Response to the debates on Immigration Reform
These are the insights of the candidate's statements by Illegal Immigration expert, Xelan Bonn, president and founder of the Patriot Union of America.
Hillary Clinton And Barrack Obama
These [illegal aliens] people are immigrants.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: Using such obfuscating language may be a political ploy and cute but it remains propaganda at best and ignorant embellishment at worst. It is certainly a form of yellow journalism when used by the press or news media.
Those who come onto US soil illegally are clearly not "immigrants" and cannot be labeled as such for one very simple reason - to be an US immigrant, a person must come here in a legal capacity that permits them to immigrate. "Illegal alien" is the proper terminology for the criminal who enters onto US soil in violation of our laws. Such persons are not entitled to legally immigrate and under current law are suppose to be both jailed and then deported when caught.
The US is a country of immigrants - but legal immigrants who respect our laws. The criminal or illegal alien is not part of that proud mix or heritage. It is perhaps important to note that based on current statistics, the average illegal alien has committed at least one felony to arrive on US soil illegally, secure forged or fraudulent documentation (e.g. IDs, etc) and secure work illegally. Calling such persons immigrants in an insult to our legal immigrants as well as the nation.
I supported the Dream Act because we would rather have a nation of educated persons than not.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: It is extremely difficult to fathom why any US citizen, even a politician, would prefer opportunity and assistance be given to those who are on US soil criminally over US citizens who are increasingly in need of an education and funding assistance and asked to go without. The guise of this proposal was that it sought to help illegal alien children - the reality is that is would have actually reduced the benefits available to US citizens, favoring and rewarding instead, the criminal foreigner (with no age limit so that illegal alien adults also benefited).
Humanitarianism begins at home and on US citizens - and when all US citizens have had a reasonable and fair fill of the bounty of their country and its resources, then we might give our excesses to the world. Better to take the same money proposed to be spent on the Dream Act and give it to all US citizen students to reduce their student loan burdens rather than offer up such freebies to foreigners who should be returned home instead of coddled. The burdens we try to accept that are now placed on illegal alien children would have, and are, eliminated by simply enforcing our immigration laws.
In 2004 the Senate tried to make a set of mean spirited laws that criminalized anyone who helped illegal aliens - people who were providing humanitarian assistance - those proposals were just mean!
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: One of the major obstacles in this debate has been clearly separating two distinct aspects: one is the terrorist or potential terrorist component of illegal immigration; the other is the more benign class of illegal alien most of us typically gravitate toward in our opinion forming - the former could kill millions of Americans but is given less focus - we chose instead to focus on the more benign class as politicians and citizens. Politicians use this to their advantage in their approach on illegal immigration when they have a pro-amnesty agenda.
Americans are not trying to avoid offering humanitarian assistance to anyone, least of all the benign classes of illegal aliens. However, because we have no way of knowing who is in a benign class or a threat class, law makers tend to want to protect society so they error to the safe side. After all, would any American want to aid and abet terrorists? Such laws are not mean, they are prudent and meant to protect US citizen families rather than coddle criminal aliens, regardless their classification.
If the Senator or Senate adopted the Safe America Act approach, they would see that this issue is eliminated - all illegal aliens who cooperate are given humane and dignified treatment throughout the process of repatriating and only the terrorists and criminals who will not cooperate will be treated harshly - as they should be.
I support driver's licenses for illegal's because we need to get people insured.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: Across the US, driver's licenses are used as the primary means of obtaining other forms of identification and access, from government to banking and more. Offering drivers licenses to illegal aliens is a national security issue simply because terrorists and other criminals can game the system and remain undetected on US soil indefinitely via being aided by such documents. This is not an issue about the ability for someone to drive while on US soil. It is an issue that concerns the basic flaws in our current state ID systems and their security or lack thereof, and the outcroppings of those issues on national security. Such aspects can easily aid domestic terrorist.
It is important to note that legally authorized aliens on US soil can obtain drivers licenses without incident or issue simply because they are clearly known and identified - this is contrary to those on US soil criminally and whose true identities cannot be verified. issuing drivers license to illegal aliens is a foolish recipe for aiding in the death of Americans at the hands of illegal alien terrorists - period!
However, it is also important to note that offering legal documents to those on US soil criminally is also a reward, which helps encourage others to come here illegally as well.
I do not hold [illegal] immigrants accountable for the job losses to the Black community or other communities - [illegal aliens] are being scapegoated. Blacks were suffering long before this last wave of [illegal] immigrants came here.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: We know that there are likely as many as 5 million high paying jobs being taken by illegal aliens, and millions more lower paying jobs that US citizens could be doing. However, at the core of the issue is economic opportunity and Civil Rights progression. If jobs are taken by those who are here in a criminal capacity, they are not available to those of US citizenship-right who most hold priority and privilege over the criminal foreign interloper.
