time, didn’t you read where Dave said “my reputation precedes me”?

  • Liquidmicro
    March 5, 2009 at 11:52 am

    Part of your sides problem, Mary, is that you refuse to see the bad in your ideology. How do you plan to separate those whom you think deserve a path to citizenship vs those who don’t? How do you plan to separate the males who have left their wives and children back home and have come here, re-married, or have just come here to get out of having to pay child support back home? So until your side starts dealing with all these other consequences, its not just a simple 3 step solution like you think.
    As men go north, wives get forgotten

  • Panchito
    March 5, 2009 at 9:30 pm

    Hi MaryElizabeth,
    Your 3 step solution makes sense but why does legalization have to lead to a path for citizenship? This is the part that I and, perhaps, many others have problems with. I can buy giving them a residence / work visa that can be renewed provided there is work for them and they do not engage in criminal behavior. I believe that for many of us it is an issue of fairness- putting them on a path to citizenship is not fair to those immigrants who followed the rules to get here.

  • laura
    March 6, 2009 at 4:07 pm

    Hola Panchito,
    there are many people who would have starving children back home if they had “followed the rules,” because the rules allow no way for them to come work here.
    Do you know how many children are kept from starvation in Central America because of the remittances of their relatives here?
    The people who “followed the rules” usually have much less urgent reasons to be here – professional advancement, for example. That is because my professional friends who are here with J1 and H1B visas are highly educated and could make a good living back home as well. They come here “following the rules.” Some of them go on to get green cards eventually. They are then eligible for citizenship after some more years.
    So how are they morally more upstanding than the father who walks across the desert to feed his kids?

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 6, 2009 at 9:56 pm

    Hi Panchito,
    I think it would make sense that whoever wants to be here is serious about being a part of our country. I am the daughter of a World War 2 veteran. When my grandparents came here on a boat from Italy the path was opened for them. Dad and I believe the US should be open for anyone who has the desire to be an American. It is true that perhaps you did follow the rules but remember the doors were not opened for some and through our borders were there only path (which is sad to me). I truly believe the system should have not been that difficult for you and I do believe you should be in line first. If and when we do reform our immigration system I am hopeing many jobs are created their because the flow of paperwork should not be backed up for years. Remember economic factors do and always will govern the amount of immigrants that flow into the American system. Also it is not good for immigrants to go back and forth and invest all their money abroad. If they were citizens they will invest in homes and business here. We need to create jobs and boost real estate. Just think of all the jobs that would be created with immigration reform. Yes they did break the rules but I dont blame them for wanting to be here. I would want to come here too if I were them. I wouldnt be here if my grandparents didnt have that desire and we all wouldnt be here if dad didnt fight against Hitler in Germany to protect us. So I am grateful and I try not to be selfish in life. Again, its a part of me that wants to share the American dream that I was so fortunate to have. Remember years ago the Pilgrams came here for freedom and they didnt have to face the INS when they arrived. To have anyone here without a path to citizenship defeats the ideology of the the American Flag. You must have a path and have a passion for the flag. The Red, White and Blue is all about loyalty and (Freedom). It wouldnt be American to deny anyone the pursuit of happiness.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 6, 2009 at 10:35 pm

    Hey micro! Whats up? They might be covered by labor laws but they arent going to call the employer on it. Think about it. If I were undocumented the last thing I would do is call the state or challenge an employer. They would be fired by the employer or deported by the state. Remember they are living in fear. A few years back a friend of mine who was in the process of getting her citizenship was working at the local diner and the state passed a law that banned smokeing. The owner of the diner tried to force her to allow the patrons to smoke at night for business purposes. I went in there at night and told the patrons off. I told them to put the cigerettes out because that was the state law. I couldnt believe the owner was going to force her to break the law.

