Sleepless in Midland

Iced -- the Dreamer's nightmare

If we want a merit based immigration system then an important test would be whether the applicant can meet deadlines. Also, if they've overstayed and gone underground, whether or not to give interviews on TV would be another test.

So when we see this headline: ICE nabs young ‘dreamer’ applicant after she speaks out at a news conference, we have to wonder if this is the sort of immigrant who will be a productive resident and not just another community organizer.

Prediction: Daniela Vargas will get to stay. And she'll become a Democrat party symbol. She'll be the Sandra Fluke of illegal immigrants.

Meanwhile, this brings up a recent revival of an old subject -- A new underground railroad. From Buzzfeed: Churches Are Readying Homes And Underground Railroads To Hide Immigrants From Deportation Under Trump. Interesting, if true. Excerpt:

Churches across the US are fighting back against the Trump administration’s mandate to ramp up deportations with new sanctuary practices of their own, using private homes in their congregations as shelter and potentially creating a modern-day underground railroad to ferry undocumented immigrants from house to house or into Canada.

Passage to Canada seems like a worthwhile objective. But we need to question the wisdom of opening one's home to someone who has already exhibited a certain disrespect for the law.

Imagine if the police went on strike -- it's happening in Brazil

The Black Lives Matter movement has been notably silent lately. Someone must have shushed them -- their financial backers? The DNC? In any event, they didn't bring out the Obama coalition vote in November and have probably been abandoned by high powered supporters.

That aside, one needs to remember some of their goals which included disarming police or establishing police no-go zones in inner cities. What would happen if they had been successful?

A comparison with Brazil might not be exactly on point as Brazil has so many other problems the U.S. doesn't have. (See what Heritage.org says about Brazil to get a flavor of what ordinary Brazilians are up against.) What brings Brazil to our attention now is this item from WaPo, Police went on strike in a Brazilian state. The result was near-anarchy:

Shots punctured the eerie silence as thieves held up pedestrians for their cars and purses, local media reported. In commercial centers throughout the area, packs of looters drove trucks into shop windows and carried whole racks of clothes and appliances on their backs.

This wave of near-anarchy has engulfed the state of Espirito Santo, a picturesque region along Brazil’s northeastern coast, since Feb. 4. That’s when the state police announced a general strike, leaving the streets open to gangs and petty criminals alike. The state government said that 143 people were slain in Espirito Santo between Feb. 4 and Feb. 13, compared to just four people in all of January.

Sounds horrible. One has to wonder how many Brazilians are seeking refuge status in the U.S.

Why Americans are sour on immigration -- too many in other countries don't understand free markets

We have enough problems already. We don't need more people prone to rioting. OK, not every immigrant is ready to riot, but the face of things at the old country don't look so good.

I'm talking here about the recent deregulation of gasoline prices in Mexico. In a free market prices will fluctuate with supply and demand. With a central economic planning committee setting prices, the market doesn't really get to correct itself when shortages occur.

So when we see items like this, it's troubling. Protests ignited by gasoline price hikes continue to roil Mexico. Excerpt:

More than a week after the government of President Enrique Peña Nieto deregulated gasoline prices, which instantly rose as much as 20%, Mexico is engulfed in a nationwide rebellion.

Four people have been killed and more than 1,500 arrested while looting, staging road blockades and marching in protests such as the weekend demonstrations in Rosarito and along the border.

The price hike, which many believe will lead to higher prices for food and household goods, is opposed by 99% of Mexicans, according to a recent poll, and has drawn the condemnation of business groups, truckers unions, leaders of the political opposition and even the Catholic Church.

What's worrisome about this is the prospect that immigrants from Mexico bring their politics to the U.S.

And Democrats struggle to understand why Trump's promise of a wall was so popular among his supporters.

Meanwhile, is Mexico another Venezuela but with drug cartels? We'll see.

Gloria Alvarez -- a voice of reason in South America

As everyone knows by now, John Stossel's TV show on Fox News has ended. I'll miss him even though I missed most of his shows. He was a breath of fresh air for conservatives and liberals alike, although his libertarian message seemed more at home on a conservative network than it did when he was on a liberal one.

This came to mind when I ran across a link to a segment from his show featuring Gloria Alvarez. Mark J. Perry has a tribute to Stossel at John Stossel’s TV show ends — his contributions to advancing libertarian principles have been unmatched, invaluable. There he linked to a youtube segment of a show I actually did see.

If you've got any concern for South America and its people, this is a must see. Gloria Alvarez is an amazing speaker, and let's hope she is persuasive, because she has a message about socialism South Americans need to hear.

