Interesting story. (Prostitution/illegal immigration)

[Ben E Lou]

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/sandysprings/1205/22metsex.html

3 women charged in sex trafficking ring

Suspects allegedly lured illegal immigrants into prostitution


Three Brazilian women are being held in a sex trafficking scheme in which they allegedly lured young women to the country and forced them into prostitution in Sandy Springs.

The four victims' families paid thousands of dollars for the women to be smuggled into the country, being told they would be working legitimate jobs in retail sales or as maids or waitresses.

However, once here, they were told there was no job and they would have to work as prostitutes, federal prosecutors said Thursday morning in announcing the arrests.

"Here they are, thousands of miles from home, they know no one; it's either prostitution or you're on your own," U.S. Attorney David Nahmias said. "They are truly victims."

The women charged in the six-count indictment are: Lucilene Felipe Dos Santos, 35, Viviane Christina Chagas, 29, and Jurani Felipe Pinto, 55. They are all in the country illegally and are in federal custody, prosecutors said.

The indictment says the women were kept in apartments in Dunwoody and Sandy Springs and an apartment in the 500 block of Abernathy Road was used as the house of prostitution.

The suspects allegedly kept half the money paid to the women.

Nahmias said the scheme was conducted earlier this year and ended after authorities received a tip. The prosecutor said he believes there are more victims connected to the alleged scheme. And there are a lot more operations such as this preying on "desperate young women," usually illegal immigrants, he said.

"There's a lot of this going on," he said. "It's very hard to break into."

"It's very difficult for victims to come forward," Nahmias said. "They are usually here illegally and are very scared" to come forward to authorities.

He said authorities are supporting the victims' applications for tempory visas. They will be able to apply for permanent visas, he said, as a sort of a reward for their coming forward.

Sex trade victims can either call the U.S Department of Health and Human Services at 1-888-373-7888 or Tapestri, an Atlanta immigrant and refugee coalition, at 404-299-0895. Comments to follow...

[Ben E Lou]

"Here they are, thousands of miles from home, they know no one; it's either prostitution or you're on your own," U.S. Attorney David Nahmias said. "They are truly victims."Here you have a nice capsule of what would appear to be our government's attitude toward illegal immigration in general. "Well, they knowingly participated in a scheme to break the law, but they're victims."

Hmmm...I just realized that the online edition of this article is significantly shorter than the print edition that I read at breakfast a few minutes ago. Some of the stuff that caught my eye is in the print version. Heading out to the car to get it. Back in a moment...

[Raiders Army]

Something like this happened in El Paso with a UTEP Professor. His brother was in Russia and brought girls over to the U.S. promising them a college education. They attended his classes and he "forced" them into stripping to "pay" for his classes (they actually received no college credit whatsoever). They had no money, so in order to go home, they had to strip enough to pay for their return ticket (they used their life savings to come to the U.S.). In addition to room and board, this professor gave them like $10 a week when they were making thousands. One of my soldiers met one and started dating her. Once he found out about this scam, he called the F.B.I. and got this guy busted.

[Ragone]

Utep Professor eh? stripping eh?

ah, i'm too tired to complete this joke

[Raiders Army]

Here you have a nice capsule of what would appear to be our government's attitude toward illegal immigration in general. "Well, they knowingly participated in a scheme to break the law, but they're victims."
After having lived in El Paso for almost eight years (and I'll return there this summer), I have zero tolerance concerning illegal immigration; however, I can also recognize that these women were victims as well.

[albionmoonlight]

Here you have a nice capsule of what would appear to be our government's attitude toward illegal immigration in general. "Well, they knowingly participated in a scheme to break the law, but they're victims."
[/font] They are not mutually exclusive. Anyone can be a criminal and a victim at the same time. Illegal immigration is an issue where I tend to be a pretty law-and-order guy--much more so than I am on other crimes/issues.

But saying that we should enforce the law against those who break it does not mean that we also need to leave them vulnerable to vigilante justice or whatever else may happen to them. These women may deserve to be deported; they do not deserve to be forced into prostitution against their will. They are still human beings.