Let's look as this another way. Assume there are 10,000 jobs consumed by illegal aliens in any given city (many high paying) and that Blacks have the highest unemployment rate in that city. Does is not make more economic and Civil Rights progress sense to incentivize area employers to provide recruiting and training for Blacks in those cities toward filling those positions (that are currently being given to lower paid criminal foreign labor)? After-all, Blacks fought for and won hard-earned rights toward not only ensuring greater equality but toward achieving their community progression through the Civil Rights movement, which we as a nation embrace, respect, and now largely promote and adore - that is, until we turn our head and give our progress and opportunities away to foreign criminals and not secure them for the nation's Blacks who want and need them.
Instead, we exasperate the problem for Blacks and de-incentivize both government and employers by condoning criminal behavior and allowing cheap or slave-like labor to flourish. I would expect such a perspective from perhaps a white politicians in the deep south, but I am puzzled by Obama's contrary approach - he appears to be pandering to foreigners at the expense of the Black community and I find this extremely troubling - he may become the first anti-Black Black president in US history.
I would not vote on the Kennedy-McCain Immigration bill proposal again. I would work with the Congress to find a solution. Look, the people were clear, they want the borders secure before we do anything else.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: Notice he did not say anything about path to citizenship or other amnesty scams! It's very difficult to put one's faith in someone who officially and clearly stood and fought for amnesty for 12 to 20 million illegal aliens and also wanted to increase legal immigration to astronomical numbers toward overpopulating the US and transforming it into an impoverished, Third World country (like all of Latin America). His answers are but political-speak - canned answers offered by the establishment's candidates toward securing a future "out" so that they can later justify a new amnesty attempt, if elected.
I am floored with amazement on just how hell bent these prospective leaders are on securing an amnesty (path to citizenship and not deportation) for this criminal sector within our society - people who do not belong on US soil - many who remain a threat to our family and national security - people who have no right in any form to be on US soil and who have cost this country irreparable damage and are now to be fully rewarded in the name of extremist liberalism or in aid of greedy corporations - even at the cost of bankrupting our nation - it's just mind boggling to anyone with common sense and respect for our laws and Constitution. Fifty years ago these types of leaders would have been put on trial for treason.
Barrack ObamaI support a path to citizenship for [illegal] immigrants.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: This allows criminal aliens to step ahead of all legal immigrants by virtue of allowing the criminal continued and uninterrupted access to US soil, jobs, and programs - meanwhile, the legal immigrants the world over wait for the same access, jobs, and programs and cannot get equal treatment.
For a law maker to say they support criminals and criminal activity... it's just mind blowing and contradictory to all forms of reason.
This is amnesty. It rewards criminal behavior and encourages more of the same. It is a slap in the face to not only the rule-of-law, but to all legal immigrants who are conducting their affairs in a legal and orderly fashion in respect for America and its laws - contrary to the criminal alien that breeches our borders or overstays their visa as any thief-in-the-night searching for free booty.
The punishment for entering onto or remaining on US soil criminally is generally 6 months in prison for the first offense; for obtaining illegal documents, as much as 5 years prison; for working for cash and evading taxation, perhaps another 5 years. We are not dealing with slap-on-the-hand crimes that the average illegal alien is committing, yet asking them to simply return home as their punishment appears too much to ask for those entrusted to our highest offices? Such displays of extremist liberalism and disdain for the law and Americans ensures the erosion for the respect of law in general and in turn, digresses society rather than uplifts it.
Amnesty plots will aid and assist over 78,000 known persons of interests (from countries with ties to terrorism) who are now on US soil undetected - giving them greater time and ability to plot their terrorists activities. Amnesty is unconscionable and is actually a disguised form of treason - there's just no other soft-worded way to say it.
Lastly, amnesty plots that require background checks are actually political scams in that such background checks would take decades to perform (our politicians know this fact and the risks and yet still seek to sell out American families and our Constitution) - meanwhile - the criminal alien remains on US soil to conduct their terrorist or criminal activities at will until such background checks can be conducted for millions of aliens; such scams place the entire domestic security of the United States and its people at undue risk.
The failure of the federal government to enforce our immigration laws has triggered a Constitutional breech by the federal government to the states and their citizens under Article 4, Section 4, and if we are no longer going to respect and obey our Constitution, we are no longer the United States of America but some other country disguised as such. Any presidential candidate who supports such a breech (by supporting amnesty or path to citizenship) is conducting themselves as a traitor under Constitutional law - direct opposition to the oath required to become a president.
At stake is much more than the mere fabric of whether we chose to allow a group to live and work on US soil who came or stayed here illegally - at stake is the basic foundation of our sovereignty and Constitution and our nation's support for either one's integrity or dismantling.
Remember, under the law, if the US Constitution is no longer considered valid (or can be proven invalid), then the states are no longer required to remain in the Union and are free from federal government authority and would then be considered state-countries free to stand on their own or to form smaller groups of states in new unions.