It should be clear that socialism has a brilliant but short life span. And it always ends in misery. (Yeah, I know, Sweden seems to be an exception. But whatever magic keeps them going hasn't occurred elsewhere.)

Anyway, here's John Stossel's interview with Gloria Alvarez. It's short. Watch it. With enough young people in South America like her, there's hope.

Well, guess who really is moving to Canada -- Mexican refugees

Canada is getting ready for an influx of refugees from Mexico if they aren't allowed to resettle in the U.S. See John McCallum says Mexican visa could be 'reimposed' if refugee claims spike.

CBC News has learned officials at IRCC and other departments have held high-level meetings to discuss a potential flood of Mexican asylum-seekers due to both the visa lift and the result of the U.S. election.

It's interesting that the "refugee" status is being assigned to our Southern neighbors, although that's probably nothing new. It's reasonable enough to assume the narco-terrorist cartels can be sufficiently violent to generate refugees. Although, it's ironic that the very same cartels run the businesses that smuggle immigrants into the U.S.

Meanwhile, we heard cries from some wealthy celebrities that they'll leave the U.S. if Trump won. They could probably afford to go anywhere they would be welcome. But Canada would seem to be a likely choice. But who would have guessed it would be Mexicans who were rejected by the U.S.?

One celebrity may actually leave, if he can be believed. That makes one: Hollywood’s George Lopez insists he really will leave the country due to Trump. Now where would he go? He wouldn't say. Mexico is probably out of consideration, but maybe he can get refugee status in Canada.

In search to besmirch Steve Bannon, Washington Post stumbles on uncomfortable truth about immigration and unemployment for unskilled workers

Alex Pfeiffer found this reporting mishap and relayed it to us it at The Washington Post Thinks Reporting On A Study That Shows Illegals Take Jobs Is Racist.

Steve Bannon is one of the current victims of the left using Saul Alinsky's tactic of freezing, personalizing and polarizing a target. He's been accused of every ism in the book. And according to the above cited article, Washington Post attempted to find evidence that Breitbart news was white-supremist. The articles WaPo found were about immigration studies and seminars that supported the theory that immigration of less educated workers had a negative impact on employment. You can follow the link for more details about those alleged connections to racism.

However, for the final word on uneducated immigrants and their effect on local employment, listen to George Borjas in this C-Span interview. (NOTE: Site requires viewer to accept cookies.)

Borjas took the statistics coming out of the Mariel boatlift to determine what impact that influx of immigrants had on the local population. What he found most significant was the negative impact on the demographic group that most resembled the immigrants, specifically, high-school dropouts. This goes against the conventional wisdom that immigration has such a beneficial impact on an economy that everyone benefits. Wrong. It's merely redistribution.

For an excellent review of Borjas' book, "We Wanted Workers," see The Facts on Immigration.

And to anyone who thinks talking about this is racist, get a life that doesn't revolve around slandering those with whom you disagree.

Seismograph technology has made tremendous advances in the last few decades -- why can't they find smuggler tunnels?

It was the Mexican police that found the 1/3 mile long smuggler's tunnel connecting a building in Tijuana to a location in San Diego. The find was due to an anonymous tip, according to Daily Mail with the derisive headline Can't build a wall against this! Mexican police find massive tunnel leading from Tijuana to San Diego that is equipped with rails so drugs can be smuggled into the US by the CARTLOAD.

No, a wall on the surface wouldn't be do it. But why isn't there technology available to find abnormal conditions underground? Well, there is, it's just not perfect.

There's seismograph works sometimes. But geological anomalies can make the walls of the tunnel hard to spot.

Then there's ground-penetrating radar which looks like the better of the two.

In any event, every time we hear of a tunnel like this being located we have to wonder how someone could dig a tunnel 1/3 mile without detection. Then again, the article said there was an anonymous time, so someone one noticed.  And there's probably no better source of information than a witness who isn't afraid to talk.

A question for those who want to return California to Mexico

Mexico is close to being a narco-state, and the government does not have a stellar reputation for honesty. What we know is mostly anecdotal, but it seems that the bribe is an important ingredient in the process of getting things done.

So here's the question: What exactly is it about the Mexican government that you like so much that you want it in the U.S.?

Are they looking for income equality?  They won't find that in Mexico.

Gun control?  Mexico has the laws but not the control.

Good schools?  They could be onto something with the schools. Somewhere they are getting a sense of national pride in Mexico. Our schools certainly aren't doing that in regard to our own nation.

But ultimately, open borders and relaxed crossings are probably the objective of the movement, not a change in government. After all, if they want a leftest government, California already has it.

