R.P. Barr

Waiting for Reality to Blink

I am old enough to remember a time when liberals were pie-in-the-sky delusional and conservatives staunch realists.  Remember world peace and flower power versus stay-in-school and the work ethic.  The positions on the reality scale have now reversed.  Who’d have thunk it?

One example is from NPR [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129305280], a little microcosm of the larger economy.  Modoc County, California has only one hospital, and it is on economic life support.  If the hospital doesn’t get an infusion of cash, it may have to close its doors.  The nearest alternative is hours away—that's in the summer time when the roads are clear.  There are a number of elderly in the area who depend on the hospital for their very survival.  In addition, the hospital is the largest employer in the county.  If it closes, so will a lot of other things.  Property values will fall, and the consequent further drop in county revenues will cause other cutbacks to services.  The only apparent solution is a property tax increase to save the hospital.  It is opposed by at least one man who is funding the anti-tax-increase movement.  The problem with preaching fiscal responsibilty at this point is that there may be no-one left to hear the lesson.  What's more important, your point or your life?

There is a similar psychology at work regarding Islamic mosques.  The anti-mosque legion in New York does not want a place where Moslems can peacefully gather and engage in recreational activities as well as sometimes pray.  Remember a few months ago when these same people (probably), did not want to try and punish Muslem terrorists in lower Manhatten either?  And, if a few blocks from the place where New Yorkers cannot even erect a memorial in nine years time, is too close, then what is the reason for objecting to a mosque in Tennessee where they allow church members to handle poisonous snakes?  Or in California where enemas are given for entertainment and getting high passes for a religious experience?

This anti-Islamic sentiment is not only bigoted, it is delusional and dangerous.  

Look at the guy who went around stabbing and slashing African-Americans (and a few who resembled African-Americans).  We know what kind of person does that.  We know the profile.  --Except this guy was from Israel.  Okay, new profile.  We've read about the settlers who attack Palestinian children on their way to school.  He just couldn’t find any Palestinians.  -–Wait a minute, he was an Israeli Arab, not a Jew.  That’s easier.  We know about Hamas and that bunch.  Maybe he was trying to start a race war in the U.S.  --Except that he wasn’t Moslem.  He was an Israeli Arab Christian.  Stuff that in your profile and smoke it.

Then there were the killers who escaped from prison in Arizona.  A nasty trio, illegal immigrants from south of the border, right?  Nope.  Good ol’ American white boys.

 9/11 was a bad thing, but in spite of the horrific death toll, it was only one attack.  We lose more Americans to drunk drivers on a regular basis.  And, most Moslems don’t drink.

 Our economy is in the crapper thanks to a bunch of mostly white Christians and Jews who pushed us off a cliff for a quick profit.  You've got to look at who your real enemies are.

 There are a couple million Moslems in the United States, and they are nearly all here legally, unlike the devout Roman Catholics that are flocking over the border.  The other thing about American Moslems is that they are not trying to kill us.  Even with a few radicalized young men, they are not nearly as dangerous as the ethnic organized crime groups who are also nearly exclusively Christian.

 Worldwide, there are 1.5 billion Moslems who may not like us very much—although many do—but are not trying to kill us.  A handful of them are using their religion to manipulate the ignorant.  They are practicing the lessons of Machiavelli.  If you are unhappy with your lot in life, blame the other, the outsider.  People will put up with the failures of their leaders if they feel threatened.

 In this country, there are some who have read The Prince, but I see a stronger influence by a more modern political thinker: Joseph Goebbels who was proponent and perfector of the “big lie.”  In case you’ve forgotten, the theory was that if you tell a big lie boldly enough and often enough, the masses will come to believe it.  Call a social liberal both a Nazi and a communist; say that he is foreign born despite all evidence to the contrary, and that he is a Moslem only a year or two after attacking him for going to his choice of churches—say those things often enough and loud enough and they will gain traction.  Goebblels would be so proud.

New York Story

A few weeks ago (February 4, 2010, “Panic in a tough town”), I criticized the current batch of New Yorkers for whining about bringing terrorists to trial in Manhattan.  The actions of Faisal Shahzad in Times Square have proved both my points.

 First, there was no trial and a bomber came to New York anyway.  Shahzad was from Connecticut.  He could have bombed Hartford or New Haven.  If he had wanted to hit a landmark, he could have gone to Boston.  Why not?  Because Pakistan—and the rest of the world including many in the U.S.—don’t know about the importance of Boston landmarks.  But, they all know about New York.  They all see the ball drop in Times Square on New Year’s Eve.  You see?  It doesn’t matter what New Yorker’s do, they are going to be targets.

