The Costs of Mass Deportation: Impractical, Expensive, and Ineffective

http://bit.ly/cU2qbX

Issues › Domestic › Immigration

The Costs of Mass Deportation

Impractical, Expensive, and Ineffective

SOURCE: AP/Brian Kersey

Deportees wait to be transferred at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement's in Broadview, Illinois facility.

By Marshall Fitz , Gebe Martinez, Madura Wijewardena | March 19, 2010

• Print
• Email
• Share:

Read the full report (pdf)

Download the executive summary (pdf)

Fast facts on deportation (pdf)

Video: Immigration Reform by the Numbers

What Could We Do with $285 Billion?

Almost three years ago, Congress tried to reform the nation's broken immigration system but fell short of the mark. The core questions of what to do about undocumented immigrants already living in the United States and about those who are sure to seek our shores in the future thwarted political agreement and shut down congressional negotiations in 2007. Under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, deployment of new enforcement strategies and the allocation of enforcement resources have multiplied. Nonetheless, the inherent systemic dysfunction has deepened, and the public call for solutions has amplified.

That legislative battle for immigration reform now looms again on the horizon. There are three options for restoring order to our immigration system:

• Live with the dysfunctional status quo, pouring billions of dollars into immigration enforcement programs at the worksite, in communities, and on the border without reducing the numbers of undocumented immigrants in the country
• Double down on this failed enforcement strategy in an attempt to apprehend and remove all current undocumented immigrants
• Combine a strict enforcement strategy with a program that would require undocumented workers to register, pass background checks, pay their full share of taxes, and earn the privilege of citizenship while creating legal channels for future migration flows

The first alternative would leave in place policies that have allowed 5 percent of our nation's workforce—approximately 8.3 million workers in March 2008—to remain undocumented in our country. This is clearly an unsustainable position in a democratic society—permitting a class of workers to operate in a shadow economy subject to exploitation and undermining all workers' rights and opportunities.

The second option, mass deportation of undocumented immigrants, is essentially the enforcement-only status quo on steroids. As this paper demonstrates, this option would be prohibitively expensive and trigger profound collateral consequences.4 Our analysis is comprised of a detailed review of all federal spending to prevent unauthorized immigration and deport undocumented immigrants in FY 2008, the last fiscal year (ending in October 2008) for which there is complete data (see box on page 5). It shows that the total cost of mass deportation and continuing border interdiction and interior enforcement efforts would be $285 billion (in 2008 dollars) over five years.

Specifically, this report calculates a price tag of $200 billion to enforce a federal dragnet that would snare the estimated 10.8 million undocumented immigrants in the United States over five years. That amount, however, does not include the annual recurring border and interior enforcement spending that will necessarily have to occur. It would cost taxpayers at least another $17 billion annually (in 2008 dollars) to maintain the status quo at the border and in the interior, or a total of nearly $85 billion over five years. That means the total five-year immigration enforcement cost under a mass deportation strategy would be approximately $285 billion.

When viewed through this most narrow but most telling fiscal lens, it should be clear that a deportation-only strategy is highly irresponsible. In these challenging economic times, spending a king's ransom to tackle a symptom of our immigration crisis without addressing root causes would be a massive waste of taxpayer dollars. Spending $285 billion would require $922 in new taxes for every man, woman, and child in this country. If this kind of money were raised, it could provide every public and private school student from prekindergarten to the 12th grade an extra $5,100 for their education. Or more frivolously, that $285 billion would pay for about 26,146 trips in the private space travel rocket, Falcon 1e.

The worst economic downturn since the Great Depression has clearly diminished the number of people attempting to enter the country illegally–the absence of jobs eliminates the predominant incentive to migrate. And yet, even with diminished pressure at the border, the dramatic increases in spending on immigration enforcement have not significantly altered the net number of undocumented immigrants in the country. In fact, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, reports that the undocumented immigrant population as of January 2009 stood at 10.8 million, or 300,000 more than it was in 20052 In other words, the massive outlays in enforcement resources are barely making a dent in the current population.

That leaves the third course, comprehensive immigration reform, as the only rational alternative. The solution to our broken immigration system must combine tough border and workplace enforcement with practical reforms that promote economic growth, protect all workers, and reunite immediate family members. Among other things, that means we must establish a realistic program to require undocumented immigrants to register with the government while creating legal immigration channels that are flexible, serve the national interest, and curtail future illegal immigration.

Some proponents of the second option—a deportation-only strategy—contend that the Great Recession and heightened unemployment justify mass deportation. As if deportation were a panacea for the nation's economic woes, the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), claims: "The single most effective thing that DHS could do to create jobs for American workers would be to conduct vigorous worksite enforcement and to actually deport the illegal immigrant workers so they don't remain here to compete with citizen and legal immigrant job-seekers." The patently erroneous analysis behind this contention—that unemployed Americans are a perfect substitute for undocumented workers in the workforce–ignores the devastating impact such an approach would have on economic growth.

In fact, a recent study by the Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Center demonstrates how legalization of undocumented immigrants and more flexible immigration channels would significantly expand the economy—by a cumulative $1.5 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years—through increased consumer spending, higher tax receipts, and other related factors. A deportation approach, by contrast, would have the cumulative effect of draining $2.5 trillion over 10 years from the U.S. economy. That is a $4 trillion swing in GDP depending on which policy approach we adopt.

Once policymakers in Congress and their constituents across the country weigh the unrealistic five-year immigration enforcement costs of pursuing a deportation-only strategy—$285 billion—against the progressive alternative they will recognize once and for all that mass deportation is fiscally untenable.