Obama's remark about tracking Western Union remittances suggests he's oblivious to the citizen monitoring his own administration is doing

There was a snippet on the news with a quote from President Obama. He was addressing Donald Trump's promise to build a border wall by taxing or threatening to end remittances from the U.S. to Mexico. It's an idea that has some merit. But Obama never misses an opportunity to criticize a political opponent. So he says this:

We just talked about the difficulties of trying to enforce huge outflows of capital. The notion we’re going to track every Western Union of money sent to Mexico—good luck with that.

So you need good luck to track money sent by Western Union to Mexico. Does anyone doubt that the Treasury, the FBI, or even the Federal Reserve isn't already tracking it? If they can get meta-data from the phone companies and bank transactions from banks, then remittances through Western Union seem like a piece of cake.

Only Obama would think his listeners wouldn't know that. Then again, maybe his listeners haven't been paying attention these past few years or don't actually have memories.

I hope El Chapo doesn't have Sean Penn and the soap actress whacked for their botched effort to make him look like a Mexican Robin Hood

Those cartel bosses may be sometimes remembered for an occasional free dinner, but more often than not their reputations were formed by brutality -- retribution, especially.

Let's hope El Chapo isn't so mad about being recaptured that he tries to take it out on Sean Penn and/or Kate del Castillo since their clumsy attempts to get him in the pictures got him picked up by the federalies.

Say, you know what? Now that Sean and Kate are part of the story they are probably more exited about a movie than ever.

 

First the good news -- Sinaloa farmers' profits on marijuana off by 70% due to marijuana legalization in U.S. ...

The bad news is that Americans' appetite for heroin and meth is growing. And the cartels are more than happy to satisfy that need for smack and speed.

One of the anticipated benefits of marijuana legalization was the blow against the Mexican drug cartels since a legal product would certainly hurt a business that depended on tunnels, mules, hidden compartments, high speed boats, lots of workers willing to risk capture, and a complicated detection avoidance system. Also, the quality of the domestic pot is reportedly better than Mexican weed.

It was also easy to anticipate an increased emphasis by the cartels on drugs that were still illegal. LATimes.com: "High demand for heroin in the U.S. has been driving up prices, and there is little chance it will be legal any time soon."

"High demand for heroin" is never a good trend, and reducing that demand would be a good thing for everyone. Ah, but that's the problem, isn't it? Some people need a way to escape their own minds. But for those people there's no escape from the problems created by some of the choices they make.

Hoards of people crossing border -- no, not Europe but Texas

If we measured uninvited immigrants by numbers the U.S. is doing OK compared with Europe. Nevertheless, the spike in the number of children crossing the Southern border is causing some concern among those who are keeping numbers. See What’s Driving the Latest Surge of Illegal Immigration From Central America. They don't answer the question asked in the title. They do say this, however:

But the spikes are causing alarm because crossings of the southwest border had declined after Mexico began better enforcing its borders—with help from the U.S.—and the Obama administration pursued a public awareness campaign in Central America discouraging people from migrating.

The timing is also surprising because peaks in illegal immigration usually occur during the summer, when the weather is more bearable.

And this:

“This may be the new normal,” said Marc Rosenblum, the deputy director of the U.S. immigration policy program at the Migration Policy Institute. “Everything that was going on in 2014 that caused people to flee is as bad or worse now. Violence in El Salvador is worse, the whole region is amidst a two-year drought, more families are experiencing food insecurity, there’s political turbulence in Guatemala. Those are strong pressures that will cause people to try to get here.”

(Bold added.)

President Obama's response to "the new normal" is to open new shelters and add more beds.

The answer to the question of what's driving the surge is that there is no visible opposition to it.

New Mexico is part blue, part red -- sometimes ends up with a mess on its hands like with the drivers' licenses unacceptable to feds as ID

Like all Southern border states, New Mexico has a share of illegal immigrants. And with the mix of Democrat and Republican voters, individuals from both parties end up in office. For example, Clinton pal Bill Richardson was governor not too long ago. And he signed into law a bill allowing illegal immigrants the right to get drivers' licenses.

Unfortunately for New Mexico, the law didn't comply with federal requirements which require more stringent evidence of an applicant's identification. The result is that holders of these licenses may not be able to use them to get into federal facilities which require IDs for entry. Furthermore, the airlines might start rejecting them.

Source Grounded: New Mexico driver's licenses fail feds' test, thanks to illegal immigrant policy.

Now governor Martinez will have to clean up Richardson's mess. I'm sure she can do it, though, as long as the Democrats in the NM legislature don't stand in the way.

Hopefully, President Obama won't intervene with an executive order granting an illegal immigrant exception.

