Quantcast
Opinion

John Florez: Illegal-immigration problem belongs to everyone

Comments

Return To Article
  • To John
    Dec. 17, 2007 4:26 a.m.

    When is your organization going to face the issue that illegal means illegal. There are already laws on the book since I believe 1986 that the law spells it out in detail for how our business community are to act in the appropriate manner by following the Rule of Law. The legislators do not have to waist time coming up with new crafted ideas. The Department of Homeland Land Security and ICE needs to be supported. The legislators have access by just picking up the telephone and request how you would like Utah to cooperate. Many states are taking this action. And if our legislators are getting approval from the LDS on all legislation from the Church stop it because this is un-American.

  • Mike
    Dec. 17, 2007 5:41 a.m.

    Anyone is welcome to my home if they enter by the front door and respect the rules of my home, whether they be strangers, my friends, or the friends of members of my family. No one is allowed to just enter without first being admitted into the home by me or by a family member.

    No one seems to think that my behavior strange. No one argues with my right to determine who enters my home and under what conditions they are allowed to enter.

    Most who enter are guests that stay for a few hours. Some are invited to eat with us. Some have come to stay for longer periods of time until they could find another place to stay. Some have married my sons and daughters and, by so doing, have gained full rights to use the house and full access to its possessions.

    The United States is also my home. The same rules apply. Knock before entering. Ask permission to enter. Agree to abide by the laws while here, then you'll be welcome.

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 17, 2007 6:41 a.m.

    Nonsense.
    In neoconservative circles, our Mexican brothers and sisters are being viewed the way the Jews were in Fascist Europe.

  • Richard
    Dec. 17, 2007 7:31 a.m.

    How many sides are there, Mr. Florez, to ILLEGAL?

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 17, 2007 7:49 a.m.

    "Nonsense. In neoconservative circles, our Mexican brothers and sisters are being viewed the way the Jews were in Fascist Europe." - Anonymous

    Which shows how ignorant you are. "Neoconservatives" are emphatically open borders. Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, is the classic neoconservative. He called amnesty opponents "yahoos." Another big neocon, Max Boot, has proposed giving citizenship to anyone and everyone who signs up to serve in the US military.


    "Sen. Hickman might realize that if he took the time to talk with our own state employers such as farmers and growers; the construction, recreation and manufacturing industries; and service industries such as hotels and restaurants."

    When I was a kid nearly all of these jobs, save the fruit pickers, was done by legal Americans. These industries don't support illegal immigration out of the goodness of their heart - they support it because it's cheap, servile labor.


    "He also seems to fail to recognize the growing economy for local businesses that benefit from a growing consumer market."

    Well in that case, Come One, Come All! That's a recipe for a Ponzi scheme (no wonder Utahns like illegals). When does it stop? When our population hits one billion? Two?

  • Jim
    Dec. 17, 2007 8:36 a.m.

    I agree with Mike's comments; sensible, legitimate and right. It's obvious that too many members of our state Government haven't delved into the problems that illegals bring to this state and country. Utah IS a sanctuary state. Now that Arizona and Oklahoma have enacted laws that prohibit hiring, providing drivers licenses, etc., to illegals, they are moving to Utah where they are welcomed with open arms. And, they have brought with them their criminal element. We have the largest Mexican Gang organization west of the Mississippi, excluding California. The illegal drug business flourishes in this state. The education process is pitiful because illegal students are mainstreamed and for the most part, refuse to learn English costing the taxpayers millions each year for interpreters. Nearly 50% of all babies born in some of our major hospitals are to illegal immigrants who are then enrolled into our welfare system. Only until we stop allowing babies, born of illegal mothers, citizenship in this country will some of this come to a halt. And, when arrested for the majority of major crimes in this state, these illegals should be incarcerated for the maximum, no plea bargaining. Send a message that the door isn't open.

  • Smokescreen
    Dec. 17, 2007 8:56 a.m.

    When people think of fascism, they imagine Rows of goose-stepping storm troopers and puffy-chested dictators. What they don't see is the economic and political process that leads to the nightmare.
    The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
    The legal/illegal argument against Mexicans is merely a smokescreen for this nations' growing fascist direction amongst our Neocon types.

  • Lew Jeppson
    Dec. 17, 2007 8:57 a.m.

    Florez gets close to the truth of the matter, and that is that the interests of capital and labor are quite different, even though they share the same society. To capital all labor (domestic and foreign) is a commodity with all of the considerations due a commodity. An understanding of the immigration issue must deal with the relationship between capital and labor, and that is neither an easy nor comfortable thing to do.

  • simplyillegal
    Dec. 17, 2007 9:51 a.m.

