U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
November 25, 2008 08:29 PM UTC
127 Comments
Especially if workers were allowed to frequently pass between countries. Many of the people involved in terrorist activities in Europe don’t have any obvious terrorist connections that would show up in a standard background check.
And I know you’re kidding about the mines, but they are some of the worst conventional weapons ever invented.
I do agree with A and C though.
One thing your plan doesn’t address, however, is what to do with the millions of immigrants already here illegally.
For a work card in their home country and then return.
That’s E:
New, brutal penalties for any business paying immigrant labor directly.
I’ve known several immigrants who came here on student visas and then got jobs, and it can be a real hardship to send them back to their home countries.
1) It’s expensive, obviously, especially since in some cases one may not still have family there.
2) There are long waits at American embassies, along with a fair amount of corruption at some of them.
3) Most jobs that a skilled immigrant might get are not going to be thrilled if s/he has to take indeterminate weeks off to try to get a visa.
4) It’s already quite expensive and burdensome to get an ordinary work permit even without going to a home country.
So what’s the reason for requiring it? Is there any genuine good from it, or is it just to be punitive?
than this or any other plan would probably do. We’re also seeing immigrants, legal and illegal, returning home because the job situation is so crappy.
Apparently crashing the economy should have been plan A all along. it works like a charm. In the current situation this just doesn’t seem to be such a high priority problem for the time being.
are proposing would have a minimal impact on illegal immigration and a huge awful impact on legal immigrants. The former I don’t care much about, but the latter is a serious problem.
The only way to deal with illegal immigrants already in the US is to incentivize them to become citizens. This can be done in a variety of ways, but it must be done so those living in the shadows feel it would be worthwhile for them to become legal.
LB’s suggestion about the state ID card is interesting but could lead to a patchwork approach from different states. I would rather see an overhaul of the existing visa process and a new ID for immigrants in the US.
I agree with LB 100% when he says this is a problem that can be solved. Take the crazy rhetoric out of the equation and there are common sense solutions that can ensure immigrant rights, American workers and a win/win for all involved.
Path to citizenship should be cleaned up, but overwhelming majority of current illegal immigrants just want work, not citizenship.
This is not about xenophobia, it’s about knowing who’s coming across the border, ensuring that their uses of our system are paid for, and protecting them from exploitation.
Should local law enforcement be given more authority to deal with immigrants who don’t have proper ID?
It seems like the biggest problem right now is that the Feds are ignoring everything except Swift and Co. and the local law enforcement officials are saying it’s the Feds’ job and not theirs (which under current law is true.)
Would a Federal ID card give more power to local law to arrest, detain and properly process immigrants who break laws?
It is opt in, so it is up to the police chiefs and sheriffs. People get trained and the link between the locals and ICE is expedited.
There must be a concerted effort to revamp the existing alphabet soup of visas we offer.
If you have ever stood in line and/or gone through the process of getting/renewing a visa in this country – it is a nightmare.
No wonder so many opt to enter our country illegally instead of going through the system.
Imagine waiting at the DMV, then square it, then multiply that by $5000, and add the possibility of having to leave and never come back.
Most illegals have no desire to become citizens. They are here to work and improve their lives, send remittances back home. No desire to be part of the larger society. Yes, I know that this is a generalization and that there are exceptions.
I’m supposing that the four illegals found with seven pounds of coke yesterday were hoping for citizenship…..
because there is no reason for them to become citizens. Why should an illegal risk his/her neck to come out of the shadows when current practices reward their behavior.
Establishing a system where immigrants are eligible for benefits, language classes, and education may help reduce the numbers of illegals. The system must reward those who wish to stay, not punish all who are here now.
And, yes, the four illegals with seven pounds of coke were hoping for something besides citizenship – but they are part of the growing problem of illegal drug trade across the border. This is a separate issue in my mind than what to do about those immigrants already in the US.
Criminals can move with ease in the US because of the cover that the 12 million illegals provide. They don’t need to know English and they effectively have an underground railroad. Our “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on immigration has created this.
There is also a relationship between illegal immigrants and public health, education, law enforcement, economic development and cultural diversity.
I hate the idea that drug cartels are ruling border towns and allowed to flourish. However, the illegal immigrants contributing to crime in the US are different than those not (although some would say that the very nature of them being illegal makes them contributors).
We need to have immigration reform in this country that looks at the complex nature of all aspects of the policies – not just focusing on crime or border security or the visa process.
the choice to insert “somewhat” was likely a conscious one.
But at least he had the courage to show his true colors.
Unless you wanna rescind that part, LB?
Which borders would Jesus mine?
He wasn’t being serious.
please forgive me. How could I have misinterpreted his exact words.
The only secure borders are fortified; mines are the cheapest and most effective way to fortify borders. If “secure the border” is part of the plan, you gotta say how.
If “secure the border” is not part of the plan, then explain how you stem flow of illegals…
The problems of illegal immigration haven’t been solved because the choices are too dire and the current situation is tolerable.
People who get the vapors when a horrible option is suggested have to understand that it must be said, if only to know where your decisions are moving away from. Saying mine the border is not horrible. Doing it, in our rather enlightened society, is. And the two are different.
One un-politically correct option would be for ICE agents to shoot anyone found crossing. I assure you that within 36 hours no one will be crossing. But is this doable or moral? Of course not.
Maybe a 2000 mile monofilament trip line? 🙂
Just putting up signs warning the border is mined?
If a Mexican kid is lucky enough to be able to stay in publicly funded free education, that only goes to 8th grade, if I understand correctly.
Many drop out well before then. My friend Jose, who lives in Temoris, Chihuahua, calls them (with accent) Boo-roes. Burros.
problem very unlike they way we view the economy.