 The second point is that the bomb fizzled.  Shahzad was a bumbling excuse for a terrorist.  The world has changed since September 11, 2001.  Bad guys like the members of al-Qaeda have been pounded and stretched their resources to the limits.  And, U.S. security is much, much better.

Some of the pundits have been saying that the sputtering bomb was discovered by civilians, and that a better trained terrorist could have done terrible things and we should be afraid for the next time.

The point is that our multi-layered approach makes sending someone with more experience or training much more difficult.  In 1993, the U.S. based wannabes had trouble constructing the bomb that eventually wound up in the World Trade Center.  An expert flew in from the Middle East, set the rookies on the right path and then left.  That can’t happen today.  The experienced professionals who haven’t been killed are on watch lists.  Al-Qaeda has to rely on people who are already here, and who are below the enforcement radar. 

And, for those who laugh at the ineffective bomb that Shahzad put together, I would challenge you to build a better one.  On the first try.  It ain’t as easy as it looks.  Before Timothy McVeigh built the 7,000 pound truck bomb used in Oklahoma City, he made many tests.  Shahzad appears not to have made any.  Test explosions attract attention.  Foreigners buying the ingredients can raise suspicions.  Today’s bomber wannabes have to move quick and maintain a low profile.  The system works.

Every week, if not every day, someone attempts a dry run for terrorist or criminal purposes to see what they can get through.  When I was on the job, we caught these attempts on a regular basis.  I remember particularly the time someone tried to smuggle detergent powder inside a hollowed-out picture frame.  A hazardous materials unit took it away for testing.  A whole lot of effort for a false alarm—except that it probably told the baddies that they couldn’t hide the real thing inside a picture frame and sent them back to the drawing board.

 One more note.  Customs and Border Protection officers were the ones who stopped the plane that Shahzad was using for his escape and captured him.  His now famous remark, (“I was expecting you.  Are you NYPD or FBI?”)  usually stands alone.  The answer to his question was that the officers who captured him were CBP. Of course the FBI took the credit.  They always do.

Straddling the Border

The United States has a responsibility for what is going on in Mexico and on the border with Arizona.  The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is largely responsible for the massive poverty and unemployment on the other side of our borders.  U.S. companies set up factories in border towns—at the cost of jobs in this country—only to shift those factories and jobs to China and other places where people work for even less.  Our ethanol requirements for vehicle fuel have driven up the price of corn which is an essential part of the Mexican diet.  The U.S. also provides a market for illegal drugs that established smuggling gangs out of the unemployed in the border cities.  Then, we failed to control the shipments of guns across the border to arm the gangs.  Then, the federal government made it very hard for smugglers and illegal immigrants to cross the border in Texas and California—the places of first choice--leaving Arizona as the next best choice. 

Having created a disaster that points at Arizona, we criticize the way that Arizona deals with it.

The criticism seems to have had an effect.  The original version of their infamous anti-immigration law seemed to endorse stopping people at random to ask for their citizenship papers.  The revised version says that when someone is stopped for a criminal offence, their citizenship will be checked as a matter of course.

 As long as the police do not start targetting Hispanics for every minor infraction, and if the citizenship question is asked of every arrestee,  I don’t see a problem.  The situation was ridiculous before, when a person could be arrested, tried, convicted, serve time and be released all without anyone checking whether the perpetrator was in the country legally.

 Meanwhile, we need to do what we can to make life below the border less harsh.  If people have fewer reasons to leave their homeland, then fewer of them will come here.

Drug trafficking is not just for criminals

A few years ago, when the capital of Kazakstan was Almaty—it was also when they were flirting with spelling the country’s name without the middle “h”—I went there to teach drug interdiction.  Some high ranking officials attended the opening ceremony along with someone from the U.S. Embassy.  When my turn to speak came, I made the standard introduction and then said that for some 40 years, the United States had engaged in a cold war with communism.  From the corner of my eye, I saw the embassy diplomat jump in his seat, afraid that I was going to say something that he was going to have to repair.  I continued, “But, during that time, more Americans were killed by illegal drugs than by the communists and that includes two shooting wars.”  Our diplomat relaxed.  I was hoping that the Kazakhstanis wouldn’t.

