Illegal Immigrants - Article Example

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS Illegal immigration has been going on for a long time in the United s. The majority of illegal immigrants enter the U.S through its borders with Canada and Mexico. Their favorite route chosen is along the 2,000 mile {3,200 km} U.S.-Mexican border near Yuma {Arizona}, Del Rio {Texas} and Eagle Pass {Texas} (McKinley, 2007). It is estimated that 1.6 million illegal immigrants enter via Arizona alone each year (Buchanan, 2007). The second largest group of illegal immigrants enters legally and then overstay in the country. The third group comprises ship jumpers – crew of ships that dock at U.S ports who stay on in the country after their ships depart (Malkin, 2002). California has traditionally attracted about 50% of illegal immigrants due to its incentives to such people (Sheehy, 2007), but recently trends show preference for newer destinations {Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee}(Businessweek.com, 2005)}. About 60% of all illegal immigrants are Mexican (Buchanan, 2007). There have been many arguments for and against illegal immigration. While the arguments in favor are equally balanced by the first set of arguments against the practice, the addition of three other sets of arguments to the latter – comprising refutation of the pro-stance arguments, hard statistics, and negative stance of government/corporations and real danger of terrorism - heavily weigh in favor of the anti-illegal immigration side, thereby projecting it as the only logical and safe policy to be followed by the U.S. The first argument in favor of illegal immigrants is that allowing it is a magnanimous and humanitarian thing to do. American strength lies in its diversity; the more who come, the stronger and better the country becomes (Buchanan, 2007). Illegal immigrants who come from poor backgrounds are able to earn money and send it home to support their impoverished dependants there (Masters, 2008). Moreover, as President Bush went on record to state: “Illegal immigrants do jobs Americans won’t do.” By working at or near the minimum wage, illegal immigrants benefit the country by freeing Americans for more productive labor (Buchanan, 2007). Secondly, U.S. businesses benefit enormously. Illegal immigrants comprise cheap labor, the businesses do not have to pay labor related taxes or healthcare, and the businesses do not need to comply with Occupational Safety & Health Administration {OSHA} regulations (Masters, 2008). The massive amount saved on labor serves to make the products or services of the businesses very competitive, which benefits the American people in the form of lower prices and wider choice. In case the business is export-oriented, this factor gives it a definite edge over competitors who are constrained by heavy labor expenses in securing international contracts. Thirdly, U.S. citizens get benefits of cheap menial labor (Masters, 2008). The average working couple in the U.S is in need of domestic help such as maids, babysitters and gardeners. In the present environment, they have to approach labor supplying agencies which are not widely available, or the type of labor needed is not available with them, the labor turnover is rapid as many are arrogant and demand unreasonable terms and conditions, and the agency rates are very expensive. By employing illegal immigrants for such menial labor posts, the average American people benefit in the form of lower wages, easier availability and more reliability. In the first set of anti-illegal immigration contentions, illegal immigration is blamed for increasing the crime rate in the country. Illegal immigrant gangs terrorize neighborhoods and are responsible for nearly all the murders in the area (Sheehy, 2007). Citizens living near highly suspect border crossings {especially ranchers} hardly get sleep at nights as illegal immigration takes place mostly under cover of darkness, and the ranchers are in danger of being victimized in the form of stolen vehicles or poisoned dogs (Buchanan, 2007). Secondly, the U.S. government and government-funded organizations lose heavily due to it. The most important loss to the government is the loss of taxes. Government-funded schools suffer loss of money by teaching children of illegal immigrants. Hospitals operating on Government aid suffer loss of money by treating illegal immigrants and their families free of charge (Masters, 2008). The Police Department, National Guard, Justice Department and Border Patrol have to spend more money to try and control illegal immigration. U.S. Anti-Terrorism personnel have to keep high vigilance to discover and act swiftly to smash terror plots before they can be put into operation {for example, they exposed a plot to blow up Brooklyn Bridge (Morris & McGann, 2007)}. Thirdly, the livelihood, safety and security of U.S. citizens are compromised. Middle and lower class citizens earning less than $ 75,000 annually are the ones impacted by illegal immigrant replacement (Buchanan, 2007). The huge influx of illegal immigrants also causes home prices to spiral, creates massive sprawl and congestion, and strains precious natural resources (Sheehy, 2007). Illegal immigrants who originate from rural villages, towns and cities of some the poorest nations in the world, frequently referred to as ‘an assembly line of diseases,’ bring in diseases such as tuberculosis (Buchanan, 2007). In the second set of anti-illegal immigration contentions, the pro-illegal immigration arguments are all refutable. The first is refutable because of four reasons. Firstly, the immigrants have to pay large amounts to human traffickers to be smuggled into the U.S., frequently taking loans to do so. Even if they do manage to find jobs and send money back home, it will take a very long time to repay loans {and its allied heavy