  • Sandra
    March 7, 2009 at 7:45 am

    Laura, first don’t have kids you can’t feed in your own homeland. It is a myth that most are starving anyway. It is just that they can make more money in this country than their homeland. Nothing justifies breaking the law.
    One of the reasons we have immigration laws is so that our OWN citizens won’t end up starving because of jobs taken from them and too much population growth but then you don’t give a rat’s behind about them, do you? It is all about Your concerns are in the wrong place.

  • Horace
    March 7, 2009 at 7:58 am

    “Do you know how many children are kept from starvation in Central America because of the remittances of their relatives here?”
    Tell us Laura, or are you just touting the lies of the advocates who would blow the plight of Latin Americans out of proportion? Do you actually know that they’d starve, or are they just earning more than they would otherwise? And why should the American people have the sole burden of these people? How much have you given in charity to these people? I suggest that you’ve given nothing at all, that you want to foist the mistakes of foreign governments, and their lack of birth control on the citizens of this nation. Why should I be responsible if Jose and Maria have had six or seven kids and Jose has to go north to support them? No, these people are the responsibility of their governments, not of the American people who’ve acted responsibly. If your people refuse to change their situations I do not feel compelled to help them. They are not U.S. citizens and are thus not entitled under our laws to our assistance. I suggest that you abandon you citizenship and leave for Mexico or another place in Latin America, where you can be among your people; those who you hold first allegiance to.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 7, 2009 at 10:45 pm

    They might be covered by labor laws but they arent going to call the employer on it. Think about it. If I were undocumented the last thing I would do is call the state or challenge an employer. They would be fired by the employer or deported by the state. Remember they are living in fear.
    So you are changing your statement again, now they are covered by laws, BUT they aren’t going to call the employer on it. And exactly who’s fault is that? These people put themselves into this position by their own doing, they know the deal when they come here, they are the ones gaming the system just as much as the employer is, simply because they can make here in 1 day what they would make back home in 1 week. The only “fear” they have is being caught and sent home, the fear of having to re-spend the money for the coyote, an added expense if you will.
    Your talking in circles, repeating the rhetoric of the PRO sympathizers, come up with something new, at least a decent argument.

  • Panchito
    March 8, 2009 at 1:31 am

    I was stationed in Panama for two years and traveled extensively throughout Central, South America, and the Caribbean. I never saw anyone starving. However, I’ll admit that their standard of living is lower than ours is in the U.S.
    Every year, I sponsor international military officers from Mexico and Central America who come to study at our military schools for a whole year. We become close friends. They unanimously agree that most (not all) of the people who head “North” and cross the border illegally are those who failed to get an education at home and see an opportunity to make a better living in the U.S. The issue is not that there are no jobs at home but that they know they can make more money in the U.S. I’m personally not opposed to giving them a visa to work here if the demand is there but I don’t agree that they should be put on a path to citizenship simply because they were able to cross the border without getting caught.

  • Panchito
    March 8, 2009 at 2:01 am

    Don’t talk to me like I’m a border crosser and tell me stories about how “we all wouldn’t be here if dad didn’t fight against Hitler in Germany to protect us.” That is the problem with all you “European” Americans. You think you are the only “Americans” and everyone else is an immigrant. For your information, my relatives have fought in every major war since WW II and I myself spent 27+ years in the military. My family does not owe your Dad anything. We earned our own freedom. By the way, I still do not think that anyone should be on a path to citizenship just because they were able to cross the border without getting caught.

  • Sandra
    March 8, 2009 at 9:03 am

    Mary, oh so you are for unlimited immigration for anyone in the whole damned world who wants to come here? Are you crazy? When the first immigrants came here we were a vast open frontier, sparsely populated, that isn’t true today. We are fighting for resources now to support the 300 million we have already. You would have U.S. citizens commit national suicide all in the name of humanitarism?
    Immigrants come here for what this country can give them and not the other way around. They have no deep seated love or loyaly for this country initially, love and loyalty takes growing over time.

