In NYS....they come looking for you if your name doesn't match your drivers license after you are married......I know someone who never changed their SS name to their married name.....NYS DMV was going to suspend their car registration......ALL IN THE NAME OF 'SAVING US FROM THOSE TERRORISTS'....

Ya dont need the government to 'keep your marriage together',only if ya plan on using the 'system'......if we think we are going to need them to collect child support for us, or hand over SS, etc....then by all means involve the government in every aspect of our lives.......

http://www.humanevents.com

Quoted Text

'No Drug Smuggler Left Behind!'
by Ann Coulter  

President Bush was so buoyed by the warm reception he was given in Albania that he immediately gave all 3 million Albanians American citizenship, provided they learn Spanish. The offer was withdrawn when Bush found out most Albanians haven't broken any U.S. laws.

Bush keeps claiming he's dying to enforce the border, but he just can't do it unless we immediately grant amnesty to 12 million illegal aliens. I wonder if that worked on Laura Bush:

Laura: George, it's time you quit drinking.

George: OK, honey, let's discuss it over cocktails.


How about Bush enforce the border and then we'll discuss his amnesty plan?

He assures us that granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants already here won't inspire millions more to run across the border because ... he's going to put infrared lights at the border!

Well, that's a relief. What precisely will infrared lights do again? This is worse than those fake cameras they sell at hardware stores to make it look like you have cameras outside your house. We still need something or someone -- say, a wall or a Border Patrol agent -- to stop the Mexicans illegally crossing the border as we watch them on the infrared cameras.  

Bush won't build a wall and he keeps prosecuting law enforcement officers who stop illegal border crossers. But trust him: He'll get right on that border enforcement business as soon as we grant amnesty to 12 million illegal aliens.

Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean are normally the sort of Mexican-Americans Bush would tear up at while promoting amnesty for illegal aliens. Both served in the military and are taxpaying, law-abiding citizens. They've been risking their lives as Border Patrol agents for years.

Ramos was nominated for Border Patrol Agent of the Year in 2005. His nomination received a major setback when the Bush administration decided to put him in prison instead. Ramos and Compean are now serving more than 10 years apiece in solitary confinement for chasing a drug-running illegal alien back to Mexico.

Bush's pal, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, gave immunity to a Mexican drug dealer hauling a million dollars worth of drugs across the border so that the drug dealer could testify against two Border Patrol agents who shot him in the buttocks.

The border patrol agents were presumed guilty of an unlawful shooting because they neglected to fill out the proper paperwork. For busting a cap in the butt of a drug courier crossing the border illegally -- who was so mortally wounded that he proceeded to scamper back to Mexico -- they were supposed to spend five hours filling out paperwork. This is what the Bush administration means when it talks about a "cover-up." As U.S. prosecutor Debra Kanof said, "You have to report any discharge of a firearm."

Intriguingly, Kanof also says: "The Border Patrol pursuit policy prohibits the pursuit of someone." (Hence, the oft-heard warning of the border agent in hot pursuit, "Stop or I'll ... do absolutely nothing!") Can we apply this rule to meter maids and tax collectors? At least now border agents will be able to watch the illegal aliens they can't pursue on infrared cameras!

But wait -- that's not all! The Border Patrol agents also exceeded the speed limit. "In order to exceed the speed limit," Kanof said, "you have to get supervisor approval, and they did not." It's just so hard to fill out a written request to exceed the speed limit when you're off-roading at 65 mph. There's a whispering campaign suggesting that Ramos and Compean failed to use their turn signal.

As I understand it, you're also supposed to not cross the border illegally from Mexico with a van full of drugs. But the Bush administration has no interest in enforcing those laws. Ninety-eight percent of illegal aliens captured crossing the border illegally are not prosecuted. Those drugs are doing the job American drugs just won't do!

The Bush administration pulls out the big guns only for serious violations like a Border Patrol officer not filling out paperwork.

In addition to giving the illegal alien drug smuggler full immunity to testify against U.S. Border Patrol agents, the government gave him taxpayer-funded medical care for his buttocks wound, an unconditional border-crossing card, the right to sue the U.S. for "civil rights" violations, and a GAP gift card. The drug runner is also on the short-list to replace Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

He's now suing the U.S. for $5 million, but the Bush administration is hoping to bargain him down to $10 million.

