What do we do with 5.5 million illegal immigrants?

Happy Holidays,

Its been a while since I’ve sent a newsletter out. Long story short, life has been keeping me busy and distracted. I still keep an eye on what is going on politically and socially in the culture. And while there have been several issues tempting me to write again, the border crisis has really been gnawing at me lately. So much so, I could not resist jotting down my thoughts and sharing them with you. Before I get into that, let me first say…

MERRY CHRISTMAS and a Happy New Year!

Merry Christmas!

And now, on to my latest rant.

Now What? - Totally biased and agenda driven news

NOTE: At some point, before bed, I read through 50+ news sources and share my findings here. If you like it, share it. If you don’t, share it. Follow my blog now to support my work or to find new reasons to complain about it. My opinions are my own. Your financial support is appreciated. Click here to send me a tip of $5.00.

What do we do with 5.5 million illegal immigrants? 

The Federation for American Immigration Reform declared, “5.5 Million Illegal Aliens Have Crossed our Borders Since Biden Took Office.” To quote…

“Some 2.7 million migrants—those who illegally entered or were otherwise inadmissible at a port of entry—were encountered at our borders in FY 2022, bringing the total under President Biden to a whopping 5.5 million. One thing is clear: These record-breaking numbers are a direct consequence of open-borders policies implemented by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and the person who appointed him, President Joe Biden,” charged Stein. “This deliberate sabotage of our nation’s immigration laws demands that the president remove Mayorkas from his position immediately. Otherwise, the impeachment of his disgraced cabinet member is sure to be one of the first orders of business in the next Congress.”

Our country is being invaded by illegal aliens aka undocumented immigrants.

This is irrefutable.

This is reality.

This invasion (and that is precisely what it is) of illegal immigrants has been ongoing since Biden took office. In fact, it has become so bad that the city of El Paso declared a state of emergency and made their airport a holding center for illegal immigrants. With the removal of Title 42, things will only get worse. But, I digress. 

Politics being politics, the main concern of our elected officials is who is to blame for this fiasco? Predictably, both sides will blame the other (at best) or try to ignore the matter entirely (at worst). Here are two such examples. 

On December 19, 2022, Martha Raddatz blamed Republicans for the border crisis. In her view, if Republicans remained silent about the border crisis, the problem would have dissipated on its own. I find that nonsensical yet, the argument was made with a straight face. On the same day, the Whitehouse made a gaslighting attempt by saying that the border was not open, when it clearly was, as evident by all the illegal crossings. 

Sigh.

When the left discusses immigration, they use words like compassion and diversity to support their positions. Republicans have a different take on why Democrats favor illegal immigration. They don’t believe it has anything to do with compassion or diversity. They believe its all about power. What’s going on from the perspective of the right is “replacement theory.”  

Whether you accept the replacement theory or not, there is ample evidence to suggest such a strategy is ongoing. Consider this timeline.

All that being said, there is the matter of 5.5 million new illegal immigrants in the country. What do we do with them? I have a few suggestions, for what its worth. 

Stricter E-Verify penalties – E-Verify is an online system that allows employers to verify the identity and employment eligibility of their employees. The penalty for hiring undocumented workers can vary depending on the circumstances, but can include fines, jail time, and the loss of business licenses. Since E-Verify rules vary from state to state, I propose that a national standard be implemented with very strict penalties and narrowly defined use cases. Ron DeSantis tried to make it happen for Florida and he was successful to a point, but the bill he signed was not in line with the original vision. If you agree with this idea, please understand that it is not a panacea. It is a double-edge sword. How? Mandating E-Verify could, in a sense, force every American to ask the government for permission to work. (And what if the government does not like your opinions?)

Plus, do you remember when Obamacare first rolled out? Chances are, tens of thousands of legal workers would be prevented from getting new jobs due to errors in the system. Yet and still, at least one notable study said, “[E-Verify] mandates appear to lead to better labor market outcomes among workers likely to compete with unauthorized immigrants.  

Immediate Tonal Change – Four years ago, when the migrant caravans first started, President Trump stopped them in their tracks by stating his position loudly, clearly and without any deference to political correctness. As a result, the caravans stopped. Greg Gutfeld made jokes about Trump being “the wall,” and to an extent, he was correct. The reason that worked is because everyone knew Trump would back up his rhetoric with action. Data points out that Trump did not deport as many illegal immigrants as Obama did, one has to wonder is that because they were reluctant to sneak in under Trump? Biden should revert to his original stance on the border then, back it up with multiple arrests. What was his original stance? According to The Huffington Post, back in 2007, Senator Joe Biden said this at the Rotary Club in Columbia, South Carolina. 

“Folks, I voted for a fence,” the then-senator from Delaware can be heard saying, referencing his backing of the Secure Fence Act. “I voted, unlike most Democrats ― and some of you won’t like it ― I voted for 700 miles of fence. But, let me tell you, we can build a fence 40 stories high ― unless you change the dynamic in Mexico and ― and you will not like this, and ― punish American employers who knowingly violate the law when, in fact, they hire illegals. Unless you do those two things, all the rest is window dressing.”

Former President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton ― both of whom were senators at the time ― also supported the bill.

Continuing, Biden, who launched his 2020 bid last month, raised several talking points currently championed by the man who may be his challenger, President Donald Trump.

“Now, I know I’m not supposed to say it that bluntly, but they’re the facts, they’re the facts,” Biden told the crowd during his previous 2008 bid for the presidential election. “And so everything else we do is in between here. Everything else we do is at the margins. And the reason why I add that parenthetically, why I believe the fence is needed does not have anything to do with immigration as much as drugs.”

Biden then stated that “people are driving across that border with tons, tons, hear me, tons of everything from byproducts for methamphetamine to cocaine to heroin, and it’s all coming up through corrupt Mexico.”