The big problem with immigration in this country, IMO, is our addicition to cheap, illegal labor. As long as we all wink and nod at a certain level of illegals here so that the price of lettuce stays low, we will never be able to really seal off the borders. Even the most die-hard Congressional advocates of tightening up the border are willing to allow versions of a "guest worker" program in order to take jobs that "Americans don't want."

Of course, the only reason that Americans don't want certain jobs is because they pay less than a living wage. If we let the free market operate without an artificial influx of illegal labor, then wages would naturally rise to a level that would make the jobs attractive. Of course, that would mean that we would all have to start paying a bit more for vegitables and manual labor. Personally, I am willing to make that sacrifice if it means that we can execute a workable immigration policy that helps keep labor costs in this country at a living wage, and helps keeps drugs and terrorists out of this country by keeping the borders tight.

But, I know that sacrifice has been a dirty word in America since WWII, so we will continue to have this unworkable legalish illegal immigration in this country about which everyone complains but about which no one does anything because it would actually require making hard choices.

And women like the women in this story do fall through the cracks of that policy. I'm not saying that they didn't break the law. I am saying that they should not have to suffer any more than the law provides for their small role in a very messed up system.

[Ben E Lou]

OK...

Dos Santos allegedly took lewd photographs of three of them and blackmailed them into prostituting themselves, threatening that their families would learn what they were doing.OK. I'm not following this one. Did 35-year-old Dos Santos physically force three "young women" (safely assuming ages 18-25ish and at least somewhat physically fit?) to take these pictures, or did they agree to take them?

Here's a gem from the online edition that's not in the print version, too:He said authorities are supporting the victims' applications for temporary visas. They will be able to apply for permanent visas, he said, as a sort of a reward for their coming forward.So wait a sec. They come in illegally, work illegally as prostitutes (keeping half the money), and get rewarded with the opportunity to get permanent visas???


Dos Santos and Pinto pleaded not guilty in a hearing before a federal magistrate Thursday afternoon. Chagas is in custody in Florida.This was the other thing that was a little strange. What were the exact charges they pled guilty to, and why are the three not charged together?

Of course, the bigger question I have is this: all three are in the country illegally, the girls they brought here were also illegals. Why not save all this taxpayer money on this? Our law needs to allow us to just confiscate whatever they've bought in this country, and ship 'em all back to Brazil with a promise that if any of them set foot on U.S. soil again, they will spend a very long time in a federal prison.

Another less-serious question is this: they get word from America that there are jobs as maids, retail sales, and waitresses available, but only young, thin, attractive girls need apply What did they/their families THINK they were coming over here to do? :p

This just strikes me as a strange story all around.

[Ben E Lou]

The big problem with immigration in this country, IMO, is our addicition to cheap, illegal labor. As long as we all wink and nod at a certain level of illegals here so that the price of lettuce stays low, we will never be able to really seal off the borders. Even the most die-hard Congressional advocates of tightening up the border are willing to allow versions of a "guest worker" program in order to take jobs that "Americans don't want."

Of course, the only reason that Americans don't want certain jobs is because they pay less than a living wage. If we let the free market operate without an artificial influx of illegal labor, then wages would naturally rise to a level that would make the jobs attractive. Of course, that would mean that we would all have to start paying a bit more for vegitables and manual labor. Personally, I am willing to make that sacrifice if it means that we can execute a workable immigration policy that helps keep labor costs in this country at a living wage, and helps keeps drugs and terrorists out of this country by keeping the borders tight.Preach the word, brother. Preach the word.

And women like the women in this story do fall through the cracks of that policy. I'm not saying that they didn't break the law. I am saying that they should not have to suffer any more than the law provides for their small role in a very messed up system.Oh, I agree with you there, but the thought that they're getting to stay really grates on me.

[albionmoonlight]

Here's a gem from the online edition that's not in the print version, too:So wait a sec. They come in illegally, work illegally as prostitutes (keeping half the money), and get rewarded with the opportunity to get permanent visas???
I think that "reward" is a bad choice of terms here. I think of it as not prosecuting one of John Gotti's hit men in exchange for the hit man testifying against the big boss.

