Larry Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 There's been some discussion about this supposed wave of children being smuggled into the country, in the "GOP Roadmap" thread. But it was occurring to me, at lunch, that there's a couple of ways to look at this issue. And that the Roadmap thread is more about politics, than about discussing people's opinions about actual issues. So I have decided that I'm going to exercise my vast and powerful influence over ES, to try to steer the Roadmap thread to a discussion of the impact this issue will have on politics. And to try to start a new thread to (hopefully) discuss the issue itself (rather than it's impact on the election). I think that the first thing that it would be nice to see if we can reach a consensus on, is whether this is a new phenomenon. Me, I'm going to proceed on the assumption that it is, because everybody seems to be painting it that way. (There is no chorus of people on one Party of the other trying to claim that it's not new.) So, in the absence of information to the contrary, I'm going to assume that yes, it's new. I think the nest item to discuss is whether it is, in fact, a problem. And, again, I think that, without contrary information, I'm going to proceed on the assumption that it is. Which then brings us to the question of what we should be doing with the situation. Seems to me that we're rather in the situation of the homeowner who opens his front door, and discovers that somebody has left a baby on his doorstep. Something which, as it turns out, has been done to me. Seems that, when I was born, one set of grandparents drove up to Minnesota (my family's from Oklahoma. But Dad was in the Air Force, stationed in Minnesota) for my birth. but the other set did not. So my parents decided not to call that set and inform them that they now had a Grandson. (Dad's brother had given them two grandkids, at the time. but both daughters.) Instead, they drove to Oklahoma (through a December blizzard which is part of family legend), to Dad's parents' home. They then set my basket on the front porch, rang the doorbell, and hid in the bushes. (According to the story, my Grandmother opened the door. Looked down. Saw the basket. Slammed the door on me. Parents then heard her voice, from inside the house "Laura Dell! (A friend who was visiting at the time). Somebody left a baby!" "Well, bring it in!") (Since that time, I have reflected on the possible significance of the fact that one of the first things I did, on this Earth, was to be used as a prop in a practical joke.) Although there are some differences. Unlike the homeowner, the US can't just call the government and hand the kids to them. They are the government.I will also state that I assume (again, completely without support) that these kids aren't exactly babies. I would assume that all of them are able to walk (across the border), and that a good chunk of them are in their teens. (Because I have trouble imagining a parent handing over a toddler to smugglers, and I have trouble imagining said smugglers accepting one.)(Although it does occur to me that said smugglers probably aren't the most ethical people in the world, either. Yes, I could see them taking a toddler (and the money), and then just killing the kid, under the theory of "the parents will never know if the kid made it, and we've already got paid." But even in that case, while said smugglers might be accepting toddlers, they wouldn't be showing up here.) Seems to me, you got two choices: 1) Let em stay here, and put em into the system. (There's a variant of this, in which we create a special system, to deal with the fact that their needs are different from a lot of orphans.) 2) Put em on a plane (or whatever), fly them to their home country, (assuming you can figure out which country it is), kick em out the front door of the Embassy, and say "you're on your own, kid". 3) Or, if their parents can be identified, kick them out the door of a van on their parent's front lawn. This might be an option for some of them. But I have no clue how many. I have to say that, to me, "put em into the system, find them a foster home and a school and things, and start raising em" certainly seems like the most humane approach. But I can certainly see some huge possible problems with it, too. One is the whole notion that you're encouraging people to do it more. (I also think there's a side problem that's kinda related to this one, too. You're allowing organized criminals to profit from the thing, too. I'd love to figure out a way to eliminate the criminal's profit from the whole thing. But I sure can't think of one.) And I can think of a second potential Big Problem with that notion, too. OK, let's suppose you basically forgive the kid for his "crime", and turn him into an American. What do you do when the kid's been here a while, and his parents show up at the door? They want their kid back. (And they want him back, in the US.) ---------- I certainly recognize that this is one of those situations where I don;t think it's possible to come up with something to do, that isn't going to be undesirable. But what's the least undesirable way to deal with the situation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/07/15/after-criticizing-white-house-over-unaccompanied-minors-martin-omalley-said-dont-send-them-to-maryland-site/?hpt=hp_t1 Have to bring them in. Only humane thing to do. Just don't let them in to my state! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 But what's the least undesirable way to deal with the situation? actively discourage the practice....same as any behavior control effort. proactive is better than reactive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 16, 2014 Author Share Posted July 16, 2014 I'd rather leave the political parties out of the discussion. But your article does raise some non-political things that should be discussed, too. One that leaps out at me, is the conditions under which the children are being kept. Now, I assume that they're being kept in conditions which are similar to those used for adult illegal immigrants. (Although I don't know. Aren't the vast majority of captured adults simply given a court date, and turned loose?) (For reasons which, I have to confess, I really don't get. But that's not for this thread.) What should be done about their conditions? Looks like what Obama is proposing is to give the government power to speed up the "ship them back home" solution. Admittedly, that's one way to improve their conditions, is to make them briefer. I'd really appreciate it if anybody has any clue as to how viable a solution the "ship them back home" option really is, though. For example, are they even able to identify these kids? actively discourage the practice....same as any behavior control effort. proactive is better than reactive How do you propose to do that? Before they enter the country, we have no jurisdiction, and no crime. Once they're here, they're here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 This thing with the kids really makes feel sick. It has brought out the absolute worst in some people. Using their health as a reason to fear them instead of eliciting sympathy? Really sickening. Laura Ingraham has been one of the most disgusting pundits on the issue. Glenn Beck has been one of the most refreshing, granted I have to pigeonhole him on this specific issue of the kids. I divide the situation into short term and long term. Short term we need to be good neighbors and take of the care of them while they go through the system. If a country like Jordan can handle a refugee camp with a 150,000 people there is no reason, beyond small minded, spiteful hatred, that we can't as well. I think that should be what is done, not letting them scatter throughout the country while they await a hearing that is perhaps a year or more away. Refugee camps are better than dying at the hands of gang thugs but not nice enough to entice people to come who really aren't refugees. Long term, we need immigration reform. I know whose fault it is that we haven't acted before now. They deny. Nothing happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 16, 2014 Author Share Posted July 16, 2014 Can anything be done to shorten the length of time before these hearings? Could we, say, hire 30 judges (and whatever support people they need. I assume social workers and who knows what else) and have them set up and running, in 90 days? Do we need more money? Legislation? And, does anybody know what the results of said hearings, usually are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 How do you propose to do that? Before they enter the country, we have no jurisdiction, and no crime. Once they're here, they're here. numerous ways, for one you work with Mexico to prevent illegal migration thru their territory the ones here can be dealt with, the numbers will only grow w/o addressing the causes though a number of others here http://www.cis.org/2008-trafficking-law-inapplicable-current-border-crisis Shipping them up north would be educational.....ya'll need some culture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 16, 2014 Author Share Posted July 16, 2014 numerous ways, for one you work with Mexico to prevent illegal migration thru their territory the ones here can be dealt with, the numbers will only grow w/o addressing the causes though a number of others here http://www.cis.org/2008-trafficking-law-inapplicable-current-border-crisis Shipping them up north would be educational.....ya'll need some culture Observing that the blog post you posted's, (from a lobbying group who's primary, stated, focus is to warn people about how immigration is a costly threat to our very nation), primary point is to try to claim that a law which was specifically designed to prevent deportation of unaccompanied minors, cannot possibly be blamed for the difficulty we're having, deporting unaccompanied minors. Not that it has an agenda to try to protect the Party that proposed the law, or anything. Their first attempt to make this claim is to try to claim that the law only applies to minors who do not have a parent or legal guardian, and then announcing that the "majority of children arriving on American soil" "have family in the US". (The article then later mentions that oh, by the way, the children arriving now are vastly different from the children arriving as recently as a year ago, and announces that gee, it sure would be nice if they had any clue as to how many of the current kids arrived with parents. (And not that the site, whose FAQ devotes probably half of their FAQs to trying to prove how it's Obama's fault, including such things as claiming that Obamacare gives preferential treatment to illegal immigrants, because it doesn't punish them for not buying subsidized insurance which they cannot legally purchase, has a political agenda or anything.) ---------- However, as to actual practical suggestions, I love the notion that