  • Alessandra
    March 8, 2009 at 11:47 am

    Wow, lots of points were brought up on this thread. At least we are openly discussing the issue without censorship. Thanks to Marisa for this.
    After the 1986 amnesty, Americans were told, “Henceforth our borders will be secured, our immigration laws enforced. We will never again revisit the issue of amnesty.” And we all know how that went. So, one general amnesty and six or so smaller, targeted amnesties later, we now have 12 – 20 million illegal immigrants in the country.
    There are three guilty parties here: the government for not securing the borders and enforcing immigration laws as promised, the employers who hired illegal immigrants, and those who came illegally in contempt of our sovereignty as a nation.
    This just cannot continue. We cannot have another mass legalization without securing the borders, having an efficient system to track visa overstayers, and e verify to ensure that employers no longer have the loophole of claiming that they did not “knowingly” hire illegals. Cannot happen or it will be “business as usual” and then we will be back in the same place a few years from now. This contempt for our sovereignty as a nation and our immigration laws just needs to stop and so does the “cheating” by employers with the tacit approval of our government.
    To me, offering a “path to citizenship” is rewarding those who came here knowing full well they were in defiance of the law. It is simply unfair to those who did follow the laws (and most immigrants do follow the immigration laws). If this were the first time we’d been down this road, I might feel differently; however, in light of the fact that we have been here before–more than once–I believe it only encourages more illegal immigration.
    Also, we are assuming that everyone (or most) who are here DESIRE to become American citizens. Perhaps a large percentage of them, or maybe even the majority, only desire to work here and plan to return to their native lands at some point. So, perhaps some kind of legalization could take place on a case-by-case basis, but not citizenship. There are countries who have a well-run guest worker program; we should see how they run their programs, examine the pros and cons and see if it is something which might work here.
    We have to keep in mind that immigration policy for any country is developed for the best interests of the receiving country, not the potential immigrants. There are very important considerations: labor needs, ability to absorb the newcomers so as not to stress infrastructure, schools, natural resources, public resources, etc., and to enable the newcomers to integrate into our society. Illegal immigration throws all of this out of whack and has very negative effects on our nation and its citizens.
    Also, what immigration policies were in place 200, or 100 years ago is really irrelevant. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, mass immigration was handled through ports of entry where immigrants stood in line, were screened for contagious diseases and “mental deficiences.” Those who were “rejected” were repatriated and their families given the choice to either remain here without them or return. A hundred years before that, these procedures were not in place. So what?
    The immigrants who came in 1900 didn’t complain that they had to go through this procedure when others did not have to 100 years before. So it is just a waste of time to compare the immigration of today with that of 100 years ago. Our situation as a naton has changed. We are no longer a developing nation or even an industrializing one. So these “emotional” arguments about how immigration was done a 100 years ago just don’t hold water.
    We are now in a globalized, 21st century economy. A lot of manufacturing jobs are being outsourced. We are struggling to educate our own existing population to meet the challenges of competing in this global economy.

  • Alessandra
    March 8, 2009 at 11:50 am

    For Mary: I understand your emotional thoughts on immigration. However, as I explained in my previous paragraphs, we cannot establish immigration procedures in the 21st century based upon situations which were in existance in this country back in the 1800s or early 1900s. Time has marched on and our circumstances as a nation continue to change and evolve.
    My great grandparents immigrated to this country from Italy and so I understand your gratitude for the opportunity to be a part of this great nation and you want this for others. However, like I said, immigration laws are set for the benefit of the receiving nation (all countries do this) and not the immigrant. Remember that in 1926 most immigration from So. and Eastern Europe was cut off. While some have denounced this limitation, IMO this gave those who had come in the mass immigration wave time to integrate into their new home and gave their children a better chance at the “American Dream.” But, the point is that the immigration policy was made in what was considered, at the time, in the best interests of the nation–not for the benefit of those who still wished to immigrate.
    I think most clear-thinking people know that some kind of immigration reform must be achieved; the devil is in the details. But my point is that we must keep in mind the foremost purpose of having immigration laws–the well-being of our nation and its citizens. Immigration laws are not an extension of an Affirmative Action program.

