The invasion by illegal immigrants has aroused the ire of the American people, and politicians are responding by doing what they do best: milking it for all the publicity they can get.
Some well-connected politicians have even ventured down to the U.S.-Mexican border for publicity photos as they ride in taxpayer-purchased patrol boats on the Rio Grande. As ineffective as these non-solutions have been in stopping illegal entry into the United States, the solutions that have been implemented under the aegis of increased border security have done additional damage to the constitutional rights of law-abiding American citizens.
In a constitutional republic, an increase in border security should result in, at most, only minor inconveniences to the law-abiding citizens. For many years the United States and Canada proudly boasted of having the longest unguarded border anywhere in the world. The only requirement for U.S. citizens reentering the United States from Canada was to answer the question of where they were born. There wasn’t even a requirement to show an identification card. Embarrassing to statists is the fact that illegal immigration problems were miniscule compared to what we have now.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
Current procedures for American citizens to reenter the United States require a passport in a manner similar to a national ID card. But this infringement is mild compared to other police-state requirements that have been implemented under the banner of border security, such as checkpoints on roads well inside the borders. KCCI Television in Des Moines, Iowa, reported that a group of Iowa Boy Scouts was detained for four hours after one of them took a picture of a Border Patrolman.
Whatever happened to the basic freedom of every American to photograph anything that’s outdoors in public view? What about the 14th Amendment right of equal protection under the law? Why should a troop of Boy Scouts face a four-hour detainment because one of them took a photo at a border while politically connected politicians flock to the borders to pose for photos that help them in their political campaigns?
Successful Operations in the Past
One of the best-kept secrets in America is that the United States waged a successful campaign against illegal immigrants in 1954. It was accomplished without imposing police-state measures on innocent American citizens. Under the direction of retired Lt. General Joseph “Jumpin’ Joe” Swing, Operation Wetback became successful as soon as the illegal immigrants realized that American Border Patrol agents meant business. As reported in The New American online for July 13, 2010:
On D-day, June 17, 1954, Swing sent 750 of his Border Patrol agents into the field to begin a sweep through Arizona and California. Within a month, Jumpin’ Joe’s boys had taken more than 50,000 illegal aliens into custody — and half a million more, fearing arrest, had self-deported.
For every illegal immigrant deported by the U.S. government, ten more self-deported within the first month. But we can do better today because we have technology to assist us in making deportations stick. If, for example, we passed a law stating that those who self-deport must state their intentions to do so, give their intended date (no more than 60 days after declaring their intentions) and have their fingerprints and facial features scanned, they will be on a list of those who self-deported and will be allowed to enter this country again in a legal manner. Those who have to be forcibly deported will also have their fingerprints and facial features scanned, but they will be on a list of those who were deported involuntarily and will be banned for life from re-entering this country.
Another reason Operation Wetback was successful is because the deportees weren’t just dropped off at the border. Lt. General Swing made certain they were taken far enough into Mexico to discourage them from trying again. Again from The New American:
Those taken into custody by the Border Patrol — about 1,100 a day after big numbers during the first week — were transported across the border in trucks and buses and then put on trains bound for Durango. The United States wanted the illegal aliens shipped deep into Mexico to discourage re-entry. They were also taken to Port Isabel, Texas, and put aboard ships such as Emancipation, which then sailed them to Veracruz, 500 miles to the south. Transportation by sea continued until seven illegal aliens jumped off Mercurio in an escape attempt and drowned. Since the United States depended upon the cooperation of the Mexican government in sending illegal aliens deep into Mexico’s interior, protests from Mexico over the drownings caused the United States to end waterborne deportations.
The seven drownings in 1954 should no longer be an excuse for not deporting illegal immigrants. The National Foundation for American Policy reported in 2010 that 4,375 people are known to have died during attempts to enter this country illegally between 1998 and 2009. Those are just the official totals. The real totals are certainly much greater. That any should die while being deported, even seven, is certainly a concern. But when thousands die entering the country illegally, that’s worse.
Turn Off The Magnets That Reward Illegal Entry
The illegal immigrants cross the border because there is a prize for successfully completing the obstacle course. Once inside the country, there is a virtual smorgasbord of benefits supplied by government agencies, some federal, some state or local. Free healthcare, free or reduced cost housing, and SNAP (formerly known as food stamps) top the list. Most states give in-state discounts on college tuition to illegal immigrants. The greatest prize of all is amnesty coupled with a pathway to U.S. citizenship.
The illegal immigrants aren’t the only scofflaws when it comes to the government benefits that encourage illegal entry. Government employees are disobeying laws too, but the laws aren’t being enforced on them. The recent indictment of Texas Governor Rick Perry on charges of misusing taxpayers’ resources highlights the existence of a Texas law that requires such accountability by the people who are elected, appointed, or hired to administer government programs. All states have similar laws, as well as laws against concealing known fugitives from law-enforcement agencies.
Why are the following state laws not being enforced on those who administer state or local taxpayer resources to feed, house, or transport illegal immigrants or conceal them from law enforcement: 1) Misappropriation of taxpayer resources; 2) Harboring fugitives; and 3) Obstruction of justice?
