American Tragedy: Non-legal Immigrants Leave Arizona After Laws Enforced!
Shocking to the reporter filing the story, a human tragedy is occurring even now in Arizona!
PHOENIX, Arizona (AP) — Illegal immigrants in Arizona, frustrated with a flagging economy and tough new legislation cracking down on their employers, are returning to their home countries or trying their luck in other states.
For months, immigrants have taken a wait-and-see attitude toward the state's new employer-sanctions law, which takes effect January 1. The voter-approved legislation is an attempt to lessen the economic incentive for illegal immigrants in Arizona, the busiest crossing point along the U.S.-Mexico border.
...
"People are calling me telling me about their friend, their cousin, their neighbors — they're moving back to Mexico," said Magdalena Schwartz, an immigrant-rights activist and pastor at a Mesa church. "They don't want to live in fear, in terror."
...Strangely, it seems that the "illegal immigrants-rights" activists tend to be far more racist, implying that illegal immigrants are Mexican and South American and, more insultingly, that evidently only Mexican and South American people desiring to immigrate to America are too stupid to navigate the immigration process.
I'll bet you a cookie no one (except me) accuses her of racism however, because she is on the "right side" of the argument.
Martin Herrera, a 40-year-old illegal immigrant and masonry worker who lives in Camp Verde, 70 miles north of Phoenix, said he is planning to return to Mexico as soon as he ties up loose ends after living here for four years.
"I don't want to live here because of the new law and the oppressive environment," he said. "I'll be better in my country."
He called the employer-sanctions law "absurd."
"Everybody here, legally or illegally, we are part of a motor that makes this country run," Herrera said. "Once we leave, the motor is going to start to slow down."
Dude got four years' better life than he can get in Mexico; he should be grateful for what he got. Calling the law "absurd" again reminds me of my 7th-grade students, who only cry "unfair" if they don't get what they want. If I am unfair and it benefits them, no one says anything. It's a case-study in illegal immigrant politics.
Also, Mr. Herrera — er, Sr. Herrera — might be wrong about the whole "illegal immigrants are part of the motor" theory. Perhaps the illegal immigrants are part of the sand in the gears that are causing the country to grind to a halt and dissolve. I, for one, am willing to take my chances with the "slowing-down" theory of Mr. Herrera.
There's more. Wade past the tears and sniffles of the reporter, and glean the information. Arizona may be nutty in a hundred ways, but at lest they get the whole idea of what borders are for.There's no way to know how many illegal immigrants are leaving ..., especially now with many returning home for normal holiday visits. But economists, immigration lawyers and people who work in the immigrant community agree it's happening.
State Rep. Russell Pearce of Mesa, the author of the employer sanctions law, said his intent was to drive illegal immigrants out of Arizona.
"I'm hoping they will self-deport," Pearce said. "They broke the law. They're criminals."
Under the employer sanctions law, businesses found to have knowingly hired illegal workers will be subject to sanctions from probation to a 10-day suspension of their business licenses. A second violation would bring permanent revocation of the license.
Nancy-Jo Merritt, an immigration lawyer who primarily represents employers, said her clients already have started to fire workers who can't prove they are in the country legally.
"Workers are being fired, of course," she said. "Nobody wants to find out later on that they've got somebody working for them who's not here legally."
Now I wonder if California might follow — ?
Naw. That's crazy talk.
Bravo, Arizona! Well done! Eliminating jobs & tax revenue is a great idea.
Reply to this
I say adios to senior Herrara. Thanks for driving down wages while you were here. Greedy developers will have to go back to paying a decent wage instead of the slave wages their paying these construction workers. That means more tax revunue as well. I've got 20 plus years of building experience and I couldnt find a job that pays less than I was making in the mid 80's. Company owners hire you for a few weeks to train their mexicans then they cry poverty and Fire you after you've trained their underpaid slaves.
I'm sorry I dont wanna share an apartment with 20 or more other guy's. so I cant live on those wages. Most of them arent paying taxes by the way!
Reply to this
Welcome, rich, and thanks for commenting! I am happy the post resonated somewhat with you.
I like that the law targets the legal Americans -- business owners, mostly -- I think that emphasizes the idea that it is the LAW that is important here, not the "discrimination" against Brown peoples (allegedly) or any "racism" against La Raza (allegedly). No; I'd like to think that the legislators there in AZ are thinking like me: play by the rules, because we can only absorb so many people, and we can only give the rights of US citizens and residents to (surprise, surprise) US citizens and residents!
Someone, somewhere has gotten the Big Idea that the way to destroy the US success story is to promise US rights and privileges and benefits to ALL WORLD CITIZENS, but on the US' dime. Then -- the Great Experiment collapses, and we can all go back to being ruled by tyrants and autocrats, like in the good old days.