  • Alessandra
    March 8, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    “That is the problem with all you “European” Americans. You think you are the only “Americans” and everyone else is an immigrant.”
    Jeepers, Panchito, “ALL” us “European” Americans think we’re the only Americans and everyone else is an immigrant? Kind of painting with a broad brush there, aren’t you?
    I don’t know anyone who feels that way. However, most new immigrants today aren’t coming from Europe; they are coming from Asia and Latin America.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 8, 2009 at 12:09 pm

    Nah, Panchito. You got me wrong. By far, I dont put myself above you in anyway. As a matter of fact, I have respect for you the same way I have for my Dad. You see…we are all here thanks to you and my Dad and I want you to know I do appreciate that. I just think the system was a good one back then. For my Great grandparents and for your great ancestors. As far as border crossing you and I think differently on this issue. If these people were able to come over the right way to begin with they would have done so. Remember, alot of these people crossed that border more than ten years ago and have children here that only know the USA. I dont put myself above you or the undocumented. I believe all people should have the same chance that we had and as for the system it is unfortunate we have this mess. This system enticed these people to cross the border to find an underwaged job. Its a system that actually discriminated the worker, Undocumented and American but I feel the culprit was the employer. I think going forward a fine should be given and documentation but I do think they should close the Border first and of course give the employer a huge penalty if they break labor laws. Panchito, I totally agree with you that many europeans think they are above everyone and the truth is when the pilgrams came here they did not have to face the INS.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 8, 2009 at 12:26 pm

    See Sandra. Thats where you and I disagree. The current system has around 12 million in the shadows not protected by labor laws. Our country is still the most successful melting pot in the world but the problem lies in our broken immigration system. As far as jobs are concerned; lets say we bring the undocumented out of the shadows and give them a path. My estimation is the ones that are serious will make a real life here with investments. Those are the ones that married other US citizens and have children that were born here. The others will go home because they dont want to be here permanantly. I think our system should be based on a path. I really dont like the ideal of a guest worker program. That does hurt the American worker. The problem is the system needs to bring in people that want to contribute a life and investments in our country and without a path that defeats us. As for opening it legally. I believe if we dont the borders will remain pourous. We are slipping here in the US. Our economy stinks, and we need inovation. If a migrant worker comes here and his child becomes the person that is determined enough to have the inovation for the job creation we need here then lets bring it on. We need it desperately.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 8, 2009 at 12:47 pm

    Also, look at our economy today and what it is after years of experienceing a broken immigration system. No jobs, lack of innovation. When the groups before these groups came in they had a path and the created business and jobs through there innovation. Micro: Lots of these people who come here for work are oblivious to what they will expect here in America. When my Italian ancestors came here years ago, they were told the streets were lined with gold, little did they know they would be the ones paveing the streets. When my ancestors arrived they werent liked. They werent considered the light skined Americans. I think the new group is always picked apart and yes dark skin seems to be the the agenda in this country when it seems to fit the agenda of picking a group apart.

  • Sandra
    March 9, 2009 at 4:25 pm

    FYI Mary Elizabeth, when it comes to legal immigration, Latinos have the second highest percentage of quotas allowed in. They are second only to Asians by a few percentage points. Whites are nearlly off the radar. So I would say that having darker skin color is not a discriminating factor.

  • Liquidmicro
    March 9, 2009 at 7:33 pm

    Also, look at our economy today and what it is after years of experienceing a broken immigration system. No jobs, lack of innovation. When the groups before these groups came in they had a path and the created business and jobs through there innovation.
    More propaganda, you cite no reference material, you rely on hearsay. To equate the situation of our economy to that of denying Deportable Aliens as a cause is laughable, hysterical. Our economy has nothing to do with the situation our economy is in. I have given you links previously about Immigrant employers taking advantage of Deportable Aliens that refutes the inane point you are trying to make. Please come up with something original.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 9, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    Sandra, having a darker skin color is a discriminating factor to you because you are obsessed with highlighting the quotas.

