Letter to the Editor: Doctor’s immigration letter needs a second opinion

ByLetter to the Editor Reading Time: 3 minutes

After reading Dr. Moss’ letter to your editor, I was aghast at the inaccuracies therein; illegal amnesty, rapid importation, criminal immigrants, etc.

With his fiery rhetoric, Moss’ interpretation of illegal amnesty skips over the similar programs created by past Presidents Bush and Reagan.[1] While the size of the current order is certainly larger, it is not a “rapid importation of tens of millions.” As a matter of fact, it isn’t an importation of anyone.

The scope of the program addresses only those unauthorized immigrants that are already here and only those who have been here for at least five years. Anyone who entered this country illegally after that will not be covered by the executive order. In all, this shields approximately 5 million of the estimated 11.4 million unauthorized immigrants in the country.[4]

Records reveal an increase of unauthorized immigrants from 3.5 million to 11.4 million between 1990 and 2010. Reading Moss’ description of many immigrants being “criminals, guilty of rape, murder, theft and selling drugs” one would expect our crime rates to increase. On the contrary, violent crime rates and property crime rates have dropped over 40 percent during the same time frame.  That decline in the crime rates occurred across the nation, including cities with large immigrant populations and those along the border.[6]

Indeed, it has been found, that there is “consistent and compelling evidence over a period of three decades that incarceration rates are much lower among immigrant men than the national norm despite their lower levels of education and higher poverty rates.”[9]

This is not a claim that unauthorized immigrants never commit crimes. The administration’s executive order reduces the stress on our limited resources by allowing us to concentrate on actual criminals rather than wasting time on otherwise law-abiding peoples.

Aside from spending less time investigating those immigrants, it will also allow the immigrants the ability to approach authorities and report crimes without fear of themselves being deported helping make us all safer. With the ability to legally work and pay their way, it will reduce any strain they might have had on our social systems.

This executive order is not a path to citizenship or even permanent legal status for unauthorized immigrants. It is only a temporary reprieve that allows us to prioritize how we allocate our resources.[11]

Joseph Huddleston
Jasper, Ind.

Sources:

  1. http://www.nytimes.com/1990/03/05/nyregion/new-policy-aids-families-of-aliens.html
  2. The Federal Immigration Commissioner, Gene McNary, said recently that as many as 1.5 million illegal aliens could be affected by the new policy, called ”family fairness”…
  3. About 3.1 million undocumented aliens have been given temporary residence under the 1986 immigration law… (1990)
  4. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/11/what-obamas-immigration-action-actually-does/383037/
  5. Who won’t get covered? For starters, anyone who has come to the U.S. illegally within the last five years cannot apply… (2014)
  6. http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/anecdotes-evidence-setting-record-straight-immigrants-and-crime-0
  7. Crime Rates in the United States Fell as the Size of the Immigrant Population (Including the Unauthorized) Increased Dramatically. (2013)
  8. other studies regarding crime rates and immigration:
  9. http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/Imm%20Criminality%20(IPC).pdf
  10. Taken together, studies such as these provide consistent and compelling evidence over a period of three decades that incarceration rates are much lower among immigrant men than the national norm despite their lower levels of education and higher rates poverty rates. (2007)
  11. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/19/your-complete-guide-to-obamas-immigration-order/
  12. People in both groups will have to reapply every three years. (2014)
Share

6 Comments

  1. Great Response Joseph. Any article by Moss, Lewinski, or Engelberth I do not waste my time reading anymore. Glad to see you challenge their rants with researched facts. Bravo!

  2. Wholly Inaccurate Rebuttal Needs to be Debunked
    Let us start from the beginning. There is nothing similar in the way of immigration from either Bush or Reagan. I surmise this is just your way of trying to make people believe that Republican presidents in the past have done the same thing. At no time has any president offered amnesty to massive amounts of illegal immigrants that include driver’s licenses and relief via our social programs. As a matter of fact if you read the story with the link you so graciously provided it states that a family could be deported if they go on welfare. At no time has any president directly offered up the tax dollars of hard working American citizens to those whose first act of coming into our country is to break our laws. We are after all a nation of laws. It is however hard to believe these days as our President walks over our constitution with distain. You remember that constitution, the one that says “congress shall make the laws”, not the President with a pen and a phone. The earned income credit program was designed to encourage people to continue to work and stay off of social programs with a tax incentive. It was not designed to give back pay of tens of thousands of dollars to non-citizens straight from the pockets of hard working blue collar Americans. But as he promised in his campaign when he first ran for President, Obama wants to share the wealth. This means those Americans who work hard for their money and struggle in today’s economic downturn to stay above the poverty line will be handing over their money to people who have illegally entered our country and stayed here breaking the law every day they remained. No jail time, no penalty, instead a reward from the left for their defiance of our laws and help in destroying our culture. I also have no reason to believe that millions of illegal immigrants now seeing that the door can be open to them at a later date with all transgressions forgiven, if not already will soon be heading for our borders in droves.
    Let us address these so called rules that are supposed to allow only those illegal immigrants that have been here for 5 years. Which illegal immigrants are those specifically? Are they just the ones from Mexico or do they include those from Yemen, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, China, Russia? There is NO distinction as to what nationality one must be, so yes it will include terrorists who have been in this country illegally.
    I suppose you should be applauded for your spin on so called facts of violent crime rates dropping in areas with high immigrant population. If this is true why also did Arizona try to enforce the immigration laws that the federal government refused to? It certainly isn’t because they are swimming in a sea of law abiding, community supporting illegal immigrants. It is because the state had become overrun with criminal activity by non-citizens. I see your references but I also conclude you use those who are promoting propaganda to back up your claims. Now see mine https://noarizona.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/chilling-crime-facts-phoenix-arizona/
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2014/04/12/sheriffs-warn-of-violence-from-mexican-cartels-deep-into-interior-of-us-n1823602
    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/02/08/2-us-army-veterans-disappear-in-mexico-border-town-hit-with-drug-violence/
    http://www.criminaljusticedegreesguide.com/features/the-8-most-dangerous-border-towns-in-america.html
    I could list hundreds of more stories. You can easily do the research yourself.
    Most of the areas in which violent crimes have been greatly reduced can accredit it to two things, the expansion of gun rights allowing citizens to not only arm themselves but stand their ground and shoot to kill those who invade their homesteads and police stop and frisk policies like in N.Y. which have now been walked back under new leadership and whose crime rates are again rising.