Because if the WHOLE WORLD wants US rights and privileges, baby, then I say: have your own damned governments grant them to you. You'll find that they're a little less damned if they do.
Reply to this
Welcome, John, and thanks for taking the time to comment! I am happy that the post was at least a tad stimulating to you!
Again, I say, it is their choice, and -- since it is different from the one California is making, and we are a dying state -- I applaud them for simply creating a relatively simple law and than (surprise) enforcing it.
The jobs? They are not "lost." How are jobs lost? Any jobs remaining that need doing will still be there.
What tax revenue Arizona loses (sales, perhaps?) will, I suspect, be more than made up in savings to the health and education and law enforcement sectors. At any rate --
At ANY rate --
It is nice of some state to finally volunteer to take the lead on that approach, so that the rest of us can at least assess it in real-time and see if it works or not.
Will you give them that?
Reply to this
I dont think kicking out the illegals are eliminating jobs, its freeing them up for those of us here legally. This action will only help tax revenue because now we will not be paying their medical bills when they come here and have babies in our hospitals, on our dime, also, they send their money back to their families in other countries, making a good impact on those economies and a bad one on ours. Bravo Arizona is right, I cant wait until other stats start inacting these same laws.
Reply to this
Corporate greed has outsourced every job that can be exported and continues this process by bringing in illegals from any country where wages are lower than pervailing US wages. Thanks Arizona for standing up to corporate greed and may your efforts pervail.
Reply to this
What they should do is create a path for citizenship.
In terms of job loss, when a population decreases jobs are lost. Ask any economist, in fact ask the store owners in Arizona who will love the lost sales that the illegal immigrants previously afforded them. (Note: It's not limited to just store owners, that was just used for an example.) Think of every time you spend money and where it goes, food, entertainment, etc.; those are the businesses that will be hit the most.
My next points hit some parts of the original article that "Wry Mouth" chose to exclude. (The link at the top of the page should direct you to the article in its original format.)
In terms of saving money, that prospect is almost laughable. Pearce stated that there will be less crime; until I see a viable report that states, illegal immigrants departing, contributes strongly to less crime, I will be skeptical. (To my knowledge, there is no such information to date.)
To his second point about there being less taxes, this would hint at government (state and/or local) decreasing in size. Every tax payer knows this never happens. Government does not and will not "trim" down. On a side note, I hope the residents of Arizona hold Pearce to his words. Although, I don't know how much control, if any, Pierce has over the size of state and local governments in Arizona. The fact that he would say something like "less taxes", something he has little or no control over makes me want to throw up; this claim seems especially hollow, and artificial.
Point three: Less congestion. This is the first viable point. To what extent though, I do not know.
Point four: Smaller classroom sizes. This is another viable point. Although, the costs for educating are largely fixed, for example, adding 1 child to a 20 person classroom is not increasing expenses by a material amount, the majority of the costs (teacher's salary, electricity, etc.) would be expensed with or without the extra child. It is important to note though that there is a learning advantage for classrooms of significantly smaller size.
Point five: shorter lines in emergency rooms. This is also another viable point, but the question is to what extent. In my opinion, the change will most likely be minimal, but again, that is just my opinion.
To DHLake, the world we live in now centers around a global economy. Exporting illegal immigrants will not stop outsourcing--it won't even put a dent in outsourcing.
Reply to this
"Exporting illegal immigrants" ... Um... is this how we actually want to look at it? That we've generated illegal immigrants as a domestic product and now we want to export said illegal immigrants to other states/countries? Hm.
"What they should do is create a path for citizenship."
But I think that is the old, old story: there *is* a path to citizenship. I wish you could ask my maternal Grampa and Gramma. They took the path, and whaddyaknow: they and their progeny are citizens, every one. Why do we need to create a new path? Why can't we ask people to stay on the old path, and broaden it if need be? Why can't we create a temporary worker program?
Kudoes to you, sir, for being (somewhat) balanced, although your ticking off of possible valid benefits was a little shy, relative to your ticking off of deficits.
I encourage us all to start as far out on the fringes as we want, but if the center is the most reasonable, let's move toward it. The overall question: will the benefits outweigh the losses? Keep your eyes on AZ, if they continue to play this hand.
Reply to this
Thanks, Arizona, for shipping out your illegal immigrants to us in California. We'll take them, put their kids in school, pay for their premarital sex babies, and watch their menfolk hang out at the local Home Depot. Sheesh. I want to move to Arizona.
Reply to this
Concerning some of your points:
1) Point three: Less congestion. This is the first viable point. To what extent though, I do not know.
Since you cannot estimate the impact on congestion, consider that the population of the United States is 300 million and the illegal immigrant population is reported at 20 million, the impact should be obvious especially in areas where the illegals population is concentrated.