  • Sandra
    March 10, 2009 at 9:03 pm

    Mary, your remark to me makes no sense whatsover. All I did was to point out the facts about the percentatages of quotas for legal immigrants by ethicity. You are the one claiming discrimination against Latinos or people of darker skin color. I proved you wrong.
    I don’t care what skin color an immigrant has, only that we have fair quotas for all and that they come legally. You can take you accusations of me and shove them where the sun don’t shine. As I said, in a prior topic to Laura, all you pro-illegals have is the race card and personal insults because you can’t justify your advocation of illegal entry into our country or rewarding these illegals for doing so.

  • Panchito
    March 10, 2009 at 10:22 pm

    The reason “Whites are nearly off the immigration radar” is because Europe finished dumping all their poor into the U.S. by the 1970s. If it had not been for the Marshall Plan, they would likely still be coming in. If you don’t believe me, look at the extreme poverty in Eastern Europe when compared to the West. What is the difference between the East and the West? We (the U.S.) donated billions of U.S. tax paying dollars to the West rebuilding their infrastructure and their economies. This after we sacrificed many thousands of American lives to keep them from annihilating each other. Then, we continued to fuel their economies by stationing hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops there through the 1990s. I was one of them. All of this at U.S. tax payers expense. We still have thousands of troops there. So where is your outrage, where is America’s outrage over using so much of our tax paying dollars for the benefit and protection of other countries for such a prolonged period of time?

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 11, 2009 at 11:52 am

    Gee Sandra, You get mighty worked up when the finger of truth is pointed to you. You dont care what the color of ones skin is that is an undocumented WORKER but you seem to be highlighting quotas to justify how you feel about your dark racial impulses. I forgive you Sandra, because I honestly believe you are oblivious to how you really feel and you look up some silly statistics to try to convince yourself. As for the argument on Immigration Reform…Lets get real Sandra. These people were not let in to contribute to our country like my ancestors were. When mine came they were allowed to come here through ellis Island. When the Pilgrams came they didnt even have to face the INS. You see Sandra, people are going to come here no matter what. You say my argument is only about humanity issues. I dont think so Sandra. Our Borders are out of control, our labor laws are inforced with a system thet allows the companys to get around it, and we have undocumented WORKERS here working rather than going on a path to citizenship like my european ancestors did therefore they can not contribute to our society in the same way. You continue to obsess over the same break the laws argument which makes me believe your internal racial impulses outway the security and the future of our country and our children.

  • Sandra
    March 11, 2009 at 1:26 pm

    Panchito, we do not have troops stationed oversees merely for the protection of those countries! We have them stationed there because it is also in our national interests to do so! If you had spent as much time in the military as you claim, you would know that we (nor any other country) makes foreign policy decisions, which includes how to use our military, unless it is in our best interests.
    Now there are legitimate debates on where our troops should be stationed and whether some of those bases have outlived their usefulness. But if so, they will most likely be moved to countries where they will be more effective in protecting our interests. We have troops stationed all over the world, including Japan and the Philippines–not just in Europe! The reason they are “protecting” those countries is because those countries’ interests intersect with ours.
    Also, the reason that the West is in much better shape financially than the Eastern Europe is because the West was not subjugated under Communist rule for 50 or so years! That was one of the reasons why we stationed our troops in Western Europe–to stop Communist expansionism. Going from a Communist system to a free market one is not easy.
    And guess what? There are illegals here from Eastern Europe and they too have disregarded our soveriegnty and immigration laws and need to return to their homelands! This is no longer a vast open frontier and we have no need for the kind of immigration we had in the past. The days of mass immigration are over.

  • Sandra
    March 11, 2009 at 7:35 pm

    As I said, Mary E. all you have is the race card. I repeat that the reason I posted the quota percentages for you for legal immigration is to prove to you that non-white people are not being discriminated against in our immigration policies today and they shouldn’t be. Where you get that I am a racist or opposed to certain skin colors is beyond me. I just want all immigrants to come here legally and within in our laws in place TODAY. Our immigration policies cannot remain the same as 60 years ago because our needs are different now and our population has blossomed into 300 million now.