People are crossing the border because their own countries aren’t nearly as prosperous as ours. Well, why? Largely the reason why they don’t have it is because at almost every opportunity they have to empower themselves, become self-sufficient etc., some neighborhood bully is there to destroy it. America has been the biggest bully on the block and its largely due to economic motivations which, have often been varying shades of imperialistic in nature. These are complex issues with complicated solutions. Suggesting the use of one of the most devastating anti-personnel weapons to secure a first world country from the sewer it has helped to create is sickening to me. To consider the cost effectiveness of the option is even more revealing of the characters and ignorance of anyone who would imagine it viable. You guys should be ashamed of your arrogance.
Like the economy, we need to incentivize good behavior instead of ignoring and thereby exacerbating the role we have played to create it. When you buy your cheap crap that was made with no environmental or human rights standards, you are voting with your dollar to create the situation you hate. Its not hard to figure out where the drugs come from, its just hard to kick the habit. Mining the border won’t help the situation but it sure is a great way to fuck it all to hell.
And yes, I get that you dont take it seriously, but the conversation marches on with different little nuances and reasons why landmines aren’t such a horrible option.
Good job at the Christian thing, Laughing Boy. You really nailed it.
And you can see below this comment that LaughingBoy still thinks that if we put up signs, it might make it a little bit better to blow off desperate peoples limbs as a warning shot to other desperate people.
Gross.
I don’t know what the point is in even arguing about it. This is so far off-base I can’t even take it seriously. It is tremendously depressing that my fellow, relatively well-off citizens could be so inhumane and predatory as their first marker to move away from.
I am not up for sanctimonious crap, okay,sufimarie. Countries with huge poverty populations are the result of complex factors….See, it is not that everyone was once middle class and then some bully came and upset the apple cart. For most of all time, most people were incredibly poor, living hand to mouth….it is the development of wide spread affluence which is the real puzzle..
As for our neighbors to the South….There is a rich oligarchy in Mexico and sending their poor north allows the oligarchy to survive..You want to see the pretty face of Mexico, catch the soap operas on Univision…that is real wealth….finca land….loaded with dark skinned, indian maids…
Mining the 38th parallel has kept South Korea safe from northern aggression for 55 years. The first question with Mexico is how to we keep criminals from controlling the border?? It is a real and continuing question.
so climb off your high horse, and suggest a solution…
The poor on both sides of the border are the victims of the criminals.
any one who includes bullshit like “keep[ing] criminals from controlling the border” in respect to Mexico ain’t playin with a full deck.
you just aren’t paying attention to so many things.
The interesting thing is if you look at the world and which cultures and nation have good economies, they fall into two categories: Those of Enlightenment Europe and the Chinese. That’s it. As you say, the question is why are some countries wealthy and their citizens live in comparable stability and affluence.
Mexico has three classes, top to bottom: Euro, Mestizo, and Indio. The Euros live like kings and send the Mestizos north, the Indios live in abject poverty or hope for a military job. The USA never caused any of that stratification.
The nations of European descent that are failing so miserably have a common denominator: Spanish (and Portoguese)hierarchical culture with the centuries old influence of the Catholic church. OTOH, the Protestant Reformation distributed power centers, which helpd the nacent movements of self-determination.
You will also find that Mexico is very fatalistic. Why wear seat belts? When it’s your time it’s your time. In the Enlightenment/Protestant countries you find much more of a “Destiny is in my hands” attitude.
OK, I’ll stop although I could rant for hours.
Sufi, while you’re right in saying that “bullying” has had its role in the issues, you do have to look at the history of countries with no recent history of being pushed around (e.g, Mexico) and see that it’s not a good assumption to say that if we had left some of these countries alone, they’d be good democracies with solid economies and a strong middle class, as you seem to imply. Some places, maybe, but others would probably still have the kinds of class disparities that are the root of the immigration problem. (Pardon me if I misread you.)
Jambalaya, if you don’t think organized crime is part of the issue, it’s you who is not very learned on the issue. (I won’t make an insult about your intelligence, like you did with dwyer.)
now that I have had a chance to calm down a little about the whole “landmine the southern border” bullshit from some idiotic Christian epitome of mediocrity hypocrite.
(and Aristotle, not all of this is for you.)
Accountability is of the utmost importance when trying to solve a problem. Its all about understanding cause so as to be able to change its effect.
The US has played a role, even recently in Mexico (NAFTA), in the current horrific economic and political situations of all of the countries south of the border. It is from these situations people are trying to escape when they come here illegally. That aspect is really not that hard to figure out.
Our trade practices and interests with these countries have not fundamentally changed since 1492. We still exploit as much as we can get away with. We still do so unsustainably and unfairly. We still ravage the land and murder those who try to change the status quo. Until we change this, we can expect more of the same.
I’m not saying that we are entirely the cause of every bad thing but as long as we continue to abuse, we can expect an ab-used response.
“Well, how can we change?” you ask.
Don’t buy crap. Speak out about the region’s labor and environmental abuses. Just today union leaders in Venezuela were killed. Thats pretty heavy stuff. I wonder to whose economic benefit that was.
Something else that we need to do is to try to have a more interested stance in events. Expect it to be complicated. Expect to not be satisfied with the open ended answers. Blanket belligerent responses like “we should landmine the southern border during beer lol” are unacceptable, juvenile, hateful and would be called out by healthy individuals. I have learned that Coloradopols is not a place generally populated by healthy individuals– which makes me feel somewhat vindicated to be the target of such childish slander.
And, I never said that if we had left them alone, they would be strong. I can’t claim to know something like that. All I am saying is that if you take a hostile stance in a situation you don’t understand, you won’t fix it, you will only worsen the problem. Its disgusting that so much time was spent weighing the economic viability of planting landmines along a river. Anyone who espouses such a thing clearly does not know or does not care about the consequences something like that would entail.