Do you remember when our Secretary of State led a high ranking delegation to Mexico City to promise them help with their war on drugs?  It was only a couple weeks ago, but I would bet most Americans have pushed it from their minds.  And, the bodies keep falling.

 In addition to overdoses and drug-related murders—which are the statistics I used for my statement in Almaty, there are also the deaths caused by drug-financed terrorism.  And, the war in Afghanistan.

 There is a cultural prejudice against organized crime in the intellectual circles that study foreign affairs, and a prejudice against the political influence of drug trafficking. 

 If you recall, for many years even J. Edgar Hoover refused to let his FBI agents investigate either.  His stated reason was that no agent had ever been found to be corrupted by bank robbers or Nazi spies and he wanted to keep their record spotless.  We know now that Hoover also had social connections with some Mafia figures through his wagering on horse races.  Or so it’s been reported.  Regardless of Hoover’s involvement, drug-financed corruption has had an effect on American politics.

 There was an article about Boris Yeltsin a few years ago in the Wilson Quarterly, a scholarly journal for people with short attention spans.  The writer was trying to praise Yeltsin, but called some of the Russian President’s decisions inexplicable.  I wrote in that if one looked at Yeltsin as making decisions to benefit the forces of corruption, then all of his major decisions were perfect.

 What’s going on in Chechnya and Dagestan in Russia is not merely a religious or even political disagreement.  There is an oil pipeline that will put money in somebody’s pockets.  There is also a very lucrative drug trafficking route that means payoffs for officials all along the way.

One of the mental roadblocks I ran into in my training days was when I warned officials about a population of addicts.  The general attitude was that “we don’t use drugs, they only transit our country.”  That comment was usually in the same conversation with “We’re a poor country, we need the money.”

 I tried to point out that traffickers have drugs and want money.  They quickly figure out that it is cheaper to pay off their helpers with relatively cheap drugs instead of the dearly held dollars.  Also, the helpers—who include government officials—are not blind to the profits that the traffickers make.  They want those profits, too.  Hence the spread of addiction.  Drugs are now third only to alcohol and HIV in the cause of preventable deaths in Russia.  Drug use is also a factor in many of the HIV cases.

 In my classes, I used to ask the participants to think about all of the commodities in illicit trafficking and tell me which was the most dangerous.  Usually, I would get heroin or cocaine as an answer.  The correct answer was money.  Look at Mexico, or our inner cities, or the battlefields across Africa or in Afghanistan.  Wherever drugs are trafficked, there is violence and instability.

Anyone who thinks that legalizing drugs will cause a rush on universities by former criminals looking for a career change proves that a person need not be high to be delusional.  With drugs, we have a common thread with which to reel in the bad guys, like sticky pest traps—if we ever decide to devote the attention and resources to do it.

 Some might ask what the governments of the world have been doing all these years?  Isn’t that proof of how impossible the task is?  The truth is that they have spent a lot of money in uncoordinated, ineffective efforts.  Money that has been relegated to law enforcement and/or health agencies when the effort needs to involve all agencies.

 We have got to stop thinking in terms of good nations and bad, or that trafficking money can be used for political purposes.  Our biggest threat is criminal anarchy and the collapse of nations.  It’s already on our doorstep.

Detecting racism

Are attacks on the president’s health care proposal racist?  Of course, but that is not the whole story.  There are those who are legitimately concerned about features of the plan.  The way to tell the difference between the racists and those who are issue-driven is to measure the volume, the inflammatory words they use and whether they disseminate disinformation.

 For example, would Joe Wilson have heckled Bill Clinton addressing a joint session of Congress?  God—and everybody else--knows that Clinton was vilified by Republicans at a level beyond anything before seen in the modern era, but no-one shouted back at him when he addressed Congress.  Race may not have motivated Wilson’s opposition to health care reform, but it gave him that extra little push when Obama was speaking.

 Similarly, would Kanye West have taken the microphone away from Rihanna or Janet Jackson?  Of course not, but a white country singer did not deserve the same respect.  Racism is all around, and does not even have to be in the front of our minds. 