  • Panchito
    March 11, 2009 at 9:22 pm

    I wouldn’t expect you to believe me that I served even one day in the U.S. military. Why would you? The people you listen to on the radio and TV tell you every day that all Hispanics are “aliens and they are invading “your” country.
    By the way, we still have troops stationed in Europe and Asia because we don’t trust them – period! We know that, left on their own, they would start another world war. These people are compulsive invaders. And I’m not talking your silly definition of “invader” that you use to describe desperate people migrating in hope for a better life. It is also very interesting that you feel that such a long term U.S. financial and military commitment overseas, especially in Europe, is in our national interest but giving a hand to our needy neighbors to our South is money down the toilet. Can it be their skin color?

  • Sandra
    March 12, 2009 at 8:44 am

    Panchito, the usual race card pulling by you that is typical of the pro-illegal side. Once and for all, I couldn’t give a rat’s behind what someone’s skin color or ethnicity is only that they be in our country legally.
    I don’t listen to the media or talk radio to form my views. More ASSuming by you pro-illegals. My views are formed by our laws, thats all. Maybe you can’t think for yourself but I can.
    We already provide aid to Mexico and other countries and our immigration laws are in place for the best interests of this country and its citizens. You would have us commit national suicide and allow any desperate person to come here that wants to? Do you know how many millions more we would have it we allowed that? It is up to the citizens of their own countries to fix them. We can’t be the savior to the whole world endlessly by taking in every single person in the world that wants to come here that claims desperation.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 12, 2009 at 10:19 am

    It is their skin color! and that is why Sandra is an anti-immigration activist. She has deep rooted dark skin racial impulses and she is oblivious to it. She has been programed to hate and she really believes in it. Their is a war in Mexico between the good people and the drug cartels and the reasons why this is going on is because they receive our generous cash flow purchase of drugs, are generous supply of guns. Our American children can not grow up without going to school with mass drugs and crime, The good people of Mexico are getting destroyed and Sandra just continues to post the same rhetoric. We need to beef up border control, we need all workers documented and on a path to citizenship and we need enforced labor laws and we need to work with the good government of Mexico and hope someday Mexico will look something like Canada. Panchito is right…why are we in Europe when we have issues right here in our back yard. I dont know Sandra…you make me think you support the drug smugglers, rapists and human traffickers. They just caught a Mexican and an American trying to export guns into Mexico the other day. Why not document everyone and arrest the really bad guys.

  • Horace
    March 12, 2009 at 5:21 pm

    Panchito said: “”The reason “Whites are nearly off the immigration radar” is because Europe finished dumping all their poor into the U.S. by the 1970s. If it had not been for the Marshall Plan, they would likely still be coming in.”
    You really don’t know what you’re talking about Panchito! Modern Europeans were an educated lot and because of it, they assimilated very quickly. Immigration from Europe declined because their economies grew and accommodated nearly everyone, so there was no reason to leave. Also, immigration policies changed to encourage people from other countries, including that of Latin Americans.
    Latin Americans have had more than their fair share of legal immigrants, but the culture of Latin America promotes dictators and managerial incompetence, resulting in endless illegal migration. We can’t accommodate all who want to come, so to assert that this is a solution for the plight of South and Central Americans and Mexicans is idiotic.
    Corrupt and violent Mexico shamefully dumps it’s illiterate on the U.S. because it doesn’t want to pay for their education or improvements in their economic plight. They leave that for you, the suckers. You advocates are complicit in Mexico’s vile plan as all you want to do is put the onus on your fellow citizens. Perhaps you should abuse the Mexican government as much as you do ours.
    Poor choices by Latin Americans are the reason why they head north, not the jobs that we could easily fill through legal immigration, if we truly required them. I’m certain that our legislative system would work as designed and provide for additional legal immigrants if the border were secured. And they wouldn’t necessarily come from Latin America, either. There is no shortage of people who would immigrate to our country. However, we don’t get the best at this time, because illiterate Latin Americans have the greatest opportunity because of our common border with Mexico.
    There’s a world of difference between the education level of post WWII legal European and illegal Latin Americans, but you people are too blind and in self-denial to admit it. And what’s worse, you want the rest of us to pick up the financial burden of bringing these people to the educational and economic standards of the the average citizen. This is why many of us hold advocates of illegal immigrants in contempt.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 13, 2009 at 6:39 pm

