Mediaboss Marketing

On the 28th of last month, the United States celebrated the 100th anniversary of the founding of the U.S. Border Patrol. According to the website of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Border Patrol was established for the purpose of securing the borders between inspection stations. In 1925 its duties were expanded to patrol the seacoast.

If there is anything everyone in the United States can agree on, it is that during the past 100 years, the Border Patrol has failed to fulfill its mission. Today, everyone agrees that the Border Patrol has failed to prevent the illegal entry of people into the United States and especially on Americas southern border.

Yet, for immigration statists, hope springs eternal. Despite 100 continuous years of failure, immigration statists are convinced that someone will somehow figure out a way to make their immigration-control system succeed. In fact, one of the most amusing mantras during the past century has been, If only Congress would just enact comprehensive immigration reform, we would finally finally! end Americas perpetual immigration crisis.

Of course, lost in this process of eternal hope is that there have been all sorts of comprehensive immigration reforms during the past 100 years. The problem is that they have all failed.

Domestic highway checkpoints. Roving Border Patrol checkpoints. Warrantless searches of ranches and farms within 100 miles of U.S. borders. The criminalization of hiring, transporting, harboring, or caring for illegal immigrants. The boarding of Greyhound buses to check for peoples papers. The building of a Berlin Wall through eminent domain stealing of peoples property. The use of underwater concertina wire designed to cut people up. Forced deportations. Violent government raids on private businesses. Forcible separation of children from parents. The use of the U.S. military to secure the border.

It all adds up to a massive immigration police state along the border, one that has destroyed the liberty and privacy of people, including Americans. And none of it has worked to bring an end to illegal immigration. In fact, from the standpoint of advocates of this failed system, the illegal immigration problem is worse than ever.

Another favorite longtime mantra of advocates of immigration controls is, The system is broken. We need to fix it. If that is true, then why hasnt anyone fixed it? After all, theyve had 100 years a full century! to do so. Why hasnt anyone fixed what is supposedly a broken system?

The answer is: Because the system isnt broken. Instead, it is inherently defective. Something that is inherently defective cant be fixed. Thats what advocates of immigration controls simply cannot confront. No matter what they do no matter what comprehensive immigration reform they adopt it will still not work. Their system will continue to fail, just as it has for 100 years. In the process, they just continue destroying life, liberty, and privacy through the immigration police state that enforces their failed system.

The reason that their system is inherently defective is that it is based on the core socialist principle of central planning. Government officials plan, in a top-down, command-and-control, manner, the movements of millions of people in one of the most sophisticated and complex labor markets in history. It simply cannot be done at least not without the planned chaos that Ludwig von Mises pointed out comes with socialist central planning.

I have said it for 34 years here at FFF, but it bears repeating: There is only one solution to Americas decades-old failed, deadly, and destructive immigration morass. That solution lies not in the continuation of socialism and the continuation of death, suffering, rapes, kidnappings, Berlin Wall, concertina wire, highway checkpoints, warrantless searches, and other aspects of the immigration police state that comes with immigration socialism. The only solution to Americas 100 years of immigration-control failure is freedom, free markets, and limited government. That necessarily means the abolition of the Border Patrol, ICE, and all controls over the free movements of people across borders that is, the same system we have inside the United States with respect to state borders.

See the rest here:
A Century of Immigration-Control Failure The Future of Freedom Foundation - The Future of Freedom Foundation

State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Washington D.C. West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Puerto Rico US Virgin Islands Armed Forces Americas Armed Forces Pacific Armed Forces Europe Northern Mariana Islands Marshall Islands American Samoa Federated States of Micronesia Guam Palau Alberta, Canada British Columbia, Canada Manitoba, Canada New Brunswick, Canada Newfoundland, Canada Nova Scotia, Canada Northwest Territories, Canada Nunavut, Canada Ontario, Canada Prince Edward Island, Canada Quebec, Canada Saskatchewan, Canada Yukon Territory, Canada