I’m finished here. I would rather not spend time fighting with people who are only self-interested and profoundly self-unaware.
Have fun with the circle-jerk, boys. I’m sure it’ll be “productive.”
Your contributions are appreciated. Don’t quit over this.
Over and over again, actually. My comment to Parsing was to suggest simply putting up signs that stated the border was mined without actually mining the border. It was a stab at humor, and I think he probably got it. I don’t care if you didn’t get it. You seem to have bigger fish to fry, like not being a dick to everyone.
You were too busy being “outraged” to realize that this is a discussion, not policy implementation.
This whole Christian thing is really a burr under your saddle, isn’t it? Sorry, but you deserve it. You came in here generalizing about anyone that’s Christian, and even though I haven’t been to a non-wedding/funeral service in 25 years, I’m lumped in with the Knights Templar as the cause of everything wrong in the world. I don’t deny much of what you say, particularly where it comes to the European Catholic Church, but one of your first posts earned you the title of “Christianist Designator. It took you a few more to earn “Jerk Ass” from a fellow lib, but that’s another story.
I went ahead and called my sister (an Episcopalian Priest) in Haiti to tell her that I’ve seen the light and that she’s a monster and needs to stop her colonialist war-mongering hospital trip.
You’re obviously really intelligent and interested, but you’re simply horrible to anyone that doesn’t share your views lock-step, and I don’t have any patience for that. You can go away if you want, and if it makes you feel better to say to yourself that you went away because we were too dense and un-worldly for you, than go for it.
Why don’t you stay and just not be such a shit?
For you this seems to be much more about “gotcha” than anything else. Well, I’m not running for office here. We’re discussing something that has somehow inexplicably paralyzed Congress during both Dem and Republican Administrations.
In a real discussion, one could ask “What’s the most economical and effective way for us to secure our southern border?”. Looking at it in those terms, mines would fit the bill. Could you ever actually do it? Of course not. But that was the reason for my “half kidding” comment. There really aren’t any ways to economically and efficiently secure the border.
And in all your shrieking and shit-throwing, you missed the entire first part of my proposal, which was to make it easier for people to come here and work, which they need to do to survive and thrive. Yet you drew out of that that I dislike ‘poor people’. Again, it’s not about the issue, I think it’s about ‘gotcha’ since I like to point out your silly “Christianist” thing all the time. Let it go. You’ll feel better.
Maybe you’ll come to the meet-up. I bet we’ll get along just fine. I’ll make sure nobody says grace before they order the first round.
Sufimarie, I think it is more important for you to feel self-righteous and superior than it is to deal with real problems in the real world. cheap thrills.
For the record, a fortified border is a secure border. The cheapest way to fortify a 2000 mile border is to mine it. That is a fact. To state a fact is not to be guilty of genocide or whatever crap you throwing. It is simply a fact.
To create a “no man’s land” along our border with Mexico is to create a safe haven for criminals, both petty, dopers, and as well as terrorists. It is not fair to decent people on both sides.
The US was not around in 1492,,your statement is bizarre.
We are decent people struggling to begin talking about a very difficult problem. Your emotional needs supercede your grasp of historical fact or even a superficial understanding of the most basic facts. You will not be missed by me.
I mean, for fuck’s sake, it really is starting to look like a bunch of guys swinging their dicks around to let a woman know where she stands.
It’s one thing to say sufimarie is wrong; it’s quite another to ascribe that disagreement to some imagined emotional problems she has.
I’ve read in the NYT about a contractor here who needs his workers, who are in Mexico. He just calls them up on their cell phones, and they drive right on up in a couple of days. They have green cards, sort of what LB is proposing.
What’s wrong with this picture? Obviously, it’s the American workers who don’t get hired.
Our local housing projects is being rebuilt. Something like 500 residents applied for labor jobs. They were supposed to be getting preferences. So, what happened, the reality is that the contractors hired labor brokers and wound up with mostly illegals. Concerned citizens stopped this and the current crop of contractos have been kicked out. They broke contracts to save on labor.
If the workers have to be legal there is no room to undercut citizens. If the payments run through state, there is little room for breaking contracts. If there are serious penalties for hiring nondoc the problem solves itself.
I would add–its time for a national ID. It will help on immigration and it will help on national healthcare (crosses fingers)
The current green cards aren’t really up to the task of serving as solid ID. Nor, for that matter, is the current Social Security ID system.
I’m not a big fan of a national ID, and I won’t even consider supporting one unless it’s strictly for tax purposes like the SS# was supposed to be. There’s a fine line between good enforcement and “papers, please,” and the United States has been working on crossing that line for a long, long time. On the other hand, a new national ID system that replaces the Social Security ID is more than a little overdue.
Now that I embedded you with a v-chip when you shook my hand.
..I’ve spent most of my adult life carrying some form of ID card, and in the case of a National ID, it’s way over due.
It must have an RF-Harded chip to hold data, biometrically matched to the owner and could also have additional data channels for things like security clearance, CLEAR Pass, etc.
On the flip side, we need super-clear laws on what it can be used for, and who can ask for it. It’s NOT going to be a check-cashing card, or the thing you leave at the bar for your tab. Also, there’s has to be greater than reasonable suspicion for law enforcement to ask for it – (border & customs allowed.)
WIthout violating federal law, there’s certain…things we had in the military that were used to go and do certain things, and only certain people could ask for them. THAT’S how a National ID card should work.
You can go and carry around an unshielded RFID chip and get blown up the next time you visit overseas. I’ve got one of the new RFID-enabled passports and am shopping for a metal case to put it in because I don’t trust the “shielding” they’ve supposedly woven into the cover.