That border-crossing card came in handy when the winged illegal alien brought in another load of drugs a short eight months later -- for which he has still not been charged, nearly two years later. Who does he think he is? Rep. William Jefferson?

Bush's pal Sutton keeps defending his decision to prosecute Border Patrol agents for paperwork violations, rather than an illegal alien for drug trafficking, on the grounds that the drug dealer has not been charged with any crimes. Let's see, whose job is it to charge that Mexican drug runner with a crime? Why, I believe that would be Johnny Sutton!

Maybe Sutton was too busy prosecuting another Mexican-American law enforcement officer for trying to stop illegal aliens from crossing our border. Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez shot at the tires of a van full of illegal aliens, inadvertently wounding one of them. Sutton prosecuted Hernandez. The government proceeded to give the illegal aliens green cards and $100,000 each.

I didn't realize "living in the shadows" meant in the shadows of palm trees around the pools at taxpayer-funded houses.

Illegal aliens might want to rethink Bush's amnesty plan. The only Hispanics Bush seems to prosecute are the ones who are law-abiding U.S. citizens.

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Immigration issue is really about cheap labor
MARIO CASSELLA Fort Johnson

   The July 8 column by E.J. Dionne fails to mention the fact that crossing our border illegally is not immigration. There is a system in place. I know, because my father used it years ago. This is about cheap labor. Let’s tell it as it is.

Let's not forget about the votes too if the illegals are made citizens.

And clearly Shadow...this IS what it's about...votes/politics!

......and cheap labor.....how much are we will to pay for our lettuce, or anyother fruit and vegetable?????? what is the acceptable 'high' or 'low' for that matter........

http://www.timesunion.com

Quoted Text

IFCO foreman enters guilty plea
Probe continues as prosecutors say he helped steer undocumented workers to firm with plant in Guilderland  
  
By JORDAN CARLEO-EVANGELIST, Staff writer
First published: Tuesday, July 17, 2007

ALBANY -- For years, Abelino Chicas helped steer illegal workers to pallet plants in Texas and across the country -- arranging to transport and train them and calming their fears of detection by immigration officials.
Chicas, 41, admitted Monday to his role in what prosecutors call IFCO Systems North America's systematic hiring of illegal labor, an alleged practice that lies at the heart of an ongoing federal investigation.

  
In pleading guilty to helping harbor and transport illegal immigrant workers, Chicas admitted to, among other things, ignoring that many of the workers often had no documentation or had work papers that were clearly fake.

The guilty plea, the latest development in a sprawling nationwide immigration crackdown with its nexus in suburban Albany, was seventh among current and former midlevel managers at IFCO -- all of whom had some ties to the company's Guilderland Center plant.

Chicas, a native of El Salvador who later became a U.S. citizen, served since 1990 as a recruiter of Hispanic workers first for Texas Pallet Company and later IFCO, which bought the company in 2000, according to prosecutors.

It was in that capacity that Chicas, who was based in Houston, came to the company's plant at Northeastern Industrial Park.

There, he helped local managers recruit workers and later tried to convince some to come back to work in 2005 after federal immigration authorities raided one of the houses where the company had been boarding them.

Chicas faces up to five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines for the felony conviction. He said little during the 30-minute hearing in federal court, other than answering standard questions from U.S. District Judge Lawrence E. Kahn. The questions were translated into Spanish for Chicas by an interpreter.

Chicas, who worked as a foreman and systems manager in a Houston area plant, is the third IFCO employee to admit to a felony. Four others have admitted to misdemeanors linked to hiring the illegal workers.

The cases against two others continue. William Hoskins, a manager at the company's Cincinnati plant, was indicted in April for his alleged role. Misael Romero, who prosecutors say is an illegal immigrant from Honduras and a former foreman at the Guilderland plant, remains at large.

The case went public in April 2006 when federal immigration authorities raided more than 40 IFCO plants around the country, rounding up nearly 1,200 illegal workers. At the time, the raids were the largest of their kind.