Breitbart writer points out Jorge Ramos' hypocrisy

How's this for a clever headline? Jorge Ramos Uses Wall… but Wants Open Borders for Y’all.

Senor Ramos got some attention in the conservative media recently because of the way he tried to barge into the queue instead of waiting his turn at a Donald Trump question and answer forum. Ramos is an ardent defender of illegal immigration, and the symbolism was rich.

Anyway, Patrick Courrielche penned the referenced article. And his point is that Ramos sends his children to an exclusive school that likely isn't available to the average anchor baby. Courrielche makes a point:

Mr. Ramos’ open border policy has an interesting side effect, though. It burdens our public schools with the children of illegal immigrants that pull resources from our kids – and disproportionately so in at-risk minority communities. In places like California, as much as 13.2% of K-12 public school students are children of illegal immigrants. This open border policy has likely dragged down our schools academically as well – helping pave the way for the federal government to intervene with hugely unpopular learning standards and standardized tests in a clumsy attempt to boost lagging test scores.

Coincidently, an open border has the added benefit of increasing Mr. Ramos’ potential TV audience. What a fantástico business model!

The (not so) funny thing is that Jorge Ramos actually shelters his kids from the effects of the very policy he so adamantly advocates. How, you may ask? Well, Mr. Ramos sends his kids to elite private schools, including a Miami preK-12 school with tuition that reaches above $30,000 a year per student. I think it’s fair to say most illegal immigrants aren’t footing that bill.

Well, everyone with a position on the border policy has a motive. Those wanting an open border are expecting some sort of gain, whether it's cheap labor or something as simple as more votes for Democrats. Those who want border security think there's something far bigger at stake. Elizabeth Price Foley sums it up nicely:

Any country (or federation of countries, as with the EU) that wishes to protect its sovereignty and citizens (which is the very purpose of government) must control its borders. It’s really that simple. While one cannot help but have empathy for those individuals fleeing economically or politically volatile countries, the solution is to help stabilize those countries, not tolerate ongoing massive, disruptive shifts in population, which only leads to destabilization of stable democracies (republics), which in turn, holds the potential to destabilize the world.

As someone else once said, if you open the borders of a prosperous nation you are welcoming that nation's future rulers.

Anchor Baby born in U.S. every 93 seconds

While politicians flounder over whether the phrase "anchor baby" is politically correct enough for the electorate, it might be worthwhile to note this observation at Breitbart.com, Anchor Baby Delivered Every 93 Seconds.

Democrats are quick to contend that the anchor baby phenomenon doesn't really exist. So if true, that one every minute and a half is an astonishing claim.

So let's look at the source of the number. Breitbart.com cites a Pew research article which cites research which contends that 340,000 babies were born to illegal immigrants in 2008. If we divide that number into the number of seconds in a year, 31,536,000, we do indeed get 92.75 seconds per baby.

But that was way back in 2008, before Obama took over border control. Common sense and memory of the border surge headlines should convince us that the illegal immigrant birth rate is much higher now than it was then.

Meanwhile, in spite of reporters' gotcha lines of inquiry, "anchor baby" still resides off the list of banned words, at least for now.

There is nothing more heartwarming than seeing an immigrant embrace the American dream -- too bad they are discouraged from doing so

A few years ago I read a touching account of a gentleman in New York who took his family to see the Statue of Liberty. And he took along a co-worker who happened to be a recent immigrant. When they got to the island, the immigrant knelt down and kissed the ground then explained how grateful he was to be in this great country and how much he dreamed of being an American. The gentleman's children were stunned.

That story came to mind today after reading America the Place vs America the Idea by Dan Joppich. He describes the plight of the immigrants who risk their lives in leaky boats to migrate to Greece. They are leaving one broken country for another. Why?

Mr. Joppich asks some provocative questions:

Do these mostly unskilled, uneducated Muslims go to Greece or Europe hoping to someday become Greeks or Europeans? Do they wish to embrace Western culture and raise their children in a Western society? Or are they just looking for handouts like the ones that Greece already provides to over 70% of its population?

Do Central Americans, Mexicans, and Muslims come to America because they want to become Americans? Do they wish to embrace American culture and raise their children in an American society better than the one they left, or do they come here hoping to create Somalia in America? Do they raise the Mexican flag on American soil and force schools in their adoptive communities to cover symbols of America because they might be offensive to some of them? Do the predominantly unskilled and uneducated immigrants bring unemployment and the vices that accompany it like drugs, violence, crime, homelessness, dependency, etc? ...

Are the immigrants to America crossing the southern border illegally, doing so because they want to be Americans, or are they just looking for free stuff promised by Obama for themselves and their children? Do the Muslims in Minnesota long to be Americans and live the American dream, or do they dream of returning to the Middle East and fighting the western Satan when they realize they can’t make America more like the Middle East?