Zip Code

Country United States of America US Virgin Islands United States Minor Outlying Islands Canada Mexico, United Mexican States Bahamas, Commonwealth of the Cuba, Republic of Dominican Republic Haiti, Republic of Jamaica Afghanistan Albania, People's Socialist Republic of Algeria, People's Democratic Republic of American Samoa Andorra, Principality of Angola, Republic of Anguilla Antarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S) Antigua and Barbuda Argentina, Argentine Republic Armenia Aruba Australia, Commonwealth of Austria, Republic of Azerbaijan, Republic of Bahrain, Kingdom of Bangladesh, People's Republic of Barbados Belarus Belgium, Kingdom of Belize Benin, People's Republic of Bermuda Bhutan, Kingdom of Bolivia, Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana, Republic of Bouvet Island (Bouvetoya) Brazil, Federative Republic of British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago) British Virgin Islands Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria, People's Republic of Burkina Faso Burundi, Republic of Cambodia, Kingdom of Cameroon, United Republic of Cape Verde, Republic of Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad, Republic of Chile, Republic of China, People's Republic of Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia, Republic of Comoros, Union of the Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, People's Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica, Republic of Cote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of the Cyprus, Republic of Czech Republic Denmark, Kingdom of Djibouti, Republic of Dominica, Commonwealth of Ecuador, Republic of Egypt, Arab Republic of El Salvador, Republic of Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Fiji, Republic of the Fiji Islands Finland, Republic of France, French Republic French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon, Gabonese Republic Gambia, Republic of the Georgia Germany Ghana, Republic of Gibraltar Greece, Hellenic Republic Greenland Grenada Guadaloupe Guam Guatemala, Republic of Guinea, Revolutionary People's Rep'c of Guinea-Bissau, Republic of Guyana, Republic of Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras, Republic of Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China Hrvatska (Croatia) Hungary, Hungarian People's Republic Iceland, Republic of India, Republic of Indonesia, Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq, Republic of Ireland Israel, State of Italy, Italian Republic Japan Jordan, Hashemite Kingdom of Kazakhstan, Republic of Kenya, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait, State of Kyrgyz Republic Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon, Lebanese Republic Lesotho, Kingdom of Liberia, Republic of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein, Principality of Lithuania Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Macao, Special Administrative Region of China Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar, Republic of Malawi, Republic of Malaysia Maldives, Republic of Mali, Republic of Malta, Republic of Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania, Islamic Republic of Mauritius Mayotte Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco, Principality of Mongolia, Mongolian People's Republic Montserrat Morocco, Kingdom of Mozambique, People's Republic of Myanmar Namibia Nauru, Republic of Nepal, Kingdom of Netherlands Antilles Netherlands, Kingdom of the New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua, Republic of Niger, Republic of the Nigeria, Federal Republic of Niue, Republic of Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway, Kingdom of Oman, Sultanate of Pakistan, Islamic Republic of Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama, Republic of Papua New Guinea Paraguay, Republic of Peru, Republic of Philippines, Republic of the Pitcairn Island Poland, Polish People's Republic Portugal, Portuguese Republic Puerto Rico Qatar, State of Reunion Romania, Socialist Republic of Russian Federation Rwanda, Rwandese Republic Samoa, Independent State of San Marino, Republic of Sao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic of Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of Senegal, Republic of Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles, Republic of Sierra Leone, Republic of Singapore, Republic of Slovakia (Slovak Republic) Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia, Somali Republic South Africa, Republic of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Spain, Spanish State Sri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic of St. Helena St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Pierre and Miquelon St. Vincent and the Grenadines Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Suriname, Republic of Svalbard & Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland, Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Switzerland, Swiss Confederation Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand, Kingdom of Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of Togo, Togolese Republic Tokelau (Tokelau Islands) Tonga, Kingdom of Trinidad and Tobago, Republic of Tunisia, Republic of Turkey, Republic of Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda, Republic of Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain & N. Ireland Uruguay, Eastern Republic of Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Viet Nam, Socialist Republic of Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zambia, Republic of Zimbabwe

Read this article:
Bipartisan Struggle: The Stalled US Immigration Reform | National World News | bhpioneer.com - Black Hills Pioneer

Recalling her own immigration journey from India to the US at the age of 16, Indian American Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal has reiterated her call for immigration reform.

I navigated a complex immigration system, Jayapal said in a video posted on X joining #SpreadAAPILove campaign started by STOP AAPI Hate as part of Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (AANHPI) heritage month.

READ: Bridging Histories, Shaping Our Future theme for AANHPI Heritage Month (April 25, 2024)

Coming to the US with $5,000 given by her parents to sustain her American dream, it took her 17 years to navigate a complex immigration system to become a US citizen 20 years ago.

Emphasizing their belief in her potential and in the opportunities America could offer, she said, They (Jayapals parents) made the ultimate sacrifice of living on a different continent than their child.

Pointing out that many people today face an even more difficult journey, Jayapal reiterated her call for immigration reform.

Having gained US citizenship over two decades ago, she underscored her pride in representing her constituents and serving in Congress.

Today, more than two decades after I gained my citizenship, I speak to you as the first South Asian American woman ever elected to the House of Representatives, as one of only two dozen naturalized citizens to serve in the United States Congress, she said.

As the ranking member of the Immigration Subcommittee, I have fought to give back to immigrant communities and ensure that their rights are always protected, Jayapal stated.