Six of the defendants were to have been sentenced in June, but a federal judge postponed the proceedings. The reasons were never made public, but the delay could mean prosecutors are banking on their help to prosecute Hoskins and other IFCO managers they continue to investigate.

On Monday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Tina Sciocchetti would say only that the investigation continues.

In February, federal prosecutors vowed to try to target higher-level IFCO officials who also may have been involved in hiring illegal workers. But IFCO has denied intentionally pursuing illegal labor describing those arrested as "lower-level IFCO employees" who "were not part of any companywide plan, scheme or practice to violate the United States immigration laws."

Jordan Carleo-Evangelist can be reached at 454-5445 or by e-mail at jcarleo-evangelist@timesunion.com.

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Immigration key to U.S. population control
Froma Harrop is a nationally syndicated columnist.
Froma Harrop

   “Population Explosion” was a call to arms for American environmentalists 40 years ago, amid fears that baby boomers would have big families. That didn’t happen, but hyper-population-growth is occurring now due to large-scale immigration.
   California has just projected a population of 60 million by mid-century, up 5 million from its forecast of only three years ago. We’re talking about a 75 percent leap between 2000 and 2050 — by any measure, a population explosion.
   That’s the truth, but one that has sent many environmental leaders into hiding. Most of California’s population growth will come from immigrants and their relatively high birthrates, but the Sierra Club refuses to touch the matter. Once a tiger on U.S. population growth, it has retreated behind calls for a global approach that, it contends, will reduce the demands to immigrate to the United States.
   Problem. Despite great strides in reducing birthrates in many poor countries — Mexico is one of the success stories — the world’s population is still expected to jump to 9 billion from 6 billion by 2050. Mass immigration to the United States, if anything, eases the pressure on other governments to promote family planning.
   Not a few Sierra Club members have challenged the group’s spineless response to a spiraling American population. Prominent among them is Dick Lamm, the former Democratic governor of Colorado.
   “I can’t believe my friends who are still jerking their knees out of the ’60s,” says the always outspoken Lamm. “It’s really important to be sensitive, but I can’t understand the fact that we are not talking about issues that are fundamental to America’s future.”
   The prospect of 25 million more Californians in a mere 40 years — and the added cars, shopping malls, sprawling developments and lost species that implies — alarms a splinter group called Sierrans for U.S. Population Stabilization (www. susps.org).
   “With that kind of overpopulation, California is going to be importing virtually all the resources needed to sustain ourselves,” warns the faction’s co-chairman, Dick Schneider.
   A consultant on citizens’ growth-control ballot measures, Schneider says that California cities and towns will be pretty much on their own. Some may try to set zoning that balances their goals for open space, quality of life and projections for growth. That will require fighting off the real-estate developers who often dominate local governments and accepting a loss of state money.
   Demographers say that the population boom could be slowed if Californians refuse to build the roads and other infrastructure needed to accommodate the surge. The resulting congestion would stall the economy — attracting fewer people and prompting more Californians to relocate. This emigration, already well under way, would export California’s population pressures to Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, Washington and other Western states.
   This is what passes for population policy in the United States: Make people so miserable that they leave.
   There have been glimmers of liberal courage. In 1996, President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development called for a halt in population growth, citing mass immigration as a main driver. Population concerns took a back seat during the recent struggle over immigration reform. But because the bill would have vastly accelerated the numbers of legal entrants, its defeat ended up serving the cause.
   It really is time for a national population policy — an honest one.  

  
  
  

Quoted Text

Demographers say that the population boom could be slowed if Californians refuse to build the roads and other infrastructure needed to accommodate the surge. The resulting congestion would stall the economy — attracting fewer people and prompting more Californians to relocate. This emigration, already well under way, would export California’s population pressures to Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, Washington and other Western states.

AND, if they raise taxes.......is that the idea here in Rotterdam??