How Ironic. 

Included in this change in policy should be an increase in ICE recruitment, funding, and resources. This would serve to address the influx of illegal immigration over the past few years. Although the need for such is obvious (I would think), a PR campaign may be needed to sway public sentiment. Simply put, who among the 5.5 million illegal immigrants are criminal? How many are simply seeking a better way of life? And how do we tell the difference before Americans are harmed? One way is to apprehend and interview yet, it would be catastrophic to the effort if the initial focus is on everyone suspected of being here illegally. So, I suggest dealing with the bad first then, moving on to everyone else.  

THE BAD GUYS

 I don’t know all the legal methods for finding illegal immigrants but, the first place I would search are sanctuary cities. It is difficult to provide a precise number of “sanctuary cities” in the United States, as the term “sanctuary city” is not clearly defined and is used in various ways.

Generally, the term “sanctuary city” is used to describe a city or jurisdiction that has adopted policies or practices that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities or that protect undocumented immigrants from deportation. These policies may include refusing to honor requests from ICE to hold individuals in custody for immigration purposes or prohibiting local law enforcement from inquiring about an individual’s immigration status.

There is no comprehensive list of sanctuary cities, and the number of cities that have adopted sanctuary policies can vary depending on how the term is defined. Some estimates put the number of sanctuary cities at over 500, while others put the number at closer to 300. It is worth noting that the adoption of sanctuary policies can be a controversial issue, and there is ongoing debate about the extent to which these policies should be allowed or encouraged.

What better place for a criminal illegal immigrant to live than a sanctuary city? I propose that sanctuary cities receive some sort of federal sanction or some other punishment when they refuse to comply with ICE requests to hold criminals in custody or when prohibiting law enforcement to ask about a suspect’s immigration status when its related to serious crimes (i.e. murder, drug dealing) The message being sent is ICE is hunting for bad guys, not the ones trying to make an honest living. Of course, there would be some resistance from the left. This is why I said earlier, a PR campaign would be necessary to sway public sentiment. Let me also say that I am no expert on ICE and immigration. I know something like this was tried before during the Trump administration. What can we learn from history that can help us have a better future?

A PATHWAY TO REMAIN FOR EVERYONE ELSE

Check out this quote from the Voice of America website.  

For nearly the past 80 years, the United States has offered a path to citizenship for foreigners who volunteer to serve in the American military. Under the Nationality Act of 1940, foreign-born military service members whose superior officers certify that they are serving with honor can use an expedited process to seek U.S. citizenship.

That process changed in October 2017, when the Trump administration added new requirements for applicants. Instead of being able to start the application process soon after reporting to basic training with at least one day of service, green card holders first had to complete their military training requirements, have at minimum 180 consecutive days of active-duty service or at least one year of satisfactory service in the selected reserve, and pass an extensive background check.

Although at the time of the article (September 2020), the process reverted back to the pre-Trump edits, I like this idea of earning citizenship through military service for those who entered the country illegally and remained. There are millions of illegal immigrants that have lived here for decades, without criminal record and even paid taxes. They would not all qualify for military service so, what about them? How would they earn a pathway to remain legally in the United States? I suggest a sponsorship program which would work like this…

  • A sponsor is a natural citizen who vouches for the character of the undocumented immigrant.
  • As sponsor is someone who would pay a nominal annual fee (~$100.00), each year, for the life of the sponsorship. 
  • Sponsorship continues until immigrant is a green card holder. 
  • Should the immigrant get convicted of criminal activity, sponsor pays a hefty fine (~$1,000.00) and the annual sponsorship fees increase, based on the offense. Fees are cancelled when/if immigrant is deported or cleared of all criminal charges. If immigrant is incarcerated on US soil, sponsor still pays annual sponsorship fee. Sponsorship fees increase when immigrant is in jail.
  • Sponsor can cancel their support in the event the illegal immigrant is proven guilty of a major crime. Immigrants proven guilty of a major crime are deported.
  • If immigrant is deported and reenters the country, immigrant must get a new sponsor. The original sponsor is under no obligation.
  • If immigrant cannot find a sponsor within 1 year, they are subject to deportation. 
  • In the event of a disagreement, the immigrant and sponsor can petition the government for a switch in partnership. Any switch must be approved by the court system. 
  • Charities can sponsor a limited number of immigrants. However, heftier fines are enforced in these instances.
  • Sponsors are not required to house or care for immigrants, only pay applicable sponsorship fees.
  • Sponsorship fees are tax deductible. 
  • Sponsored immigrants must pay taxes.
  • Green card holders can sponsor illegal immigrants.
  • Sponsors do not have any legal hold on immigrants and cannot compel them to perform any act or service that violates their basic freedoms, religion, or conscience.
  • Sponsoring an illegal immigrant does not grant an illegal immigrant citizenship, nor the right to vote, only a method of legally remaining in the country. 
  • An illegal immigrant without a sponsor (by a certain date) much return to their country of origin.
  • Sponsored immigrants can apply for citizenship. However, their applications are considered after those who followed the legal protocols.

Do I think a stricter e-verification system, an immediate tonal change in policy and US citizens sponsoring immigrants will change things overnight? I would like to think so, but I don’t honestly know. At the very least, I think its a step in the right direction. What has the status quo given us? How much longer can we pay to support it? Until we have all the answers and the intestinal fortitude to get it all done, my final proposal is to close our borders entirely and immediately, for a limited time. How long?

Long enough to replace the first responders who are overwhelmed and retiring due to the influx of people.

Long enough to create a system for handling the increased population in the interim.

Long enough to complete the wall.

Long enough to get our country back in order.

Just long enough. 

…

Follow me on Social Media: