by Robert M. Traxler
“Overall, government data show there were a total of 50,308 people last month that were apprehended or deemed as “inadmissible” at the border.” — CNBC
The number of people illegally actually crossing the border per month at any given time will never be known; the number apprehended is a result of priority of effort on the part of law enforcement and the number attempting to enter. The number of those who enter illegally can only be an educated guess. Google this subject and you will get vastly different numbers, depending on how the source comes down on the issue of illegal immigration.
It is probably safe to say that every week more folks illegally enter our nation than live in Wayland, Dorr, Hopkins, Martin and Moline combined. The method used varies, but the one becoming more popular is simply presenting themselves to the Border Patrol Agents and requesting asylum. The illegal or undocumented person is processed, given a date to be arraigned and released. A number never show up for the court date. The number varies from 90% to 3% given the view of the people working the numbers.
”Asylum Seekers,” those fleeing violence in Honduras or Guatemala, are processed and released, and a crime is committed when they fail to present themselves to the court as ordered. Having spent time in Honduras, less in Guatemala, I will attest to a high crime rate in the major cities. If a person wishes to flee crime and only flee crime, they could move out of the cities into the much safer countryside with its small towns and villages. No law, rule or procedure requires them to illegally enter the United States. If crime was a serious problem for us we would move to a new town or village, as the good African American folks are doing in Detroit, Chicago and other crime ridden locations.
Getting back to the number who cross the border without being caught or surrendering themselves for asylum, it is probably well more than the number reported. Regardless of the actual number, it is a problem. The politically correct view is only workable if you think that all who face poverty in other nations are economic refugees, thus we need to embrace them.
The American standard of living is overall the best in the world. Using the need to provide sanctuary for all who are economically deprived would bring over a billion people to our nation. Using those who live in Central American nations with a high crime rate (much of it fueled by our demand for illegal drugs), we could allow millions of unskilled immigrants per year to enter.
Tegucigalpa, Honduras, a city used as the poster child for fleeing violence, has a major problem. With a crime rate of 8%, eight of every 100 people are victims of a crime per year — it is horrible.
Many good folks on the left, leading with their hearts and not their heads, feel that bringing millions into our nation is the answer. The conservative folks would tell us we need to help their nation, help their people. The cost of processing and allowing or denying a single Honduran to enter our country is $29,340, not including the costs of living during the 2- to 12-month processing time. Most are denied; would the funds be better spent helping Honduras solve their problems at home? Yes, but saying that will stir the ire of most on the left who will call me once again a horrible person who wishes to see poor minority children starve to death or be murdered in the streets.
The annual cost of processing refugee requests, illegal immigration and the increased Border Patrol Agents would be enough to train, equip and pay over 50,000 police officers in Honduras each year. It would be enough to pay for the education of all the Honduran children in the entire nation, including two meals per day, or to increase the income of every household in the entire nation by 40% every year.
The logical solution would be the betterment of Hondurans in Honduras, but that statement will invite the wrath of those who are looking for a political issue, not logically looking to help the maximum number of poor people. It all boils down to political power and who benefits from opening our nation to millions of unskilled illegals.
Common sense is not too common, with this politically charged issue.
I have always favored the use of my tax dollars to improve quality of life in other countries over less than humanitarian efforts to impose our American way of life upon foreign neighbors. The money we spend on so-called catch and release at the borders would be much better spent on food, clothing, medical care, disaster relief and human rights issues for those neighbors. It truly does speak volumes that millions upon millions of people would like to come to America for a chance at a better quality of life than they find in their home nations. In addition to sharing our financial wealth with the world in positive ways, I’d like to see a corresponding attitude adjustment toward the plight of our fellow inhabitants of Earth.
Nicely written piece, except for the implication that it is somehow easy to move away from inner city violence and poverty in the US. Or am I mistaken to infer that from your opinion?
Mrs. Mandaville,
Thank you for the comment. You are not incorrect to infer people can move away from violence and poverty.
Good folks who live in high crime rate cities are moving to safer smaller towns and out of crime ridden areas every day, easy or not. Many major cities are not growing at the same rate of population growth as the nation or even loosing population in part because of crime, Detroit is a prime example.
Again, thank you for the comment.