In class essay 2 Argument against Revamp Immigration
Amy La Jeunesse
Argument against Revamp Immigration
May 28, 2008
English 1B
The Editors, at the Contra Costa Times wrote an article that appealed to the sympathy of the readers. I was surprised that fine journalist would write such a subjective and boldly fallacy piece using pity as the backbone of their facts. The facts that supported their opinion were pity vs. real facts, border patrol, alliance between the U.S and Mexican president, Mexico’s failed of economy, and the “guest worker” system. I will explain each of these topics and prove how they are fallacious arguments.
First, the introduction describes an accident when several illegal immigrants died in the process of trying to enter the U.S. “The horrific deaths in Texas of 19 illegal immigrants who suffocated while being transported in locked big rigs, put an exclamation mark on the urgency for change in the United States’ immigration policy”. This statement sets the tone for the entire article of pity for these victims. True it is sad that these 19 illegal immigrants suffocated while being transported, the fact remains that they all made a decision to flee their country knowing the risk could be deadly.
Border patrol’s the country line between Mexico and the Unites States Yet, their written policy is to persuade, or detain immigrants crossing the country line with the least force necessary. The agents are trained to use force last; unlike Germany in the 1980’s when it was still split between East and West, the guards were instructed to use deadly force at all encounters. Russians have also had a harder life and greater reason to flee because they poverty so extreme that the women and girls sold their bodies, mail order brides became a huge market, and communism controlled their government. The Russians life style far exceeded the minor discomforts that Mexican immigrants experience. On a scale of one to ten the Mexican immigrants desire to come to the U.S for better opportunities does not seem as desperate as the Russians. Therefore, the moderate life in Mexico is not worth the deadly risk and if they chose to take the risk then they need to accept their fate.
Secondly, the authors claimed that the alliance between Mexican President Vicente Fox and President Bush were scheduled to mediate the topic of immigration. The event of 9/11 changed the importance of the mediation meeting as the U.S changed their policy of immigration due to heighten levels of security in the Department of Homeland Security. “The terrorist attacks changed the way the Unites States viewed all foreigners as potential terrorists” this example is how the editors think that terrorists changed the fate of the Mexican Immigrants. They also went on to say that “Relations between the two countries cooled even further when Fox spoke out against the United States’ war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq”. This statement is fallacy and subjective implying that the U.S was holding a grudge against Fox for not supporting us in the war.
The third shocking key idea is that claim Mexico as a victim for decades of failed economy. “Mexico’s economy still hasn’t recovered from the decades of government neglect and abuse under the PRI ruling party”. This quote is shocking because if insinuates that Mexico was a victim in the fall of their government and economy. Mexico chose to make bad economic decisions and should not look to the U.S as a source to fill the millions of jobs that are needed to bring their people out of poverty.
The fourth irrational idea is that the Mexicans fill the jobs in the U.S that no one wants. “On this side of the border, there are jobs that go begging because no one else will do them”. This is a common simple idea to a huge issue of immigration. As editors, I am surprised that they did not research the whole story of these 19 immigrants attempting to enter the U.S. They lacked any reference on the income that is needed to support the immigrants once they have began work, the pyramid of government benefits for the illegal children, not born in American, will receive.
The U.S. government has a policy that they will support American citizen children of illegal immigrants. This government funding covers education and medical care from prenatal - the first five years for low income or no income families in California. The issues is that over looking 19 immigrants to enter the Us with the assumption that they work the labor jobs that no Americans wants is a narrow look in to a huge topic.
The U.S. Census states that on average couples have 2.5 children. Latin American cultural descents tend to have more. So if each of the 19 immigrants could have two children in the United States that quickly become 38 children that the government supports. Their illegal status makes it unlikely that the parents will ever pay taxes. As Ling Ling stated in State Needs a “Time Out”, from mass Immigration, “ Most low- skilled workers do not pay enough per child to off set even the costs of educating their children, around $7,000 per child per year” This $7,000 times the 39 offspring of the 19 immigrants becomes a overwhelming $273.000.
Ling –Ling also shares that fact of the “1997 National Academy of Sciences, each native household paid an additional $1,200 a year due to services provided to immigrant families. This is a gross over look of the long-term consequence of the 19 immigrants’ if they had successfully entered the U.S.
The fifth misconception is that “guest Workers” is a great idea. “Guest workers systems allows hard- working people to legally cross the border without becoming permanent residents. Both countries would benefit from this arrangement. While here, the guest workers would be protected by labor laws and pay U.S taxes.” This concept sounds like a good resolution on the surface but underneath it if a far cry from an answer.
The “guest worker” system will allow “Mexican worker to send up to $10 Billion back to their families, according to a 2002 report”. The workers would pay taxes but the income that they make of $13 – 24,000 per year barely covers the bill that will take to educate their children and provide government social service medical benefits. On top of the bill that the U.S will be forced to pay they will be sending their billions and billions of dollars back to Mexico to support their economy, not the U.S which is supporting them.
Using drastic example to change the U.S immigration policy was an armature-writing tactic on part of the editors. They appealed to the pity of the victim’s verses stating true facts and a long term out look on immigration. They claimed that Border patrol forced the immigrants to fall victims because of the closed border policy. They used the broken alliance with Presidents Fox and Bush and Fox’s lack of support on the war as an excuse for the lack of immigration police change. They claimed Mexico as victim of a failed economy with out taking into account Mexico has decades of bad decisions leading up to their fallen government. Lastly, we discussed the effect of the chance that these 19 immigrants successfully entering America and the waterfall of reactions.
America needs to regulate immigration at a nice balance allowing only the percent in that our economy and government can support. Immigrants migrate to California because of the dream of opportunities for a better life. With over-immigration the rich gold lifestyle that California offers will quickly be drained. Without control and balance California will be depleted and Californians will want to move to Mexico with their new found economy found from illegal sending American money home.