    TO ANONYMOUS- Yeah, but I'm not a racist and I'm certainly NOT a neoconservative. I just believe in the rule of law. We are setting a legal precedent if we award American citizenship to an estimated 11 million illegal aliens just because many of their special interest groups tell us it's inhuman of us to enforce our laws which explicitly tell us to deport these exploiters . If our government will grant American citizenship to criminal illegal immigrants--if it will actually do THAT, then-- what will it NOT do?? This needs to be remembered.

  • Open minded on open borders
    Dec. 17, 2007 10:00 a.m.

    I agree with Mike's analogy of "guests" to his "home" and tie them into Lew's comments also. Immigrants are welcome to come into our home through the front door, but that ignores that we have a large family and many doors. Other family members - as Lew (and the author) states that different family members have different agendas/purposes. Other family members are helping 'guests' in and worse, the whole family sits down to eat with them and greets them, pretending not to know. And yet, the whole family has known... the whole time. We've allowed them in because we all benefit by them being in 'our home' and there's lots of room and lots of work to be done. But now many want to reevaluate this 'relationship' but the family has to determine what 'our' common needs are and how do we come together on them, hence Lew's comments. We're all in this together, folks. Let's not fool ourselves.

  • Polk 1848
    Dec. 17, 2007 10:06 a.m.

    Revising history
    "History" as told by supporters of LULAC, MALDEF, MEChA, and La Raza almost invariably includes not only the claim that "Hispanics" were here "first," but that "Hispanics" were established in large numbers throughout the Southwest at the time the United States annexed that territory in 1848.

    In fact, the Spanish Empire was unable to establish effective control over most of the land that today forms the seven States of the U.S. Southwest Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah. The Indian nations Apache, Comanche, Hopi, Navajo, Paiute, Shoshone, Ute, etc. not only militarily defeated the Spanish attempt to invade and colonize this land, but the Apaches and Comanches counter-attacked and raided deep into what is now Mexico. The Comanches raided as far south as Guatemala

  • simplyillegal
    Dec. 17, 2007 10:10 a.m.

    TO ANONYMOUS- Remember that our immigration laws existed long before the illegal invasion from Latin America. We have one of the most liberal immigration policies in the world. No one wants to enact Nuremberg Laws--we just want to enforce the immigration laws already on our books--and for good reason!! Is that so unreasonable? Do you realize how stringent, how well-enforced Mexico's immigration laws are? People who employ the race card, with regard to the ILLEGAL immigrant issue realize that legally their position is untenable. Most thinking people aren't duped by that position.

  • Simplyillegal
    Dec. 17, 2007 10:20 a.m.

    To POLK- Thank you. I'm not surprised-- but remember Polk that for this much needed bit of educated clarification you will be roundly declared a neo nazi by many special interest groups. But console yourself with this thought: the Nazi's were once a special interest group too. Wow, Guatemala, huh??

  • grundle
    Dec. 17, 2007 11:28 a.m.

    I am not sure why one would label those who want rule of law to prevail a racist or "neoconservative" (whatever that really means)

    We have a system here in our country that works very well. It produces opportunity and wealth for all who participate. We have harbored immigrants from every country in the world, taken them in and given them a home and opportunity. We have been able to accomodate everyone and continue on with our business.

    Now we are faced with an influx of immigrants that are here illegally and taxing our system beyond breaking point. Are we racists, hatemongering, or facist to want to control this situation? I think not.

    Seal the borders, fix our immigration system, enforce our laws and our problem will be greatly reduced. Doing these things will allow those from outside of our country to come here, become citizens, and participate in our great system. They will contribute and make us better. Thats how it has always worked.

    Do we have the resolve and courage to do it?

  • Polk1848
    Dec. 17, 2007 11:35 a.m.

    If a white English-speaking American expresses displeasure over the prediction that his ethnic group (if present trends continue) is destined to lose its majority status, he will be called a racist.

    But Hispanic activists publicly gloat over the increase of their ethnic group. Why isnt that racist?

  • Randy
    Dec. 17, 2007 11:50 a.m.

    This multi-facted problem exceeds the capability of our somewhat impotent government.

  • tenx
    Dec. 17, 2007 12:20 p.m.

    Every time I read an article such as this one and then read the comments I come to same conclusion. 80-84% of the American Tax Paying citizens don't want ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. Two snap polls (results aren't tainted) on Channel 2 & 4 also indicate that SAME result. So why shouldn't our legislators, attorney general, governor and senators listen to the people. We are not racists, we are American Citizens who want our laws enforced. We welcome LEGAL IMMIGRATION. Some one coming here legally is screened for health, criminal background and general charactor and have a desire to assimilate and become a citizen of this country. Increase the legal quota, if necessary, but it must be done legally!!