This paper will demonstrate in detail the severe consequences of a deportation-only policy on the nation's economy and how the execution of such a policy would require massive direct expenditures. We analyze publicly available data to assess the costs and the steps required to carry out such a policy—from point of arrest through transportation out of the country. Our report adopts conservative assumptions for key variables to ensure that the estimated program and spending requirements are realistic and not overstated. Our findings are not just sobering; they conclusively prove a deportation-only immigration strategy would be the height of folly.

Read the full report (pdf)

Download the executive summary (pdf)

Fast facts on deportation (pdf)

Video: Immigration Reform by the Numbers

What Could We Do with $285 Billion?

To speak with our experts on this topic, please contact:

Print: Suzi Emmerling (foreign policy and security, energy, education, immigration)
202.481.8224 or semmerling@americanprogress.org

Print: Jason Rahlan (health care, economy, civil rights, poverty, judiciary, open government)
202.481.8132 or jrahlan@americanprogress.org

Radio: John Neurohr
202.481.8182 or jneurohr@americanprogress.org

TV: Andrea Purse
202.741.6250 or apurse@americanprogress.org

Web: Erin Lindsay
202.741.6397 or elindsay@americanprogress.org

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Unidos Venceremos! United We Will Win!
~Peta-de-Aztlan~ Sacramento, California, Amerika
Email: peter.lopez51@yahoo.com 
http://help-matrix.ning.com/

http://twitter.com/Peta_de_Aztlan

http://www.facebook.com/Peta51

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Humane-Rights-Agenda/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetworkAztlan_News/   

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible,
make violent revolution inevitable."
~ President John F.Kennedy ~ Killed November 22, 1963
c/s

"Burn the Mexican flag!": A look back at the hateful anti-immigration rhetoric from 2006

http://bit.ly/cgTQa0

"Burn the Mexican flag!": A look back at the hateful anti-immigration rhetoric from 2006
March 18, 2010 4:17 pm ET — 31 Comments

In anticipation of the upcoming immigration marches, Media Matters for America has compiled a review of the hateful and outrageous right-wing rhetoric surrounding the immigration debate in 2006.

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigrant-rights marchers, immigrants are seeking to reclaim the Southwest for Mexico

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigrant rights marchers are "racis[t]"

Right-wing rhetoric: Pro-immigration marchers should be arrested or deported

Right-wing rhetoric: Stoking fears over displays of the Mexican flag

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigration is an "invasion"

Right-wing rhetoric: U.S., Mexico are in a state of "war"

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigrants are fundamentally altering American culture or way of life

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigration reform is part of plot to institute "North American Union"

Other hate speech and outrageous rhetoric

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigrant-rights marchers, immigrants are seeking to reclaim the Southwest for Mexico

"Reconquista" is a discredited smear used by the right to generate fear of Latino immigrants. During the 2006 immigration debate, right-wing media repeatedly advanced the discredited smear that Mexican-Americans and Mexican citizens -- particularly "illegal aliens" -- are plotting to take over the U.S. Southwest for Mexico.

Dobbs referred to potential "army" of "illegal alien" "invaders" taking over Southwest. During an April 2006 broadcast of his now-defunct CNN show, Lou Dobbs introduced a report by stating: "There are some Mexican citizens and some Mexican-Americans who want to see California, New Mexico and other parts of the Southwestern United States given over to Mexico. These groups call it the reconquista, Spanish for reconquest. And they view the millions of Mexican illegal aliens in particular entering the United States as potentially an army of invaders to achieve that takeover." Correspondent Christine Romans reported, "Long downplayed as a theory of the radical ethnic fringe, the la reconquista, the reconquest, the reclamation, the return, it's resonating with some on the streets," and went on to say: "A lot of open borders groups disavow it completely. But the growing street protests in favor of illegal immigration, Lou, are increasingly taking on the tone of that very radicalism." [CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, 4/31/06]

CNN reporter referenced "the Vicente Fox Aztlan tour," used "Aztlan" graphic sourced to hate group. Lou Dobbs Tonight correspondent Casey Wian characterized then-Mexican President Vicente Fox's trip to Salt Lake City, Utah, as a "Mexican military incursion" and claimed that "[y]ou could call" Fox's trip to the United States "the Vicente Fox Aztlan tour." During Wian's report, CNN featured a graphic of "Aztlan" that was sourced to the Council of Conservative Citizens -- an organization whose "Statement of Principles" reads: "We also oppose all efforts to mix the races of mankind, to promote non-white races over the European-American people through so-called 'affirmative action' and similar measures, to destroy or denigrate the European-American heritage, including the heritage of the Southern people, and to force the integration of the races." [Lou Dobbs Tonight, 5/23/06]

Malkin: "[T]he vast majority of mainstream Hispanic politicians" embrace "the intellectual underpinnings of reconquista." On Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, columnist and blogger Michelle Malkin declared that protesters in Los Angeles were "people who believe that the American southwest belongs to Mexico, that we don't have a right to enforce our borders, and who do nothing more than try to sabotage our sovereignty." Malkin later added that "the kind of quote-unquote 'pride' that a lot of these illegal alien activists are touting now goes much further than just being proud about one's heritage and one's roots. The idea, the intellectual underpinnings of reconquista, are embraced by the vast majority of mainstream Hispanic politicians." [Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, 3/30/06]

Wash. Times editorial: Protesters approve of "reconquista" agenda. A Washington Times editorial accused Latinos who protested against a proposal to restrict immigration of either supporting or having given "tacit approval" to the "reconquista" agenda of "Hispanic radicals," which the editorial said was the "reconquering of Mexican land lost during the Mexican-American war." [The Washington Times, 3/30/06]