There has been an ever-increasing slide down the slippery slope of ID in recent years; your Social Security # is no longer a tax ID – it’s your life, and it’s easy to spoof. The push for REAL ID with RFID is a horrendous travesty of computer and information (in)security pushed by RFID vendors looking for a guaranteed buck over the objections of security experts.
I’m willing to carry a replacement SSID card with better security and a ready attachment to a verification database. I’m not willing to carry around an ID card that can be sniffed for my security clearance when I present it to a company or bank that has no need to know.
Rules don’t prevent access to data. Separation of function prevents access to data.
It might be hard to implement, and it could put a financial burden on states that already are dealing with budget crises.
Or, at least, the funding of a national ID?
This isn’t a driver’s license.
The only reason for states to do such a thing is that the burden is divided by 50. Regardless, they must be absolutely uniform. And the fewer people involved in the production, a la passports, the better.
Instead of creating something new.
has more to do with non-US citizens.
If we’re talking national ID, there’s no need for visa pages, etc. that come in a passport. How about an enhanced SS card?
Combined with the sensible restrictions that SSG suggests. Aside from employment, it could also be used for accessing benefits.
Right now Taiwan has a health ID card that maintains your medical records. It has cut down on administrative costs immensely.
If the government’s serious about cutting needless spending, how about a card like that? It could hold emergency health inormationthat could speed reaction time at an emergency room, for example.
It would just be a matter of first deciding what information would be linked to the card, then centralizing the information and ensuring its security.
The costs could be split between the states and the federal government, taking small amounts from various departments’ budgets.
It should be a national ID.
It is cheap compared to other homeland security measures.
it’s just really hard for me to shake my black helicopter, NWO, tin foil hat upbringing. In my house, Nat’l ID card was tantamount to the 4th Reich.
Then you don’t need the tinfoil to justify the paranoia – and there are real risks to a National ID system that doesn’t implement proper security measures and restrictions.
Anyway, the UK has been trying for a national ID for years (they have a much more interesting immigration problem) and have never been able to work out something that doesn’t a) cost of freakin’ fortune, b) provide a reasonable balance between security and privacy, c) defeat the purpose because it’s too complicated, no one would bother, or d) include all of the above issues.
Right now the limitations of a national ID system is that it seems impossible to get a new government database set up to handle it for less than too much money or a decade of development.
I’m not so sure it’s cheap compared to other HS measures, but it’s necessary if those measures are to be effective and reliable. It needs to be done, and someone needs to herd it through the bureaucratic red tape so that we can have it by the end of Obama’s first term.
How does it protect us? and if it does protect us, how do we keep people from forging it. People can forge money, drivers liscences, passports, more or less anything but DNA and biometric information. what does it do for us that a SSN doesnt do?
If we have a card like the Military’s Common Access Card, with harded RF, biometrically linked to you, and will all your important data embedded in the card, your like would be immensely better.
F’r instance, there’d be no more lines at customs – you’d watch thru a checkpoint, a camera would scan your face, match it to your data card in your pocket, record the entry and dump the data.
Same thing with DMV, or voting. You show up, and the data on the card “tells” an authorized data reader/sniffer that, well, you’re you. It would also be a faster way to enforce the Brady Bill – a data sniffer would read your card that you’re not a felon, dump the read, and you buy your weapon of choice. (This would work at a gun store or gun show.)
The most important thing is that uploading data would have to be controlled at the highest level…no using it as your King Soopers card. And 99% of the times it’s used, the data scanned would have to be dumped after verification. (The same way that Vegas casinos use facial recognition software to id cheaters = scan once, match/fail, dump scan.)
Again, the Military has used this since 2000, and it works great. I know there’s no guarantee that someone will figure out a way to forge or spoof it once, but there’s ays to audit the system to keep it clean.
1) You don’t want it used everywhere. Sure, that’s what they said about Social Security numbers. But now you need that number for any kind of financial transaction.
2) My face doesn’t always look that much like my photo ID; sometimes I wear glasses, sometimes I have facial hair. Some people dye their hair. Some people gain or lose weight. A person can recognize you in a photo. A computer, as awesome as we want to believe it is, cannot. Less of a problem in the military, where appearances don’t change much.
3) People lose their driver licenses all the time. Credit cards too. Even passports. What happens when this card gets stolen?
4) For this to work the way you describe, it would have to be constantly updated with data, which would mean bureaucrats would be constantly digging for information about you and everyone else. And since such systems always have gaps, you’re still going to have people slipping through the cracks.
What do you do when you’ve submitted yourself to the basic technology of a totalitarian society to preserve your freedoms, and one immigrant with no criminal record except a little child molestation in a small town in Burma that nobody ever noticed comes through and rapes a child? Then what was it all for?
You seem to understand, at least subconsciously, that an RFID chip is constantly accessible from a distance. Do you understand the security implications of that?
There has yet to be an encryption algorithm that hasn’t fallen to the test of time. If you’ve got an ID in your pocket and it goes the same places at the same basic times every day, you’re inviting someone to steal your ID.
Also, it’s been widely discussed that carrying around an RFID chip in certain places (say, Kuwait) is kind of like advertising your American citizenship status to any bomb that’s broadcasting for RFID signals.
No RFID.
Also, in the citizen world, such information is better protected in a central database; yes, there’s the not-insubstantial risk of a break-in, but that’s what secure systems are designed to do. Storing too much information on a card or chip is asking for that information to get out into the wide world with a very small probability of detection.
…first off, Hardened or Passive RF. Not active, like my handy-dandy AmEx Blue card. Chip only transmits to authorized receivers when properly cued.
Second, Facial Recognition software is REALLY REALLY good. You can thank the Vegas casinos for that. And if somehow it doesn’t match, you get asked to show your card. The idea with facial scan and RF Card match is that you don’t have to stop.