  • short term memory
    Dec. 17, 2007 12:30 p.m.

    The German government in the 1930's, due to a collapsing economy (devalued Deutsch Mark, unemployment, etc., and low industrial production) drafted The Reich Citizenship Law that put pressure on immigrants (especially the non-christian Jewish variety) to keep them out of the country.
    Those who cannot see the fascist-like similarities of today's illegal immigration problem have already forgotten how far things got out of hand in The Fatherland.

  • Lois
    Dec. 17, 2007 12:38 p.m.

    Taxing our system, past the breaking point? I don't think so, grundle. A quick google search will lead you to some recent studies that show that non-citezen workers contribute more than they take. If you don't believe me, why don't you protest by refusing to pay for cheap produce, fast food, clean hotel rooms.......

  • unrealistic
    Dec. 17, 2007 12:40 p.m.

    It's not a question of anybody wanting illegal immigration or not, its the unrealistic expectation that anything short of gestapo-like raids on illegals (and how are we to know if they are legal or illegal - make them wear "L"s on their clothes?)
    and building a Great Wall of China on our borders is going to solve the problem.

  • grundle
    Dec. 17, 2007 1:15 p.m.

    I just read data on the issue of hospitals shutting down because they are going broke treating illegals. Another article talked about Florida not being able to keep obstetricians because they are being forced to deliver babies for free to illegal immigrants. hmmm...seems like something is breaking.

    Sorry you don't think so Lois....a quick google search comes up with plenty of evidence that illegals are taxing our infrastructure...especially in health care and education.

    I guess we all see what we want to see.

    What part of RULE OF LAW do you disagree with?

    What part of the concept of LEGAL immigration do you disagree with.

    What part of my statement about welcoming immigrants LEGALLY do you disagree with?

    What part of sealing the borders, fixing our immigration system, enforcing our laws do you disagree with?

    I await your reply...

  • tenx
    Dec. 17, 2007 1:18 p.m.

    I think President Eisenhower's "operation wetback" in 1952 went quite well and no one had to wear a L on their back. Then Sen. Kennedy passed 7, as in seven, amnesties one of which was the "amnesty to end all amnesties" and now we have 12-20 Illegal Aliens in our country. If we pass another amnesty, history tells us that the problem will become worse. Illegals are self-deporting out of Oklahoma due to passage of the bill that Sen. Hickman is proposing for Utah. Maybe we should look at it as a possible solution.

  • Wilkey
    Dec. 17, 2007 3:14 p.m.

    "If a white English-speaking American expresses displeasure over the prediction that his ethnic group (if present trends continue) is destined to lose its majority status, he will be called a racist. But Hispanic activists publicly gloat over the increase of their ethnic group. Why isnt that racist? - Polk1848

    Before the thought police took over, it would have been.

    BTW: Nice name. I get the meaning. Does anyone else?

  • grundle
    Dec. 17, 2007 3:37 p.m.

    re:tenx - I agree with you. Its like trying to get rid of the ants by smothering them with honey - :)

  • poor indian nations
    Dec. 17, 2007 3:51 p.m.

    Now you know what the Native American tribes must have gone through.
    And I supposed the White Man by virtue of his white and delightsome appearance, were automatically declared "legal" when they invaded the country.
    Sounds like the universal law of karma to me.

  • Stewart
    Dec. 17, 2007 4:38 p.m.

    John is partially right. Illegal immigration is a moral issue, but as he says, "Immigration has always been a workforce issue." Not so many years ago, one parent could earn a living for the family, even at unskilled entry level jobs. Now a days, wages have been so depressed by the flood of immigrants, both legal and illegal that both parents have to work for even a lower standard of living. This is a workforce issue, but instead of looking at the depressed wages, the employers are telling us that they can't find workers(of course they don't think of paying more). Since they are not afraid to hire cheap labor illegal aliens they don't want the flow of imported labor disrupted.

    John is also right, it is a moral issue. The cheap labor employer use of foreign labor causes many of our workers to be unable to earn a subsistence wage for their family, and therefore require government, taxpayer subsidy. The addiction of employers to illegal cheap labor is truly a moral issue.

    Wages are determined by supply and demand. If a job can't be done for a fair, American subsistence level wage, it doesn't need to be done!!

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 17, 2007 5:13 p.m.

    It's all about economics.
    Everything is now outsourced.
    GM is building plants in China.
    Gas prices are never going to be cheaper.
    The dollar is at its lowest point in years.
    Nothing is made in the U.S.
    And the American ego rejects doing the jobs Mexicans (legal or not) are more than willing to do.
    What's left?
    Make a scapegoat out of some group.
    How amazingly stupid!

