UPSIDE / DOWNSIDE
What's The Bottom Line
To: [email protected], [email protected]com, [email protected]
From: tim [email protected]
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 07:29:18 -0700
Subject: Editor of the day
To The Editors
Arizona Republic, Arizona Daily Star, Tucson Citizen, Sierra Vista Herald
If I were Editor For The Day I would contact the Border Action Network,
the Southern Arizona ACLU and the Coalicion de Derechos Humanos and
ask the following questions.
Can you give documentation of one instance of a member of one of the
citizen patrol groups making a racial slur?
Can you give documentation of one instance of a member of one of the
citizen patrol groups advocating the total elimination of lawful
immigration?
Can you give documentation of one instance of a member of one of the
citizen patrol groups opposing a guest worker program?
Given that the Border with Mexico is an international border, attested
to by the Governor of Arizona, and given that the problems of illegal
immigration spread to every state, can you give one credible reason why
residents from states other than Arizona should not participate in
watching the border?
Can you give documentation of any instances of the Mexican Army
violating the international border?
As Editor For The Day I would probably publish an editorial or opinion
column analyzing what the effect of elimination of illegal immigration,
sealing the border between entry points and establishment of a guest
worker program would be. Something like the following.
Assuming that a guest worker program would have built in to it methods
for controlling the number of unemployed guest workers at any given
time. Assuming that the guest worker program would protect Americans in
the job market. Assuming that there would be a funding for medical
assistance for guest workers from deductions going in to a medical care
fund rather than Social Security.
THE UPSIDE
Workers would be able to move around by purchasing transportation such
as bus tickets for as low as $15.00 instead of paying coyotes hundreds
of dollars.
Workers would be able to stay in motels as they travel from place to place.
Workers would not have their families threatened because of non-payment
of smuggling fees.
Workers would be able to retain more of their earnings.
Ranchers and businesses would not be vandalized by hordes of people
moving through.
Families would stay in the home country.
School enrollment would dramatically drop.
Crime would dramatically drop.
Disease would dramatically drop.
Highways, deserts and parklands would be cleaner.
Taxes would drop dramatically.
People would stop dying in the desert.
People would stop dying in van and SUV rollovers.
Workers would no longer be targets of criminals from their own countries.
Workers would be properly identified and available to be held
responsible for their actions.
Workers' wages would be properly reported and taxed.
Drug smugglers would be exposed because their cover would be gone.
Citizen patrol groups would be unnecessary.
The attorney based organizations, the Border Action Network, the
Southern Arizona ACLU and the Coalicion de Derechos Humanos, would
have to find new causes. Their quest of a civil/human rights case on
the magnitude of the O.J. Simpson case would have to find other fields
to look in.
The smugglers would be out hundreds of millions of dollars.
Mexico would not have an excuse to meddle in the day to day operation of
all levels of American government.
Mexico would not have to open a political office in Tucson.
The PRI would not have to establish a network to teach illegals how to
get free medical help.
THE DOWNSIDE
Mexico would be out a lot of money since the people-smuggling money
would be gone. A lot less money would be available for paying off
government officials at various levels.
Mexico would be out a lot of money because of having to provide services
to their people now being provided free in the U.S.
Tim Richardson
|