    Horace, I know many Mexicans that are here and they are undocumented and they are not illiterate so that is such a stereotype. I also think you are not giveing credit to the Mexican people where credit is deserved. The good people of Mexico elected an honest government in hope to fix the current situation only to find the drug cartels are more powerful than the good government they put in. The reason why they can not beat them is because the drug use in the United States keeps them in business. They have our cash flow and they also get 90% of their gun supply from here. They are working with our own people in the US..our own citizens. Google Anderson Cooper and 60 minutes CNN and you will see that if the good police take out one bad guy…the bad guys take out ten of the good guys and beheads them and they hang their heads up as a display. I think it is really unfair for you to mock the Mexican citizens because they really want to fix their country.

  • Horace
    March 14, 2009 at 12:25 pm

    I tell you this ME, if our citizens headed south to cross the border into Mexico illegally for work, it would be considered a national shame that would result in millions marching on Washington, D.C. Where is the national backbone of Mexico? It’s nowhere to be found. Their people are apparently spineless. The Mexican government and its rich plutocrat puppeteers and the Mexican people themselves (apparently little more than sheep in man suits), just consider illegal immigration acceptable (something they do not tolerate from other countries) and a fact of life. Why should we respect Mexico or the Mexican people for that, and accept the burden of the people they treat as refuse? We hear a lot of race card pulling by advocates of illegal immigration against opponents, but silence from them when citizens state the culpability of Mexicans for their own plight. Lastly, Mexican illegal aliens seem to become bold in criticizing us in our own country, but lack the balls to criticize their own government, even when they live here. You advocates speak of the American Dream, but abandon any possibility that there could be a Mexican Dream for the rest of the 80 million who remain in Mexico. After all, we can’t accept the entire country of Mexico as our responsibility. Or, is that what you’re really demanding? When will illegal immigration stop, and when will the American people stand up and refuse to accept the failures of the Mexican people themselves?

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 15, 2009 at 11:17 pm

    Arent you allowed to go into Mexico invest your money and enjoy yourself? Many Americans go to live in Mexico and they open a business there and they have cheap labor. And there are people debateing that in Washington that too much has been outsourced and the fact that we outsourced jobs at lower wages that we pay the undocumented here and actually if the undocumented didnt come here these industrys would find a way to continue to move out to Mexico and get their cheap labor. As far as the Mexican people go…I think you are being very unfair since they recently elected a government in to try to throw out corruption and drug cartels. If you watch the news you would notice that 90% of the guns the cartels use to kill the good people with come from us and most of the money for the drugs also come from us. Its a joint effort here…and until we work along with them we will have drug trafficking, kidnappings, human trafficking and a broken border. This is one of the main reason why I am for comprehensive immigration reform. I believe until we figure out who is here in our country we will never improve the quality of life for our children in our country or improve our crime rate. Also opening up the legal immigration will help us Secure the Borders because workers will not traffic through.

  • Sandra
    March 16, 2009 at 3:46 pm

    How naive and convenient to blame all of Mexico’s woes on just the drug trafficing problem. What about the Mexican government creating jobs for their people and creating a better life for their people there so that they have the desire to stay in their own country? What about the Mexican people demanding that they do so? As Horace points out, the answer isn’t for our country to import the entire population of Mexico into our country to solve their problems. It creates problems for US!
    I don’t know of millions of anglo-white citizens of this country who are entering Mexico by the millions illegally so your so-called point is just plain dumb.
    No, increasing our legal immigration numbers will not stop more illegals from coming because there is an endless number of potential immigrants that want to come here, more than we can realistically absorb without committing national suicide. We need to continue to only absorb as many legal immigrants that can be beneficial to us rather than harmful. Our immigration policies and quotas are in place to benefit our country and its citizens, not the potential immigrant’s needs and rigthly so.