Fox's Gibson suspicious that Latino advocacy groups are set on "retaking old Mexico territories ... by pure birth rate." While saying that he was citing an internal email from the National Council of La Raza, John Gibson claimed on his Fox News show that he was suspicious that advocacy groups like the NCLR favor "the so-called reconquista," which Gibson described as the "retaking of old Mexico territories, which are now part of the United States, by pure birth rate." Gibson also asserted that the NCLR "is a group dedicated to the betterment of the race," adding, "good, but try being American while you are at it, guys." [Fox News' The Big Story with John Gibson, 4/3/06]

O'Reilly: Purported immigrant protest "organizers" have hidden "hardcore militant agenda" to take back American Southwest. On his radio show, O'Reilly said that the "organizers" of immigrant rallies have a "hardcore militant agenda of 'You stole our land, you bad gringos.' " O'Reilly said that the "slogan" of the demonstrations' organizers was "[W]e didn't cross the border, the border crossed us," and that this meant that the organizers believed that Americans "stole [their] land." The organizers' hidden "agenda underneath," said O'Reilly, was that "now, we're going to take it back by massive, massive migration into the Southwest." [Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, 5/1/06]

Buchanan: "Chicano chauvinists and Mexican agents" want to "take back through demography and culture what their ancestors lost through war." In his book, State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, published in August 2006, MSNBC contributor Pat Buchanan wrote: "Chicano chauvinists and Mexican agents have made clear their intent to take back through demography and culture what their ancestors lost through war." He also wrote that the United States must keep "Americans of European descent" from becoming the "minority" in order to "survive[]." [State of Emergency (Thomas Dunne Books)]

Malkin: "[W]e saw ... that supposed fringe" that favors reconquista "come out into the mainstream." O'Reilly said to Malkin, "So I know that there's an undercurrent of militancy that says, 'Hey, this is our territory. You stole it from us in the Mexican-American War. We're going to take it back now by illegal immigration.' But I think that's a fringe, nutty group, not the mass of millions that we have." Malkin replied: "Well, I guess I disagree with you there, Bill, because I mean, we saw in April and May of this year [2006] that supposed fringe come out into the mainstream. And it wasn't just a dozen folks who are ensconced in the ivory tower who believe that the Southwest is Aztlan and it belongs to them." O'Reilly later asked her: "You think that this massive immigration to the United States, 15 million strong, is a part of a plan to bring back territory to Mexico?" Malkin responded: "Well, I take the Mexican government at its word when it says that is exactly its plan." [The O'Reilly Factor, 8/23/06]

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigrant rights marchers are "racis[t]"

Malkin: "[M]ilitant racism from another protected minority group was on full display" from "Latino supremacists." In her syndicated column, Malkin wrote of immigration rallies, "Well, this weekend, militant racism from another protected minority group was on full display. But you wouldn't know it from press accounts that whitewashed or buried the protesters' virulent anti-American hatred." Malkin also wrote: "Apologists are quick to argue that Latino supremacists are just a small fringe faction of the pro-illegal immigration movement (never mind that their ranks include former and current Hispanic politicians from L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to former California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Cruz Bustamante)." [Creators Syndicate column, 3/29/06]

Savage: "[B]rown supremacists" are "behind these protests." On his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage said: "So, it seems to me that there's a certain group of immigrants that's not very happy and they're all Hispanic. I don't see any other racial group out there in the streets, do you? Now, that's very interesting. I'm not allowed to raise the issue or the specter of brown supremacists behind these protests. Don't tell me this is all about compassion for immigrants, because it is not at all only about compassion for immigrants. They are trying to provoke the takeover of the United States of America." [Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation, 4/11/06]

Right-wing rhetoric: Pro-immigration marchers should be arrested or deported

Fox's Asman wondered whether marches are a perfect chance to "round up these lawbreakers and ship them out." Guest-hosting Fox News' Your World, David Asman discussed nationwide protests of immigration reform and wondered: "With so many illegals hitting the streets, is this the perfect time to round up these lawbreakers and ship them out?" As Asman spoke, the on-screen text read: "Round 'Em Up?" Later, the text read: "Perfect Chance to Arrest Illegal Immigrants?" [Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, 4/10/06]

Smerconish: "[L]aw enforcement ought to step in" at immigration demonstrations and consider "gathering ... up" undocumented immigrants. Guest-hosting MSNBC's Scarborough Country, Philadelphia-based radio host Michael Smerconish suggested that "maybe law enforcement ought to step in" at pro-immigration demonstrations and consider "gathering ... up" undocumented immigrants. Smerconish wondered why there was "zero discussion" of "gathering them up" at the demonstrations, when "[a]ll I keep hearing is how would we ever find them?" [MSNBC's Scarborough Country, 4/10/06]

Doocy suggested "round[ing] them up right then, when they're saying, 'Hey, I'm right here.' " On Fox & Friends, syndicated radio host Erich "Mancow" Muller announced that he was "having a big rally here in Chicago" for a "group" that he said was "pro-illegal murder and illegal car thieves." Muller added: "We're just getting together, and we're going to be out on the street. We're for illegal murder and illegal car thievery. So, we just like illegal stuff." Muller added: "I just like illegal murder and illegal car thieves. So, you know, it's illegal, but -- and, in fact, all the people who have done it are going to be out there on the street, and hopefully, none of the cops will come arrest us." Co-host Steve Doocy then said: "Yeah, you wouldn't want to round them up right then, when they're saying, 'Hey, I'm right here.' " [Fox News' Fox & Friends, 4/3/06]

Right-wing rhetoric: Stoking fears over displays of the Mexican flag

Media figures attacked Mexican-flag wavers, but not those waving Irish, Italian, or Israeli flags. Following immigration rallies, media figures criticized demonstrators for carrying Mexican flags, but the same media figures had not complained about people waving other nations' flags, such as Irish flags at St. Patrick's Day events, Italian flags at Columbus Day events, or Israeli flags at Israel Day events. Some commentators even dismissed the comparison. For instance, National Review editor Rich Lowry called the Mexican-flag waving "more ominous" than the St. Patrick's Day or Columbus Day displays.