working with the Mexican government to prevent smuggling across the border is 1) something we aren't doing, and 2) has a chance of working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Working with Mexico on the whole drug smuggling thing sure worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 16, 2014 Author Share Posted July 16, 2014 Working with Mexico on the whole drug smuggling thing sure worked out. It is a side topic, which I'd rather drop. But I have to confess that I find it really surprising that with the whole NSA and all that other things we have, that we can't manage to wipe out (or at least fatally cripple) organized gangs in an adjacent country. Gangs which to certainly assume we could classify as terrorist organizations. But like I said, it seems OT, to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 odd ya didn't mention the differentiation between smuggling and trafficking. too busy humping O's leg I guess Working with Mexico on the whole drug smuggling thing sure worked out. Some people work together better than others.....Hope for Change? Personally I say we throw the doors open and distribute them proportionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Congress passed a law that says each kid get's a trial. they've got 200,000 backlog for the trial judges or 3 - 4 years... So Obama asks for more judges to clear the backlog... what else can he do? Nothing.... It is crazy to realease the families and kids into the US pending trials... sure it's humane and all. but facts are that's 3-4 years where they are free to be here.. and then if they decline to show up for their immigration trial they get another year or so in the US while we track them down... and they aren't showing up to the trials on the order of 90%.... We need a different law as we are causeing the human hardhship at our boarders telling these folks they can stay.... Saying you can't stay it will just take us 5 years to deport you is the same message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Personally I say we throw the doors open and distribute them proportionally.Done & done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Some people work together better than others.....Hope for Change? Personally I say we throw the doors open and distribute them proportionally. I think Mexico has earned a bit of the stick with this one. Change is possible I think. Probably even say it's necessary. Not sure what to make of that second comment. By population or area? Should the ones with relatives go where they are? Seems cheaper than housing them in government facilities. The ones we have Cruces have been staying an average of 3 days before they go to relative or somewhere more permanent than the Church meeting hall. Thing is with a 12 million people strong underworld it's pretty easy for them to disappear if they want to. Really is going to take changes in the law and how we deal with illegals who are here as a whole. Hard to separate it all out. That people would express their displeasure with the government by protesting at the expense of kids fresh off the ordeal of their life getting some relief, is depressing to me. Make the politicians lives more unpleasant not some kids that have nothing to do with where they are and why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I think Mexico has earned a bit of the stick with this one. Change is possible I think. Probably even say it's necessary. Mexico's not the problem.... The law which allows these kids to stay here excludes Mexico. It applys to all the countries south of Mexico. .Mexican kids get sent back that day just like Mexican immigrants if we catch them which make up most of the illegals traditionally... No because central American kids were being subject to human trafficing the bill trying to combat that human trafficing with bipartisan support passed congress in 2008 which gave each kid, or a kid and his familiy an immigration trial with full representation to ensure they weren't being preyed upon by human trafficers.... Only there is such a huge backlog of cases that means a kid, or a family with kids effectively get's to stay here for 3-4 years on a promise they will appear at their immigraiton hearing.... The immigration courts have like a 200,000 case backlog... And most of the illegals who promise to show up to their hearings.. ultimately don't. So we effectively have an open boarder to children... resulting in 50,000 unaccompanied children crossing our boarders in the last few months... and another 230,000 family members with children who the law also applies too. All from Central America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Mexico's not the problem.... The law which allows these kids to stay here excludes Mexico. It applys to all the countries south of Mexico. .Mexican kids get sent back that day just like Mexican immigrants if we catch them which make up most of the illegals traditionally... No because central American kids were being subject to human trafficing the bill trying to combat that human trafficing with bipartisan support passed congress in 2008 which gave each kid, or a kid and his familiy an immigration trial with full representation to ensure they weren't being preyed upon by human trafficers.... Only there is such a huge backlog of cases that means a kid, or a family with kids effectively get's to stay here for 3-4 years on a promise they will appear at their immigraiton hearing.... The immigration courts have like