Third, DoD has been using it for 8 years. Considering that Military people are target #1 for terrorists, none of them have been offed by their CAC cards. And if you believe in the world of James Bond Terrorism, someone from SPECTRE should’ve already stolen one of these cards, hacked them, and snuck into a NATO airbase and stolen a nuke. (Now, the Air Force losing one is another discussion.) Hasn’t happened. Nor has someone used another GI’s CAC card to draw their weapon from the Arms Room and use it blast a Shopping Mall.
Lastly, the purpose of the card is to positively identify you, and leave enough space for extra data. So, if all you wanted was your vital stats, plus your CLEAR Pass number, that could be all they load when you get it from whatever Federal Agency is using them.
My example is this – the Missus is a Dutch National. She’s grown up with a law that says you HAVE to have National ID, either an ID card or a Passport. It’s against the law for her to NOT have it on her, but it’s also against the law for a Dutch policeman or gov’t agent to demand it without “beyond probable cause.”
Yes, she has to show it when she renews her info with the Dutch Gov’t, or when she enters the county. But no one asks her for it when she uses a credit card, makes a deposit in her bank account, or goes to visit her brother who works for the Dutch National Weather Service.
It’s a mechanical system stuffed in a pretty small space, my guess is it’s a lack of access to a test sample that’s preventing a complete break.
The purpose of the card in the military may be to completely identify you and carry all your good data; that’s not what I want in a free society.
We aren’t the Dutch, our system of laws is different, and we’ve seen quite nicely, thank you, how easy it is for our politicians to erode the boundaries of ID access.
By using a 9-digit identifier, it doesn’t fit the definition of a “good” unique ID system. Consider what would happen if we changed from the 9-digit SSID to a 9-character ID (base-36)…
A regular SSID number theoretically could represent up to 1 billion people. We have 300 million people in the country right now, meaning somewhat under 1/3 of SSID numbers are in active use. That means that for every three 9-digit numbers you guess, one will be a currently valid SSID, and another one will probably have been valid in the past. Not good from a security standpoint.
Switching to an alpha-numeric 9-character ID changes the picture, though: such an ID could identify one of over 100 trillion people (or business entities). That’s a bit better – in computer terms, it’s a “sparse hash”, which is good for assuring uniqueness.
Such a unique ID is invaluable to enforcement agencies, giving them a good sense of confidence when double-checking employer records – something we don’t have now. Sure, you can forge the card – but can you figure out a valid ID number?
I can see your point if you think this is a “papers, please” kind of ID. But unlike SSG_Dan, who thinks the military ID is great for society at large (it isn’t), I see this more of a combination tax ID, proof of citizenship, and visa/green card. Only a very few people will be able to ask you for it, and only to confirm information or record to government agencies – like the SSID used to be before it got corrupted by the credit rating agencies. If done properly, only the holder of the ID ever need know their ID number – an equivalence ID could be given to any employer or other tax-reporting entity that the government databases can map to the person’s identity.
“The program will start with roughly 50,000 foreign students and spouses of permanent residents who will receive cards if they qualify for visa extensions.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…
You have touched on what I think is at the root of this whole debacle. Part of our society thinks that everyone should make a ‘liveable income’, thus we have a relatively high minimum wage. Another part of our society wants to build buildings, grow crops and make a profit. Problem is these jobs require massive amounts of relatively unskilled labor. Paying $7 an hour for someone to work in the fields or on a construction site can add up to a lot of cash, and often can cause a business to go bankrupt.
Hiring illegal immigrants at a fraction of what we would have to pay US citizens allows farms, construction businesses, slaughterhouses and the like to increase profit margins, or decrease cost and still make a profit.
Not hiring immigrants may give more Americans jobs, but it will also drive up costs for more Americans. Food and housing prices will continue to rise. Fewer public works projects will get built. The illegal immigrant scheme works because most of the workers send the money back to their families in Mexico where the cost (and standard) of living is lower.
Stop exploiting South Americans and their land in unsustainable and slave-like ways?
Quit deposing their democratically elected leaders?
(After we fix our own infrastructure) Help them to utilize strategies that would improve their economies?
I just can’t get over that mine comment he has in his diary. Thats so fucked up.
Yeah, LB would make a great Republican front-pager. He certainly has all the hypocritical bullshit to appropriately represent.
A major problem we face with the current illegal immigration wave is that the leaders don’t want to improve the lower class in their economies, only the corporate/government profit.
While I don’t advocate deposing the leadership, it is in fact the leadership that continues to be the problem.
By trying to protect the wages of and to ensure the easy border crossing of North, Central, and South Americans that want to come work hard here?
You’re right. How exploitative of me.
Shoo! Back to your snippy little HTML class…
The mine comment was a stab at a cheap and efficient way of confining border crossings to predetermined, established, government crossings. It was also in jest, as I noted.
Please go jump in a lake and take your false huffing and puffing with you.
Own it.
You wrote “I’m only somewhat kidding about D.”
Thats crystal clear. You think it is somewhat acceptable and you think you can get away with it because of the nature of this forum.
The fact that you would even consider that demonstrates your lack of integrity on the issue.
I’m not shocked that you would write it. I fully expect it from you, but that doesn’t make it less full of shit.
I bet you wouldn’t say that crap in a room full of migrants. Not even jokingly.
Also, you don’t demonstrate the slightest bit of compassion or understanding about the realities of what it takes to try to help your family in that situation.
How would you feel if someone wrote about mining the places you and your ilk go? Would you take them seriously? Would you take the threat seriously or would you take anything they say seriously?
Whatever, LaughingBoy. What the fuck ever.
Is it possible we could tone down this little fight?