The illegal immigrants have to pay money to coyotes to smuggle them into the United States. They wouldn’t pay the money and take the risks if the prize wasn’t worth it to them. The way the game is played today, once they cross the goal line they’re rewarded. When Lt. General Swing was in charge, once they crossed the goal line their reward was the risk of being caught and deported. If we add to that the penalty of being banned for life from re-entry, we won’t need a fence on the border. In fact, we wouldn’t want one. It would get in the way the self-deportees as they race back to where they came from.
Double Standard on Child Protective Services
Why aren’t the parents of the illegal immigrant minors being subjected to the same scrutiny that American citizen parents are? A recent post on Breitbart.com related the story of a Texas mother’s encounter with the police.
Why aren’t the parents of the recent influx of illegal-immigrant minors facing prosecutions for child abandonment? Even if the initial act of abandonment was in a foreign country, once the children reached the U.S. border the continuing act of abandonment became a U.S. affair. Additionally, the parents’ names should be on a list of persons who will not be allowed in this country in the future. Instead, these parents are being positioned to be rewarded with anchor-baby paths to U.S. citizenship. Such incentives will encourage more parents in foreign countries to place their children at risk for coyotes to smuggle them into the United States.
Double Standard on Sexual Activities With Minors
Many of the young girls who join the immigration invasion are prepared in advance by their mothers with birth control pills. That’s because of the high probability that these girls will be victims of forced sexual activity while being smuggled into the United States. Their mothers also prepare them psychologically for the risk of being forced to perform other forms of sexual activity that, although they won’t result in pregnancy, can leave emotional scars on the young girls. With preparations as extensive as this, how can anyone say this endangerment is not premeditated? Why aren’t the parents of these under-age girls being held accountable for knowingly placing their daughters in the presence of sexual predators?
Why aren’t the molesters, rapists, and accomplices being indicted for their sexual crimes when these crimes are committed in the United States during smuggling of illegal immigrants? Their names should be on the list of registered sex offenders, and they should be wearing ankle bracelets.
The New American has contacted the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services regarding child abandonment and sexual crimes against minors as they are being smuggled into this country. As of press time for this article, they have not yet responded.
Border Security: A Dog-and-pony Show?
Addressing the illegal immigrant problem solely as a border protection issue is a defense-only strategy and is destined to lose. That’s bad enough. But how well are we playing defense? Brandon Darby, Managing Director of Breitbart, Texas, spoke at the Frisco Tea Party in Frisco, Texas, on September 8 of this year. He described the current defense of the border as “a dog and pony show.” Darby explained how he went to Laredo one Friday night with his film crew and saw very little evidence of border security. The following weekend, Jorge Ramos from Unavision was in Laredo on an announced visit. Darby explained:
The next Friday night I was on a border tour and Jorge Ramos came, announced, from Univision…. They had boats out. They had border patrol agents on horses and on all kinds of weird vehicles I’ve never seen. They had some helicopters searching with lights.
That wasn’t there the week before. So it’s a dog and pony show.
Darby also criticized the lack of coverage for whole sections of the border. Darby continued:
We’re sending people to 25.6 per cent of the border…. When you go to the Rio Grande Valley Sector all the way from Boca Chica all the way to Zapata it looks good.… Half way through the town of Zapata by the Falcon Reservoir there’s no more DPS. There’s no more state troopers.
Darby also explained that when he drives from Lubbock, Texas, to Sweetwater, a distance of about 123 miles, he routinely sees about five or six state troopers. But when he drives between the Texas border towns of Zapata and Laredo he usually doesn’t see even one.
It’s Not Just a Border Problem — It’s an Illegal Immigrant Invasion
The millions of illegal immigrants inside our borders present a number of threats to our country. Some are gang members. Some are terrorists. Some are bringing infectious diseases with them. Many of them have become a burden on government-funded services and are now depriving the American citizens who paid for these services. In some states, such as Texas, the drain on the state budget has caused many planned roads or expansions of existing roads to be changed to toll roads or they won’t be built.
One aspect of this invasion that is rarely discussed in the liberal press is the political. Many illegal immigrants have no concept of freedom. They come from police states. They have no understanding of the free-enterprise system and think government regulators are the best way to do business. If they are granted amnesty they will become voters who will vote for more government and less freedom. They are highly likely to vote for politicians who want to form a North American Union of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. If there is an amnesty for illegal immigrants, it will likely include family members living outside the United States. That would open the floodgates for new voters, the vast majority of whom would vote for more government and less freedom.
Politicians need to be reminded that this is an illegal immigrant invasion, and not just a border problem. Politicians like to use the phrase “border security” as they misdirect conversations from the real problem of immigration invasion and box-in the discussion to increasing border security. Implementing police-state procedures on U.S. citizens at or near the border while encouraging illegal immigrants by rewarding them with government benefits will not solve the problem.
If that isn’t insanity, what is?
Photo of U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agent patroling the Texas-Mexico border from a helicopter: AP Images