a 200,000 case backlog... And most of the illegals who promise to show up to their hearings.. ultimately don't. So we effectively have an open boarder to children... resulting in 50,000 unaccompanied children crossing our boarders in the last few months... and another 230,000 family members with children who the law also applies too. All from Central America. You forget the fact that Mexico has a very short southern border with Guatemala that all these people are using to get here and a pretty strict set immigration regulations themselves that they are ignoring. They're letting them through or at the least not doing as much as they could to turn them around down there. I usually defend Mexico here, but they aren't innocent of this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 You forget the fact that Mexico has a very short southern border with Guatemala that all these people are using to get here and a pretty strict set immigration regulations themselves that they are ignoring. They're letting them through or at the least not doing as much as they could to turn them around down there. I usually defend Mexico here, but they aren't innocent of this one. I don't know the specifics about what's going on in Mexico's southern boarders right now.. But traditioanlly Mexico is extremely harsh on illegal immigrants... it's irronic.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I read that the Vatican thought we should let them stay...maybe we should send them to the Vatican instead of back to the land they fled. I'm sure the Vatican has more funds to care for them they we do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 http://cnn.com/video/?/video/world/2011/07/19/romo.mexico.border.cross.zipline.cnn Looks like fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I think Mexico has earned a bit of the stick with this one. Change is possible I think. Probably even say it's necessary. Not sure what to make of that second comment. By population or area? Should the ones with relatives go where they are? Seems cheaper than housing them in government facilities. Yes, Mexico has been less than helpful. Area would be nice, though locating with family certainly has benefits(of course that also encourages more) I'm sure you know the burden on local taxes and such when it is truly a national issue. besides I hear those schools up North are better, and we wouldn't want to leave them all in minimum wage land with the uneducated racists now would we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 . besides I hear those schools up North are better, and we wouldn't want to leave them all in minimum wage land with the uneducated racists now would we? Haha Now that's a great idea. Send them all to Boston to live with all of the enlightened, tolerant, non racists that populate that fine city Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 You forgot the 4th option: do nothing. Don't set up a separate system, release these kids and create immigration holds on them. If/when they don't show up, who cares... just more "shadow people." If they do bad, the law will catch them and they will be deported. If they live good virtuous lives than at best their kids will have the chance to be much more successful. Don't give them any legal status with rights to bring their parents in our country at all. Your prize is living a miserable life in the shadows... thats what you chose when you came here. The above has been the default position for a long time now. What I would do is deport them and temporarily militarize border and declare war with Mexico. Our politicians lack the guts for that... which would harm Mexico a lot more economically. Unless we do something about the cartels affecting this country, because this seems like another step for them, I don't think this flood will stop. 8 years ago when Bush pushed immigration reform, I said nationalize and make mandatory e-verify (use some carrot/stick like denying new citizenship to states which don't participate.) Federal govt can't even make CA compliant with the RealID act! National policy and debates should not be driven by overt action of non-citizen actors who break the law. One more thing, provide a private right of action by citizens against companiea that use greencard labor or shadow labor over qualified Americans. See how many companies will risk that (another carrot/stick). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mocountyskins Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Why is it our problem? Why do we have to try to fix everything? If they are not citizens its not our problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Why is it our problem? Why do we have to try to fix everything? If they are not citizens its not our problem. Congress passed a law which is creating the impression that our boarders are open to children of south america... That's our problem. Congress is going to have to fix the law, or at a minimum provide the resources to address the backlog. It is our problem, cause it's our boarder and our law causing the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Why is it our problem? Why do we have to try to fix everything? If they are not citizens its not our problem. Because they're here in our country. Broken stuff sucks. We have to do something with them until we send them home or decide to give them refuge. Both of which outcomes are determined by our laws and processes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.