There are people who argue with the whole "freedom for testimony" exchange process. If you and I both kill someone, why should I get a lesser sentence than you just because I conicidently happen to have some evidence against a bigger criminal and you don't? It's not really fair on that level.

But, if we agree that we live in a world where the government has made the policy choice to let some people get away with crime in order to compell them to provide evidence allowing for the prosecution of bigger crimes, then letting it be known that coming forward with evidence of prosecution rings may help you get away with sneaking into the country makes sense to me.

[albionmoonlight]

dola--

And I am not saying whether I agree, in this case, that letting these women stay is right or wrong. Once you get to the level of these deals, I think that it really becomes very fact specific--which is part of the reason that the process can be unfair. If a group of women in another state happen to run into a U.S. Attorney who is more upset at immigration than prostitution, then they may not get the deal. It ends up being, IMO, pretty arbitrary.

[Ben E Lou]

albion:

Maybe I'm reading the story wrong (and there are holes in it, to be sure), but it sounds like someone else (not one of the girls) gave the tip. I could understand granting concessions if one or more of the girls had come forward and helped out lots in the investigation, but this story makes it sound like the government found out what they needed to make arrests on their own.

(Perhaps one or more of the girls did help out, and that's part of what is missing here...)

[QuikSand]

They are not mutually exclusive. Anyone can be a criminal and a victim at the same time. Illegal immigration is an issue where I tend to be a pretty law-and-order guy--much more so than I am on other crimes/issues.

But saying that we should enforce the law against those who break it does not mean that we also need to leave them vulnerable to vigilante justice or whatever else may happen to them. These women may deserve to be deported; they do not deserve to be forced into prostitution against their will. They are still human beings.

The big problem with immigration in this country, IMO, is our addicition to cheap, illegal labor. As long as we all wink and nod at a certain level of illegals here so that the price of lettuce stays low, we will never be able to really seal off the borders. Even the most die-hard Congressional advocates of tightening up the border are willing to allow versions of a "guest worker" program in order to take jobs that "Americans don't want."

Of course, the only reason that Americans don't want certain jobs is because they pay less than a living wage. If we let the free market operate without an artificial influx of illegal labor, then wages would naturally rise to a level that would make the jobs attractive. Of course, that would mean that we would all have to start paying a bit more for vegitables and manual labor. Personally, I am willing to make that sacrifice if it means that we can execute a workable immigration policy that helps keep labor costs in this country at a living wage, and helps keeps drugs and terrorists out of this country by keeping the borders tight.

But, I know that sacrifice has been a dirty word in America since WWII, so we will continue to have this unworkable legalish illegal immigration in this country about which everyone complains but about which no one does anything because it would actually require making hard choices.

And women like the women in this story do fall through the cracks of that policy. I'm not saying that they didn't break the law. I am saying that they should not have to suffer any more than the law provides for their small role in a very messed up system.


Looks like I don't need ot post in this thread... this is pretty much what I'd have said, only probably more clearly put. Great post.

[albionmoonlight]

albion:

Maybe I'm reading the story wrong (and there are holes in it, to be sure), but it sounds like someone else (not one of the girls) gave the tip. I could understand granting concessions if one or more of the girls had come forward and helped out lots in the investigation, but this story makes it sound like the government found out what they needed to make arrests on their own.

(Perhaps one or more of the girls did help out, and that's part of what is missing here...)
I agree--hard to say who gave the tip based on that story. And, like I said, I am not at all sure that these women should not be deported as the law provides. Like you, I get the sense that this story left out a lot of details--some of which would have been nice to know.

[Grammaticus]

I think that "reward" is a bad choice of terms here. I think of it as not prosecuting one of John Gotti's hit men in exchange for the hit man testifying against the big boss.

There are people who argue with the whole "freedom for testimony" exchange process. If you and I both kill someone, why should I get a lesser sentence than you just because I conicidently happen to have some evidence against a bigger criminal and you don't? It's not really fair on that level.

But, if we agree that we live in a world where the government has made the policy choice to let some people get away with crime in order to compell them to provide evidence allowing for the prosecution of bigger crimes, then letting it be known that coming forward with evidence of prosecution rings may help you get away with sneaking into the country makes sense to me.
Fine, reward them by not prosecuting them for prostitution, then ship them right back to Brazil, where they can be with their familys through this tough time.