Her efforts include promoting policies to improve AAPI health, protecting civil liberties, and advocating for a just and humane immigration system.

I am always going to work to help all those who want to achieve the American dream, the possibility of doing that, just like I had, she said with a call to action for solidarity and storytelling within the AAPI community.

Being an immigrant is part of who I am. Its something that I am incredibly proud of. America was built by immigrants, and without us, this country would come to a standstill, Jayapal asserted.

So lets all continue sharing our stories, standing together, and spreading AAPI love. Happy AANHPI Heritage Month.

Go here to read the rest:
I navigated a complex immigration system: Pramila Jayapal - The American Bazaar

Talk about out-of-touch Washington. At a time when the unemployment rate is 7.6 percent and would be far higher had not millions of jobless Americans become discouraged and left the workforce the topic of debate among many Democratic and Republican lawmakers is how many guest workers should be allowed into the U.S. each year.

Should it be 20,000? Ten times that number? How much new labor, most of it unskilled, should come to a country where millions already cant find a job? Those are the issues on the table in the bipartisan Gang of Eights immigration reform proposal.

When debate over the plan begins in earnest, it will set off an intense argument over the economic consequences of reform. That argument will come despite reports the AFL-CIO and top business organizations have already agreed on guest workers. The unions, of course, represent fewer than 7 percent of private-sector workers in the U.S., and the Chamber of Commerce doesnt have a mandate to speak for all of American business.

It will be a debate in which the public hears doubts about the economic wisdom of reform from voices as disparate as Jeff Sessions, the conservative Republican senator from Alabama, and Paul Krugman, the liberal New York Times columnist.

The comprehensive immigration bill being drafted right now would provide nearly immediate work authorization to millions of illegal immigrants while substantially increasing the future flow of workers, Sessions said April 5, when the latest unemployment numbers were released. Our first priority must be to help American citizens, and current legal immigrants, find good employment. The alternative, Sessions argued, would be a system in which a large and growing share of our population is permanently unemployed while jobs are filled by a constant supply of foreign workers.

In recent days, with reform on the agenda of a Democratic president, Krugman has said positive things about immigration. But back in 2006, when Republican President George W. Bush was behind reform, Krugman expressed serious concerns.

A review of serious, nonpartisan research reveals some uncomfortable facts about the economics of modern immigration, and immigration from Mexico in particular, Krugman wrote at the time. Among those uncomfortable facts, he explained, were 1) the net benefits to the U.S. economy from immigration, aside from the large gains to the immigrants themselves, are small; 2) many of the worst-off native-born Americans are hurt by immigration; and 3) modern America is a welfare state and low-skill immigrants threaten to unravel that safety net.

When Krugman wrote those words, the unemployment rate was 4.7 percent. Now it is nearly three points higher. The economic concerns about immigration reform are more serious than ever.

Back in 2007, reform died in part because some Democrats, backed by unions, opposed it. This bill will flood the U.S. job market with millions of workers who will compete, at low wages, for jobs Americans are now doing, Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., wrote in 2007. I believe it will drive down American wages and living standards.

Dorgan is now gone from the Senate. Like Krugman, it was easier for him to oppose immigration reform in 06 and 07 because it was sponsored by a Republican president. This time, will any Democrats stand up to a president of their own party?

The question might be particularly acute for Democrats because of reforms expected effect on minority workers. Last week, three members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights wrote to Ohio Democratic Rep. Marcia Fudge, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, arguing that legalizing currently illegal immigrants will have far-reaching effects on African-Americans.

Such grant of legal status will likely disproportionately harm lower-skilled African-Americans by making it more difficult for them to obtain employment and depressing their wages when they do obtain employment, the commissioners wrote. The increased employment difficulties will likely have negative consequences that extend far beyond economics. Among those consequences, according to the commissioners: increased crime, incarceration, family breakdown, and more.

Finally, the issue extends beyond the impact of legalizing the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants already in the U.S. Recently the Los Angeles Times reported that one of the biggest immediate impacts of the reform proposal under consideration in Congress would be a sudden, large surge in legal migration.

The U.S. admits about 1 million legal immigrants per year, more than any other country, the newspaper reported. That number could jump by more than 50 percent over the next decade under the terms of the immigration reform bill.

That will have economic consequences. And the coming debate could be difficult for supporters of comprehensive immigration reform.

Byron York, The Washington Examiners chief political correspondent, can be contacted at [emailprotected]. His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blogposts appear on washingtonexaminer.com.

Read the rest here:
Byron York: The effect of immigration reform on American workers - Washington Examiner

Veronica Escobar Is a Voice for Border CommunitiesMJ Calixtro

"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links."