interest} that ultimately negates the perceived additional monetary advantage of sending money home from the U.S. Secondly, illegal immigrants do not lead normal, enjoyable lives in the U.S. They have a very tough time providing for their children {it is estimated the total number of children of illegal immigrants [called ‘anchor babies’] born during the last 5 years alone was 1,976,316 (Immigrationcounters.com, 2008)}. They are the targets of an inordinately large number of crimes because the perpetrating criminals are well aware their victims will not report their crime to the police for fear of being apprehended and deported (U.S Department of Labor, 2008). Illegal immigrants also live in a state of constant fear because they never know when they may be apprehended by U.S. authorities and deported back home in which case they will not only go back with shame but also face the daunting task of repaying the heavy loans they took to be smuggled into the U.S.; in addition, the immigrant will have to undergo a jail term for flaunting immigration laws. Thirdly, the U.S strategists in Washington are not supporting illegal immigration on magnanimous and humanitarian grounds but because they are either consumed by the desire to court ethnic blocks (Malkin, 2002), or are guilty of pandering to the powerful business lobby for a never-ending stream of cheap labor (Sheehy, 2007). Lastly, far from allowing illegal immigrants to ‘free’ Americans for ‘more productive jobs,’ government policy is compromising the lifestyle of its people. As one U.S citizen plaintively complained: “I know illegal immigrants want a better life, but what the hell about me?” (Sheehy, 2007). In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, both Jesse Jackson and Mayor Ray Nagin protested vehemently when they saw illegal immigrants taking up rebuilding jobs in New Orleans from black people who lived there (Buchanan, 2007). The second pro-illegal immigration argument is refutable on the grounds that the basic foundation is illegal. Immigration laws are clear; businesses that recruit illegal immigrants break U.S law and are liable for sanctions (Buchanan, 2007). Businesses must decide whether they want to violate U.S laws by hiring illegal immigrants, or do what is best for the country and not hire them – they have chosen the former option (Sheehy, 2007). Such businesses cheat on their competitors by colluding in mass criminality (Buchanan, 2007). These businesses, especially in labor-intensive industries, illegally replace Americans with illegal immigrants who – due to their illegal status and fear of deportation – accept low wages and deplorable working conditions (Sheehy, 2007). Such businesses are anti-American because they do not alleviate the country’s employment {of citizens} problem and they cheat the government of much-needed taxes for development and protection of the country. They are rogue organizations that regularly sacrifice the American quality of life and endanger the country by recruiting illegal immigrants for their personal gain (Sheehy, 2007). The third pro-illegal immigration argument is refutable because these citizens are not only helping an illegal activity to continue in the country, but they are also compromising the lives and safety of themselves and their families {there have been several instances of robberies committed by menial staff, as well as cases where young children are misled and taught alien customs practices by mostly illiterate maids}. In the third set of anti-illegal immigration contentions, hard statistics indicate while in 1986 there were only 3 million illegal immigrants (Sheehy, 2007), as on May 3, 2008, there were 21,505,547, there were 363,999 illegal immigrants incarcerated in U.S prisons, and the number of illegal immigrant fugitives stood at 677,694 (Immigration counters.com, 2008). There are 40,000 illegal immigrant prisoners in California alone (Sheehy, 2007). In March 2008, the unemployment rate in the country stood at 5.1% or 7.8 million individuals, an increase of 0.7 percentage point and 1.1 million over corresponding figures in March 2007. Also in March 2008, 300,000 individuals lost their jobs, and the total number of unemployed due to lost jobs stood at 4.2 million. This marked an increase of 914,000 over corresponding figures in March 2007. The total unemployment rate dropped slightly to be 4.97% or 7.6 million in April 2008 (U.S Department of Labor, 2008). Illegal immigrants from Mexico, Vietnam and the Philippines account for 66% of all tuberculosis cases in the U.S (Buchanan, 2007). During the last 11 years, the cost of providing social services to illegal immigrants was $ 397,455,682,798, and the number of children of illegal immigrants in U.S. Public Schools 4,342,638 (Immigrationcounters.com, 2008) {Arizona’s taxpayers alone are shelling out $ 1.3 billion each year for education, medical care and incarceration of illegal immigrants and their families (Sheehy, 2007)}. During the last 7 years the U.S. authorities spent $ 1,411,074,125 on incarceration of illegal immigrants, and the total number of skilled jobs taken up by illegal immigrants was 10,483,567. It is estimated that money sent out of the country by illegal immigrants since 2006 was $ 29,439,675,470 (Immigrationcounters.com, 2008). In the fourth set of anti-illegal immigration contentions, the U.S government’s attitude and policies regarding illegal immigrants have been very lenient. While illegal immigrants enter the country with no basic documents like Social Security numbers, the U.S allows their consulates to provide them Matricular Consular cards freely. The Pew Hispanic Center reports that 50% of such card applicants are illegal immigrants. Many financial organizations are accepting such cards, thereby allowing illegal immigrants crucially important facilities like opening bank accounts, having credit cards