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Immigration solution End economic disparity to resolve Mexican influx
BY EDWIN D. REILLY JR. For the Sunday Gazette

   I wrote last month that I’d tell you my solution to the problem of illegal immigration — as soon as I thought of one.
Here goes.
   Once there was a war, a very unpopular war. It almost started over a skirmish along the disputed Mexican border during the administration of Andrew Jackson, but he would have none of it. He had seen enough war even though his reputation was made when his forces won the Battle of New Orleans on Jan. 8, 1815.
   Actually, the Treaty of Ghent ending the War of 1812 had been signed on Dec. 24, 1814, but news of the peace did not reach New Orleans until February. In those days, the low-horsepower Internet moved messages at the rate of about 10 kilobits per month. Snail mail!
   Three presidents followed Jackson and then, in 1845, along came another administration and another skirmish, and the new president decided to give those Mexicans a Polk in the eye, principally to fulfill our Manifest Destiny.
MAJOR ACQUISITION
   Despite the temporary setback at the Alamo, superior force defeated the Mexican army and in 1848 the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo gave us undisputed control of Texas and, for an imposed payment of $15 million, close to half of Mexico’s former territory. Half!
   That was enough to give us California and all or parts of what eventually became the states of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and Wyoming. The war and its outcome was vociferously opposed by young Congressman Abraham Lincoln, and a month before the end of the war, President James Polk was censured by Congress for “a war unnecessarily and unconstitutionally begun by the President of the United States.” (Sound familiar?)
   And as late as 1885, as former general and president Ulysses S. Grant composed his critically acclaimed memoirs on his deathbed, he wrote “to this day I regard the [Mexican] war as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation.”
   The annexed territories contained about 8,000 Mexican families. Some moved farther south to what was left of Mexico; but the great majority remained in place and were declared citizens. And as is still the case, their children and a child born of any woman who happens to be in this country, legally or otherwise, is automatically a constitutional “natural born citizen” who, upon reaching age 35, is eligible to run for president.
PRESENT-DAY
   Now, fast forward to the present day. Even at half its original size, Mexico, a country of 109 million people, is the fifth largest country in the Americas and the 14th largest in the world. So why do so many Mexicans want to enter the United States? Because it is slightly cooler on our side of the border? Because of the simple human desire that so many of us have to at least visit, if not stay, in their ancestral homeland, the lands of their great-great-great-great grandparents? Well, most Mexican immigrants do settle in the Southwest, but no reader is likely to buy the theory just espoused. Almost certainly, the reason is economic.
   As evidence, consider this: Our northern border with Canada is just as porous as, and even longer than, that of our border with Mexico. But Canadians are not streaming into our country to get warmer or richer; their standard of living is comparable to ours. Judged by per capita income, Canada is the 19th most prosperous country of some 200 in the world, only 13 rungs below our own rank of six. (In case you are wondering, those ahead of us are Luxembourg, Norway, Switzerland, Denmark and Iceland. Just below us, from seven to 10, are Sweden, Ireland, Japan, and the United Kingdom.)
   Now, Mexico, on the whole, is not a poor country. It is the 45th most prosperous in the world, quite a bit above average, and its citizens have an average per capita income equal to that of Russia.
   Ah, but 45th is 39 steps below that of the United States. Nowhere else in the world are there two countries with a border anywhere near the length of ours with Mexico and Canada for which the disparity in rank is that large.
   More evidence: The 27 countries that compose the European Union allow any resident of one of them to move to another just as easily as we might move from one of our states to another. The fact that their citizens come in slightly different hues and collectively embrace 23 different languages is of no concern. They are all members of the same race — the human race.
   But consider these examples of how similar their rank is in per capita income: Netherlands 14, Belgium 15, Germany 16, France 17 and Italy 22. Another unifying factor is that 13 of the 27 countries use the euro as currency, and in due course, more will certainly follow.
   So, one way to curb illegal immigration from Mexico is for the United States to reduce the disparity in our respective per capita incomes. But this would require a great deal of American investment in Mexico, building industries and organizations that create jobs. There is not much chance that Congress would embark on the massive subsidies that would be needed to encourage this, but even gradual steps would help.
TWO TRENDS
   In fact, there are two trends that are tending to reduce the cited disparity. One is that Mexican-Americans in the United States send $20 billion per year back to kin in Mexico, an income stream second only to that country’s oil revenue. Another is the astounding fact that fully 25 percent of all Americans living abroad live in Mexico. (My definition of an astounding fact is one I learn while doing research for my opinion pieces.)
   A faster way to minimize income disparity would be to just buy Mexico. Since $15 million bought half of it in 1848, one might think that the 2007 equivalent of that, a trillion dollars perhaps, would be enough to buy the rest of it, with one proviso: When we “bought” half of Mexico, there was a national government left to give it to. This time, there wouldn’t be, so we’d have to allocate the money to the governors of their respective states in accord with their populations (or better, inversely to their current wealth).
   We would have to consolidate the new lands into fewer states, of course; two per each of 31 current Mexican states, 62, would be a bit much. In accord with a population proportionate to our own, the newly annexed lands would deserve only 36 senators.
   A better alternative would be to keep the current 31 Mexican states, but amend the Constitution to grant only one senator to each of the net 81 states. That would save the salaries of 19 senators, make it less likely that we’d ever elect a president who loses the popular vote, and lead to a new flag whose union would contain nine rows of nine stars, forming a perfect square. How fitting. Its very preamble states that the Constitution was ordained and established “in order to form a more perfect union.” Case closed.

