| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| Mexico urges Bush to veto U.S. border fence bill | |
| 2006-10-03 | |
| MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexico pleaded with President Bush on Monday to veto a Senate proposal to build a fence to keep illegal immigrants out, saying it could backfire by making the border less secure. "The Mexican government strongly opposes the building of walls in the border area between Mexico and the United States," President Vicente Fox's spokesman Ruben Aguilar told reporters. "This decision hurts bilateral relations, goes against the spirit of cooperation needed to guarantee security on the common border, creates a climate of tension in border communities," he said. Aguilar said Mexico would send a diplomatic note to Washington on Monday urging Bush to veto the bill, which requires the president's signature to become law. "Partial measures focused exclusively on security ignore reality and represent ... a political answer rather than a viable solution to this problem," Aguilar said. Asked about the fence at an international media forum in Mexico City, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Shannon said: "We need to know who's coming across our borders and after years of not paying that much attention to the frontier ... we are now attempting to come to terms with it." "We recognize that how this is perceived outside the United States is not positive but we would ask for patience."
| |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #25 Oh, I know, mcsegeek1. But really, if these people are going to write articles and have public opinions, they ought to be a bit more intelligent about it. I know I'm spoiled by what I read here, but sometimes I can't stand the exasperation! |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-10-03 21:41 |
| #24 "So what we really want is illegals with PhDs? Doctors and engineers, accountants and English professors? The occasional Pepsico CEO?" TW, I think you know the answer to that one. Those types can migrate legally because they have the money and political connections to overcome their government's corrupt immigration policies. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-10-03 20:47 |
| #23 With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services. So what we really want is illegals with PhDs? Doctors and engineers, accountants and English professors? The occasional Pepsico CEO? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-10-03 19:14 |
| #22 Barriers!? We don't need no STEENKING barriers!! |
| Posted by: AlmostAnonymous5839 2006-10-03 15:10 |
| #21 I hear the sound of squealing |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-10-03 14:29 |
| #20 "The Mexican government strongly opposes the building of walls in the border area between Mexico and the United States," There is NO "border area between" Mexico and the U.S. The wall will be on the U.S. side of the border LINE. It is not some vaguely-shared area. It's a LINE. It is not to be crossed without our permission. "This decision... goes against the spirit of cooperation needed to guarantee security on the common border" Cooperation didn't work. You had your chance and you abused it. You chose a porous border over proper legal relations. This is the consequence of your choice. "This decision... creates a climate of tension in border communities," ROTFLMAO. On your side. We already had tension on our side. Why don't you be a good chap and start planning facilities for the pile-up of illegal-wanna-be's who won't get across. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-10-03 14:03 |
| #19 "immigrant flushing and capital sucking" Lol, Jules - that sums it up exceptionally well. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-03 13:54 |
| #18 What Fox is REALLY upset about is that the American people have nixed his program of equalizing the economies of the US and Mexico through immigrant flushing and capital sucking. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-10-03 13:45 |
| #17 the remittances they send home are the 2nd largest source of income IIRC, behind only oil sales (and were projected to pass oil as no. 1, last year). Something like $20 billion in 2006 (est.)? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-10-03 12:26 |
| #16 The Center for Immigration Studies found, among other things: 1- Households headed by illegal aliens impose more than $30 billion in costs on the federal government per year and pay only $16.5 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $14 billion, or $2,800 per illegal household. Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.7 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.4 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($2.1 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.9 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.7 billion). With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services. On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households. Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them. If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,800 per household to nearly $7,800, for a total net cost of over $30 billion. Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status -- what most illegal aliens would become -- can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments. Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent. The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain -- many legal immigrants are highly skilled. The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work. The results of this study are consistent with a 1997 study by the National Research Council, which also found that immigrants' education level is a key determinant of their fiscal impact. After we tell Mexico to F*ck off, send them a bill. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-10-03 12:12 |
| #15 As you tally it all, don't forget the criminal and judicial system costs, the cost of detention and incarceration, as well as the cost of increased Border Patrol and law enforcement. Add in also the long term costs of drug addiction, treatment, etc, from the dope that's muled across the border. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-10-03 11:59 |
| #14 I live in Austin, Texas, and I work for Medicaid. I also pay my share of taxes. We should be sending Mexico for the free medical care we've been providing to the multitude of illegals that have crossed the border. And also bill Mexico for the cost of educating their children in our schools too. |
| Posted by: texhooey 2006-10-03 11:51 |
| #13 "This decision hurts bilateral relations, goes against the spirit of cooperation needed to guarantee security on the common border, creates a climate of tension in border communities," he said. Yep, it's ALL Bush's fault! I mean, before this fence goes up, everything was hunky-dory along the border, right? No mention of his Army/Police incursions into our nation, not to mention the drug-runners, the illegals and their coyotes/wolves/whatever ya call 'em. *crickets chirping* |
| Posted by: BA 2006-10-03 10:48 |
| #12 What's it worth to ya? Go ahead, make us an offer. How about 30 billion dollars a year? |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-10-03 10:21 |
| #11 keep it up - it demonstrates the perfidy of Mexican elites in foisting their problems on us. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-10-03 10:05 |
| #10 Um...no Fox. Better yet, how about you shut your fucking trap before we decide to build the fence just 10 miles north of Mexico city after we take your land like we did the first time? Sit down and shut up before we hurt you. Again. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2006-10-03 09:46 |
| #9 WTH? Previous comment lost a long way from home. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-10-03 08:46 |
| #8 Notice Clinton didn't try this crap when Demi was married to Bruce Willis. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-10-03 08:45 |
| #7 Hey Foxy, Sure. Just after you amend your own Constitution so foreigners in your country get due process before deportation and foreigners are able to purchase land just about anywhere a citizen can. Free flow of labor after a free flow of capital. You first. |
| Posted by: Speck Phomomble3299 2006-10-03 08:45 |
| #6 Sounds good to me. What good is a 'bully pulpit' if you don't do some 'bullying'? |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-10-03 08:40 |
| #5 The story is told about a conversational technique LBJ used to use. Following a formal introduction when the two men would find themselves alone in the Oval Office, LBJ would stand, which would cause the other fellow to stand. At that moment the president would reach across and pull his guest's sitting chair right up next to his, arm to arm. The president would then sit down once again and with his long Texas reach he would put his hand on the visitors distant shoulder, pulling the guest even closer. The president would then lean over and say in his famous Hill Country drawl ....... now listen you SOB, "here is exactly what I would like you to do, do you understand me sir." |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-10-03 08:32 |
| #4 Although he won't, Bush should sit down privately with Fox and the President elect. After a couple minutes of silence, he should simply say "I'm the president of the United States of America. Just who the hell do you think you're dealing with? Don't ever try to interfere with US border security policy again! You got it?" I can dream, can't I? |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-10-03 08:22 |
| #3 "We recognize that how this is perceived outside the United States is not positive .... |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-10-03 07:12 |
| #2 Why? |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-10-03 06:49 |
| #1 Heh. Not this life cycle, Fox. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-03 03:04 |