Savage: "[B]urn the Mexican flag!" On his radio show, Savage urged his listeners to "burn the Mexican flag" in opposition to undocumented immigrants, telling them to "[b]urn a Mexican flag for America, burn a Mexican flag for those who died that you should have a nationality and a sovereignty, go out in the street and show you're a man, burn 10 Mexican flags, if I could recommend it. Put one in the window upside down and tell them to go back where they came from! And if that's a little to xenophobic for you, ask yourself why the xenophobes from Mexico wave their flag in your country." [The Savage Nation, 3/27/06]

Fox News: Waving Mexican flag shows "antagonistic edge," waving U.S. flag "just a cover" and "a ploy to win America's support." Asman cited demonstrators' use of Mexican flags as evidence of "an antagonistic edge" and suggested that the use of U.S. flags and signs written in English at pro-immigration demonstrations was "just a cover" by the demonstrators to conceal their "real intention, which is to keep things as normal among illegal immigrants in the country." Similarly, Neil Cavuto suggested that the pro-immigration demonstrators' U.S. flags were "just a prop" and "just a ploy to win America's support." [Your World with Neil Cavuto, 4/10/06; 4/11/06]

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigration is an "invasion"

Buchanan: Illegal immigration is "an invasion of the United States of America" and "[t]he whole world is coming." On MSNBC's Hardball, Buchanan claimed that the influx of undocumented immigrants into the United States is "not immigration" but "an invasion of the United States of America" that is "coming not only from Mexico," but "from the whole world." He reiterated: "The whole world is coming." [MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, 5/15/06]

Savage: "This is an invasion by any other name." Savage said, "We, the people, are being displaced by the people of Mexico. This is an invasion by any other name. Everybody with a brain understands that. Everybody who understands reality understands we are being pushed out of our own country." [The Savage Nation, 3/27/06]

Buchanan: "This is an invasion, the greatest invasion in history." In State of Emergency, Buchanan wrote of immigration: "This is an invasion, the greatest invasion in history." He also wrote: "We are witnessing how nations perish. We are entered upon the final act of our civilization. The last scene is the deconstruction of the nations. The penultimate scene, now well underway, is the invasion unresisted." [State of Emergency]

Right-wing rhetoric: U.S., Mexico are in a state of "war"

Tancredo: [W]e are at war with Mexico, in a way." On Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, WorldNetDaily.com columnist Tom Tancredo -- then a Republican congressman from Colorado -- said, "[I]n a way, we are at war with Mexico, in a way. I'll say it in this way: Mexico is aiding and abetting an invasion of this country. They are part of the problem. They are doing what they are -- in fact, they are creating situations along that border using their own military to protect drug trafficking into the United States, pushing their own people into the United States for a variety of reasons. It is an invasion. It is an act of aggression." [Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, 6/26/06, transcript from the Nexis database]

Beck sidekick Gray: "[W]e are in a war with Mexico right now." Pat Gray, who is now a co-host of Glenn Beck's radio show, appeared on Beck's then-CNN Headline News show and claimed that "we are in a war with Mexico right now." After Beck agreed that "we better wake up soon," Gray responded: "[O]r we're going to wake up dead." [CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck, 9/25/06]

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigrants are fundamentally altering American culture or way of life

O'Reilly claimed to have exposed the "hidden agenda" behind the immigrant rights movement: "the browning of America." O'Reilly claimed that during his Fox News show, guest Charles Barron, a New York City councilman, had revealed the "hidden agenda" behind the current immigration debate. O'Reilly told his radio listeners: "[T]he bottom line is Charles Barron said last night is there is a movement in this country to wipe out 'white privilege' and to have the browning of America." But in the interview, Barron at no point claimed that he and other advocates for immigrant rights are motivated by a desire to force white Americans into the minority -- despite O'Reilly's repeated efforts to provoke such an acknowledgment. [The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, 4/12/06]

Beck: "[I]llegal immigrants are attacking our culture, and our way of life." On his then-CNN Headline News show, Beck said, "[A]t the very least, illegal immigrants are attacking our culture, and our way of life. They are not melting into our melting pot -- they're here for the cash." He later said, "I mean, we've got all these threats coming in from overseas, but the simplest way is for us to lose the culture of the West is just to do nothing and let illegal immigrants not melt in and take the culture away from us." [Glenn Beck, 8/24/06]

Buchanan: "They're not welcome to come here and insult the symbols of our country, and that's what these outsiders have done." On Scarborough Country, Buchanan said that a Spanish-language version of "The Star-Spangled Banner" is "a provocation and an insult" and that immigrants are "not welcome to come here and insult the symbols of our country, and that's what these outsiders have done." Buchanan then said that the Spanish recording is "a good thing in this sense: The American people are awakening to the character of these people." [Scarborough Country, 5/1/06]

Matthews: Republicans "have a right to fear" a "cultural change" that would result in their hometowns "becom[ing] overwhelmingly Mexican." On Hardball, Matthews claimed that House Republicans who had passed a bill that would apparently have criminalized undocumented immigrants, their employers, and those who provide aid to them "have a right to fear" a "cultural change" that would result in their home states and towns "becom[ing] overwhelmingly Mexican." Matthews was responding to a suggestion by guest Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now, that "the Republicans who passed the House bill" are "afraid" that the United States will soon have "a majority Latino population." Matthews later said, "It's not my point view necessarily," before suggesting that "90 percent of this country" agrees with the "viewpoint" that "I didn't move to Mexico; Mexico moved to me, and I'm complaining about it." [Hardball with Chris Matthews, 3/30/06]

O'Reilly: "[Y]ou're on a nice block ... and then the house next to you is turned into an illegal alien Club Med." On his radio show, O'Reilly said:

You've got the folks who don't have emotion invested in it, other than the farmers down and the ranchers down on the border are going -- as the lady just called up, [caller] -- say, look, I got garbage in my -- on my ranch every day. I mean, I'm under siege. They have emotion invested in it. But those of us up here don't.