Since taking office five years ago, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar has gotten used to hearing migrants on the Texas-Mexico border being referred to in racist and xenophobic terms around Capitol Hill. To counter these mischaracterizations, Escobar has invited members of Congress to visit her hometown of El Paso, Texas. Shes brought 20 percent of the House (about 87 representatives) to her district for tours of federal immigration facilities, shelters, local government entities, and a public hospital that cares for migrants. I wanted to ensure that people understood the border, and understood how broken our immigration system is, she says.

In 2018, Escobara third-generation El Pasoan, whose family originally came from Chihuahua, Mexicobecame one of the first two Latinas from Texas elected to Congress. Her path to national office followed more than a decade serving on the governing body for El Paso County, first as a county commissioner and then as county judge. Her campaign centered on the positive: hope, promise, unity, and humane border reform. After winning a second term in 2022, Escobar teamed up with Florida Republican Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar to coauthor the groundbreaking Dignity Act of 2023, a bipartisan immigration reform bill that steers clear of harsh deterrence policies and instead emphasizes paths to citizenship, border security, and refocusing the spotlight on the migrants themselves. Weve got to get the undocumented out of the shadows, Escobar says. We have to demonstrate leadership in this difficult moment, and we have to do that while hanging onto our values. With the 2024 presidential election less than a year away, Escobar is working to turn out Latino voters, who are now the second-fastest-growing group of voting-age Americans.

The weight of the moment, and the responsibility of her representation on a national level, is not lost on her. It is so important to have womens voices at the leadership table, and even more important to have Latina voices, the congresswoman says. We are so underrepresented in positions of power and authority and leadership. I feel that responsibility to help other Latinas achieve their dreams and goals to serve in public office. I also feel a responsibility to ensure young women in my district know that this is absolutely an option for them, and it should be something that they pursue if its a goal of theirs. Im a big believer in, If you can see it, you can be it.

I feel a responsibility to ensure that more Latinas are able to run for and serve in Congress, and also in seats up and down the ballotwhether its school board, city council, or state representative. At the same time, I also feel a significant responsibility to spend time with young women in my district and ensure they know that this is absolutely an option for them, and it should be something that they pursue if its a goal of theirs. Im a big believer in, If you can see it, you can be it.

Its empowering and terrifying. Its empowering, because I feel like I have the ability to show young women that they can achieve their dreams, that they can one day walk the halls of Congress, that they can one day sit at the leadership table and serve their community in the United States Capitol. But it is intimidating and slightly terrifying, because I dont want to make a mistake. I dont want to disappoint people. I dont want to let anyone down, and I dont want young women to think its so hard that its out of bounds. So I try to be realistic when I speak, especially with young women, about the demands of the jobbut also about the satisfaction that comes with it, the joy that goes hand in hand with the hard work.

I hope at the end of all of [my time in Congress], that I can look back and be proud of the positive impact Ive made on the community. I also hope at the end of my career, I can look back and see a direct impact on immigration, womens rights, the climate crisis, and animal rights.

Compromise is critical to progress. When I first got into politics, I was so rigid in terms of what I saw as the solution, what I saw as the end goal. I was kind of a purist in that respect. Anything less than what I saw as the right thing was unacceptable. As Ive grown older, and as Ive spent more time in politics and seen how to create true progress, it all comes within the art of the compromise. Unfortunately, that doesnt happen often enough in this business, and it needs to happen more.

Im a workaholic. Something that I regret significantly is that I didnt say no to some things. I didnt do that early in my career when my kids were little, and I wish I had. As we try to be all things to everyone, especially women, many of the sacrifices we make are with our own family. I wish I had said no more often back then and treasured and savored some of those moments a whole lot more.

A lot of women in Congress, from the get-go, told me, You need to make time for yourself. The challenge for a lot of women is that we are a lot of things to a lot of people: As a mom, I try my best to be there for my kids and to help and support them. Same thing as a wife. Same thing with my mom, who is 84 years old. And then I have my constituents, my staff, my team, and my campaign folks. You are always running, running, running, working, working, working. Its easy to burn out. And you cant be an effective legislator or leader if youre exhausted.

I used to go hiking in El Paso, and I need to get back to it. Long walks for me are therapeutic, and breathing fresh air is really important to me. But also, Im a cat lover, so cat time is important to me. Theres nothing like snuggling with a kitty.

A version of this article appears in the April 2024 issue of ELLE.

Shop Now

You Might Also Like

Continued here:
Rep. Veronica Escobar Approaches Immigration Reform With Hope, Promise, and Unity - AOL