 I learned about the subtleties of discrimination in high school.  Ours was a consolidated school that drew students from three towns.  It was also all white until the school accepted a couple black students in my senior year.  My government class was all white.  This was the situation when my teacher asked me to select students from the class for parts in a role-playing exercise.  I studied the class roster and very carefully picked those individuals that I thought would do the best jobs.  When I handed in the list, my teacher glanced at it and asked me if I was aware that all of the people I had selected were from my town.  I had not realized that.  Where they were from had even entered my mind.  There had been no discrimination in my heart, but by picking those whose virtues I knew best, I had in fact discriminated.  So, I made up a new list, and was gratified at how good the people were whom I had inadvertently slighted before.  The moral is that discrimination is proven by the results of an action, not by the stated intent.

Racism has become a very nasty charge.  For instance, I continue to be confused by those who deny the holocaust.  Denial is not only an offence to those who perished, but also to those who worked so hard for their extermination.  I would think that those who hate the Jews, the Gypsies and the assorted other targets of the holocaust would claim that the millions who were murdered was a good start, a splendid effort that was stopped too soon.  But, look, the anti-Semites who speak out do not praise the Nazis for their efforts, they claim that the Third Reich is misunderstood and blamed for things that did not occur.  That is how ugly the charge has become, that even those who promote and plot the murder of other races and ethnicities today deny the achievements of the most successful pogromists of all time.

 The people who do not want illegal immigrants to be benefited by the health care bill aren’t really worried  about the expense.  Down deep, they do not want non-English-speaking, dark-skinned people to receive health care at all.  Shut them out of our hospitals and let them die on the sidewalks, or go back where they came from and starve there.  Even the most vocal of the health care opponents will deny that that is their intent, but it is the effect they seek.

 Not all conservatives are racist.  Neither are all liberals.  Not all whites and not all blacks.  But, look at the downstream effects of what people promote.  As I learned in art school, your work is what you intend it to be, and it must stand on its own without explanation or excuse.

A foreign affairs agenda for the new administration

At the top of the Obama’s foreign affairs to-do list should be 1) the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; 2) Israel and the Palestinians; 3) the rise of totalitarianism in Russia; 4) corruption and the Mexican drug wars. 

From Iraq to a hard place 

Iraq is or should be winding down. The Iraqi military is attaining adequacy. I don’t have a great deal of faith in the Baghdad government’s prospects for long term survival, but they may hold it together long enough for us to draw down our forces. 

Afghanistan, on the other hand, has defeated the best armies in the world, from Alexander the Great, to the British at the height of their powers, to the Soviet Union. It is true that we are there in support of the Karzai government, but there are Afghans (especially the Taliban), who do not recognize that regime. To date, the technology of modern warfare has not tipped the scales in our favor. I was impressed by a program that teamed a U.S. Marine Corps officer with a State Department official to provide cows to widows in Fallujah [NPR January 4, 2009]. Programs like that in Afghanistan, properly funded, may accomplish something that guns and bombs cannot. There are some projects there already, such as a soap factory in Kandahar that buys materials from local farmers, but more of these need visible military partners to improve the image of our forces. We also need to stop bombing weddings, etc. 

Another initiative would be to buy up opium from farmers and pay more than the Taliban-linked traffickers do. This would choke off a major source of Taliban and al-Qaeda income as well as give the Afghan farmers a more favorable view of the U.S. Once we have achieved our objectives in Afghanistan, we could offer alternatives to the farmers and wean them away from opium poppies. Meanwhile, we will have reduced the amount of heroin in the world more than any destination-country enforcement has done. 

Lessons from the ghetto 

Meanwhile, we have to tell the Israelis that they are behaving like Nazis. Of course, since they equate Nazism with extermination camps, they would object. However, they have seized property from Palestinians with no compensation, relegated Palestinians to perptual limbo in refugee camps, denied them the right of free travel and commerce, and periodically raided and terrorized Palestinians in their homes actions similar to what were once called “pogroms.” The totality resembles Nazi Germany in the years before their “final solution” was initiated. 

On CNN a week or so ago, an anchorperson asked a Palestinian spokeswoman for her take on the recent Gaza incursion. Among her charges was one that I regard as key. The Israelis did not support moderate Palestinians by allowing them to achieve anything in negotiations, thereby pushing Palestinian public opinion in favor of radicals like Hamas. When the anchorperson turned to an Israeli diplomat for his response, he said that Israel allowed protests over the incursion which made them a more moral regime than Hamas. He did not address the underlying problem of denying concessions in peaceful negotiations. 

