Children being bussed across border illegally. Heard of this?

[Butter]

But, *if* there were a busload of kids coming through a checkpoint, why wouldn't the border patrol turn them back before they entered? We would not have to provide aid if they did not actually enter our country, would we? From the way you wrote that above, it almost sounds like if they simply show up at the border, we have to provide aid.

 

We can turn them back *at* the border.  Once they have crossed we cannot.  There are (illegal) ways to get large groups of people across the border (usually involving falsified documents, some of which are caught by border agents, some of which are not).  Then the people hired to get them across dump them inside our country and we have to deal with with them according to our laws.  Most of these kids are coming in through places that are not border crossings, but are open.

[maize]

How do you mean legally?

 

Are they showing up with their asylum claim processed? No

 

Are they showing up with visas or visa waivers? No

 

They are simply showing up at our borders. We don't call them legal or illegal, we simply call them asylum seekers and we determine if they can stay in our country once they are here. They become illegal once their claim has been denied. Right now no one from Syria is having their claim denied, nor I think is anyone from Somalia (I could be wrong there but I am to lazy to look it up right now :))

So they present themselves at the borders as asylum seekers? Do they attempt to sneak across the borders? By my understanding, these children are not presenting themselves as asylum seekers, they (and many others) are crossing the boarders and entering the country illegally. I do think it is problematic when a person's first act in the United States is to break a law of the country. That is what makes them illegal.

 

If they sought asylum legally would it be granted? Probably not. Should that change? Maybe so. Personally would prefer to have more people here with documented and legal status and fewer trying to live under the radar.

[Butter]

This is not a snarky question, but here's what I'm wondering. What do people who keep saying we can't support this many refugee kids (which I actually agree with) and it should be stopped believe that we should do? The kids are over the border and in the US already when we find out about them, right? They are here without parents, and most of them are from countries that are not directly bordering the US, so we can't just put them back in Mexico and tell them to go home. What kinds of solutions are being proposed? 

 

That's not snarky.  That's what is tragic about the situation all the way around and why it's so difficult.  What do we do with them?  It's an excellent question and one that really, so far, does not seem to have a good answer.

[LizzyBee]

Is there anything that can be done to help?

 

I've read a couple articles that say Catholic Charities is helping with shelter and supplies.

 

[Lanny]

Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador are in North America. South America is south of the Darien Gap between Panama and Colombia. South America doesn't currently have anywhere near the level of violence being seen in North America. Even Venezuela doesn't have this level of gang violence and drug-related anarchy.

 

<snip>

 

There is a gap in the so called "Pan American Highway", in N.W. Colombia, just South of Panama. I think there's no road in that section and that also there are some very hostile folks there. I believe there is a car ferry, probably from Cartagena, Colombia, to somewhere in Panama. So, we can't just drive up to the USA.   When I see an RV here, usually it's someone from Mexico, it is like something from another planet... From Central American countries, it is very easy to drive or take a bus to the USA.

 

The violence in those Central American countries is rampant, but that is not a new problem for them. 

[QueenCat]

So they present themselves at the borders as asylum seekers? Do they attempt to sneak across the borders? By my understanding, these children are not presenting themselves as asylum seekers, they (and many others) are crossing the boarders and entering the country illegally. I do think it is problematic when a person's first act in the United States is to break a law of the country. That is what makes them illegal.

 

If they sought asylum legally would it be granted? Probably not. Should that change? Maybe so. Personally would prefer to have more people here with documented and legal status and fewer trying to live under the radar.

 

For the most part, the parents of these children have been duped by the coyotes (smugglers) into believing they are sending their children to safety, in a legal situation. Their parents are desperate due to the violence in their region to get their children out, and will, like most desperate parents, believe what they want to believe is best for their children. They have no idea how it really is. That is why our government is starting public relations campaigns in these regions, in hopes to get the word out as to what the real situation is. And quite honestly, we must remember that they are CHILDREN, of whom approximately 25% are UNDER THE AGE OF 14.

 

[TeacherZee]

So they present themselves at the borders as asylum seekers? Do they attempt to sneak across the borders? By my understanding, these children are not presenting themselves as asylum seekers, they (and many others) are crossing the boarders and entering the country illegally. I do think it is problematic when a person's first act in the United States is to break a law of the country. That is what makes them illegal.

 

If they sought asylum legally would it be granted? Probably not. Should that change? Maybe so. Personally would prefer to have more people here with documented and legal status and fewer trying to live under the radar

 

My understanding is that they show up without proper documents to stay here you can apply for asylum. It is difficult to enter Sweden illegally as our neighbours can come and go as they like without visas. According to European legislation you have to apply for asylum in the first EU country you reach. If you are coming to Sweden any other way than by air you almost have to pass through some other European country. If you come by air you have to show your passport and therefore the asylum process is started. You can also enter the country and then start the asylum process. You don't have to do that at the border. It isn't really an issue that we discuss here as we have a process that people go through. While they are going through that process we help them financially so that they have a place to live, food to eat, clothes to wear, and schooling for their children. We (as a country) believe that this is our responsibility as citizens of the world.

[MrsBasil]

I heard a Navy pilot talking the other day about how he flew for the Navy and saw extreme poverty in El Salvador twenty years ago. I don't see credible links that all of a sudden something has changed for these countries. (The gov't is implying that, but the question is why.)

 

 

Quote snipped by me for space.  :)

The murder rate per capita in Honduras(one country where we are seeing an influx of refugees coming from) was 70.7.  By 2010 it was 81.8 2011 it was 91.4 and in 2012(the last year I can find information with my meager search skills) it was 90.4

 

In 2009 the country with the highest rate of murder per capita was El Salvador(another country where refugees are coming from) was 70.9  Now the country with the highest rate of murder per capita is Honduras with it's 90.4 in 2012.

 

This, to me, implies worsening conditions.  But I admit I am not a statistician or even that well educated.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

 

It's not so much about poverty, but about children being targeted to join gangs, work as drug mules, or in the cases of many young girls, become sex slaves.  If they don't agree they are likely to be kidnapped, tortured, raped, and/or killed.  This article has a slant, but it also stories and quotes from actual refugee children.

 

http://www.vox.com/2014/6/30/5842054/violence-in-central-america-and-the-child-refugee-crisis/in/5577523

 

For everyone asking what can be done, here is a link describing President Obama's actual proposal.  He essentially wants to be able to send them back more quickly, the same way our country currently deals with children from Mexico. 

 

http://www.vox.com/2014/6/29/5854904/obama-child-migrants-congress-2-billion-contiguous-screening-central-america/in/5577523

[maize]

My understanding is that they show up without proper documents to stay here you can apply for asylum. It is difficult to enter Sweden illegally as our neighbours can come and go as they like without visas. According to European legislation you have to apply for asylum in the first EU country you reach. If you are coming to Sweden any other way than by air you almost have to pass through some other European country. If you come by air you have to show your passport and therefore the asylum process is started. You can also enter the country and then start the asylum process. You don't have to do that at the border. It isn't really an issue that we discuss here as we have a process that people go through. While they are going through that process we help them financially so that they have a place to live, food to eat, clothes to wear, and schooling for their children. We (as a country) believe that this is our responsibility as citizens of the world.

How do EU countries with boarders close to countries with widespread poverty and violence handle immigration/asylum issues?

[TeacherZee]

I don't actually like the law about having to seek asylum in the first EU country as I think it places an unfair burden on countries such as Italy and Greece who have suffered under the economic problems. It was one of the big issues for me in our recent EU elections and will play a part in our coming parliamentary elections. I actually think Sweden could take more refugees.

[TeacherZee]

How do EU countries with boarders close to countries with widespread poverty and violence handle immigration/asylum issues?

 

Not well, see my answer above for my issues with it. I think we in the northern parts of Europe could do more. I am not saying we are doing it right in Europe right now. Not by any streach of the imagination.

[Scrub Jay]

But...but....the US is different.It's big. It's not like any other country. Citizens of the world? That sounds socialist.

 

It also sounds kind and graceful.

 

And no country is like any other country. 

[wonderchica]

Crossing the border has become much harder and more dangerous in and of itself in the last few years. One cousin's husband came illegally from Mexico in the early to mid '90s. They drove pretty close to an "open" border area, got out and walked for a couple hours, and boom. American soil. A different cousin's husband came from Mexico in 2000. He had to pay $1,000 to a smuggler and walked for days until all his toenails fell off. It's has definitely gotten more difficult, not easier.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

Three solutions - build a triple border fence with posted national guard the entire length, and drone patrol the remainder of the border. Once this is in place amnesty considerations can begin for those already here. Doing amnesty first, however, will exacerbate the problem.

 

Second solution would be mass deportations, which are probably necessary but not useful without more enforcement of the border by the Feds.

 

Third solution is no additional border enforcement and severe penalties for any employer found employing illegal immigrants. Dry up the jobs, the people move elsewhere. The dips in immigration seen during the recession seem to confirm this.

 

 

Those are the three main solutions that seem to have coalesced.

 

Thanks, although that wasn't exactly what I was asking. The people that I've been hearing from seem to think we need to just airdrop these kids somewhere. I'm wondering what they think a more immediate solution should be. 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I am reading that a law put on the books by Bush forbids the U.S. from sending back unaccompanied minors.  I think, based on my research, it's called the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008.  Word seems to be out that the U.S. govt won't send unaccompanied minors back from where they came from and that they will get to stay. 

 

We do have a treaty agreement and laws that goverm how unaccompanied minors can be deported/returned to their home countries.  It is not true that we are not able to deport them, but there is a process that must be followed.

 

[Sisyphus]

Of course there has to be a process- there is just no way to know which kid was sent by a desperate grandmother who paid thousands to a coyote, and which kid was an orphan grabbed for organ harvesting and escaped in Mexico. Some will qualify for asylum, some may even be us citizens born here and taken back, most will need medical care. That all takes time. You can't just put them on planes and send them back to wherever, they are children.

 

I don't really understand how this has become a political problem (and I'm not asking, board rules and all). It's big, messy problem with no clear way to solve involving unstable governments, human rights, crime, so many things. It's going to take time to solve it or even move towards solving it, and that can't really be pinned on any law/administration here in the us.

 

I do hope we help these kids, personally I don't see why we cannot. If any country can, it'd be the one with the most money and resources...aka, us. I was pleasantly surprised to see the Glenn Beck organization info on this thread, I hope more organizations will step up. Surely if anyone can solve this, it's us, if we can just stop pointing fingers at each other and actually do it.

[hepatica]

The refugees from Syria and Iraq tend to go to Turkey and Jordan because they can access them by land transportation. Those countries are no where near as rich as us, but they haven't been sending people back to war zones.

 

I think the Jordanians have absorbed something close to a million refugees from Syria and Iraq just in the last decade. That is in a country of only about 6 million people. Surely, a country the size of the US can muster the resources to deal responsibly and humanely with this crisis. 

[creekland]

I think the Jordanians have absorbed something close to a million refugees from Syria and Iraq just in the last decade. That is in a country of only about 6 million people. Surely, a country the size of the US can muster the resources to deal responsibly and humanely with this crisis. 

 

While not forgetting that the "crisis" is made up of actual human beings with feelings, lives, and futures just like ourselves and our offspring.

 

[NicksMama-Zack's Mama Too]

I think the Jordanians have absorbed something close to a million refugees from Syria and Iraq just in the last decade. That is in a country of only about 6 million people. Surely, a country the size of the US can muster the resources to deal responsibly and humanely with this crisis. 

 

This NYTimes article describes Jordan's "Absorbing" of refugees.  Is that what we in the US would accept as responsible and humane?

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/31/world/middleeast/new-refugee-camp-in-jordan-absorbs-flood-from-syria.html

[6packofun]

It has been stated in several links.  There is essentially a war going on throughout parts of Central America between drug cartels/gangs vs the governments and other cartels/gangs.  It began intensifying in the mid-200s and has turned many areas into what are effectively war zones.  Some of these areas are no longer under government control, which is leading to more and more people fleeing those areas.

So yes, there has been a significant increase in violence in parts of Central America along with declining economic conditions.  I am not sure why this is such a surprise when we see mass migrations from other areas of the world where these same things occur.

 

 

I think what's surprising is to hear political sides complaining about some legislation not being passed but the U.S. not actually doing anything meaningful within these countries to prevent mass migrations in the first place.  Why must we always be reactionary now and only give lip-service to "immigration reform" which rarely includes enough border control measures?  Gosh, if these countries are basically at war, are they asking us for help and we can't/won't or are they not asking for help so that they can send people here because they know they'll be accepted? 

 

I want to know what the "do nothing congress" should have done legislatively to prevent this mass migration since that is being complained about by many in Washington.  Because we either want to avoid it or we don't care at all to prevent it.  (This isn't a question directly to YOU, ChocolateReign, btw!  I was just quoting you because it led me to think of these questions! lol)

[Aelwydd]

So are other areas of the country better prepared for this??? They have the money to educate them and raise them? Who is going to organize all of this???

If the kids with no family here were allowed to be fostered, I'd seriously consider taking in a child.

 

Demographic collapse? No problem, if we invested in this resource of a steady stream of young people. If other countries' governments are going to permit the steady drain of their young, we'd be foolish to just throw them away.

 

JMO.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I think what's surprising is to hear political sides complaining about some legislation not being passed but the U.S. not actually doing anything meaningful within these countries to prevent mass migrations in the first place.  Why must we always be reactionary now and only give lip-service to "immigration reform" which rarely includes enough border control measures?  Gosh, if these countries are basically at war, are they asking us for help and we can't/won't or are they not asking for help so that they can send people here because they know they'll be accepted? 

 

I want to know what the "do nothing congress" should have done legislatively to prevent this mass migration since that is being complained about by many in Washington.  Because we either want to avoid it or we don't care at all to prevent it.  (This isn't a question directly to YOU, ChocolateReign, btw!  I was just quoting you because it led me to think of these questions! lol)

 

Every current immigration reform plan I have seen includes significant amounts of money for increased border security.  However, I personally feel that until conditions improve in Mexico and its neighbors to the south, border security measures will only be bandaid on the problem.

 

I am not sure what aid has been requested from the US regarding the increased violence in those nations, but US intervention in the past has often not worked out to their benefit.

[maize]

I think what's surprising is to hear political sides complaining about some legislation not being passed but the U.S. not actually doing anything meaningful within these countries to prevent mass migrations in the first place. Why must we always be reactionary now and only give lip-service to "immigration reform" which rarely includes enough border control measures? Gosh, if these countries are basically at war, are they asking us for help and we can't/won't or are they not asking for help so that they can send people here because they know they'll be accepted?

 

I want to know what the "do nothing congress" should have done legislatively to prevent this mass migration since that is being complained about by many in Washington. Because we either want to avoid it or we don't care at all to prevent it. (This isn't a question directly to YOU, ChocolateReign, btw! I was just quoting you because it led me to think of these questions! lol)

What do you suggest we do? Invade yet another sovereign country to attempt to impose our ideas of order?

 

Our ability to exert real control beyond our borders is quite limited. As it should be.

[HS Mom in NC]

If the kids with no family here were allowed to be fostered, I'd seriously consider taking in a child.

 

Demographic collapse? No problem, if we invested in this resource of a steady stream of young people. If other countries' governments are going to permit the steady drain of their young, we'd be foolish to just throw them away.

 

JMO.

 

 

Would you be willing to take one already in the foster care system regardless where (s)he was born (like the US) or only one from another country that is about to enter the system?  I'm just curious. If you seriously consider and then decline where should these kids go instead?

 

When you say WE should invest in them, do you mean the border states they cross into?  We're already maxed out as it is.  Do you mean other states should be sending tax dollars to help us with the waves of people coming?  Would you please start a campaign for that, because we've been screaming for years and years that just because we live in the state they crossed into, that doesn't mean we're completely responsible for all the expenses related to housing, feeding, educating, medically treating, and legally processing them.  Do only people in CA, AZ, NM, and TX have an obligation to provide all that? Yes, the Feds cover some of that, but they never really cover all of it.

 

Will you be willing to explain why any jobs they get (including building and maintaining their own temporary and permanent housing, water drilling, etc.) aren't going to US citizens and legal immigrants?  The fewer citizens working the lower the tax revenue which means less tax money to spend on helping them.  Unemployment is very high right now, so we've got that to deal with. Also, could you please talk to unions about that too?  They're very vocal about competing for jobs in the US with those here illegally.  At least my brother does, do you want his number? I'm tired of hearing about it from him and the decline in union work (which is almost always related to government funded projects like this would be)  lately here in AZ.

 

Please send us:

 

Adequate temporary facilities to house them until they can be sent somewhere permanently. Remember we're in the most remote parts of the country-no running water and water tables so far down you would be shocked. Do you know how much it costs to drill a well in that kind of region? If not, it has to be trucked in.

 

Please send us a list of all the facilities you have nearby that are empty and ready to house groups of people.  Which of your school districts have extra space?  How many of the teachers there speak Spanish and are ESL trained? Who will pay the cost of the transportation? How many kids do you think is too many for a classroom and do you have the staff, buildings, resources, materials and transportation to handle it all?  We don't.

 

Adequate medical personnel and medical treatments to screen, treat and humanely quarantine people with serious, contagious medical conditions before you send them into communities where it can spread.

 

Adequate food.  Nothing grows here but cactus, so it will have to be shipped in (terribly expensive) and it will have to be non-perishable while they're at the temporary facilities.

 

Adequate housing.  We already don't have enough people to take in all the US citizen foster kids.  That means we'll have to provide group housing. Are the people who are complaining about that offering their homes?  If not, then they need to come up with another idea.

 

Adequate education.  Send all your extra ESL teachers and fluent Spanish speaking teachers.  Does your district have extra teachers just waiting around with nothing to do?  We don't.  We're maxed out. Also send teachers trained in dealing severely traumatized children-these kids have been across several countries with coyotes.  They're going to have all sorts of serious problems.

 

My SIL is ESL trained and works with homeless kids in PHX.  Do you have any idea how much harder it is to get a child in those conditions up to speed academically?  Their long term academic performance is not so great as a whole because they have all kinds of obstacles to overcome. Most end up in low income, high crime neighborhoods and many of them end up in prison as adults. So much more than kids in stable homes.  Send lots of taxpayer dollars from around the US because this is going to take shocking amounts of resources.

[Aelwydd]

Would you be willing to take one already in the foster care system regardless where (s)he was born (like the US) or only one from another country that is about to enter the system? I'm just curious. If you seriously consider and then decline where should these kids go instead?

 

When you say WE should invest in them, do you mean the border states they cross into? We're already maxed out as it is. Do you mean other states should be sending tax dollars to help us with the waves of people coming? Would you please start a campaign for that, because we've been screaming for years and years that just because we live in the state they crossed into, that doesn't mean we're completely responsible for all the expenses related to housing, feeding, educating, medically treating, and legally processing them. Do only people in CA, AZ, NM, and TX have an obligation to provide all that? Yes, the Feds cover some of that, but they never really cover all of it.

 

Will you be willing to explain why any jobs they get (including building and maintaining their own temporary and permanent housing, water drilling, etc.) aren't going to US citizens and legal immigrants? The fewer citizens working the lower the tax revenue which means less tax money to spend on helping them. Unemployment is very high right now, so we've got that to deal with. Also, could you please talk to unions about that too? They're very vocal about competing for jobs in the US with those here illegally. At least my brother does, do you want his number? I'm tired of hearing about it from him and the decline in union work (which is almost always related to government funded projects like this would be) lately here in AZ.

 

Please send us:

 

Adequate temporary facilities to house them until they can be sent somewhere permanently. Remember we're in the most remote parts of the country-no running water and water tables so far down you would be shocked. Do you know how much it costs to drill a well in that kind of region? If not, it has to be trucked in.

 

Please send us a list of all the facilities you have nearby that are empty and ready to house groups of people. Which of your school districts have extra space? How many of the teachers there speak Spanish and are ESL trained? Who will pay the cost of the transportation? How many kids do you think is too many for a classroom and do you have the staff, buildings, resources, materials and transportation to handle it all? We don't.

 

Adequate medical personnel and medical treatments to screen, treat and humanely quarantine people with serious, contagious medical conditions before you send them into communities where it can spread.

 

Adequate food. Nothing grows here but cactus, so it will have to be shipped in (terribly expensive) and it will have to be non-perishable while they're at the temporary facilities.

 

Adequate housing. We already don't have enough people to take in all the US citizen foster kids. That means we'll have to provide group housing. Are the people who are complaining about that offering their homes? If not, then they need to come up with another idea.

 

Adequate educqation. Send all your extra ESL teachers and fluent Spanish speaking teachers. Does your district have extra teachers just waiting around with nothing to do? We don't. We're maxed out. Also send teachers trained in dealing severely traumatized children-these kids have been across several countries with coyotes. They're going to have all sorts of serious problems.

 

My SIL is ESL trained and works with homeless kids in PHX. Do you have any idea how much harder it is to get a child in those conditions up to speed academically? Their long term academic performance is not so great as a whole because they have all kinds of obstacles to overcome. Most end up in low income, high crime neighborhoods and many of them end up in prison as adults. So much more than kids in stable homes. Send lots of taxpayer dollars from around the US because this is going to take shocking amounts of resources.

You know, I understand you don't like the idea, but you don't have to be snarky about it.

 

To answer your questions in short form, dh and I have been considering fostering.

 

Two, I live in Texas. I would foster here or elsewhere, it makes little difference to me.

 

Three, low wage jobs, and increased competition is the result of poor economic policy at the behest of the oligarchy (Wall Street and Washington). The goal of reducing 90% of us to slavish service jobs is there whether they get their numbers from impelling women here to breed more workers for the system via parsimonious contraceptive and abortion laws; or if the make use of the immigrant force pouring in.

 

Either way, we are all cogs in the machine.

 

I just suggested taking in a child because they are so impoverished, they don't even have any rights per se. If you hate the idea, then don't do it. But, I just take a different view.

[Lanny]

I just read this article, twice. The last sentence is especially disturbing to me:

"As with the previous tours, the HHS has issue  rules for the Lackland, Texas, tour that includes no recording devices, no interacting with staffers and the children and no questions until after the tour."  The tour will be on Tuesday morning.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/05/congress-to-tour-children-immigration-detention-center-ahead-obama-planned-2b/

 

So, our elected Members of Congress can tour the facility at Lackland, but they cannot ask any of the people who are working there any questions? After reading that, my impression is that the only people who can answer their questions are the HHS people conducting the tour, after the tour.

 

I have no problem with them not being able to interact with children, but not being able to ask questions of people who are being paid to work there seems a bit odd to impose as a rule on Members of Congress who are there to try to understand what is going on?

 

BTW, from previous articles, I believe the facility in Lackland and the one at Fort Sill are being run by a Baptist  Church organization.

[Butter]

BTW, from previous articles, I believe the facility in Lackland and the one at Fort Sill are being run by a Baptist  Church organization.

 

Not exactly.  They are run by BCFS,which apparently used to be known as Baptist Child & Family Services.  It doesn't look like it is affiliated with the Baptist Church or run by the Baptist Church.  http://www.bcfs.net

[marbel]

<snip>

 

 

Please send us:

 

Adequate temporary facilities to house them until they can be sent somewhere permanently. Remember we're in the most remote parts of the country-no running water and water tables so far down you would be shocked. Do you know how much it costs to drill a well in that kind of region? If not, it has to be trucked in.

 

<snip>

 

Thank you for the picture of this from close-up.  To me, on the east coast, it's a news story.  I don't mean to sound callous about it, but I don't know anyone in the area and thus have only a small picture - and I have no idea how accurate that is.   It's helpful to me to have a personal view from someone in the area.

[Scrub Jay]

Sorry. I was repeating all the ridiculous excuses that are given when people from outside the US explain how their country does things.

 

LOL!  Wow, I'm usually better at spotting board sarcasm. :)

 

[chiguirre]

The fewer citizens working the lower the tax revenue which means less tax money to spend on helping them.

Undocumented immigrants pay taxes. First off, they have to pay sales tax. In Texas there is no state income tax, but our sales tax is 8.25% in my county. That shifts the tax burden to people who spend all of their income, citizen or not. Those of us who can save do so tax free. If they rent an apartment, the part of their rent that goes for property taxes must be paid (and that's another high Texas tax that the poor must pay so that the rich can save tax-free). If an undocumented immigrant has a formal job, they gave a false social security number and their employer will withhold their payroll taxes on their behalf. They'll never recoup that money. Effectively, they're subsidizing the documented workers' retirement.

[HS Mom in NC]

You know, I understand you don't like the idea, but you don't have to be snarky about it.

 

There was absolutely no snark at all.  Just more details on the cold, hard realities border states have been facing for years and now face on a bigger scale than ever.  If people aren't going to propose a real solution or help or clarify in more details the real issues faced every day, 365 days a year, then they should keep quiet on the topic and not lecture those of us dealing with the realities.

 

To answer your questions in short form, dh and I have been considering fostering.

 

Two, I live in Texas. I would foster here or elsewhere, it makes little difference to me.

 

Three, low wage jobs, and increased competition is the result of poor economic policy at the behest of the oligarchy (Wall Street and Washington). The goal of reducing 90% of us to slavish service jobs is there whether they get their numbers from impelling women here to breed more workers for the system via parsimonious contraceptive and abortion laws; or if the make use of the immigrant force pouring in.

 

Either way, we are all cogs in the machine.

 

I just suggested taking in a child because they are so impoverished, they don't even have any rights per se. If you hate the idea, then don't do it. But, I just take a different view.

 

No, you said you'd "seriously consider"  the idea (which isn't a commitment or a solution) instead of committing to doing something that will really help someone. Definite maybes don't feed, clothe, medicate, transport or process anyone.  Those are their needs.

 

Your post seems to indicate that you, like sooo many Americans across the country, don't understand the ongoing strain on limited resources with the problems we face (shocking numbers of foster kids among citizens) and that "investing" in these kids requires additional resources that no one in other states wants to contribute.  But boy do they want to demand we do it!  I'm all for helping them, but that will require more people in other parts of the country contributing the resources I have listed.  Please do!  Stop telling us what we should do, we're doing more than anyone else.  Roll up your sleeves, divert tax dollars from your own coffers and be part of the solution.  We don't a lecture.  We need real, concrete help.

 

The economic realities you address are not going to be made better with increased numbers of unskilled labor coming in from south of the border.  If you're struggling then you should sympathize with the fact that we are too.  The nation is going to have to help out with tax money or make a hard decision and send them back.  Either they stay or go.  If they do, then you have to deal with the realities and solve the problems.  If you don't have concrete ideas or clarification to offer, then why comment? I'm trying like crazy to convince people who don't live near the problem that they will have to help in useful ways.  We don't need platitudes.  We need real solutions.  Offer one up, please.

 

 

 

[HS Mom in NC]

Undocumented immigrants pay taxes. First off, they have to pay sales tax. In Texas there is no state income tax, but our sales tax is 8.25% in my county. That shifts the tax burden to people who spend all of their income, citizen or not. Those of us who can save do so tax free. If they rent an apartment, the part of their rent that goes for property taxes must be paid (and that's another high Texas tax that the poor must pay so that the rich can save tax-free). If an undocumented immigrant has a formal job, they gave a false social security number and their employer will withhold their payroll taxes on their behalf. They'll never recoup that money. Effectively, they're subsidizing the documented workers' retirement.

 

Yes, but not as many taxes as citizens paying income taxes in addition to sales taxes. Also, they have much lower incomes, so they have fewer dollars to spend compared to middle class and higher income citizens.  They are also eligible for far more tax payer funded services than people in higher tax brackets.  So, the question is, how many people can you have paying far fewer taxes and using far more taxpayer funded services before the economic drain affects the economy on a large scale?  Economies are not immune to reality based on good intentions.  They are what they are. Whether you think it's a great idea or a terrible idea or somewhere in between, reality is what it is.  With unemployment and underemployment holding steady at best, there are real economic consequences and border states dealing with a humanitarian crisis are under tremendous strain first and that will eventually spill over to nearby states and the nation.  Adding more financial obligations with increased numbers of people coming into the country will only make that worse. What are we doing to do about it? 

 

[Aelwydd]

 

I'm not lecturing anybody, unlike your very condescending post. I'm not telling anyone to go foster a kid. I'm talking to people like myself, who are already open to fostering.