Unfortunately, too many Americans try to discourage assimilation. So we hear accusations of racism when an American complains of hearing only Spanish in a Wal-Mart. It's not racism. It's nostalgia for the days when immigrants embraced American ideals instead of wanting to recreate the society, culture, and system of government they left behind.

Oh, by the way. Everyone knows that in America you may be able to get a free Obamaphone. But did you know that if you live in Mexico the government will give you a free TV set?

Does anyone really believe that the current Supreme Court would go along with the anti-anchor baby interpretation of the 14th amendment?

Representative Steve King, R-Iowa, makes a rational interpretation of the *14th amendment and has proposed legislation to establish policy based on that interpretation. See Ending Birthright Citizenship Does Not Require A Constitutional Amendment. He makes four basic points:

The keys to understanding Birthright Citizenship:

The plain meaning of the 14th Amendment means that one must BOTH be born in United States AND be subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Since there are two explicit requirements, they both cannot be met by simply being born on U.S. soil.

The history of the drafting of the 14th Amendment makes clear that the language “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant a citizen could not owe allegiance to any other foreign power. This excludes illegal immigrants who are in defiance of U.S. jurisdiction and are citizens of a foreign power.

The Supreme Court has never held that the children of illegal immigrants born in the United States are automatically citizens.

Because the Supreme Court has not interpreted the Constitution to mandate automatic birthright citizenship, the Congress can pass a law to correct the current misguided and incorrect policy of automatically granting citizenship to children of illegal immigrants.

Ann Coulter also makes a strong case for the theory. That link goes to a 2010 article, and she hasn't backed down.

But we all know that if anyone attempts to implement that position, or if Steve King's legislation goes into law, it will end up at the Supreme Court. Does anyone really believe that the five of the current Supreme Court justices would go along with that? It isn't conceivable.

*All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Update: Click links for arguments for and against the birthright citizenship interpretation. Via Cato.org.

Black jobs matter -- Donald Trump's immigration plan, if implemented, might help African American entry level job seekers

Donald Trump has been heaped with criticism from the left and right. And one of the complaints was that his proposals were heavy on platitudes and light on substance. So it's educational to look at his recently released Immigration Plan.

One noteworthy aspect addresses a subject that doesn't get much attention -- the high unemployment rate among African American youths. Some of that might be cultural -- we've all heard the claims that African Americans discourage each other from being studious in school because they would be acting white. Maybe that's urban legend. Nevertheless, the unemployment rate among young black youths is high.

Traditionally, entry level and manual labor jobs were the first career stepping stones for many black Americans. But that changed, and most likely the cause is the 1.7 million immigrant surge since 2014 bringing the total number of illegal immigrants to 42.1 million. "The 42.1 million tabulated by Census in the second quarter represent over 13 percent of the U.S. population, the biggest percentage in 105 years."

Here's Donald Trump:

The influx of foreign workers holds down salaries, keeps unemployment high, and makes it difficult for poor and working class Americans – including immigrants themselves and their children – to earn a middle class wage. Nearly half of all immigrants and their US-born children currently live in or near poverty, including more than 60 percent of Hispanic immigrants. Every year, we voluntarily admit another 2 million new immigrants, guest workers, refugees, and dependents, growing our existing all-time historic record population of 42 million immigrants. We need to control the admission of new low-earning workers in order to: help wages grow, get teenagers back to work, aid minorities’ rise into the middle class, help schools and communities falling behind, and to ensure our immigrant members of the national family become part of the American dream.

Economists claim that immigration is good for an economy because it adds more consumers into the system. But if the immigrants are unskilled workers and they put someone out of work, then the net result is it adds more government dependents.

 

El Chapo, the Narco-statesman

Whenever someone flies the Mexican flag in the U.S. I always wonder what it is about the Mexican government that is so good that they want to bring it to the United States. It's difficult to think of an example. I would make an exception for fiestas and siestas, but the government can't lay claim to those.

Nationalism is a a strong force. And people take pride in their countries of origin even if their government leaves a lot to be desired.

So when we hear that the narcotics kingpin, Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, through his son, has jumped on the anti-Trump band wagon, then maybe Senor Guzman is expressing his pride in his country.

He should. He's gotten away with murder, mayhem, and elaborate escape under that regime. Maybe pride isn't the right word for it, but he certainly owes his country something.

Austin, the one sanctuary city in Texas, has fewer than average percentage of Hispanics

This map of Sanctuary Cities popped up the other day and has probably provided loads of entertainment to the talking class.