Unless you live in a town, like Farmingville, Long Island -- we went over this before -- where you bought a house, you spent a couple of hundred thousand dollars, you're on a nice block, your kids are happy, and then the house next to you is turned into an illegal alien Club Med. And this happens all over the country. [The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, 3/27/06]

Buchanan: "I think what's coming is the complete balkanization of America." On Hardball, Buchanan said, "I think what's coming is the complete balkanization of America, and I'm afraid it's going to be by ethnicity and culture, and language, and every other way. ... And so, then, it's not like the country you and I grew up in, Chris, whereby we were monocultural. We were monocultural." [Hardball, 6/5/06]

O'Reilly wondered whether children of Mexican immigrants in U.S. "have any kind of traditional value system" or are "setting up Acapulco North." On his radio show, O'Reilly wondered whether children of legal and undocumented immigrants from Mexico who are attending school in the United States "have any kind of traditional value system at all, vis-à-vis what America used to be," or whether they are "taking their Mexican values, because most of them are Mexicans, and, you know, basically setting up Acapulco North." [The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, 8/15/06]

Buchanan: "You're going to have a giant Kosovo in the Southwest, which de facto is going to secede." On Scarborough Country, Buchanan said: "[Y]ou cannot absorb 40 to 60 million more people. You're going to have a giant Kosovo in the Southwest, which de facto is going to secede from this country." [Scarborough Country, 6/5/06]

Buchanan: Immigration will turn U.S. into "a polyglot boarding house for the world, a tangle of squabbling minorities." On CNN's The Situation Room, Buchanan warned that "[w]e'll become a polyglot boarding house for the world, a tangle of squabbling minorities." He continued: "The problem with the immigration, basically -- let's take Mexico -- is these folks are breaking the law, first. Secondly, they're coming in huge numbers, like no other group before. Third, they're from a contiguous nation. Fourth, 58 percent of Mexicans believe the Southwest belongs to them. Fifth, the Mexican government is pushing them in here, and it's got a political and ideological agenda." [CNN's The Situation Room, 8/28/06]

Right-wing rhetoric: Immigration reform is part of plot to institute "North American Union"

"North American Union" is an absurd conspiracy theory. Right-wing media, including Dobbs, have obsessively warned that elements in the U.S. government are secretly plotting to merge the United States with Mexico and Canada in a "North American Union" similar to the European Union. During the June 21, 2006, edition of his CNN show, Dobbs stated that "the Bush administration is pushing ahead with a plan to create a North American union with Canada and Mexico" and later asked: "Do you think, our question is, maybe somebody should take a vote if we're going to merge Canada, Mexico and the United States as the leaders of the three countries are attempting to do with the security and prosperity partnership? Yes or no. Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com." Dobbs' CNN colleague Suzanne Malveaux later described the North American Union rhetoric as "conspiracy theor[y]." [Lou Dobbs Tonight, 6/21/06]

Corsi: "North American Union ... was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy." Jerome Corsi, co-author of Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry, wrote in a column that "President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy. Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically, setting the stage for a North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico." [HumanEvents.com, 5/19/06]

WND's Farah linked Bush guest-worker proposal to plan by "one-worlders" to merge U.S., Mexico, Canada. Appearing on a radio show, WorldNetDaily founder and editor Joseph Farah claimed that the "one-worlders" of the Council on Foreign Relations have a plan to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada by 2010 and suggested that Bush's proposed guest-worker program is part of this plan. Farah said, "Sometimes, the conspiracies are right." [American Family Radio's Today's Issues, 4/4/06]

Buchanan: Vicente Fox's "ultimate goal" is making Mexico and U.S. "basically part of the North American Union." On Lou Dobbs Tonight, Buchanan said, "The government of Mexico is pushing its poor and unemployed into the United States to ease social pressure on itself. Secondly, they get $16 billion in remittances back to Mexico. Third, it is awoken to the idea that it can reannex the American southwest, which it used to hold, linguistically, culturally, ethnically and socially, not militarily by pushing all these people in there and creating a gigantic fifth column in America." Buchanan added: "The ultimate goal of Vicente Fox is the erasure of the border between the United States and Mexico. He has said as much and to make the two basically part of the North American Union in which Mexico will get ... a constant flow of cash from the wealthy USA and La Reconquista is the objective." [Lou Dobbs Tonight, 9/5/06, Nexis transcript]

Other hate speech and outrageous rhetoric

Savage: Undocumented immigrants at protests are "vermin." On his radio show, Savage warned political leaders against "tak[ing] to the streets," saying "to the politicians": "I warn you personally. You will not be re-elected. If you take to the streets with the vermin who are trying to dictate to us how we should run America, even though they're not even entitled to vote or be here, you're going to be thrown out of office. The people will throw you out of office. There are not enough of them to re-elect you. You will be out of a job. You will not have a living. You will be hunting for a job. Maybe, you'll be picking the vegetables." [The Savage Nation, 4/10/06]

Beck: Undocumented immigrants are either "terrorists," outlaws, or people who "can't make a living in their own dirtbag country." On his radio show, Beck claimed that there are three reasons that an undocumented immigrant "comes across the border in the middle of the night": "One, they're terrorists; two, they're escaping the law; or three, they're hungry. They can't make a living in their own dirtbag country." [The Glenn Beck Program, 4/27/06]