The Israeli government has never seriously addressed the return of Palestinians to their ancestral homes or compensation to them for their property as Germany finally did for the Jews who were expelled by the Nazis. Although the settlements in Gaza were dismantled—unilaterally, not in response to negotiations—the settlements in the West Bank have increased. I propose that Israel simply tell the West Bank settlers that Israel is withdrawing all support in two weeks. The settlers can remain by pledging allegiance to the Palestinian state or they can come back to Israel. Of course Israel is going to do no such thing, because the ultimate goal is to insert so many settlers into the West Bank that becomes a de facto Israeli province. Since the state of Israel is the premiere example of successful illegal immigration, hard line planners see the ultimate ejection of Palestinians as do-able. 

Meanwhile, if negotiation and moderate Palestinians are able to show results, then Hamas and other extremists will lose support, and ultimately be reduced to a nuisance status. Indeed the rise of a moderate Palestinian government supported by free trade will transform the extremists into a Palestinian police problem. 

Neo-Stalinism 

Did you see where Russian television held a poll to name the most popular historic figures? Josef Stalin came in third. That was after they redrew the rules and urged voters to consider literary and scientific luminaries. Did you happen to note in December that the Dumas passed new legislation that makes any demonstration against the government treason? Passing any information of any sort to any non-governmental orgainzation that has offices outside of Russia is also treason. Charges of treason no longer qualify for a jury trial either. Add to that the use of gas supplies to bludgeon Russia’s neighbors, plus the invasion of Georgia in order to seize the enclaves of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and the rise of a new totalitarianism is hard to escape. 

We need to help both Western and Eastern Europe find alternatives to Russian gas, or we will be sucked into a greater confrontation in the near future. 

Mexican refugees 

During 2008, the casualties of the drug wars in Mexico exceeded U. S. casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. The cities just below our border have the highest murder rates in the world. The Mexican government has not demonstrated an ability to control the criminality and corruption. If the U.S. does not provide real help, we will see a flood of refugees on top of the current illegal immigration flow. And we will be stuck with people who legitimately fear for their lives if they are returned home. 

Some people say that we should slam the door in the faces of Mexican refugees and insist that they manage their own affairs. The United States has not taken that position with any other nation on earth and we cannot do it with one of our two nearest neighbors. Besides that, the violence has already spilled over into cities on this side of the border. 

One move that could improve the situation would be to examine all exports and visitors to Mexico with the intensity that we examine imports and incoming visitors. Why? Where do you think Mexican gangs get their guns? Most are purchased here and then smuggled into Mexico. The Mexican government can’t control the influx of illegal weapons, and it is in our best interests to see it controlled. 

Let’s see how the new administration deals with these four hot points. The ones that Obama misses are sure to come round and bite him on the ass.

The devil at the border

Most people read or view the occasional report regarding illegal crossings of our southern border and think that people are entering the U.S. by tunnel or across the desert or by boat or in the backs of truck, etc. In reality is by tunnel and across the desert and by boat and in trucks and on and on. And, it’s not once in awhile, it is every day and every night.

Bloomberg.com reports today on the consequences of a newly expanded program called “Operation Streamline.” The idea was to process detained illegal aliens through the courts instead of direct return to their countries of origin—mainly Mexico. By arresting the aliens and putting them in jail, they plan’s designers intended to create a deterent that would reduce the flow.

They tried it out near Del Rio, Texas in 2005 and it was so successful that it was expanded to Tuscon and is projected to be rolled out all along the 1,952 mile long border. But like all plans, the devil is in the details—and the budget.

Border Patrol is rounding up the illegal aliens and turning them over to the U.S. Marshals. The 600 Marshals stationed along the southern border are processing 6,000 aliens a month. They are spending so much time with these new chores that their traditional jobs of tracking down fugitives, and sex offenders who fail to register, etc. are suffering. The courts are so jammed that they are trying illegal aliens en masse, with groups listening to the proceedings over headphones—a process that may violate the Constitution. The sentences can range from time served to 180 days based on whether this is the first or subsequent time the individual was caught. Now, if you do the math, 180 days is almost six months. With up to 6,000 arriving every month and occupying cell space, you can see that finding jail space has become even more crucial than finding courtroom space.

President Bush has asked for $100 million more to help with this logjam, but is offering only 100 new Marshal positions when that agency said they needed 220. Border Patrol is authorized to add 5,000 more positions, but the article did not mention the number of agents who leave that agency every year. Their high turnover significantly reduces the overall increase in personnel.

Optimists are saying that the reductions shown in test areas are proof that the pressure will subside, once the program is fully deployed. These people are forgetting our long experience that anytime there is a crackdown in one area, that the traffickers move somewhere else. That is the success they see.