    You can fool all the people some of the time and you can fool some of the people all the time, Just like we kept our doctors and our healthcare. All of the prices of which went down. Just like Benghazi was because of a video. Just like the IRS didn’t target the Tea Party. You continue to believe the lies you are told because it is what you want to hear. I suppose just like the naked Emperor you think your clothes are grand.

    1. You ask, “If this is true why also did Arizona try to enforce the immigration laws that the federal government refused to?”

      If the illegal immigrant crime was so rampant why did they have to lie about it with made-up examples. Read the next two paragraphs.

      http://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-did-jan-brewers-beheading-claim-come-from/
      —————
      “Brewer’s mindlessness about headlessness is just one of the immigration falsehoods being spread by Arizona politicians,” he wrote. “Border violence on the rise? Phoenix becoming the world’s No. 2 kidnapping capital? Illegal immigrants responsible for most police killings? The majority of those crossing the border are drug mules? All wrong.”

      He added: “Two months ago, the Arizona Republic published an exhaustive report that found that, according to statistics from the FBI and Arizona police agencies, crime in Arizona border towns has been ‘essentially flat for the past decade.’ For example, ‘In 2000, there were 23 rapes, robberies and murders in Nogales, Ariz. Last year, despite nearly a decade of population growth, there were 19 such crimes.’ The Pima County sheriff reported that ‘the border has never been more secure.'”
      —————

      http://bit.ly/1Hwga85
      —————
      Reporters from the Arizona Guardian and television station ABC15 talked to several other medical examiners in counties along or near the Mexican border, and all said the same thing: no beheadings there.

      We also spoke to Vincent Picard, a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Phoenix, who told us there have been no cases involving beheadings in any of their investigations.
      —————

      So, Jan Brewer lied and crime reports in Arizona border towns have been ‘essentially flat for the past decade.’

      Your first link about Arizona reports all gang activity among all races and is not a report about illegal immigrants gangs. in fact, the words illegal and immigrant are not even in the article. Just to quote the second paragraph:
      —————
      There are no shortage of gangs to choose from, if you’re looking for some like-minded friends. The more popular brands are the Arizona Aryan Brotherhood (they hate anyone not white), Border Brothers (if you’re into Aztec tattoos), “Old” Mexican Mafia, “New” Mexican Mafia (a newer, fresher mafia), Grandel (Glendale’s favorite gang flavor), Mau Mau (an African American club), Warrior Society (let’s not forget Native Americans like gangs, too) and Dine Pride (Another Native American gang, probably created so Warrior Society would have someone to hate).
      —————

      As for the rest, indeed drug cartels are a problem and has resulted in some cities seeing an increase in crime. However, those are data points among a larger set that displays results contrary to the anecdotal evidence. You should provide large study that examines data across the nation over decades to prove your point.

      You said, “It [Earned Income Tax Credit] was not designed to give back pay of tens of thousands of dollars to non-citizens straight from the pockets of hard working blue collar Americans.”

      It was not a part of the executive order to give “amnesty bonuses” as they are being called. That is a result of our complex tax code and would require very specific circumstances to be “tens of thousands.” It also requires very specific actions on the part of a tax payer filing a tax return and could be remedied before it can happen. Indeed, such a bill has been introduced. (http://bit.ly/1Hw893a , http://bit.ly/1HwkQeg)

      You said, “it will include terrorists who have been in this country illegally.”