O'Reilly: Immigration controversy is "becoming a race war." On his radio show, O'Reilly stated that "you just cannot keep assimilating millions of people in here at the rate they're coming without unintended consequences. And you've got them all day long. So now, it's becoming a race war. That's what it's becoming -- a race war. You see half a million people show up in L.A. and they were waving Mexican flags. And they're saying, 'Hey, we have a right to be here.' No, you don't. If you're illegal, you don't have a right to be here. But they don't see it that way." [The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, 3/29/06]

Boortz: "[W]here do we store 11 million Hispanics just waiting to ship 'em back to Nicaragua, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico? ... The Superdome!" Nationally syndicated radio host Neal Boortz said that undocumented immigrants "are not going to be shipped back. I mean ... think about -- Mexico doesn't want 'em back, first of all. Think what happens if we round -- first of all, where do we store 11 million Hispanics just waiting to ship 'em back to Nicaragua, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico? Where do we store 'em? ... The Superdome! Exactly. And the Astrodome in Houston. That's where we'll put 'em. We've got practice." [Cox Radio Syndication's The Neal Boortz Show, 3/27/06]

Cavuto: Are immigration protests "economic terrorism?" On Your World, Cavuto addressed the "Day Without Immigrants" protests, asking, "So is it freedom of expression, or economic terrorism?" At various points throughout the program, the on-screen text echoed Cavuto's question, asking: " 'A Day Without Immigrants'; Economic Terrorism?" [Your World with Neil Cavuto, 5/1/06]

— T.G.

http://bit.ly/cgTQa0

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Unidos Venceremos! United We Will Win!
~Peta-de-Aztlan~ Sacramento, California, Amerika
Email: peter.lopez51@yahoo.com 
http://help-matrix.ning.com/

http://twitter.com/Peta_de_Aztlan

http://www.facebook.com/Peta51

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Humane-Rights-Agenda/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetworkAztlan_News/   

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible,
make violent revolution inevitable."
~ President John F.Kennedy ~ Killed November 22, 1963
c/s

PERMANENT AGGRESSION: War on the horizon in Latin America

http://bit.ly/cpe2tt

Thursday, March 11, 2010

PERMANENT AGGRESSION: War on the horizon in Latin America

The Empire will stop at nothing to find mechanisms and techniques to achieve its final objective, and we cannot disregard the possibility of a military conflict in the near future. If the US places Venezuela on the "terrorist list" this year, we could be on the verge of a regional war.

Latin America has suffered constant aggressions executed by Washington during the past two hundred years. Strategies and tactics of covert and overt warfare have been applied against different nations in the region, ranging from coup d'etats, assassinations, disappearances, torture, brutal dictatorships, atrocities, political persecution, economic sabotage, psychological operations, media warfare, biological warfare, subversion, counterinsurgency, paramiliary infiltration, diplomatic terrorism, blockades, electoral intervention to military invasions. Regardless of who's in the White House – democrat or republican – when it comes to Latin America, the Empire's policies remain the same.

In the twenty-first century, Venezuela has been one of the principle targets of these constant aggressions. Since the April 2002 coup, there has been a dangerous escalation in attacks and destabilization attempts against the Bolivarian Revolution. Although many fell beneath the seductive smile and poetic words of Barack Obama, it's not necessary to look beyond the past year to see the intensification of Washington's aggressions against Venezuela. The largest military expansion in history in the region – through the US occupation of Colombia – the reactivation of the Fourth Fleet of the US Navy, as well as an increased US military presence in the Caribbean, Panama and Central America throughout the past year, can be interpreted as preparation for a conflict scenario in the region.

ESCALATION IN AGGRESSIONS
The hostile declarations from various Washington representatives during the past few weeks, accusing Venezuela of failure to combat narcotics operations, violating human rights, "not contributing to democracy and regional stability", and of being the "regional anti-US leader", form part of a coordinated campaign that seeks to justify a direct aggression against Venezuela. Soon, Washington will publish its annual list of "state sponsors of terrorism", and if Venezuela is placed on the list this year, the region could be on the brink of an unprecedented military conflict.

Evidence seems to indicate a move in that direction. A US Air Force document justifying the need to increase military presence in Colombia affirmed that Washington is preparing for "expeditionary warfare" in South America.

The 2009 Air Force document, sent to Congress last May (but later modified in November after it was used to demonstrate the true intentions behind the military agreement between the US and Colombia), explained, ""Development of this CSL (Cooperative Security Location) will further the strategic partnership forged between the US and Colombia and is in the interest of both nations…A presence will also increase our capability to conduct Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), improve global reach, support logistics requirements, improve partnerships, improve theater security cooperation and expand expeditionary warfare capability".

ON THE VERGE OF WAR
The first official report outlining the defense and intelligence priorities of the Obama administration dedicated substantial attention to Venezuela. The Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community – which has mentioned Venezuela in years past, but not nearly with the same emphasis and extension – particularly signaled out President Chavez as a major "threat" to US interests. "Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has established himself as one of the US's foremost international detractors, denouncing liberal democracy and market capitalism and opposing US policies and interests in the region", said the intelligence document, placing Venezuela in the same category as Iran, North Korea and Al Qa'ida.

Days after the report was published, the State Department presented its 2011 budget to Congress. In addition to an increase in financing through USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to fund opposition groups in Venezuela – more than $15 million USD – there was also a $48 million USD request for the Organization of American States (OAS) to "deploy special 'democracy promoter' teams to countries where democracy is under threat from the growing presence of alternative concepts such as the 'participatory democracy' promoted by Venezuela and Bolivia".