It’s starting to take up significant space and is permeating many threads.
Just a request. Thanks for listening.
Its hard for me to let this slide because a slight about mining the border in his diary is pretty outrageous for many reasons, especially considering the things he accuses others of.
Pols has a reputation for being a pie-fight in a minefield (how apropos) and its weird how some things are enforced by the community while others are not.
congratulations.
If you are on one side of I-25 and you need to get to the other side, do you consider it an affront that you need to go to an underpass to walk safely across or do you leap onto both lanes and run across to ‘stick it to the man’?
It’s not practical to mine the border, and the point wouldn’t be to mine it and not tell anyone where the mines are, the point would be to inexpensively dissuade people from trying to sneak across the southern border of the US and to make it so easy to cross at a checkpoint that unless they were doing so for nefarious reasons that there would be no need to sneak at all.
My point was that in purely hypothetical terms, mining is as realistic and as cost-effective as anything else that’s ever been thought up. so fuck off.
Many of the people who cross the border to work (who we should make it easier for them to do so) come from countries where broken glass is fixed to the top of residential fences. Where concertina wire is common around anything of value. What’s the difference between falling to your death into barbed wire (anyone who’s served in the military and had to roll out concertina wire will back me up that they might rather walk into a minefield than trip into the wire) and being blown up by a mine, marked with lots of signs that say “Don’t cross the border here – you will blow up. Please go two miles down the road to the checkpoint and have some free water – welcome to the USA.”
Sorry, you’re not the civility police here on pols. I’m done talking to you about this particular issue. Have fun under your rock.
Hmm… landmines or concertina wire?
Dude, just give up.
You made a horrible mistake about suggesting mining the border. It is stupid in many ways. Which two first-world countries would ever consider mining each others borders? I think you think its okay to suggest it because poor people aren’t worthy of your consideration.
Are you a member of the minutemen? You sound like it.
Thats not very Christian.
Not very Christian at all.
That is classic.
“I bet you wouldn’t say that crap in a room full of migrants. Not even jokingly.”
I wouldn’t say it jokingly, I would say it outright. Why do I think I can say it, because I unlike you (most likely) have lived in other countries where I HAVE had to get work papers, or work their illegally and just wait for the government to come get me if it wanted to. Yes I am a US citizen, but I choose not to work in this country, I choose to work elsewhere.
And guys what immigrants do, by sending their money back home to their families. That’s partly what I do, and I think most immigrants in any country do it. I spend money in the country I live in yes, but I also put it back into the bank or send it to the US.
and you are deported pronto!
Mexico is also fight their illegal immigrant invasion on the southern borders. If you think ICE is bad, try the Mexican Army. Rape, murder, drug muling, beatings all at the hands of the hypocrites. “Do as we say, USA, not as we do ourselves.”
I was still on my first cup, OK?
In any other country in the world if you are caught in the country illegally you get deported. Its as simple as that. It doesn’t matter if your family is still in the country and you are the only source of money, you are there illegally you get kicked out.
Why don’t people in this country understand that, why is that we have to be the country that looks the other way and have to be all warm and fuzzy? And if someone says that ‘C’ work again, ARGH!
Most countries do not have birthright citizenship if one of the parents is not acitizen. Many countries do not allow you to purchase real estate if you are from another country and don’t have the appropriate visa or whatever. Only Mexicans can own property within I think it’s 50 miles of the coast.
Being in America illegally is the only crime that apparently should have no consequences. Said folks commit crimes (illegal entry and identity theft at the least)and expect no consequences.
I know that if I go knock off the local bank, there are consequences, even if years later.
There are plenty of things that are illegal that have no punishment. Many of the things Bush has done fall into that category….
Being here illegally isn’t a crime in the felony-or-misdemeanor sense, it’s just illegal.
Maybe it should be a felony. Frankly, I’m amazed it’s not.
Actually, to use your (poor) example of Bush, there are punishments such as we meted out in Nuremburg. With the bombing of Baghdad I reviewed the Nuremburg indictments. Boosh & Co. was guilty of the very things we hanged Germans for.
Not so much the war crimes.
For example, some of his executive orders violate statutes like the ESA, Clean Air Act, and land use statutes. There are, however, no penalties specified for an Executive who violates the law – the only penalty is impeachment (which is still off the table…).
Obama isn’t as far left as I would like, but he beats the alternatives.
I figure the 21st as the first day of doing “bidness.” Obama could make some huge headlines by doing some perfunctory roll back of Bush orders on the 20th, I think.
Amongst former colonies like Canada and Australia, countries built on immigration, Citizenship by birth is the norm.
Europe is moving away from citizenship by parent because they see it as a remenant of their ethno-nationalist past. Europe has huge ethnic minority underclass communities and no mechanism to integrate them.
The great strength of the US is the ability to integrate (in theory) minority groups.
It may take generations, but we (along with the other former colonies) do have a mechanism.
But even if you add up all the Western European nations and their offspring, it’s still a minority position.
Yo, Danny the Red, I really do not know what that means. France and England were colonial empires and granted right to migrate to their former colonial subjects..that is the heart of their problem. Now I may be wrong, but I think that all people born in the former colonies of Britain are automatically British citizens. I think that is the same for France. This is an interesting sideline..but not relevant to our US problem..
Once upon a time, say pre-WWII, it was rather difficult for a person born in India to actually get to the UK. Something like money and then lack of support system after arrival.
Airfare and the ever expanding base of like people has made a disaster for the UK even though the laws were the same for a few hundred years.
Last year Colorado passed a law that would allow the CO Dept of Labor to coordinate with the Mexican consulate to implement a pilot program to help workers come to CO where they are needed (HB-1325)
States throughout the US should be developing, implementing and studying these programs to help facilitate responsible immigration in the US. Personally, I’ve been part of similar programs for various service industries in Denver and the workers consistently come during the busy seasons and leave during the off seasons.