 

I don't know where you get off lecturing me about how committed my dh are to fostering. Last I checked, we didn't consult you in our private conversations on the subject. It's extremely rude to insert yourself into our motivations, and assume you know all about our dreams and hopes for our family. That's really offensive in so many ways. I don't advise you how to grow your family, please don't think I want your opinion about how we would like to add to ours.

 

And to lay your fears to rest, my husband was a social worker until his department was downsized. In Texas. I think we're pretty informed about the lay of the land here.

[Ohdanigirl]

Undocumented immigrants pay taxes..... If an undocumented immigrant has a formal job, they gave a false social security number and their employer will withhold their payroll taxes on their behalf. They'll never recoup that money. Effectively, they're subsidizing the documented workers' retirement.

Actually, having grown up in San Diego and lived in Mexico for almost ten years, I disagree that this is always the case. I have spoken to many undocumented immigrants over the years and have learned that many find ways around this. Quite a few mention actually filing taxes and being able to get the full refund along with the earned income tax credit. I am one person who had heard this from A LOT of undocumented immigrants. I cannot imagine that these are the only ones who have figured out a way to do this.

 

 

Also, someone mentioned the black market organ sales as a reason for people from Mexico sending their dc north. While this does happen, I would not say it is wide spread. It isn't even a huge concern on the lips of most people in Mexico. Again, this is anecdotal. I know. But after living in Mexico for many years before returning to the US, I am somewhat of a skeptic, as are many Mexicans when speaking among themselves.

 

The reasons that I hear given to border patrol agents, aren't the reasons many immigrants voice when among people they see as not being gringos. Of course, this is just from my personal experience and there are always exceptions.

[chiguirre]

Yes, but not as many taxes as citizens paying income taxes in addition to sales taxes. Also, they have much lower incomes, so they have fewer dollars to spend compared to middle class and higher income citizens.  They are also eligible for far more tax payer funded services than people in higher tax brackets.  So, the question is, how many people can you have paying far fewer taxes and using far more taxpayer funded services before the economic drain affects the economy on a large scale?  Economies are not immune to reality based on good intentions.  They are what they are. Whether you think it's a great idea or a terrible idea or somewhere in between, reality is what it is.  With unemployment and underemployment holding steady at best, there are real economic consequences and border states dealing with a humanitarian crisis are under tremendous strain first and that will eventually spill over to nearby states and the nation.  Adding more financial obligations with increased numbers of people coming into the country will only make that worse. What are we doing to do about it?

Most undocumented workers don't make anywhere near enough to owe federal income taxes, they would be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit if they could file. They can't apply for SNAP or WIC either. They don't have as much to spend as middle and upper class Americans because they work minimum wage (or less) jobs. Of course, if they didn't take these jobs, the minimum wage would have to rise to attract enough workers and WalMart and fast food restaurants would find their profits squeezed. Us middle and upper class Americans would find things costing more and I'm sure we'd all complain about the cost of living increases.

 

The wave of undocumented kids will cost the federal government money. It may cost state governments money if the federal government doesn't reimburse them. But, adult undocumented workers end up paying taxes and not being able to qualify for the social safety net programs. They're subsidizing us.

[Alicia64]

Economies are not immune to reality based on good intentions.  They are what they are. Whether you think it's a great idea or a terrible idea or somewhere in between, reality is what it is. 

 

 

 

Really well said.

 

Who in their right mind would like this reality? It's sad for the thousands of families involved at both ends (in the U.S. and their native country), but if you only have blank amount of money that's all you have.

 

Taking in thousands is no long term solution to the root of the problem.

 

Alley

[Paige]

I don't know what the solution is, but I don't want my country putting babies in camps. It is appalling. Children in America should not live behind bars no matter where they are from. 3yr olds can't be illegal immigrants! They aren't even responsible for stealing candy bars from a store, IMO. 

 

Does anyone know how most of the children are being found? Are the coyotes dropping them off unattended near the border to fend for themselves or are they being picked up in normal immigration investigations? Are the relatives or friends they were supposed to stay with afraid to pick them up because they too are in the country illegally? 

 

I wish we could just let those that have people here already stay with them until their case is reviewed, but I understand why that would be problematic in many ways. Also, how do they know these children are not citizens who have been abandoned by their parents here? If they can't find the parents or even be sure what country the child is from, how do they know the kid isn't from here? 

[mamakelly]

I've been watching documentaries about childhood poverty, food insecurity etc...in the US.  

 

In the US, 22% of US children live below the poverty line, which is about 13 million American children. The poverty of children that are citizens of this country is shocking. We have no business feeding and sheltering other countries children long term, until we handle our own children's poverty.

[maize]

I've been watching documentaries about childhood poverty, food insecurity etc...in the US.

 

In the US, 22% of US children live below the poverty line, which is about 13 million American children. The poverty of children that are citizens of this country is shocking. We have no business feeding and sheltering other countries children long term, until we handle our own children's poverty.

A child is a child.

 

There are very, very few children in the United States living in conditions comparable to those of disadvantaged children in third world countries.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I've been watching documentaries about childhood poverty, food insecurity etc...in the US.  

 

In the US, 22% of US children live below the poverty line, which is about 13 million American children. The poverty of children that are citizens of this country is shocking. We have no business feeding and sheltering other countries children long term, until we handle our own children's poverty.

 

Jesus = not pleased.

"Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these."

 

 

I think too much of our nation and the people within it to believe that if we truly wanted to help the children already within our borders and these new arrivals that we couldn't manage it.  The problem is we have a tendency to "other" those in need to find reasons not to help them.

 

[umsami]

I've been watching documentaries about childhood poverty, food insecurity etc...in the US.  

 

In the US, 22% of US children live below the poverty line, which is about 13 million American children. The poverty of children that are citizens of this country is shocking. We have no business feeding and sheltering other countries children long term, until we handle our own children's poverty.