http://www.timesunion.com

Quoted Text

Immigration sense  
First published: Thursday, August 9, 2007

It never made much sense to build an expensive wall along the U.S.-Mexico border to keep illegal immigrants from pouring into this country. And it made little sense for some members of Congress to lock horns with President Bush over the best way to crack down on a growing illegal immigrant population already here -- a battle that accomplished nothing and ended last June with Mr. Bush's proposed immigration reform bill dying in the Senate.
In our view, and the view of many others, there has always been a much easier and more effective solution to this issue: Go after the U.S. employers who hire illegal workers, rather than chase, or try to fence out, the immigrants themselves. The only reason so many men and women from Mexico and Central America try to sneak into this country is the chance to work at higher wages than they would earn back home. For this opportunity, they literally put their lives on the line. And American employers welcome them as a ready source of cheap labor.

But if this cycle is broken -- that is, if there are no jobs for illegal workers who can be exploited by unscrupulous U.S. employers -- then the flow across our southern border will soon ebb. The trouble is, so many employers have come to depend on this labor pool that any attempt at reform, including a crackdown on employers, threatens their economic livelihood, and they have made their voices heard in Washington.

Nonetheless, it is encouraging that the Bush administration has decided to address the problem head-on. It is poised to levy heavy fines against employers who willingly hire workers with fake Social Security numbers. From now on, employers will have to pay more attention to so-called "no match" letters from the Social Security Administration. If they don't, they will pay the consequences.

As for Congress, it must address the issue of illegal immigration more responsibly. It isn't about the flow of illegal workers, which can be stopped by tough rules for employers. It's about the best way to treat foreigners who want to come here for work, and those already here who would like to become citizens. Republicans have to stop denouncing good-faith re@@hyphen@@form proposals as tantamount to amnesty. Democrats need to be less critical of Mr. Bush's guest worker visa proposal. Instead of denouncing the visa plan as too restrictive, these lawmakers should strive to find a compromise solution.

What's needed now is a more cooperative spirit. What there is no need for, however, is more demonizing of foreign workers who simply want a chance to better their lives by coming to America.
THE ISSUE:Federal authorities will punish employers who knowingly hire illegal workers.
THE STAKES:Without enforcement immigration reform will remain elusive.

  

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Fewer illegals risk crossing at border
Tighter security, raids discourage many
BY TRACI CARL The Associated Press