One small example of how states can do something positive regarding immigration.
and it could definitely be expanded. Why just farms? In a good economy there are far more industries that can’t fill positions.
Incomplete sentence. “industries that can’t fill positions at wages Americans expect to receive.”
Twenty years ago, who was mowing our lawns, building our houses, and washing our dishes. Americans. And we wonder why so many minorities don’t see a future and deal drugs instead? Even washing dishes at a decent wage has dignity.
of the wage/work ratio. The American middle class is so spoiled.
A lot more than I was!
One of the few advantages of being older is being able to get a wider perspective of changes in society.
Once upon a time here Florida, if a family did not mow their own lawn (i.e., grumbling teenager like me)the person who did was black. Now he is Mexican, I never see a black American doing routine maintainence. Ditto in the kitchens of the restaurants and the service people in the hotels.
Same thing in Denver with office building janitorial services. Once upon a time, good union jobs for blacks and Hispanic-Americans. The illegals came along, the building owner no longer contracted directly and hired companies that hired illegals, wages plummeted. Now said illegals find themselves getting screwed and are (rightfully) demanding better wages and benefits.
Which Americans once had.
But, if the illegals get better wages and benefits, there’s no advantage to hiring the illegals and they are out of a job.
I don’t know what the right answer is, but I do see a fairly consistent pattern of the last 200+ years of American independence. We need cheap labor, the people who live here don’t want to do it, so we allow immigrants in. This started as far back as the slave trade, continued when the railroads were built and is still continuing today.
What has happened in every instance is these people, regardless if they originated in Africa, China, Ireland, Germany or Mexico, eventually started to achieve citizenship and equal rights, and started wanting to be paid more for their work. Now we have all these people here who won’t work for the wages these companies want to pay (now its even mandated by law), so companies go get immigrants.
If we allow this to continue, the central and south american immigrants will demand higher wages, become citizens and we will be looking for somewhere else to import cheap labor to support the lavish American lifestyle.
From 1926 to 1965, the door was effectively shut. Many would argue, myself included, that the lack of new, cheap labor allowed the middle class to come into existence.
This threads gotten a bit out of control, so I apologize if I’m asking a question when I’ve just missed the answer.
A fair amount of what I’ve read on this topic from you also relates to legal immigration. I was wondering what your ideal situation would be if illegal immigration weren’t an issue. Would you suggest very limited immigrant access, or cut it out altogether?
I realize that it’s hard to not sound sarcastic while typing, but I wanted to sincerely thank you for reminding me that there is a reason that’s not racially motivated. Even though I tend to lean more toward “rearranging the kitchen” (hopefully at least one person gets that reference), I do recognize the wage/work issue.
Yes, I am all for restricting immigration by maybe 90%. We now have “chain migration”, one immigrant gets in, then it’s his Mum, then her sister and so on.
This is often a total sham. ICE has started doing DNA tests on those claiming relation, and in Africa about 90% of the claims are denied. I.e., they lied.
Once upon a time I was drinking in a border town with some friends. A fight broke out and one of my buddies got stabbed, nothing major, but it scared the hell out of us. We snuck him across the border to El Paso’s hospital where the doctor told us that if we’d stayed our friend would’ve died in prison. Basically if you’re anywhere near that kind of thing, you get hauled in and forgotten about.
Also, it’s just not a guarantee. I’ve seen a documentary on the murders of young women in Brazil(?). They have one of the highest rates and literally no arrests. It was shocking.
Clear as mud, right? I don’t have a suggestion for a new plan either. B is maybe the hardest part of your plan.
A, B, and C are great ideas, and D would make for an interesting reality TV show.
If the feds and states split the cost, a national ID would be a viable solution. Implementing a national database would be a problem, though. There would have to be a network infrastructure sound and secure enough to prevent hackers from altering, stealing, or erasing data.
Setting up checkpoints would create jobs within the Border Patrol, which would help the economy, along with the spending people would do when they entered their destination country.
All in all, a set of pragmatic solutions for the immigration issue that should be discussed at higher levels of government.
I wonder what the partcipation would be if we could set up another meet and greet/policy discussion. I couldn’t make the last one.
I’d show up again if it fit my schedule.
We as a group could probably solve most of the country’s problems over mojitos, given some of the ideas Polsters have put up lately.
Now that the elections are over (except MN and GA), we could focus on state issues.
Maybe we could do something once a month or every two months. Just throwing it out there.
…they’re Cuban ain’t they? Commie bastard.”
I don’t drink myself, but some people I know like “boat drinks.” Then again, they also like Jimmy Buffett…
The years of cheap, low cost and laid back living in Florida is long gone. Beside the fact that taxes and insurance costs are way up, we low lifes compete with the rich at every turn. What were free beaches are no longer. Rents have sky rocketed.
Sigh.
Most of my friends still live between Sarasota and Port Charlotte. They’re being hit pretty hard with everything going on these days.
I just hope my best friend has a good mortgage.
The issue is slowly taking care of itself as the economy continues to crater. Many of us have been arguing for some time that the militarized nativism wasn’t necessary, just change the economics by enforcing our labor laws. Conservatives balked for any number of reasons and now they’ve lost the Hispanic community for the foreseeable future and the issue is slowly going away as economic conditions change. Funny how that worked out, no?
more, http://steampoweredopinions.bl…
No jobs, no illegals.
The Operation Wetback (Ouch!) of the Eisenhower era only deported about 10% of those headed south. The rest self-deported. It wasn’t worth the hassles of staying.
Unless I missed it somewhere, it looks like everyone is taking the notion that illegal immigration is a big problem as true. But what if it isn’t?