One week later, the Inter-American Human Rights Commission of the OAS – funded by Washington – emitted a whopping 322-page report slamming Venezuela for human rights violations, repression of the press and undermining democracy. Despite the fact that it was a report – and a Commission – dedicated to the topic of human rights, the detailed study barely mentioned the immense achievements of the Chavez government in advancing human rights; advances which have been recognized and applauded over the past five years by the Unted Nations. The evidence used by the OAS to elaborate the report came from opposition testimonies and biased media outlets, a clear demonstration of dangerous subjectivity.

Simultaneous to these accusations, a Spanish court accused the Venezuelan government last week of supporting and collaborating with the FARC and ETA – organizations considered terrorist by both the US and Spain – provoking an international scandal. President Chavez reiterated that his government has absolutely no ties with any terrorist group in the world. "This is a government of peace", declared Chavez, after explaining that the presence of ETA members in Venezuela is due to an agreement made over 20 years ago by the government of Carlos Andres Perez in order to aid Spain in a peace treaty with the Basque separatist group.

THE EMPIRE HAS NO COLOR
Last week, on tour in Latin America, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton couldn't stop attacking Venezuela during her different declarations made before international media. She expressed her "great concern" for democracy and human rights in Venezuela, accusing President Chavez of not "contributing in a constructive manner" to regional progress. In a cynical tone, Clinton advised President Chavez to "look further south" for inspiration, instead of towards Cuba.

Clinton's regional trip was part of a strategy announced by the Obama administration last year, to create a divide between the so-called "progressive left" and the "radical left" in Latin America. It's no coincidence that her first tour of the region coincided with the announcement of a new Latin American and Caribbean Community of States, which excludes the presence of the US and Canada.

THE COMING CONFLICT
A military conflict is not initiated from one day to the next. It's a process that involves first influencing public perception and opinion – demonizing the target leader or government in order to justify aggression. Subsequently, armed forces are strategically deployed in the region in order to guarantee an effective military action. Tactics, such as subversion and counterinsurgency, are utilized in order to debilitate and destabilize the target nation from within, increasing its vulnerability and weakening its defenses.

This plan has been active against Venezuela for several years. The consolidation of regional unity and Latin American integration threatens US possibilities of regaining domination and control in the hemisphere. And the advances of the Bolivarian Revolution have impeded its "self-destruction", provoked by internal subversion funded and directed by US agencies. However, the Empire will not cease its attempts to achieve its final objective, and a potential military conflict in the region remains on the horizon.

http://www.chavezcode.com/2010/03/permanent-aggression-war-on-horizon-in.html

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Unidos Venceremos! United We Will Win!
~Peta-de-Aztlan~ Sacramento, California, Amerika
Email: peter.lopez51@yahoo.com 
http://help-matrix.ning.com/

http://twitter.com/Peta_de_Aztlan

http://www.facebook.com/Peta51

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Humane-Rights-Agenda/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetworkAztlan_News/   

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible,
make violent revolution inevitable."
~ President John F.Kennedy ~ Killed November 22, 1963
c/s

Echo: Some thoughts on the Mexican American/Latino struggles for social justice VIA Rosalio Munoz

http://bit.ly/d3yELn


[NetworkAztlan_News] Some thoughts on the Mexican American/Latino struggles for social justice
...
Sat, March 13, 2010 9:27:10 PM
From: Rosalio Munoz chalio.munoz@yahoo.com
...
View Contact
To: Dorinda Moreno

Compas, below is the beginnings of a review of some of the latest demographic information together with historical trends of Mexican Americans and other Latinos. The population of Mexican Americans is twice that of all other Latinos, 6 times larger than the next group of Puerto Ricans, over 10 times greater than the next, Cubans. I know many will object to the term of Mexican Americans for all those of Mexican ancestry. I do this to stress their importance as part of the working class and people of the United States. It has to do with power, political, economic and yes cultural here de este lado, with historical trends.

I am making this review to try and help develop the vision of the role of Mexican Americans in the struggles for peace and social justice, for human survival and progress in the coming generation(s). We are at a potential major turning point in US and world history. The share of economic development is spreading around the globe with the US role relatively lessening. How this country deals with this, progressively or regressively is of world historical import, the role of Mexican Americans and Latinos is increasingly strategic to this.

In a parallel sense I see the situation today as a beginning of a new era for Mexican Americans and Latinos much like I see the depression/WWII generation and Chicano Movement generations. The former is passing away and the latter moving towards retirement and a passing of the torch is in process. The challenges were great in the past and are greater for the new and coming generations. As our forebearers did for us we of needs must do all we can as veteran@s for la juventud. Anyway, for all its worth, a start...

In 1966 the US Census estimates there were 8.5 million Latinos with 2/3 or more being Mexican-American, this constituted 4.25 % of the population. Today there are nearly 50 million Latinos with about 2/3 Mexican American and constitute nearly 16% of the population. In 1966 African Americans made up over 11% of the population, Latinos 4.25 and Asian Pacific Americans .75%. for 15% Today African Americans make up 13%, Latinos 16%, Asian Pacific Americans 4.6% for 33.6%. Native Americans and Alaskans and other groups like Arabs add to the people of color.

The size of the racially and nationally oppressed peoples in the United States has more than doubled proportionately with Mexican Americans making up around half of that increase. Mexican Americans historically have been overwhelmingly concentrated in the Southwest States and this has continued to be the case. However the size and spread of the Mexican American population throughout the country has made re Mexican Americans the second largest racially and nationally oppressed group after African Americans inside and ooutside of the Southwest. This trend will likely continue.