   TECATE, Mexico — Mexican shelters, usually the last stop for northbound migrants, are filling with southbound deportees. Fewer migrants are crossing in the windswept deserts along an increasingly fortified border. Far to the north, fields are empty at harvest time as workplace raids become more common.
   Mexicans are increasingly giving up on the American dream and staying home, and the federal crackdown on undocumented workers announced Friday should discourage even potential migrants from taking the risks as the United States purges itself of its illegal population.
   U.S. border agents detained 55,545 illegal migrants jumping over border walls, walking through the desert and swimming across the Rio Grande River between October and June. That’s down 38 percent for the entire border compared to the same period a year before.
   U.S. and Mexican officials say increased border security, including 6,000 National Guard troops, remote surveillance technology and drone planes, have thwarted smugglers who had succeeded for years at beating the system.
   Migrants also say they feel Americans are increasingly hostile toward immigrants.
   “It’s the discrimination,” said 28-year-old George Guevara, who was deported to Tijuana last month after living in the U.S. for 18 years. “It’s making people step back. It’s just too much of a risk. It’s better to be out here.”
   Guevara, who speaks perfect English and has only distant memories of Mexico, was living at a Tijuana migrant shelter filled with deportees, many of whom are Mexican-born but find themselves in a country that is foreign to them.
   “I barely remember living here,” Guevara said. “But I see this as an opportunity. I’m going to go back to Guadalajara to see my family and forget what happened.”
   While some migrants try to set up new lives, others are caught between two worlds. Salvador Perez still has a pregnant wife and three small children in Bakersfield, Calif., where he worked on a pistachio ranch before he was deported. He’s tried to cross the rocky, snake-infested mountains near Tecate three times this summer to get back to them, but failed each time.
   “I want to try again, but I’m scared something will happen,” Perez said.
   The biggest drop in Border Patrol detentions — a 68 percent decrease — was in the remote, heatseared desert surrounding Yuma, Ariz., once popular with smugglers. Border Patrol spokesman Jeremy Chappell credits the additional troops and tougher security.
   “Where an alien before was able to sneak across, now he has the National Guard watching him,” Chappell said.
   The only area that has seen an increase — 1.5 percent — is the San Diego sector, which runs along the California border and includes the harsh, roadless desert surrounding Tecate. The Border Patrol has responded with helicopters and increased intelligence from detained migrants.
   Crossing there requires hiking up to six miles, scrambling over or under the border fence, then walking some more, usually in the dead of night. The region is difficult to patrol, making it one of the few places migrants believe they can still get through.
   That’s why 22-year-old Romeo, a Salvadoran who refused to give his last name for fear of reprisals, was in Tecate’s town square after failing twice to sneak into El Paso, Texas, once in a car and once on foot. He was flown back to El Salvador each time.
   “They tell me this is the best place to cross, but it isn’t easy anywhere,” Romeo said.
   Deportations also are up for illegal immigrants who have lived in the States for years. Some are caught for minor infractions like a burned-out headlight. Others are rounded up in workplace raids that the Bush administration has vowed to intensify.
   The new measures announced Friday will force employers to fire anyone who cannot prove their Social Security numbers are legitimate.
   U.S. employers are already complaining, especially those in agriculture, where most workers are believed to be working with false documents. On a recent visit to Mexico, Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire said some crops are already rotting in the fields for lack of workers. Many employers join President Bush in blaming Congress for stalling an accord that would allow more people to work legally. “Pretty shortly people are going to be knocking on people’s doors saying ‘Man we’re running out of workers,’ ” Bush said.
   Mexican President Felipe Calderon also lashed out Thursday. “The U.S. Congress, which today turns its back on reality, knows full well that the American economy could not move forward without the labor of Mexicans,” he said.
   Fewer Mexicans are sending home cash remittances — Mexico’s biggest source of foreign income after oil — leaving many Mexican relatives with no other resources, the Inter-American Development Bank reported Wednesday.
   Despite all this, some migrants are still trying to beat the odds.
   Isaac Mendiola, 41, mapped out how he would cross near Tecate.
   “We start walking about 7 p.m., hit the Golden Casino on Highway 8 by 4 a.m.,” Mendiola explained. “Then we call this Indian guy from the reservation, and pay him $200 to take us to Oceanside, Calif. An American lady gets us past the checkpoint for another $200. Then we take public buses to Disneyland, and we are in L.A.”
   Still, even Mendiola wants to work in construction for only two more years, then return to Mexico to run a convenience store his family has opened with the money earned up north.
   “Crossing is getting a lot harder now,” he said. “You gotta stop sometime. This year and next, and boom, I’m done.”

Finally some good news...if we only financed a wall to stop the rest of them.

No walls.....

Nah, the government figures we have just the right amount of immigrants to 'do the job', so NOW they will enforce the law. And what's a dem or rep to do?  This whole immigration issue, no matter how the parties voted to resolve it, would end up in a lose/lose situation. So I guess they all sat down together and figured they'd just REALLY enforce the laws already in place! Now that's a new concept.