 

Thing is…we have the worst poverty rate of any developed country.  Why? Because our safety net sucks…and we tend to demonize the poor.  We have a feeling that if everybody really worked hard, there would be no poverty.  We don't see the very real barriers and obstacles that exist to trying to climb out from poverty.  Schools are still very much dependent on local property taxes (about half of their budget)…which means poorer school districts have crappier schools.  Back when Clinton was President, we limited "welfare" to five years.  Ronnie Reagan's myth of the welfare queen lives on….so it's OK to cut food stamps, WIC, housing allowance….you name it.  

 

Many like to pretend that we're a "Christian" nation…or a "moral" nation...but when one looks at how we treat our most vulnerable, it's really hard to believe that.   

 

http://www.epi.org/publication/ib339-us-poverty-higher-safety-net-weaker/

"Another useful way to look at the extent of child poverty in the United States relative to other countries is to examine the child poverty gap: the distance between the poverty line (defined here as half of median household income) and the median household income of children below the poverty line, expressed as a percentage of the poverty line. A smaller value means that the median household income of children below the poverty line is relatively close to the poverty line, while a larger number means their median income is further below the poverty line, i.e., that they are relatively more poor. Figure E shows that the child poverty gap in the United States is 37.5 percent, the highest among peer countries. Therefore, not only is the incidence of child poverty greater in the United States (Figure D), but U.S. children living in poverty also face higher relative deprivation than impoverished children in other developed countries."

[shinyhappypeople]

Most undocumented workers don't make anywhere near enough to owe federal income taxes, they would be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit if they could file. They can't apply for SNAP or WIC either. They don't have as much to spend as middle and upper class Americans because they work minimum wage (or less) jobs. Of course, if they didn't take these jobs, the minimum wage would have to rise to attract enough workers and WalMart and fast food restaurants would find their profits squeezed. Us middle and upper class Americans would find things costing more and I'm sure we'd all complain about the cost of living increases.

 

The wave of undocumented kids will cost the federal government money. It may cost state governments money if the federal government doesn't reimburse them. But, adult undocumented workers end up paying taxes and not being able to qualify for the social safety net programs. They're subsidizing us.

 

They're not supposed to qualify for these programs, but well-intentioned county workers look the other way and find "workarounds" every single day.  My DH currently works for county gov't in the Human Services dept.  He is one of only two workers who flat-out refuse to accept incomplete documentation and fudge information on applications for his specific program.  The workers mean well, but they aren't really helping people.  And this is NOT just the county he works for.  This is very common throughout the state.  Most workers will help income-eligible (but undocumented) people find a way to get the assistance.  I have no idea how the various programs manage to pass state audits.  It makes no sense, but it happens every day. 

 

I care about people.  I care about these children.  They seem like they're being used, like they're pawns in a game to me more than anything, and it makes me really sad.  But, the solution isn't as simple as "just let them stay."  That decision could have repercussions that we're nowhere near prepared to deal with.

[Frances]

Actually, having grown up in San Diego and lived in Mexico for almost ten years, I disagree that this is always the case. I have spoken to many undocumented immigrants over the years and have learned that many find ways around this. Quite a few mention actually filing taxes and being able to get the full refund along with the earned income tax credit. I am one person who had heard this from A LOT of undocumented immigrants. I cannot imagine that these are the only ones who have figured out a way to do this.

 

 

Illegal immigrants may apply for an ITIN instead of an SSN and use it to file taxes and receive a refund. The IRS will not report their illegal status, they are only interested in having everyone file a return who is required to do so. If they are using an ITIN, they are not eligible for the earned income credit. Although some may be using other methods to file returns and receive the EITC, here's more info on the legal requirements:

 

http://www.illinoislegalaid.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.dsp_content&contentID=8418

[Ohdanigirl]

Illegal immigrants may apply for an ITIN instead of an SSN and use it to file taxes and receive a refund. The IRS will not report their illegal status, they are only interested in having everyone file a return who is required to do so. If they are using an ITIN, they are not eligible for the earned income credit. Although some may be using other methods to file returns and receive the EITC, here's more info on the legal requirements:

 

http://www.illinoislegalaid.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.dsp_content&contentID=8418

I am fully aware of this. As I said, they ARE getting the earned income tax credit. I never said they were doing it legally. I don't want to hijack the thread, but simply wanted to share another side in response to what another poster mentioned. Of course, I realize that not all undocumented workers do this and many file with the ITIN.

[Lanny]

Thank you for the picture of this from close-up.  To me, on the east coast, it's a news story.  I don't mean to sound callous about it, but I don't know anyone in the area and thus have only a small picture - and I have no idea how accurate that is.   It's helpful to me to have a personal view from someone in the area.

 

You are probably incredibly typical.   Thursday, on TV, I saw an elected Judge, in Dallas County, Texas, step up and say that regardless of politics, the people need to help the children who are already in the USA and that in Dallas they have the ability to help and should do so.

 

It would be very nice, to see people in Boston/NYC/Philadelphia/Baltimore/Washington DC/Atlanta/Chicago, and many other large cities, step up to the plate and help the people in the "Border States". 

[Mrs Mungo]

Thing is…we have the worst poverty rate of any developed country. Why? Because our safety net sucks…and we tend to demonize the poor.

 

And, it is more than a safety net. Many countries have systems intentionally designed to help parents and children, to reward child bearing. In Germany, *all* parents can receive Kindergeld, of (at this time) EUR 184 per child for the first two children, EUR 190 for the third child and EUR 215 for every subsequent child per month. It isn't just a "safety net" for the poor. It is an allowance designed to help support families. They receive medical care. They have maternity and paternity leave. Pregnant women aren't legally *allowed* to work during the last six weeks of their pregnancy or for 8 weeks after so that nobody can pressure them into it. Their job must be held for them.

 

There are other types of help given to families in need but the idea that the state should support and protect the family unit goes far beyond a "safety net."