Even in the unlikely event that the program received adequate funding, and were deployed everywhere from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico, nobody is discussing what happens next. Corrupt Mexican military officials are already escorting drug shipments into the U.S. Would sealing the border result in a revolution in Mexico? With the resulting refugees pouring across into Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico? Would we have border war with armed incursions? Will we have to militarize the border? Will cease to be safe for Americans to venture into Mexico?

Nobody comes here because they want to change their nationality. People do not want our freedom, they want jobs. They want the ability to provide the basic material requirements for their families and they don’t have that possibility at home. Now, I don’t advocate opening the borders. But, the welfare of Mexicans in Mexico is our business—it should be our concern.

The most dangerous people are those with nothing to lose.

A 12-step immigration plan

Illegal immigration is a difficult subject. I have offered various opinions, but have not yet suggested a real solution. One reason is that there may be any, however that has never stopped me before.

Any solution must be multi-faceted. Any singular attempt will ultimately fail.

1) The State and Commerce Departments must encourage economic development in this hemisphere beyond anything already tried. Restrictive rules and subsidies that prevent Mexico, Central American and Caribbean products from competing on an equal footing with U.S. products must be eliminated (think sugar, macadamia and other nuts, etc.)

2) The first rule of U.S. foreign policy must be “The U.S. opposes and will not support any regime that creates refugees.”

3) The U.S. must oppose corruption in the Americas to the extent that sanctions are imposed on countries that do not vigorously work to shut it down.

4) The guest worker program must be made more reflective of the needs of U.S. businesses. How much better is it to allow someone to work here legally for 6-9 months and return to his family knowing that he can come back the following year, than to have him enter the U.S. afraid to go home because he may not be able to come back? An expanded guest worker program would also shut down the criminal coyotes that exploit illegal border crossing.

5) The current guest worker program restricts an employee to working only for the company that sponsored him. Sponsorship needs to be transferable without leaving the country. This change prevents companies from exploiting guest workers and from paying them less than they pay U.S. workers, because workers can offer their services to the highest bidder.

6) A significant number of undocumented workers are visa overstays, people who entered the U.S. legally, but did not return home. All legal visitors should be tracked. When I visited other countries, I usually had to leave my passport at the hotel desk when I checked in so the hotel could notify their passport control people. If UPS can track their millions of packages, the government can track foreign visitors.

6) There needs to be a significant increase in Customs and Border Protection personnel, an organization that includes Border Patrol. The number of officers and agents, together with facilities and equipment, is simply not adequate to the task.

7) The process of applying for residency and for citizenship needs to be overhauled and simplified. Many applicants simply throw up their hands and give up. There are too many forms, too many steps, and too many fees (all of which are non-refundable). Again, there needs to be a significant personnel increase. To weed out criminals and terrorists, there should be less bureaucracy and more face-to-face contact, including home visits with applicants.

8) All criminal defendants, including those for misdemeanors and traffic violations, should have their citizenship verified. Witnesses and victims should not be checked. If their testimony is significant against dangerous criminals, the possibility should exist for prosecutors to reward non-criminal witnesses with residency. Individuals convicted of criminal offenses will serve their sentences and then be deported.

9) Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents will still conduct sweeps to enforce laws against hiring illegal immigrants. However, a climate of fear in immigrant communities will only lead to more dangerous criminal activity.

10) There needs to be a program to legitimize people who are already here. This should not be easy or quick, but it should be straightforward and simple. Applicants must have clean criminal records, speak English and be employed. All eligibility periods will be double what they are for legal immigrants--the clock starts with the application and does not include the time already here. Estimated back taxes must be paid. Those caught without having applied for this plan are subject to deportation. People who return to their countries voluntarily will be able to apply for proper immigration visas. This is not amnesty. It is true that any program that permits illegal immigrants to stay will encourage others to come. However, it is also true that the absence of such a program does not provide a disincentive.

11) Local communities should not have to bear the costs of paying for the enforcement of federal laws or of services to undocumented residents who do not pay taxes. However, there are larger issues to consider. Individuals who are required to have driver training are more likely to have accidents. Individuals who cannot pay for medical treatment are more likely to spread unreported contagious diseases. Individuals who lack education are more likely to support themselves with criminal activity. All of these things impact on the rest of us. There are times when one must provide services to others in order to protect oneself.