and getting vehicle purchase loans. The illegal immigrants have even been bold enough to use the cards to approach the Internal Revenue Service {IRS} for obtaining individual tax identification numbers {ITINS} ostensibly to ‘honestly’ pay taxes like other American citizens, but actually to pave the way to obtain house mortgages (Businessweek.com, 2005). What started off as a ‘one-time-only’ concession by the government in 1986 has blossomed into 7 amnesty programs till now (Sheehy, 2007). Amnesty may win the GOP editorial encomiums (Buchanan, 2007), but by granting such amnesties the authorities are not only absorbing and absolving millions of lawbreakers with no questions asked, but the amnesties are not doing what they are intended to do {by 1997, each of the 2.7 million illegal immigrants who had been granted amnesty had been replaced by a new illegal immigrant (Malkin, 2002)}. Too exacerbate matters, if a new amnesty is not seen as coming through quick enough to suit their fastidious tastes, demonstrations are held by illegal immigrants to prompt the government to do so {such as the huge demonstration in May 2006 all over the nation, the largest being in Los Angeles} (Buchanan, 2007). Another culprit is the government’s ‘guest worker’ program that is another version of amnesty, this time both for illegal immigrants as well as for the businesses that recruit them (Buchanan, 2007). Secondly, Corporate America has been increasingly craving for business from illegal immigrants. Noting that 84% of them are in the 18 to 44 age group {identified as prime spending years}, corporate giants like Kraft Foods Inc. {KFT} are enticing customers by hosting sweepstakes in Hispanic neighborhoods; their logic being, as stated by Kraft’s marketing director Robert Simpson: “We need to fish where the fish are.” Financial organizations are soliciting savings from illegal immigrant Matricular card holders; the reason being, as stated by Wells Fargo branch manager Steven Contreraz: “To bring us all the money that has been under the mattress” (Businessweek.com, 2005). Thirdly, the present high tolerance for illegal immigration in the U.S is being perceived as an open invitation for terrorists who do not want to be recognized at legal points of entry for obvious reasons, and who mingle with illegal immigrants to slip unobtrusively into the country. By doing so, they easily evade the heavily trained, well equipped and well organized criminal detection system in place in all the country’s legal entry points, and are able to link up with their mates-in-crime already well ensconced in various cities {such as 9/11 terrorists Mohamed Ata, Hani Hanjour, Nawaf Al Hamzi and Satam Al Suqami who had entered the country legally but overstayed their visas, thus becoming illegal immigrants (Malkin, 2002)} and plan terror and mayhem within the country. James Edwards of the Hudson Institute correctly observed: “Legal and illegal immigration are two sides of the same coin” (Buchanan, 2007). The significance of this aspect is evident when {in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks}, Attorney General John Ashcroft was forced to adopt a ‘use a criminal to catch a criminal’ strategy by offering U.S citizenship to any person {especially illegal immigrants} who came forward with information that could assist in nabbing the perpetrators of the worst attack the country had ever experienced (Malkin, 2002). In conclusion, while our esteemed politicians are using the illegal immigration factor to enhance their election chances {the Republicans are heavily in favor of eradicating illegal immigration [Republican Presidential candidate Senator John McCain promised denial of social welfare benefits to illegal immigrants, enhancement of border security control and stronger enforcement of the law on companies that chronically hire illegal immigrants (Buchanan, 2007)] while the Democrats are taking the opposite, more ‘humanitarian’ view} (Masters, 2008), U.S citizens are becoming increasingly fed up with the illegal immigration problem. Their joint opinion is well voiced in the words of U.S citizen Joe Guzzardi: “Virtually every aspect of our lives is affected by illegal immigration” (Sheehy, 2007). The people’s representatives too are taking up their call. For example, dozens of congressional aspirants in California are sending a message to Washington that voters are becoming increasingly fed up with illegal immigration (Sheehy, 2007), while. In almost all opinion polls, majorities of Americans say they want to stop illegal immigration even if it means troops on the Rio Grande and a barrier fence from Brownsville to San Diego (Buchanan, 2007). Many Americans yearn for the coming of someone like President ‘Ike’ Eisenhower, who in 1954, ordered that all illegal immigrants be deported from the U.S in the infamous ‘Operation Wetback’ (Buchanan, 2007). As it stands now, the most low profile warning that one could give the nation is: “Wake up America. Time is running out” (Sheehy, 2007). References used: Buchanan, Patrick. “State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion & the Conquest of America.” USA: St. Martin’s Griffin. 2007. “Embracing Illegals.” Businessweek.com. 2005. 3 May 2008. “The Employment Situation: March 2008.” U.S. Department of Labor. 2008. 3 May 2008. Malkin, Michelle. “Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals and Other Foreign Menaces To Our Shores.” USA: Regnery Publishing. 2002. Masters, B. “The Pros & Cons of Illegal Immigrants.” National Public Radio. 2008. 3 May 2008. McKinley Jr. J.C. “Flow of Illegal Immigrants to U.S. Starts to Slow.” International Herald Tribune. 2008. 3 May 2008. Morris, D. & McGann E. “Outrage.” USA: Harper Collins. 2007. “Real Time Data.” Immigrationcounters.com. 2008. 3 May 2008. Sheehy, Daniel. “Fighting Immigration Anarchy.” USA: Rooftop Publishing. 2007. Read More