Giving them a Visa of any sort is a pathetic act and is offensive to anyone who does not break the law in this manner. If they already broke the law, because it was the easiest choice, they will do it again.

[Dutch]

Fine, reward them by not prosecuting them for prostitution, then ship them right back to Brazil, where they can be with their familys through this tough time.

Giving them a Visa of any sort is a pathetic act and is offensive to anyone who does not break the law in this manner. If they already broke the law, because it was the easiest choice, they will do it again.

Visa's do expire, don't they?

[Fonzie]

This thread is 81% less hot than I thought it would be.

[QuikSand]

Well, I don't claim to really understand what motivates an illegal immigrant to cooperate with an investigation... it's just not an area where I have any real knowledge.

If the question here (apparently) is whether prosecutors ought to have cut deals with these women, granting them visas of some sort in exchange for cooperation, then it's a matter of who has the best ability to judge whether that was best in this case, given whet information the women had, and what it would take to get them to cooperate. To reject the decision here, it seems to me, suggests that my (your) judgment is better than that of the prosecutor involved. I'm not willing to go that far, but perhaps I don't have the expertise in such matters that some of you may.

It's really easy to say "you shouldn't give that much in a plea bargain" or "you should never give a visa to an illegal" means that you claim to know what's best. Better than the professionals whose job it is to make this sort of decision. If, in the name of being a hardliner on some illegal alien prostitutes, you are willing to let go the people who actually profit form this sort of human trafficking... perhaps you're right in the absolute sense. For me, it just seems very hard to take a tiny fleck of knowledge about a case like this and see the "deal" as a clear misdeed.

But, then again, morally gray areas don't sell copy too well. Righteous indigation is the winner and still champion in that regard.

[clintl]

Human trafficking is a particularly abhorrent crime, far, far worse than either prostitution or illegal immigration. Giving them visas so that they are available to continue cooperating and possibly testify against the traffickers seems like a very good policy decision to me.

As far as illegal immigration is concerned, there's never going to be a successful strategy to stop it as long until the government is willing to crack down on the supply of jobs - and by that, I mean big penalties against businesses caught hiring illegal aliens. Big enough that the economic risks are too high to continue. And so far, the government has not been willing to take that step. In my opinion, the businesses hiring illegal immigrants are as much, if not more, to blame for the problem than the immigrants themselves.

[MrBigglesworth]

Of course, the only reason that Americans don't want certain jobs is because they pay less than a living wage. If we let the free market operate without an artificial influx of illegal labor, then wages would naturally rise to a level that would make the jobs attractive. Of course, that would mean that we would all have to start paying a bit more for vegitables and manual labor. Personally, I am willing to make that sacrifice if it means that we can execute a workable immigration policy that helps keep labor costs in this country at a living wage, and helps keeps drugs and terrorists out of this country by keeping the borders tight.
What if we allowed more legal immigration? Low wage jobs could be taken by the immigrants, who would be better off than they would be in Mexico or wherever, and prices would stay down allowing other Americans to buy more stuff for their wages. If wages go up 3%, it doesn't matter if cost of living goes up 3%.

[JeffR]

So wait a sec. They come in illegally, work illegally as prostitutes (keeping half the money), and get rewarded with the opportunity to get permanent visas???

The 50-50 split rings a little odd. The other times I've heard of similar arrests (Chinese women in Vancouver, Russians in Toronto, Mexicans in Orlando), all of the money was kept by the people who brought them into the country (under the guise of paying for their plane ticket/visa/accomodations) - presumably to make it more difficult for the women to leave. The "profit sharing" raises some suspicions that, in this case, there may have been a little more cooperation than coercion going on.

[Grammaticus]

Visa's do expire, don't they?
Yes Visa's expire and the original recipient just stays in the country. That is part of my point. If they broke the law out of convenience before, they will surely just stay past the visa and prostitute themselves somewhere else in the U.S.

Rewarding bad behavior for any reason is poor practice and leads to more bad behavior by the person who was rewarded.