  • Anonymous
    Dec. 18, 2007 12:03 p.m.

    I'm sick of the argument that Americans reject the jobs that illegal immigrants do. What Amreicans reject is the CONDITIONS and PAY of that work, not the work itself. I can assure you that if cleaning hotel rooms or picking lettuce paid $16.00/hr or more & gave me holidays and benefits I'd be signing up - lots of people would, at least for the short term until they could complete training for a less physically demanding job or set themselves up financially through investments.

  • Milt
    Dec. 18, 2007 12:48 p.m.

    This is a nation of laws. Illegals have broken one or more laws. Deport them!!

  • Jan T
    Dec. 18, 2007 4:14 p.m.

    The article doesn't say anything. Where is the logical argument? The author is pro-illegal immigration, but he dances about the bush so much one must read carefully to get a fix on his position. It's typical Hispanic behavior. If you cannot win an argument on the merits--protest, object, confuse, blame, demand, deny.

  • New World Disorder
    Dec. 18, 2007 8:40 p.m.

    Nothing wrong with following immigration laws (or any law as long as they are constitutional).

    This goes to some of you (you know who you are) - Make up your minds. Either the Hispanics, descendants from old Hispania are an ethnic group and attacking them doesn't make you a racialist because it is not a race or you view certain ethnic groups as inferior.

    Some of you should think about becoming eugenicists by the way you argue things.

  • Delaware Bob
    Dec. 19, 2007 4:48 p.m.

    I'm from Delaware and I'm all for the State of Utah to pass an Immigration Law to free the State of the "ILLEGALS". This Illegal Immigration has gone on long enough. I was very happy to see Oklahoma pass their law and I'm sure other States will follow. When Pennsylvania passes their law, Delaware will hopefully follow, or we will be adding on to the 40,000 "ILLEGALS" we already have.

    GO UTAH!!!!!

  • DJ
    Dec. 21, 2007 5:54 a.m.

    I can't believe people actually condone illegal immigration. It is ILLEGAL. Do I blame immigrants for coming here illegally, absolutely not. The US government offers free healthcare, free education, and whatever other free "incentives" to come to America which comes in the form of "subsudies" aka taxes we pay -- don't forget birth-right citizenship, legal, but the linch-pin.

    Our dollar is tanking, 43.6 million Americans can hardly afford healthcare and have no health insurance, and we're paying taxes for nearly tens of millions of non-tax paying illegals -- again, not their fault.

    Who's fault is it? Start at your State Representitives and work your way up. Demand they start enforcing the state's current immigration laws or have them start legislating for tougher laws. Otherwise, vote them out!

    Seriously. How many schools, hospitals, and other tax-paid services have to go under before people start waking up? We the People must stand up and be heard, otherwise we might as well starting thinking about Amnesty again....

  • Stephen
    Dec. 21, 2007 8:36 p.m.

    I am sick of this propaganda. First of all, the estimates of illegal immigrants in this country are so understated. I laugh when I see people write "an estimated 10-15 million illegal immigrants in this country". That is complete garbage - many estimates put it at 30 to 40 million. It is a big problem that must be dealt with. I live in the New Jersey Soviet Socialist Republic and the nearest major city to my home, Newark, is a sanctuary for illegals. My girlfriend is from China and is here legally on an F-1 student visa. Even she is shocked with all the illegal immigrants in the NJ SSR! Once she went to a landromat where nobody spoke English and was appauled. At that time she realized we should seek a greener pasture (i.e. a state with few illegals). I am not a rascist. I am a law abiding Christian that would lay down my life for this soil. I am wise to Hispanic propaganda articles like these, so reader beware.

  • Don Reynolds Austin Texas
    Dec. 22, 2007 3:57 p.m.

    This man offers no solution other than the SURRENDER of this country to the illegal aliens. He does not admit that the illegal border crossings should be stopped. He certainly does not agree that those in this country illegally should be deported. He blames business for hiring them....which is fine, as I do also. He never admits that illegal alien crimes are a major reason why Americans have run out of patience on this issue. In short, he offers us nothing other than propaganda and platitudes.

    What we want and need is the invasion reversed. What we do not care about is what country they should be returned to. This is not about race. Mexican is not a race, nor is Hispanic. And yes, this is likely to be the biggest issue of the 2008 campaign season.

    Unless the Democrats can come up with a credible candidate on THIS ISSUE they will hand the White House AND the Congress back to the Republicans. (By credible candidate, I do not mean someone who very recently got religion on the subject of illegal aliens.) We are NOT going to have another amnesty cheerleader like GW Bush!