2) Point four: Smaller classroom sizes. This is another viable point. Although, the costs for educating are largely fixed, for example, adding 1 child to a 20 person classroom is not increasing expenses by a material amount, the majority of the costs (teacher's salary, electricity, etc.) would be expensed with or without the extra child. It is important to note though that there is a learning advantage for classrooms of significantly smaller size.
The cost of one child is inconsequential, the cost of 10 million is perhaps more significant, this is even more significant when the parents are earning less than the minimum wage.
3) Point five: shorter lines in emergency rooms. This is also another viable point, but the question is to what extent. In my opinion, the change will most likely be minimal, but again, that is just my opinion.
How can the change be minimal when there are 20 million illegal immigrants involved. The is an even more of an issue given the high percentage without insurance.
Reply to this
be wary of high estimates...
What's being reported is being done so as to amplify the issue in favor of humanitarians who position illegal aliens as innocents caught in the crossfire.
Yes, they're aliens: I'll deign to consider them "immigrants" the moment they try to assimilate... in the meantime they are only ex-patriats of their home country, nothing else... well, maybe they are refugees - but there is legal status available for refuges from our state department.
I teach illegals in my classroom. While each individual has his(or her) own personality and proclivities, there are identifiable trends based on country of origin: my colleagues prefer Cubans to Haitians, Central Americans to Mexicans, South Americans to Jamaicans, any African to any westerner... oddly, in the 36 years some of my colleagues have been teaching at my school, they've never dealt with illegal Canadians, Swedes, Spaniards, French, Polish...
Educationally, it is an issue of opportunity for the underclass of the world. And we turn none away. Consider this the next time someone calls our public school system a waste: according to the same people, we teach 20 million illegal students, all of our handicapped, even the trainable mentally handicapped, and force attendance in liberal arts educational curricula until 16 years of age.
Our enlighted competitiors (the Europeans and Asian industrials) ignore their illegal aliens, ignore their handicapped, and track students as young as 11 into tech schools and university prep - testing only their cream in those international ratings... against our entire population.
The impact on Arizona schools? Their average daily attendance will go down, so the state will decrease funding to the local schools accordingly. The class sizes will not be affected because teachers are appropriated according to student averages. Some really motivated and spectacualar students will be lost, as will some who are strangers in a strange land. How many of each? well, all are working in a second language, so Arizona's testing scores will probably improve.
and when THAT happens, expect California and New Jersey, Texas and Florida to follow suit.
Reply to this
Gosh; a fella takes a few or 20+ hours off to drive to the in-laws for Christmas, and that's the one day commenting goes "off da hook" at dear old Wrymouth!
I will be cutting and pasting the most stimulating points of all these comments and posting a follow-up article.
Until then, have at it!
Reply to this
Our Tax dollars at work
Few takers in immigration's 'self-deport' program
By AMY TAXIN,AP
Posted: 2008-08-21 21:39:28
SANTA ANA, California (AP) - The federal government will scrap a program for illegal immigrants to turn themselves in for deportation after only eight people volunteered during a nearly three-week trial, an official said Thursday.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement offered the pilot program in five cities, giving illegal immigrants facing court orders to leave the country 90 days to plan their departure and coordinate travel with relatives. The alternative was the prospect of being arrested, detained and deported.
ICE will end its "Scheduled Departure" program when the trial period concludes Friday, Jim Hayes, acting director of ICE's detention and removal operations, told The Associated Press.
"The bottom line is, it is not effective," Hayes said. "Quite frankly, I think this proves the only method that works is enforcement."
Hayes said other tactics have proven more effective. ICE has been tracking down so-called immigration "fugitives" by knocking on their doors at home, often during pre-dawn hours.
ICE offered the program to 457,000 illegal immigrants nationwide who have ignored judicial orders to leave the country but have no criminal record. Applicants could sign up at ICE offices in Charlotte, North Carolina; Chicago; Phoenix; and the California cities of San Diego and Santa Ana.
Immigrant advocates said the program had few incentives and failed to consider undocumented immigrants' ties to family in the U.S.
They said they worry that ICE will cite the weak turnout as a reason to step up the raids, since it now can say that it made an effort to enforce the law in a way that was less disruptive to illegal immigrants and their families.
"My hope is it isn't going to empower them or fuel their enforcement even further," immigration lawyer Lisa Ramirez said Thursday.
The program was criticized for offering little incentive for illegal immigrants to step forward since they would be barred from returning to the United States for as long as a decade.
And while ICE has increased arrests of illegal immigrants who fail to heed court orders to depart, several immigrants said many people feel they have a decent chance of sticking it out here longer than the government would give them if they came forward.
"Why are they going to go back to their country and pay someone to bring them over here again?" asked Rigoberto Moreno, 46, who entered the country illegally from Mexico as a teenager in the 1970s and has since become a U.S. citizen.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. Active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
Reply to this