[albionmoonlight]

Yes Visa's expire and the original recipient just stays in the country. That is part of my point. If they broke the law out of convenience before, they will surely just stay past the visa and prostitute themselves somewhere else in the U.S.

Rewarding bad behavior for any reason is poor practice and leads to more bad behavior by the person who was rewarded.
And here Quik thought that this may fall into a legal and moral grey area about which we should hesitate to speak in absolutes considering both that we do not know all of the facts concerning this case and that we don't have the knowledge and expertise of the local prosecutors.

Shows what he knows.

[QuikSand]

What a dummy.

[albionmoonlight]

At the risk of introducing more grey area into this discussion, I think that, at its base, it raises issues about the role of punishment in the criminal law. Should the government's purpose in imposing punishment derive from some abstract notion of justice--you hurt a fellow citizen, so we as a society must cause you some discomfort in order to balance the scales and affirm our belief in the rights of individuals not to be hurt. Kant was a big believer in this theory of punishment.

Or, should society be totally pragmatic and utilitarian in punishment--should the goal of punishment not be an end unto itself in any way, but merely a means of decreasing behavior that we have declared undesirable. We will lock you up when you do something wrong in order to deter you from doing wrong. And in order to keep you in a place where you can't do wrong things. And all of the other practical justifications for punishment. Under this theory, you would not punish someone if it could be demonstrated that you would create more good by not punishing them.

The Tookie Williams situation raised these issues. On the one hand, he killed people in cold blood and should suffer the punishment for that. On the other hand, there was a pretty good argument that by keeping him alive, you were preventing more crime in the future because (whether it was genuine or all an act on his part) he was an active anti-gang crusader.

If you believe that the main purpose of the laws against immigration and prostitution and human trafficking is to punish those who do it, then you may look at this case differently from someone who believes that the main purpose of the laws against these crimes is to prevent them from happening, by any means necessary.

And I don't know what side I come out on, FWIW. It's a debate that I have with myself often. On the one hand, I am a very practical guy. On the other, its hard to be raised Catholic and not have some deep feelings about right and wrong and crime and punishment that are very . . . Biblical for lack of a better term.

[clintl]

Well, I think to some extent, it's both, and the balance between the two depends on the crime. And with respect to illegal immigration, I think if it's a crime at all, it's a crime contrived for public policy policy reasons, and not something that is ethically wrong from the standpoint of the illegal immigrant. Ideally, I don't think countries should even have immigration laws. People should be able live and work wherever they choose. Immigration laws, for the most part, are a form of economic protectionism. They don't really have any other purpose.

[Buccaneer]

Human trafficking is a particularly abhorrent crime, far, far worse than either prostitution or illegal immigration. Giving them visas so that they are available to continue cooperating and possibly testify against the traffickers seems like a very good policy decision to me.

As far as illegal immigration is concerned, there's never going to be a successful strategy to stop it as long until the government is willing to crack down on the supply of jobs - and by that, I mean big penalties against businesses caught hiring illegal aliens. Big enough that the economic risks are too high to continue. And so far, the government and consumers has not been willing to take that step. In my opinion, the businesses hiring illegal immigrants are as much, if not more, to blame for the problem than the immigrants themselves.
Added a key word, I perceive.

[clintl]

Added a key word, I perceive.

Well, maybe. I'm not so convinced, however, that consumers are standing in the way. I think it's primarily government and business interests, particularly business interests in the industries that are hiring most of the illegal immigrants.

[Grammaticus]

Well, maybe. I'm not so convinced, however, that consumers are standing in the way. I think it's primarily government and business interests, particularly business interests in the industries that are hiring most of the illegal immigrants.
I don't buy the "it's business" approach. All of the businesses big enough to command attention through large amounts of capitol are not able to hire illegal immigrants, because the penalty for doing so is too costly and they get audited, etc. It is primarely small employers who hire illegals. And quite honestly, they don't have much pull in congress. I mean Wal-Mart can't do it, they are losing law suits over garbage like amount of time used for lunch breaks.

It is the fear of losing a block of hispanic voters on the conservative side and the fear of losing your core supporters on the liberal side. The conservatives are afraid it will backfire and liberals see a new mass of poor people that will embrace their entitlement mentality.