About two months ago, the local NPR station had a report suggesting that, two years after our state passed its illegal immigration laws, the results showed that there must not have been nearly the number of illegal immigrants the estimates showed. For example, the drop in services requested never materialized because illegals were not getting them in the first place. The state had wasted about $2 million setting up the bureaucracy for checking on immigration status or citizenship.
So, I think that it would be wise to begin this discussion* by defining how much of a problem this really is. Some comments speak to it, but not in a big-picture sort of way.
Does anyone have any reliable data we can mine?
* I know, this is comment # 51, a bit late to “begin” anything…
the far, angry right, but here’s a good article with the number at around 11 million.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.co…
The special session in ’06 was pretty priceless because of the debate you’ve mentioned. I remember Tom Plant getting irritated and finally standing to predict that not a single illegal immigrant would be caught by the new system. His theory was that if you’re here illegally, you stay away from law, or government. Literally zero was the correct number.
As someone pointed out above, the immigrants are leaving because there isn’t any work. In my mind this is an excellent to do whatever the hell “needs” to be done.
For the record, I don’t give a shit about illegal immigration and agree that the big picture lacks a problem. For me to care I’ going to need some kind of proof that this group is dragging America down. Like if a disproportionate amount of violent crimes are committed by illegal aliens.
Sadly, this group (regardless of ethnicity) is vital to our economy in good times. The mass deportation would most likely lead to a further economic failure and the loss of more companies that would move somewhere cheaper.
I don’t have a problem with immigrants legal or otherwise. However, I do see three problems.
I have a problem with exploitation on workers, legal or not. This is why they need to be in the system.
We should know who is in the country–its a matter of sovereignty
I want to differentiate between people who want to come here to work (who I support) and people who want to smuggle contraband in to the country that I want to concentrate on
See, what I’m after is a more objective description of the problem. This is only a political issue today because of the xenophobes and jingoists, and they’ve framed the debate. (The article that droll linked above is full of comments from them, and most are predictably hateful.) It’s only fallen down the priority list because of the recession.
Parsing knows how to describe the jobs angle without sounding like somebody from South Park (They t’k ‘r jeobbbss!), which is how Tancredo and his followers come across. I appreciate that perspective, although I have to wonder how many black people have ascended the economic ladder beyond these kinds of jobs that immigrants primarily fill today. That’s an angle worth looking into.
Droll’s response to me above includes the line that we need to see exactly how illegals are supposedly dragging down America. If we’re going to follow the lead of the jingoists and xenophobes, that is also an angle that needs critical examination.
except for here of course 🙂
I stopped when I learned that Romanoff is “the privileged Jew.” As if there were only one.
That you’d come in with that one.
Do you think it’s important to track who comes across our borders?
How about protecting them from feeling like they’re going to be deported or manipulated by employers that offer them terrible wages or just don’t pay them under threat of deportation?
..my post was meant to respond to Aristotle, not you. Feel free to keep on mining w/o interference from me.
That includes (white) Irish, Russians, and other visa over-stayers. Skin color is not an issue except to those who want it to be.
…instead of inventing band-aid “solutions”?
to think that no matter what the economy here that there will be no market for many of the jobs the immigrants fill now?
I don’t. Plus, let them raise the bar with their hard work.
You mean Nuke every other country? Now you’re talking.
that the problem with the biggest weakness of this country is that all the people who know how to solve its problems are cutting hair and driving taxis.
…Burns had some good lines now and then, and Gracie was a hoot-n-half.
A. Completely open the borders for 4 hours on New Year’s Day. You cross, you stay.
B. Institute a point system Г la Canada or the UK and let in everyone who beats the spread.
C. Increase legal immigration by a factor of 4. I need some good programmers and some good lawn guys.
While under your comment, this one of mine would apply to several above.
Labor is a commodity, especially low unskilled types. More labor supply, lower wages. Lower wages, more Americans on welfare and dealing drugs and being paid less if they work. Why do we think so many Republican business people want more immigration? It holds down labor costs.
One BIG reason the middle class became so, well, big after 1926 is the almost slamming of the immigration doors. It gave a forty year breather for Americans and legal immigrants to stop competing with the latest boat load.
One cannot simultaneously be for good wages, unions, and worker dignity while endorsing more immigration. So many of my liberal friends don’t get this supply/demand stuff.
This liberal does.
I would keep D as an option. If they have convenient and legal means of coming to this country to better themselves, the US, and their family then only those that shouldn’t be coming will need to resort to the illegal crossing.
And since I am one of those, having to jump through the hoops of other country’s to work in them, A,B,and C are very easy! Much easier than getting into the BVI’s, I have direct experience with that country and many others…. Sigh
OK, I know the Maginot Line of Immigration makes all of your Conservatives warm and happy, but it doesn’t work. Neither would a minefield.
Africans risk their lives daily to charge the concertina wire fences of Ceuta and Melilla in Morocco, and the possibility of shredding still doesn’t deter them. Neither does drowning, since hundreds of Africans get on leaky boats and try and get it to the Canary Islands.
Minefields, would make those of you who’ve never seen human beings mutilated by them warm and happy, but if the immigrants think they have no choice, they will figure out basic mine clearing operations pretty fast. Shit, they currently risk death by heat stroke and heat exhaustion to get into this county.
What’s next? A double-walled reinforced fence with guard towers and orders to shoot to kill? I thought that’s what we were fighting AGAINST in the Cold War!
The Berlin wall was designed to keep people in not, keep people in. Kind of like the difference between a prison and a bank vault.
But on the substance I agree. Some people will always seek to brave dangers for a better life. As long as the standard of living is so poor in mexico and there are opportunities in the US, there will be immigration.