  • Horace
    March 16, 2009 at 9:03 pm

    “I believe until we figure out who is here in our country we will never improve the quality of life for our children in our country or improve our crime rate.”
    Really? If, God forbid, an amnesty would be implemented, I’m sure that the illegal alien criminals will just wait in line to identify themselves as such and volunteer to be deported. And of course we won’t have anymore DWI Mexicans killing citizens. It would seem that you’re admitting that illegal aliens are contributors to our crime rate. That’s a good start for being one of the advocate crowd that denies that illegal aliens commit any crimes at all.

  • Horace
    March 16, 2009 at 10:13 pm

    ME, please explain to me what is meant by undocumented? They lost their documents at the border? They left them at home? They’re in their other suit? Somebody stole them? The dog ate them? The fact is that they were never applied for nor were they ever granted documents. The term “undocumented” implies that they were entitled to documents in the first place, and they just forgot to pick them up. If this seems derisive, it’s no sillier to most Americans than calling people “undocumented” when such people have shown blatant contempt for our immigration laws. And it doesn’t matter what their motivations are. The term is a joke to most citizens and insults their intelligence, as it assumes that they are foolish enough to believe such tripe. The fact that they do not qualify has nothing to do with race or nationality, as much of the third world does not, including billions in Asia and South America. It’s comically ludicrous to call them undocumented, and only makes those who use the term sound silly and pathetically desperate in a deceptive way.
    If I cross into Mexico without entering an established border crossing point they wouldn’t call me undocumented, they’d just put me in jail. If I pulled the “undocumented” card on the Mexican police they’d spend an hour on the floor in spasms of laughter, as would many other border guards in the world. The fact that illegal alien workers use false documents kind of makes them documented, fraudulently documented!

  • Marisa Treviño
    March 17, 2009 at 8:55 am

    Sandra, did you know that there are more people of Irish descent living in the United States than there are in Ireland? What you see with Mexican nationals today happened before with the Irish and yet, I don’t see that it created problems for this country. It enriched us. In fact, many of the firemen who lost their lives in the collapse of the World Trade Center were of Irish descent. Did you know that? I’m sure people who felt threatened by so many Irish coming to the U.S. were calling for them to be deported and they were the recipients of insults, like you hurl now. Thank god, they didn’t listen to people like you but stayed and built futures for their families so when they were needed the most, they were there for all of us!

  • Sandra
    March 17, 2009 at 9:52 am

    Marisa, what you fail to realize is that most of these Irish came here legally within our immigration laws at the time. Also, when we had a high influx of immigrants from Ireland and other European countries we were a vast open frontier and sparsely populated. Not true today! We already have over 300 million people in this country. That is why we implemented immigration quotas in the first place to assure that immigrants didn’t mostly all come from one ethnic group to aid in assimilation, to be fair to all and to make sure we had jobs for them while considering our population growth.

  • MaryElizabeth
    March 17, 2009 at 6:56 pm

    Well, Sandra the truth is that as Americans we can travel into Mexico whenever we want. They reason why we are not like Canada is because of this crime situation (years out of control) they have, and this is a complicated issue. Our cash flow is the largest going into Mexico when it comes to drugs, and I am sure you are on the same page with me on this one that we do not want our country flooded with drugs. The thing is some say that if drugs were decriminalized it would solve the problem but that is not politically realistic and if drug trafficking went away then perhaps human trafficking would esculate. We have groups(gangs) in our country working with groups(gangs) in Mexico…so I believe we need to work on this problem with the Mexican government as a joint effort because the crimes are not going away.

Comments are closed.