[creekland]

"The St. Louis left Germany on May 13, 1939. Its passengers, most of them from Germany, had expensive documents - some bogus - for entry into Cuba. When the ship arrived, however, Havana - and the US - refused to admit them. The St. Louis sat in the harbor for days. Desperate relatives packed motorboats and approached the anchored liner, shouting messages to loved ones. All awaited the outcome of frantic international negotiations to allow the refugees to disembark.

 

Ultimately, only 29 passengers were permitted to land in Havana. Then the ship was ordered to leave - maneuvering slowly and tantalizingly near the coast of Florida before turning back to Europe. On June 17, 1939, the St. Louis docked at Antwerp: 214 passengers remained in Belgium, 224 went to France and 181 to the Netherlands. Another 288 passengers went ashore in Britain on June 21.

 

But, the end of that journey was, for its passengers, the beginning of the Holocaust. "The fate of the 963 is a microcosm of the Holocaust," said Scott Miller, a researcher at the American museum who is organizing the St. Louis project.

 

Belgium, France and the Netherlands proved to be only temporary havens, as they were quickly overrun by the Nazis. A large number of the passengers who sought sanctuary there were deported and perished in the camps. Some went into hiding. Others apparently fled Europe, most likely before 1941. "

 

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana

 

Are we to assume all of those saying "we can't" and crying "woe is me" are ignorant of history?  Or feel the decision to send the St Louis and her passengers back to Europe - many to their deaths - was a correct decision?

 

I'm not in that camp.  I feel the children should be reunited with their parents/relatives (here) whenever possible and given the chance for a better life.  The rest ought to be spread out among the states to ease the burden.  Our school could easily handle some.  We have ESL teachers and more.  The Hispanic kids we already have (10% of our school population, so not too high and can easily go higher) tend to have as good potential futures as our Caucasian kids.  Some of them definitely have "histories," but that isn't something that can't be overcome - just as some Caucasian kids have "histories."

 

To anyone who feels they ought to be sent back... I wonder how they would feel if the decision were made to send their own family there instead - after all - why should it only be a birth lottery?  "Do unto others..."

[ktgrok]

And for those saying we should tell them to try coming legally, it's almost impossible. At least incredibly difficult. MUCH more difficult that when our own ancestors immigrated. http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/immigration/whydonttheycomeherelegally.cfm

[shinyhappypeople]

"The St. Louis left Germany on May 13, 1939. Its passengers, most of them from Germany, had expensive documents - some bogus - for entry into Cuba. When the ship arrived, however, Havana - and the US - refused to admit them. The St. Louis sat in the harbor for days. Desperate relatives packed motorboats and approached the anchored liner, shouting messages to loved ones. All awaited the outcome of frantic international negotiations to allow the refugees to disembark.

 

Ultimately, only 29 passengers were permitted to land in Havana. Then the ship was ordered to leave - maneuvering slowly and tantalizingly near the coast of Florida before turning back to Europe. On June 17, 1939, the St. Louis docked at Antwerp: 214 passengers remained in Belgium, 224 went to France and 181 to the Netherlands. Another 288 passengers went ashore in Britain on June 21.

 

But, the end of that journey was, for its passengers, the beginning of the Holocaust. "The fate of the 963 is a microcosm of the Holocaust," said Scott Miller, a researcher at the American museum who is organizing the St. Louis project.

 

Belgium, France and the Netherlands proved to be only temporary havens, as they were quickly overrun by the Nazis. A large number of the passengers who sought sanctuary there were deported and perished in the camps. Some went into hiding. Others apparently fled Europe, most likely before 1941. "

 

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana

 

Are we to assume all of those saying "we can't" and crying "woe is me" are ignorant of history?  Or feel the decision to send the St Louis and her passengers back to Europe - many to their deaths - was a correct decision?

 

I'm not in that camp.  I feel the children should be reunited with their parents/relatives (here) whenever possible and given the chance for a better life.  The rest ought to be spread out among the states to ease the burden.  Our school could easily handle some.  We have ESL teachers and more.  The Hispanic kids we already have (10% of our school population, so not too high and can easily go higher) tend to have as good potential futures as our Caucasian kids.  Some of them definitely have "histories," but that isn't something that can't be overcome - just as some Caucasian kids have "histories."

 

To anyone who feels they ought to be sent back... I wonder how they would feel if the decision were made to send their own family there instead - after all - why should it only be a birth lottery?  "Do unto others..."

 

You're comparing 900 to 50,000.  

 

I don't want any harm to come to these children, but you want to say "Hey, 50,000 children who speak no English, many of whom have medical and psychological issues - just spread'em out amongst the states and all will be fine."  I want it to be that easy!  I wish it were that easy, but it's not.  

 

My sincere question (not snarky, so please don't misunderstand) what state or region do you live in? 

 

Those of us in border states who are hesitating at the idea of adding 50,000 children to our already overburdened social service and public school systems aren't being jerks, we're being realistic.  It's not a lack of compassion, it's the realization that in this situation a simple solution just doesn't cut it.There is NO state in the US (even California) that could handle having 1,000 children with significant needs delivered to its door step all at once with a note that says "House them, feed them, educate them!  Good luck!"  

 

We can't save the world.  I want to.  I wish we could.  But, we can't.  I don't know what the right solution is. :(   

 

 

[hepatica]

I agree the burden of dealing with this problem should not rest on the border states alone. Ultimately, this is why we have a federal/national government - to undertake the tasks collectively which would be too burdensome or irrational for individuals or states to undertake by themselves. There really is a place for "big" government action, and this is a clear example.

 

50,000 kids is a drop in the bucket nationally. We would have to see 50 million kids to compare proportionally to the impact of refugees on countries like Jordan. We in the US pride ourselves on our capacity for innovation. We could put that to use for something other than an new iPhone app.