Mexican Americans and Latinos are overwhelmingly working class. The median personal earnings of Latinos today are $21,488, for whites the earnings are $31,570, for African Americans (not Hispanic) $24, 951, and for Asian Pacific Americans $35,542. Among Latinos the median personal earnings for Mexican Americans are 20,238, Puerto Rican 25,298, Cuban 26,310, Salvadorans 20,238, and Dominican 20,238.

Immigration law and practice has historically been a key factor in the racial and national oppression of Mexican Americans. The poorest, least educated, lowest income and highest poverty levels are those of immigrants especially those without papers. Second, third and higher generation Mexican Americans do better in general than the immigrant as well as African American populations but substantially below the statistics for whites all along the line . However it is important to note that among youth the teen pregnancy and drop out rates for 3rd generation Mexican Americans and other Latinos are notably greater than those of the 2nd generation.

Mexican Americans and other Latino share substantially part of virtually every occupation but overwhelmingly underrepresented in the higher educated, higher income, and from decision making in economics, politics, culture, media etc, and overrepresented in the lowest paying and more physically demanding jobs with fewest if any benefits. For every level of education there is a substantial differentiation between incomes of Mexican Americans and whites, with the smallest differential for dropouts and the largest for those with graduate and professional degrees. At all relevant levels union membership closes the gap substantially. Mexican Americans workers are severely overrepresented in incarceration, and are overwhelmingly the most deported and detained by the geometrically growing immigration enforcement complex.

Up until the viciously racist anti immigrant enforcement laws passed in the mid nineties Mexican Americans had one of the highest unionization rates, now the proportion of Latino workers unionized has fallen more than others, but nevertheless the desire and support for unionization has grown. Mexican Americans are among the fastest numerically growing part and percentage of growth of the labor movement, but below the rate of population increase. This strong labor trend began as soon as the labor movement began in the southwest and despite Jim Crow labor practices for the first century, which began to be overcome with the CIO movement and then post WWII Civil Rights efforts.

Mexican Americans are the fastest growing voting group in the United States this despite the prohibition against voting for non-citizen non-naturalized workers. The Mexican American role as a political constituency emerged during the New Deal era when it became part of the progressive electoral alliances that have developed since. Its political history has continued and grown incrementally 24/7, month by month, year by year, and geographically more and more particularly in metropolitan areas.starting in San Antonio and Los Angeles (New Mexico as well)

It is important to note that Mexican Americans were crucial to the multiracial/ multinational unity that won the union shop in Los Angeles in the depression. In the Post WWII era Mexican Americans made many key breakthroughs in electoral, civil rights and labor movements in the Southwest. Despite severe repression and discrimination in the Cold War McCarthy era and afterward the Mexican American community continued its necessary role in building the progressive movements in the Southwest most notably perhaps in California. The Mexican American movement has had to fight through being systematically pitted against dust bowl refugees African American, Asian Pacific American, and green card and undocumented workers and has a remarkable record in overcoming such practices and building unity. This story is one of the greatest kept secrets of US reaction.

Along with Jewish Americans, Mexican Americans have been among the strongest long term allies of the African American people. Since the 1960's Mexican Americans have been the strongest supporters of immigrant rights, indeed they have integrated the struggle as a necessary part of the struggle for equality for their communities and the nation.

Perhaps the most relevant political achievement of the Mexican American movement is the turning of California, home of Herbert Hoover, Richard Nixon, and Ronald Reagan into a solidly blue anti right wing state in national politics. This has been pivotal to fighting the far right dominance for decades and more in defeating the right in the 2008 elections. If the victories in Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico are further consolidated and expanded into Arizona and Texas the country will have a strong shot on a period with reaction in retreat and advancing democracy.

All of this argues for the greater consideration and emphasis on the strategic importance of Mexican Americans. Adding to the emphasis is the youth of the Mexican American population and especially of Mexican American native born youth.

One in five of all school children are Latino more than one in 7 are Mexican American. One in four of all newborns are Latinos and over one in 6 are Mexican American. Two thirds of Latino youth are citizens and this proportion will grow. The median age of Latinos is 27, of Mexican Americans 25, of the overall population, the overall is 37, whites 41, African Americans 32. . The median age of native born Latinos, s is under 18. There is a wide disparity in median age between native born and foreign-born Latinos since most immigrants are working age adults and females of childbearing age. Most dramatically perhaps are the figures of the percentages of those under 5 years. For native-born Latinos it is 8.5% for foreign-born 0.3 percent, whites 2.7%

Among Latinos 79% of the second generation and 38% of the third report being proficient in Spanish. More native-born Latinos report “perception” of racism than foreign born.

The greatest gain in Latino voting in 2008 was the young who also recorded the largest numbers for Obama.

All of this argues there is a Tsunami of potentially progressive voting Mexican Americans and Latinos coming at the right wing. The fullest integration of the Mexican American Latino population, especially thed youth into the democratic movements is strategic to the decisive defeat of the right wing and the entering into an era of reform and substantive progressive change
__._,_.___
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group
Monitor: Peter S. Lopez "Peta": peter.lopez51@yahoo.com
List owner: Guillermo Bejarano: aztlannet@yahoo.com

To see and modify all of your groups, go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
You can subscribe to four (4) groups:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetworkAztlan_Arte
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetworkAztlan_News
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetworkAztlan_Action
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetworkAztlan_Native-Views
OFFICIAL WEBSITE http://www.NetworkAztlan.com
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Network-Aztlan-News-Blog Post Link =
http://aztlannet-news-blog.blogspot.com/2010/03/some-thoughts-on-mexican-americanlatino.html

Join Up!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NetworkAztlan_News/

Network-Aztlan Home Page
http://www.networkaztlan.com/
+++++++++++++++++++++++