My own interest is the state of Texas, and the map shows that there is only one "Sanctuary City" in the state, and that would be Austin. By reputation, Austin in notoriously progressive, and the prevailing industries therein -- government, college, and technology -- perhaps might help explain that.

But one must ask why Austin has made itself a sanctuary city when they have fewer than the average number of Hispanics. According to the 2010 census, Austin was 35.1% Hispanic compared with the statewide average of 37.6%.

The border cities have much higher percentages. Laredo was 95.6% Hispanic, Brownsville was 93.2% Hispanic, and El Paso was 80.7% Hispanic.

It might not be fair to generalize with only these examples, but let's not let that stop us. It appears that the more Hispanics there are residing in a city the less likely that city is to be a sanctuary city. The voters in Austin, on the other hand, are probably more concerned with appearing to care about immigrants than they are with any real world consequences of their political correctness.

Politiqueras deliver the votes in South Texas

Every attempt to ensure elections are fair in Texas gets attacked immediately with the claim that there is no voter fraud.

Then along comes NPR to report on the investigations in the Texas Rio Grande Valley. It seems that enough election losers complained about the process that the Texas and federal law enforcement officials had to investigate.

See In Rio Grande Valley, Some Campaign Workers Are Paid To Harvest Votes. Excerpt:

If a local candidate needs dependable votes, he or she goes to a politiquera.

In recent years, losing candidates in local elections began to challenge vote harvesting by politiqueras in the Rio Grande Valley, and they shared their investigations with authorities. After the 2012 election cycle, the Justice Department and the Texas attorney general's office filed charges.

"Yes, there is a concern in which the politiqueras are being paid to then go and essentially round up voters and have them vote a certain way," says James Sturgis, assistant U.S. attorney in McAllen.

In the town of Donna, five politiqueras pleaded guilty to election fraud. Voters were bribed with cigarettes, beer or dime bags of cocaine. In neighboring Cameron County, nine politiqueras were charged with manipulating mail-in ballots.

"Bribed with cigarettes, beer or dime bags of cocaine." That's so last-century. Just wait until they get internet registration/voting. It will be so much easier for the politiqueras.

There goes the neighborhood -- border districts lead the nation in crime

Terence P. Jeffrey has crunched the numbers from the U.S. Attorneys' 2014 Statistics Report and reported about it at cnsnews.com in Top 5 Districts for Criminal Cases in U.S. District Court Are on Mexican Border. His findings are troublesome. Excerpt:

Together, the five U.S. attorneys' districts that span the U.S.-Mexico border filed 23,457 criminal cases in U.S. district courts in fiscal 2014. That equaled 41.7 percent of the 56,218 criminal cased that U.S. attorneys nationwide filed in U.S. district courts. ...

That's 41.7% in those five districts. The number dropped to 36.6% for defendants actually found guilty in those five districts. However, in magistrates' proceedings the number of defendants found guilty jumped to 93.8%.

Someone is committing a lot of federal crimes along the border. The Houston Chronicle told us last year that cartel crimes are insignificant this side of the border. So what could it possibly be? Mr. Jeffrey again:

Obviously, the offenses people are convicted of in federal courts are not local crimes but federal ones. According to the statistical report's Table 3A, the top category of offense for those found guilty in U.S. district courts nationwide in fiscal 2014 was immigration offenses. 23,871 defendants nationwide were found guilty of those. 23,387 were found guilty of drug offenses. 12,617 were found guilty of violent crime.

In any case, there's a lot of crime along the border, and unless that was the goal, President Obama's lax border security plan isn't helping.

Catch and release of illegal aliens resulted in 121 murders according to Washington Times

Law enforcement is under a lot of pressure these days not to do anything that appears repressive.

But Immigration and Customs Enforcement is taking it a bit too far. Here's an excerpt from 121 murders attributed to illegals released by Obama administration:

It said 33 of those were ordered by immigration courts and another 24 were released because of a 2001 Supreme Court decision capping the time an immigrant can be detained to six months. But a majority of the releases were discretionary, meaning ICE had the option of keeping them detained.

I feel a little sympathy for ICE. The workers probably don't want to do a bad job, and there's probably no up-side to releasing all those illegal immigrants. But they're under heavy pressure from President Obama to put them on the streets. So they end up going along to stay in good standing with the bigs.

Doing the jobs Americans won't do -- How Illegal immigrants may be helping the stock market

Tyler Durden at Zerohedge.com looks at the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics report and notes a few things in The "Illegal Immigrant" Recovery? The Real Stunner In The Jobs Report. He points out that increases were mostly in low paying jobs, and the majority of new jobs went to those in the 20-24 age group.