      It should be noted that the terrorist that committed the 9/11 attacks arrived here legally and most were still here legally on 9/11 with only three (or four) having lapsed visas. The point being, if someone wants to commit an atrocity on our nation they are not going to risk a technicality. They will arrive legally and wait, just like they did for 9/11/2001. (http://bit.ly/1Hw8XVy)

  3. Joseph,
    You said I should provide a large study that examines data across the country. So, I should rely on pencil pushers who compile a bunch of data and infer it means what they want it to find. Who have never come within 200 miles of a border town or had to deal with large populations of illegal immigrants overrunning their schools and communities. I would prefer to use my source of someone of impeccable character who has actually been living in the situation for over 30 years and my own eyes.
    My brother is retired Sgt. Major U.S.A.F.. He purchased a home outside of San Antonio back in the 80’s. He has been living in the midst of the problems illegal immigration has caused and relays them to me. His kids have all had to grow up bilingual to get along in the community. I visited there myself and could see the deterioration in the area as the years went on. San Antonio is 150 miles from the Mexican border. I went to “Trip Advisor” to see the closest border towns. This statement from Trip Advisor was there:

    The closest border towns to San Antonio are Laredo and Eagle Pass, both being a good 2 hours by car. Neither, in my opinion, is very attractive. Nuevo Laredo has gotten a lot of publicity in the last few years for its drug wars and is considered by many unsafe, although tourists are not the primary target. The safest border town in my estimation is Nuevo Progress but it is 250 miles south.

    Amnesty is not separating the wheat from the chaff. That is what the process of legal immigration does. I agree that we could make the process easier and more efficient. But the government is in charge, which is why it is costly and inefficient.

    You told me that illegal immigrants receiving vast amounts of money in back earned income credit is just a by product of our tax laws. Just like it will be a by product when they receive social security and disability they didn’t pay into. Shouldn’t that have been a consideration? Shouldn’t maybe it been written into the policy that they are not eligible for these things? Shouldn’t we have at least required them to now take the same path to citizenship that all the other legal immigrants have had to undergo? Aren’t we spitting in the face of those who struggle to become a citizen by following the legal process? My sympathy lies with those immigrants who worked hard to become a citizen and who will now be lumped into all the problems that will be caused by illegal immigrants and what we have done.

    You told me that terrorist are going to come in to the country legally or illegally so I should not worry about the lack of border control or be concerned with the now vast number of illegal immigrants who are going to receive amnesty regardless of their background. However, I am supposed to live with TSA agents searching grandmas and little children every time they try to board a plane. Does it even make sense to be oblivious to train loads of illegal immigrants but then force our citizens to endure searches, x-rays and more to travel?

    The bottom line is that it makes no sense whatsoever to even consider amnesty when we have put in place no effective improvements in border control or security and we are doing nothing to improve the process of immigration. By giving amnesty we have also concluded our laws mean nothing in this nation of laws, it is not important that you know our constitution, what our nation stands for and that you do not need to learn any English, to those who would violate our sanctum and sneak into our country in the dead of night.
    You are also agreeing that our constitution means nothing if you stand behind this President and the illegal way in which he created the policy to begin with. I wonder if you will be so supportive when the Republican president that follows walks all over your constitution, now that you have paved the future path for them to do just that.

    1. You said, “So, I should rely on pencil pushers who compile a bunch of data and infer it means what they want it to find.”

      That is what peer review prevents and why it can be more trustworthy than the eyes of one person in one city.

      You said, “Who have never come within 200 miles of a border town….”
      The provided links went to an article that spoke to AZ medical examiners that never heard of the beheadings Brewer was talking about. As well, the claim of crime being flat came from the AZ crime data which came from AZ offices evaluated by an AZ paper.

      As for your trip advisor comment, who cares. THat is just a random person on the internet leaving a comment. If you read further down on the page you will find a person saying, “The Mexican buses are great and comfortable way better than Greyhound. Mexican highways are some of the best in the world.” http://bit.ly/1907r2O

      You said, “Just like it will be a by product when they receive social security and disability they didn’t pay into. “

      One does not get SS without paying into. This is the reason they are receiving SSNs (to pay into it) which is what caused the tax problem on the EITC.

      You asked, “Shouldn’t we have at least required them to now take the same path to citizenship that all the other legal immigrants have had to undergo? Aren’t we spitting in the face of those who struggle to become a citizen by following the legal process?”

      I am not disagreeing with what you say here. We disagree on how to approach it. I see the problem as so big that deporting everyone all at once is unfeasible so I prefer to use our resources to go after the worst first. In the mean time, those that are here and agree to register, should be able to pay taxes supporting the infrastructure they are using.

      You said, “You told me…I should not worry about the lack of border control…”

      I never suggested any such thing. You are conflating my support for the approach to handle current unauthorized immigrants with how to handle those attempting to come in.

      You said, “However, I am supposed to live with TSA agents searching grandmas,,,,”

      I never said anything about the TSA and I don’t necessarily consider them a valuable resource. As for the searches, one cannot simply look at a person and determine “illegal” or “terrorist” so everyone is searched.

  4. I would suggest that Mr. Huddleston not rely to heavily on CBS or any main stream media for facts, because they are known to bend the true sometimes and that also goes for Snopes and Fact Check. He might want to get the DVD ‘Border States of America’ and see what is really going on down on the border right from the people that face the situation day in and day out

Comments are closed.