Amnesty is not a legal remedy under the Constitution so such an act by the federal government would simply provide wealthier states like California with the legal ammunition they need at any future time to secede from the Union - do we actually want to open that door as a nation in the name of helping criminal foreigners?
What are you going to do, have thousands of police officers go door to door and round up illegal immigrants? You're living in a dream world.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: This is an overused and false Hobson's choice that says we can't enforce our laws therefore let's reward the criminal. It uses the politics of fear to drive home its position, which is to secure an amnesty for illegal aliens.
In 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower cleared US soil of over 1 million illegal aliens in just a few months by simply doing just what Clinton claims can't be done - he sent Border Patrol units to farms and other areas where illegal aliens worked or lived and they began rounding up and jailing illegal aliens by the thousands but the vast majority of them fled back to their home countries on their own rather than risk being caught and jailed - problem solved (for a time) - all in less than 6 months.
The Safe America Act clearly shows an easy and voluntary alternative program that will remove illegal aliens from US soil without a need to "round up" anyone. The Senator shows either her ignorance or her cunning toward achieving amnesty rather than her support for the rule-of-law or for America and Americans. She is clearly uninformed on the issues and potential solutions and as to why such remedies are needed or has a hidden agenda.
I support a path to citizenship. They must pay a fine for coming here illegally and then go to the end of the line.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: First, going to the end of line means deportation because all lines currently form in the person's home country, not on US soil. She knows this and is clearly being deceitful. Anyone who remains on US soil is not being punished, they are getting benefits, whether jobs, social services, medical services, education, etc.
An amnesty is clearly her position regardless of the facts on the table or the impacts to the system. We know from two studies that an amnesty will result in a minimum of $3 trillion to as much as $36 trillion over 30 years to cover the cost of amnestying 12-20 million poor and giving them entitlements and other benefits (as well as the potential for those amnestied to sponsor another 80 million under our current immigration laws). Such a cost will collapse the entire US economy as the debt is increased to cover the expense and the dollar falls on the international market - the only alternative is that all government programs must be cut by as much as half in order to pay for such amnesty costs!
Path to citizenship plots are the largest potential financial scam facing the American people and although we may all want to be generous humanitarians, the bottom line is we can't afford it - unless we want to toss out our country to mass debt with such foolhardy generosity!
We need to fix immigration and legalize everyone so that they will not devalue the wages for other Americans.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: To reverse wage devaluation, the excess labor in the market must be reduced. By sending illegal aliens home, millions of good paying jobs in industries such as meat packing, oil rigging, construction, road making, film production, and many more will be opened up to the US citizen. As employers scramble to fill those openings, wages will begin to rise toward more livable-wage levels.
Legalizing the criminal labor force in the US will only exasperate the problem and keep wages low - for there is far too much labor available in the economy (too many workers competing for scarce jobs). Yes, the wages for illegal aliens will rise a little as they legalize. but the over-all effect is wage depression across the economy for all workers who have to compete for scarce jobs - especially in economic downturns.
It is important to remember that our entire economy, social, education, health, tax base, and other systems would be greatly and positively improved by the deportation of 12-20 million criminal aliens, most of whom are from Third World countries and who bring with them endemic poverty and low education and the need for long-term government subsistence.
For our economy to operate correctly in equilibrium, it cannot be saturated with an artificial labor component (criminal aliens) that continually swells and keep wages depressed. The normal cycle is as the economy grows, jobs grow, as jobs grow wages rise as business compete for labor, and in turn discretionary income rises and provides the fuel for the consumer engine that in turn fuels economic growth. The entire cycle is destroyed when slave labor or excessive amounts of labor are continually introduced into the market, which never allow labor stabilization but instead ensure wage depression (too much labor competing for too few jobs).
These people [illegal aliens] do the jobs Americans won't do.
Xelan Bonn Rebuttal: I don't know to many Americans who, if given the opportunity, wouldn't like to be paid $2,000 a week for a film industry job or oil rigging job where illegal aliens are known to be working. In fact, even on the low paying job sector like agriculture, it might surprise the Senator to learn that the most of the labor in the US agriculture market is legal rather than illegal and if there is ever a shortage of labor, there is a little economic tool that all businesses have to insure they have plenty of workers - it's called higher wages!
Also, there is nothing wrong with weeding out many businesses that only offer low paying jobs and replacing them with business that offer high paying jobs. For example, do we really need 30 fast food restaurants with all minimum wage workers instead of eight fast food restaurants paying twice minimum wage and one factory paying 5 times minimum wage?
This nation needs leaders who will support our laws and economy and not help to erode them. An amnesty would send a very clear message to all Americans - the laws no longer need to be respected! And that's a very slippery slope to start down and President Bush has pushed us down it with his deliberate anti-enforcement policies - ironically, the radicals are not in the greater public arena in force, they're in the halls of our leadership - very scary stuff!