However, the stunning number in his title pertains to the number of jobs that went to immigrants. Here's an excerpt:

But while all of these comparisons are apples to oranges, using the BLS' own Native-Born series, also presented on an unadjusted basis, we find the following stunner: since the start of the Second Great Depression, the US has added 2.3 million "foreign-born" workers, offset by just 727K "native-born".

This means that the "recovery" has almost entirely benefited foreign-born workers, to the tune fo 3 to 1 relative to native-born Americans!

As a result, it may well be, that the surprise answer why America's labor productivity (which recently posted its worst 6 month stretch in 22 years) has plummeted in recent years and certainly months, confounding economists who are unable to explain why "solid" labor growth does not translate into just as solid GDP growth...

... and why wage growth has gone precisely nowhere, is because the vast majority of all jobs since December 2007, or 75% to be specific, have gone to foreign-born workers, a verifiable fact. What is unknown is how many of these millions of "foreign-born" jobs have gone to illegal immigrant who are perfectly willing to work hard, and yet whose wage bargaining power is absolutely nil (after all they are happy just to have a job) thereby leading to depressed wages for native-born workers in comparable jobs, resulting in wage growth which over the past 8 years has been non-existant.

He concludes by noting that the Fed has used the lack of wage growth as an excuse to keep injecting liquidity. So it's possible that stock market investors owe a big "thank you" to illegal immigrants.

Via Kausfiles.com where it's noted that young black high school graduates have not fared well in this economic recovery.

Finally, a plausible explanation of why increased immigration might not hurt local workers

Common sense tells us that an increase in the number of immigrant workers who would compete with the workers already there would decrease wages for both groups. Opponents of illegal immigration and open borders have driven the point home. Supporters, on the other hand, have their own reasons for wanting increased immigration, and they downplay that potential outcome.

But here comes a study that claims increased immigration results in an increase demand for local services. And that results in an increase of local services, an increase in local wages, and an increase in the number of jobs. Here's the abstract from Are Immigrants a Shot in the Arm for the Local Economy? To wit:

Most research on the effects of immigration focuses on the effects of immigrants as adding to the supply of labor. By contrast, this paper studies the effects of immigrants on local labor demand, due to the increase in consumer demand for local services created by immigrants. This effect can attenuate downward pressure from immigrants on non-immigrants' wages, and also benefit non-immigrants by increasing the variety of local services available. For this reason, immigrants can raise native workers' real wages, and each immigrant could create more than one job. Using US Census data from 1980 to 2000, we find considerable evidence for these effects: Each immigrant creates 1.2 local jobs for local workers, most of them going to native workers, and 62% of these jobs are in non-traded services. Immigrants appear to raise local non-tradables sector wages and to attract native-born workers from elsewhere in the country. Overall, it appears that local workers benefit from the arrival of more immigrants.

A casual observation suggest that that seems to be happening in some of those bustling Texas border cities. Although a closer look would be necessary to say for sure. One has to wonder about single industry towns, farm communities, for example. An influx of immigrant farm workers would seem to drive farm wages down as well as displace some existing farm workers. The increased demand for local services may not offset that feature.

A bigger issue, though, is the effect millions of immigrants would have on our political system. If they gravitate toward politicians who remind them of the government they left behind or promise them free stuff then that's a problem.

NBER abstract via Cafe Hayek.

If anyone doubted that Obama's immigration push was about something other than grabbing power here's more evidence

It was about a month ago that we learned that the NLRB might be giving some illegal immigrants get-out-of-deportation cards. That would come in the form of the NLRB's helping illegal immigrants obtain visas if they filed a complaint against their employer. Souce: More protection for illegal workers.

Then we learned about the memoranda of understanding the NLRB entered into with the countries of Mexico, Ecuador and the Philippines. Those agreements provided for education of residents of those countries about the Labor Relations Act and workers' right to unionize once they're in a job in the U.S. regardless of the workers' legal status. Source: U.S. signed agreement with Mexico to teach immigrants to unionize.

The arguments for these moves is that illegal immigrants should have some basic rights against exploitation by employers. On the other hand, it seems as though it also gives illegal immigrants ways to exploit the immigration process, especially in light of the NLRB's tendency to take the side against employers.

Now we learn that the Obama administration and immigration groups are pushing for a fast track to turn non-citizens into voters before the next presidential election. See The White House And Soros-Backed Open Borders Group Strategize About Bribing Immigrants To Naturalize Before 2016. We saw the same thing happen during the Clinton administration. And it worked.

Can they pull it off again? Ian Smith says this:

The current slate of presidential candidates (and their consultants) should take note: the American people care enormously about vote dilution and the demographic engineering that disenfranchises them. By pointing out the depths of the other side’s cynicism, the 2016 GOP candidate wouldn’t just win the swing states honestly, they’d win them easily.

