Dems mock border wall

June 11, 2006, 12:41AM
Dems mock border wall
Platform takes a swipe at GOP support for plan to stop illegal immigration

By CLAY ROBISON and KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

FORT WORTH - Striking a markedly different posture from Republicans, the Texas Democratic Party on Saturday endorsed an immigration policy encouraging assimilation over wall-building.

The party, many of whose voters, candidates and officeholders are Hispanic, has traditionally been supportive of immigration. But a new platform adopted by delegates to the party's state convention included language specifically striking back at GOP-led attempts to tighten up the border with Mexico without helping immigrants become citizens.

Texas Democrats also continued to poke fun at the proposed border wall, which Texas Republicans have endorsed.

"Before we start building a fence, all of us need to know two things: how much it's going to cost and then who's going to build it," said state Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, whose father was born in Spain and mother emigrated from Mexico.
(snip/...)

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3958883.html

Taunting voters, especially on an issue where the public is not in support of the Senate bill is dumb.

Democratic politicians need to oppose that Senate bill. It is vigorously opposed by a *large* majority of Americans.

Dems could literally lose 2006 over this issue if they don't watch out. We're in position to make big gains and they are making noises like this that could kill them. Idiots.

But I do agree 100% that those that are seen as being AGAINST better border security are going to have it come back and bite them at election time!

mikey_the_rat

It kept the raiders from **leaving** China after raiding, because there was never enough manpower to guard the whole wall and prevent them from entering at an unguarded area. However once they had made themselves known by raiding some village, the soldiers could swarm to an appropriate area of the wall, by keeping tabs on the raiders movements through scouts, and kill them before they escaped. So that way raiders would be much less likely to even bother invading since they knew that they probably wouldn't be able to leave with their plunder.

I suggest a similar approach with this issue. Kill the incentive for illegals to come here by:
A) enforcing the existing law on employers who hire illegals
B) Fair trade, not free trade. NAFTA has destroyed the economy in Mexico and is destroying it here in America, also.

Walls in those days actually protected people. If the US were to attack China do you think their wall would stop us? They didn't build the wall to keep Americans from wanting to move to China.

The greatest lesson of the Wall, is that it didn't work... duh.

The Chinese, for the LONGEST time, were ashamed at the wall. The reason is that its a reminder of oppression of them from the first Emperor who unified the country Qin Shi Huangdi, of the Qin(Ch'in) dynasty, which also gave China its name, around 221 B.C.E. He did many great things, standardized the Chinese script, currency, built roads, etc. However, he became famous in commissioning the connecting of all the northern walls from the previous kingdoms that he conquered, this included refortifying existing ones, and building new walls to connect them. This, eventually, became the Great Wall of China, and he drove the poor mercilessly in building this wall, in record time at that. Many died, and were then sealed up in the wall, Qin was a tyrant of the worst sort, and during Mao's Cultural Revolution, the wall became a source for shame. Nowadays, with China's opening up of a little bit, the wall is now considered a cultural resource, a place to learn about the past, rather than shun from it. Maybe we can learn from China's mistakes of over 2 thousand years ago, but I'm not holding my breath.

after quite a large number of invasions are still there.

A wall is only as effective as the people guarding it and there was no way to stop the rampant corruption. The Chinese government didn't have money to pay it's soldiers well and they often took bribes and let raiders overrun the wall.

Just out of curiosity how much do you think border guards make in the U.S.? They're quitting in droves because the Homeland Security reshuffling busted their unions and they're being replaced by underpaid, underqualified kids with no benefits. By all means spend billions on a wall, but I'm not sleeping one iota sounder with non-union privately contracted mercenaries guarding it.

th blow.

We are leaning towards big problems in Nov. if the Dems don't lighten up. It's not hard to figure out we need to do something to keep thousands from pouring over our border. We can't afford them anymore.

.. may not play particularly well with some of them ...

How the heck they are going to build a seawall around Florida? the whole idea is ridiculous

Dems remain a minor player in Texas and everywhere else throughout conservative America.

Let everyone in! What the hell! The more the merrier! Who gives a sht about the environment and what the effect of another 20 million people will have on our natural resources?

If we don't turn anti immigrant we will lose? If we don't support immigrants we will lose? Folks this is not the issue we should be talking about! The war, the economy, health care, education, jobs that's what we need to be talking about. The immigrants are not hurting us. This is a repuke wedge issue used to distract us from what we need to be taking about.

Don't fall for the bate!

Do you have a job? Unless you're the company owner or CEO, immigrants --legal and otherwise-- are definitely hurting you whether you know it or not.

Why do you think corporations love immigrants? Do you think they're being altruistic or something? Far from it. It's because the more people in the labor pool the lower the wages. Period.

This is NOT a wedge issue foisted on us by the GOP. The Americans most affected by immigration are those in the lower economic brackets, unskilled, uneducated, minorities. The very people who vote Democratic. I could make a good case that by ignoring the plight of these voters, the Democratic party is doing them a great disservice.

Not only should Dems be involved in this issue, if they're going to properly represent their constituency, they'll insist on real penalties for the companies hiring illegals. If they don't, why should their constituents, growing poorer every year, vote for them?

And the illegals are hurting us by helping drive down our wages.

... if they don't diffuse this "wedge" issue by being against ILLEGAL immigration and securing our borders -- no matter what it takes.

Progressives should be talking about the war, the economy, health care, etc. But all of those issues are effected by the prosperity and population.

Overpopulation caused by illegal immigration will dilute the economic power of the middle class, it will mean no political base for national health care, etc.

If progressives, Dems, liberals fall for this 'compassion' for illegals that the transnational corporations and the Bushites are pushing, then everything we've wanted will never happen.

Why have an increase in the minimum wage if there are millions willing to work for less? Why have national health care if millions will accept not having it and are not on the tax rolls to pay for it? Why join a union if millions will work for non-union corporations? Why improve education if millions don't care if they get beyond eighth grade? Why make things better in Mexico if they can just come to the U.S?

Yes, this is a big loser for Dems if they don't figure this out real quick.

Halliburton Fence Inc.

It's the businesses that use them to drive wages down and keep labor cheap, and the government that allows them to do that. The immigrants are just cannon fodder in our economic war.

After years of vilifying the left as high spenders - the Bushjr-led GOP has clearly shepherded in a new era... the free lunch era.

First, a quick clarification - the GOP claim of dems being high spenders has been disproven time and time again. Go back to Carter, his deficits were tiny compared to what followed by Reagan/Bush. Further more during the Reagan years three budgets were proposed each year - a House budget, a Senate Budget and a WH budget. Go back to govt documents and you will find that the highest budget deficit budget was always the one proposed by the Reagan WH, and the lowest budget deficit budget was always the one proposed by the Dem controlled House of Representatives. Then compare the deficits in the Clinton era budgets to those before (Bushsr) and those following (Bushjr). Just had to add that clarification - but regardless of the reality the public has been fed, and used to believe, that the big spenders were the democrats.

Back to my point per the fence. Over the years of Bushjr - the concern of how to pay for things has been dropped. Years of fiscal disconnect betweeen sharply increasing govt spending, while curtailing revenues in order to give bigger and bigger tax cuts to the really rich, and big corporations - it is as if the issue of COST no longer exists in DC, nor in the minds of voters.

The cost of this Wall/Fence is never discussed. How to pay for such a thing is never discussed. The question is never asked of voters ... "How much are you willing to pay, in additional taxes each year, for the construction of this fence/wall?" That is where one sees whether or not a policy is worth pursuing. Do we believe in it enough to be willing to bear the costs? If not, than we should forgo the policy until we come to an agreement of what we are willing to give up (in terms of programs from the govt) in order to pay for the fence/wall.

However in this era of free lunch republicans, cost doesn't matter. The same people who passed an oppressive Bankruptcy law that codifies excessive rates of usury, and that gives little leeway for unforseen medical emergencies or natural disasters... all under the auspices of "personal accountability and fiscal responsibility!" - these same people pass high expense policy after policy with NO way to pay for them - except to pass on an excessive future tax load to pay off the interest on the money being spent now. These same people NEVER mention cost, or fiscal responsibility - except as an occaisional cry when cutting funding for social services geared to the most needy - and which add up to very few dollars compared to the size of the debt they have created in each annual budget.

My point here is that this whole Fence/Wall issue seems to me to be symptomatic of a serious problem. Unserious public policy tied to profligate spending, while shrouded in emotional symbolism in a way that numbs folks from thinking about things like - costs, priorities, fiscal realities - that such a thing would have to be actually PAID for - by US - the tax payers, and yet we are not told about cost and how much it would cost us, in order to make an informed choice. We are not given the information that we could weigh - perhaps some would say - it would be worth it to me to pay an extra $300 a year to build thisd thing, as I believe it would solve the problem and lead to higher wages for American workers (I don't personally believe this, but some might - what I want is an informed debate, mind you.)

IMO, this is a symbolic 'fix' to a problem, that is symbolic of a much bigger problem - that is likely to saddle us for years to come that has nothing to do with illegal immigration and everything to do with crushing debts, and deficits with a shrinking economy, and reverberations throughout our financial markets (and spreading out through ripples to our local economies) due to a potential (growing each day we keep spending in this way) future default on our debt payments - an event that has crushed many a country's economy.

your voice of thoughtful reason will be drowned out in the noise.

:hi:

(You've always been one of my favorite DUers)

:hi:

Yes we have pushed emotionalism so far that folks don't seem to be able to hear/think about a bigger picture in which this particular 'solution' to the issue falls. *sigh*

It's been proven. They *can't* think about a bigger picture in a rational way at all.

It could be said that's what Rove and Co. do so well. They aren't in the solutions business after all; it suits them best that problems continue, they're in the rhetoric business.

And rhetoric sells.

not just keep them out. Ask any East Berliner over 40.

The more porous the country remains from the outside means the more terralerts they can raise- a working barrier would radically cut down on their excuses to clamp down on US. And the tighter their control from the inside, the more control they exert on their own citizens.

Smoke and mirrors. That's all it is.

who will build it.

....."Before we start building a fence, all of us need to know two things: how much it's going to cost and then who's going to build it," said state Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, whose father was born in Spain and mother emigrated from Mexico.
(snip/...)

Another poster wonders if we have to change our position and be anti-immigration to win. What's this "our" position? From what I can tell, a large number of Democrats and many Independents are closer to the Republicans on this. Not all Democrats think the wall is a bad idea. Not all Democrats want to sanction an amnesty that has already opened the flood gates. The Texas Democrats are doing the very worst thing they can possibly do. They're pandering to the undocumented who cannot vote and alienating the citizens who can vote. What a brilliant plan.

its being anti-stupid. Look at this post here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2649447

Now, I took his total cost, and divided it by the miles, that means a SIMPLE barbed wire fence will cost about $3,189,189.19 per mile. This is something that can be defeated by a simple wire cutter, about 15 bucks itself, and a pair of heavy leather gloves about 5 bucks or so. In other words its freakin' STUPID, pandering to stupidity should NOT be the only way to win votes. The border is about 1,951 miles long, multiply that into the equation here and the total cost becomes about $6,222,108,108.11. That over 6 BILLION dollars, easily, and this is a fence that is, for all practical purposes, just symbolic at best. Now, if you want to erect an EFFECTIVE barrier that could reduce illegal immigration, then add in motion sensors, alarms, GPS, a concrete barrier, and other passive systems like infrared sensors, and the costs will be easily 10 or 100 times the cost I just gave. Also, do I have to mention that amount of false alarms from large and small animals that the border patrol will have to waste its time on? Wonder how much money will be wasted on that, and how easy it will be to circumvent. This thing would be an even worst albatross than Reagan's "Star Wars" program that the US STILL wastes money on.

Chris Simcox, Colin Hanna, Don Goldwater, Steve King, and Alan Keyes raising a fence post.

(yes, that is Alan 'lesbians are heathens' Keyes)

But I still think it's a very bad idea for Texas Democrats to taunt their opponents. If they spent their time wisely, they might be able to sway some of the pro-fence people to their side. Now they're just pissing them off.

If only government knew how to fine the hell out of companies and individuals who hired illegals. And the illegals should be reparations for unpaid labor. It's a modern day slave system.

that's what they would do. I don't believe they are serious. Just trying to get an emotional divide (like abortion).

how to lose elections! Say bye-bye to the House and Senate---it was nice knowing ye.

for an historical perspective on immigration :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhEl6HdfqWM

no data to report since most are buried secretly underground and regularly 'surprise' law enforcement officials with the length and complexity