12) As the dollar sinks ever lower against other currencies, perhaps those seeking a better way of life might prefer Europe, Canada or the Far East. We could help arrange passage.

Wishful thinking and unintended consequences

The United States is not unique in its ability to write ineffective laws to paper over problems instead of addressing them.

Prostitution is one example. Outside of Nevada, it is illegal in the U.S. The greater population is proud of that prohibition and goes to bed every night without regret. However, the trade exists everywhere. HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases are at epidemic proportions. Does prostitution play a role in the upsurge of these diseases? We don’t know because it is illegal and not studied. Women and girls are abused and trafficked worldwide in criminal networks as profitable as the drug networks. Asian, Latin and European women wind up here in bondage, or “peonage” to use the legal term, or “slavery” to use a less PC term. American young women are also coerced into servitude. These abuses occur because illegal commerce is, by definition, unregulated. The larger society is so afraid of condoning voluntary prostitution by the few women who see an advantage in the practice that they permit a far more brutal trade to occur in the shadows. What are glass ceilings when compared to beatings, imprisonment, rape and murder?

Another example is illegal immigration. Just this morning on NPR, I heard an interview with a nursery grower who sells young fruit trees to fruit growers in California. His business is down 50% from last year. He says that his customers have been unable to get the workers they need to pick the fruit, and raise the young trees, so they are cutting back. As the fruit and nut growers lose business, the rest of us pay higher prices for a reduced quantity of available produce. As the nursery grower said, reducing illegal immigration doesn’t work unless there are other programs in place to provide agricultural workers.

He didn’t mention the option of simply replacing U.S.-grown products with foreign grown fruits and vegetables. That is a possibility if we disregard the fact that agricultural goods are the largest sector of U.S. exports. Also, goods produced abroad cannot be controlled for pesticides or even terrorist tampering. The government simply does not have enough inspectors and laboratories to regulate what is imported today.

The notion that terroists may be hiding in every truckload of undocumented migrant workers is absurd. The possibility does exist. The possibility also exists that terrorists might arrive on commercial airlines with properly obtained visas. Because unless a traveler has been apprehended before, he is unlikely to be on anybody’s watch list. Drug traffickers learned long ago to move their products with people who had no records with the police. I’m sure that those who hate the United States have no difficulty finding recruits these days.

There is also the strange idea that a driver’s license is a privilege. Nonsense. It is how the government ensures that drivers have some basic knowledge of the traffic laws and can operate a vehicle. In addition, it provides identification in the event of an accident or traffic violation. The notion that people will not drive or will return to their home countries because they can’t get a driver’s license is a fantasy. If security issues are a concern, licenses can always be issued with a big “NRA” in the background to indicate Non-Resident Alien. There are more than 40,000 people killed in traffic accidents every year in this country. Concern over that kind of carnage should outweigh every other consideration.

Check out
http://illegal.globalincidentmap.com/home.php
And as you look at the crimes committed by illegal immigrants across the country ask yourself which are due to the laws that make undocumented immigrants into pariahs. We have identity theft and fraud because illegal immigrants cannot obtain legitimate work and identity credentials. There are sexual assaults because young men who come to work here have left their women behind and are not welcomed by the women around them. We have traffic accidents because illegal immigrants are not required to learn to drive on U.S. roads. They move into vacant houses because it is difficult for illegal immigrants to find housing. Illegal immigrants are afraid to report crimes, so crime flourishes in their neighborhoods until it spills over. They avoid medical treatment until their conditions are severe, which makes illegal immigrants perfect vectors for spreading disease.

For those who say that the solution is to evict all of the illegals from the United States, I ask if they expect to do that job as well as they’ve done in banning prostitution.

Treat people like people and control rather than ban. You won’t get the same smug feeling, but it’s smarter, less expensive, and more effective.

Bush Begins Troop Withdrawal

Did you see the news? National Guard troops are going home at last. Unfortunately, its from Arizona, not Iraq.

According to the Washington Times of August 9, the number of Guard personnel who were backing up the Border Patrol in California, Arizona, and New Mexico is going to be cut in half, from 6,000 to 3,000. The stated reason is that increased Border Patrol recruiting has reduced the need for National Guard. In other words, as the President mighy say, the Border Patrol is standing up so the Guard can stand down. Obviously, its Mission Accomplished time and the borders are secure.

Meanwhile, I hate to rain on a happy ending, but I predict these weary Guradsmen are going to be redeployed to Iraq in the near future.