We'll see.

Careful what you wish for, Democrats, with your push for increased immigration

President Obama's zeal for more immigrants with voting rights can probably be attributed to a belief that they'll help Democrats get elected. But does the average Democrat go along with that? Some of the polls suggest that they don't.

In any event, this article at Washingtonexaminer.com is an eye opener: Census: Record 51 million immigrants in 8 years, will account for 82% of U.S. growth.

We can all sympathize with the plight of a South American family wanting to escape poverty. However, the U.S. can absorb only so many workers, especially when there is certainly no shortage of unskilled workers here already. That aside, what kind of economic system do the immigrants want?

The preference for a socialist economy seems to be strong among Democrats. However, their vision of that probably resembles some European country. If we look at current immigrants -- the people who will eventually be deciding our elections -- a more accurate vision might look more like Venezuela.

Illegal immigrants embolded by Obama's moves

Many people warned that Obama's border moves would encourage illegal immigration, and they were right. Many people warned that the illegal immigrants crossing in the recent border surge who were allowed to say on the honor system would not report for their hearings but would simply blend in with the illegal immigrant populatin. And they were right. See More than 90 Percent of a Group of Illegal Immigrants from Surge This Summer Never Showed Up to Their Immigration Hearings.

They're still coming in. And when they do get caught some of them put up a big fuss. See Immigrants entering country illegally becoming more aggressive, Border Patrol official says. That title probably should have read "Border Patrol Union official says." But it sounds like a very realistic reaction to being slowed by Border Patrol agents who stand in the way of an Obama empowered immigrant.

Why not just let anyone in? As someone once said, if you open the borders you're welcoming your future rulers. Don't believe it? Ask Sitting Bull. Ask Santa Anna.

California's welcome mat to illegal immigrants draws drug cartel

Jerry Brown said he welcomed illegal immigrants, and there's no question they heard and heeded. But here's a twist the governor might not have anticipated.

An editorial at investors.com alerted us to this. See As Businesses Flee, Jerry Brown's California Attracts A Different Kind Of "Investment". Excerpt:

When California Gov. Jerry Brown hung out the "all welcome" sign for illegals, Mexico's drug cartels heard him loud and clear. Raids on Thursday left lawmen declaring Los Angeles a cash-laundering mecca.

Roping off 100 blocks of downtown Los Angeles this week, federal agents from the U.S. attorney's office raided roughly 70 garment district businesses along with a few houses in tony Westwood and Beverly Hills.

The suspected crime was laundering money for Mexico's Sinaloa cartel. Agents hauled out $65 million in cash stuffed in duffel bags, suitcases and boxes, some of it blood-spattered.

The cash came from hostage ransoms, drug sales and alien-smuggling fees. Some of those arrested were charged with "various immigration offenses," according to the affidavit.

"Hostage ransoms, drug sales and alien-smuggling fees." Now those are businesses we shouldn't try to encourage. But it wouldn't be surprising to learn that these features were considered tolerable side effects of the more important goal of ultimately increasing the number of Democrat voters.

ISIS on our borders

ISIS is a dangerous group of Islamic radicals. And with international intentions that might even represent a threat to Americans.

The Canadians are certainly taking them seriously. See Canadians in terrorist armies threaten us all. Excerpt:

It is now public knowledge that well over 100 Canadians have left Canada to support or train with terrorist movements abroad. Most are men, but some are women. Some are immigrants to Canada, and some are Canadian-born. ...

The most obvious national-security threat is the one posed by extremists who return. How many are coming back to Canada more radicalized than when they departed? Will their status as veterans of a foreign conflict better enable them to recruit other Canadians? Will they use their foreign contacts to set up networks in Canada to facilitate the movement of fighters, materiel and money in and out of the country?

And, most importantly, will they use their terrorist training to attempt violent acts here in Canada? This is a very real prospect. Europe has already suffered such an attack, where a French citizen and “returnee” from Syria went on a shooting spree in Belgium and killed a number of innocent civilians.

Recalling that the 9/11 terrorists immigrated through Canada, one has to wonder if their target might be America. What we don't know yet is how many Americans have gone to train with ISIS.

Meanwhile, Texas Governor Rick Perry is concerned that they may try to come into the US through our unsecured Southern borders. Is he right to be concerned?

Not according to this front pager in the morning paper. The Mexican Embassy says they "have no record of presence of Islamic extremists groups or individuals in Mexico." Sorry. The suggestion that anyone really knows who is crossing the border would require a belief in clairvoyance.