[Cringer]

I have no problem with letting the 'victims' stay on Visa's.

Really when it comes to this issue I will admit upfront that I am pretty torn both ways. I have lived here on the border for 9 years now. I go over across the border and see how it is. I understand why they want over here in order to get work, because honestly what i see when I cross is not even close to the worst there is to see. I also know that they will get more money working our crap jobs then they will get working in the jobs are U.S. companies take from us and send to them (something I personally make a living off of as my company has closed many factories to move to Mexico, and Asia and east Europe, and I take that stuff to and from the border between factories). I also know that many of these people are good, hard working people.

On the other side I understand they are breaking the law. They have destroyed/messed up the personal property/land of U.S. citizens in order to get well into the country. The people who traffic them are the ones I would hold most responsible for this. They risk the lives of the people they traffic in every way possible, dehydration, being stuck in a truck trailer, confrontation with law officials. You see stupid crap like state/local governments helping these people with tax payer money.

With all that said, I surprised myself a bit a few weeks ago. After 7 years of driving out of here this is the first time I have been put in this situation. Leaving the border you have to cross a Border Patrol check point. Sometimes 10 miles down the road from the border, like in Laredo, sometimes 50 miles like on US 281 north out of where I live and on US 77. So a few weeks ago I am leaving, at night as usual. I am about 6 miles from the check point and I have a pickup and car go hauling ass past me (about 90-100 mph I would say). About 20 seconds later a third car goes by even a little faster, and it has the appearance of a plain white cop car. I think "yeah go get those bastards" and then realize shortly after that there are no plain white State Patrol cars in this area.

So about a minute later I come around a slight curve in the road where the trees begin to surround the road and fill in the median. Keep in mind this is not interstate, so there are cross overs all over, especially in this area here where Johnny Law uses them. So I see the first two cars pulling away from the right shoulder, cutting right in front of me to the cross over (causing me to hit my brakes just a touch but there was never much danger). The third car is still on the shoulder with the trunk open and back doors open, and about 5-6 guys jumping out and heading towards the trees on the right side of the road. I pass while this is happening and then the 3rd car pulls off and takes the cross over and huals ass back south.

So the first thing that I think is "What the fuck? I can't believe they just did that shit right in front of me." I was actaully a little pissed off, which surprised me. But to have the audacity to do it right in front of me really got to me. So I noted in my head what the mileage was on my speedo, and when I pulled up to the check point I told the decent looking female Officer who asks me questions before I get to go on my way. Another was there with a dog. She asked me how many, I said all I saw was 5-6 but there had to be more. She asked me about how far back. 3.1 miles exactly I say. She tells the one with the dog, he starts to head inside as I am pulling away.

Now, I did question myself if I should have done that after I had rolled back onto the road. Like I said, I understand why they do it in most cases. But damn, it just pissed me off to have it happen right in front of me for some reason. Like a slap in the face or something like that, just offensive to me.

Overall, I think changes need to be made. On a more world-wide scale. Free trade agreements don't do it either from what I see. I like MrBiggs idea of allowing more imigration to take the cheap paying jobs. It is worth a shot in my mind. I will add in conjunction with increased security at the border (something other then military I would hope, perhaps increased Border Patrol personel and higher pay to keep their officers which is currently a problem).

[Cringer]

Dang that was long. Sorry. :D

[Buccaneer]

Well, maybe. I'm not so convinced, however, that consumers are standing in the way. I think it's primarily government and business interests, particularly business interests in the industries that are hiring most of the illegal immigrants.
I have a very consumer-centric view of the economy - as the main cog. Whereas governments can exist and hold power of themselves, businesses cannot exist without consumers. You raise prices of produce high enough, consumers will then chose to go without or at least, change behavior. While gasoline seems to be an exception, I don't think lettuce falls into the same category. However, I do not know how much pressure there will be on produce prices if labor costs are tripled (in replacing illegal migrant workers).

[clintl]

I have a very consumer-centric view of the economy - as the main cog. Whereas governments can exist and hold power of themselves, businesses cannot exist without consumers. You raise prices of produce high enough, consumers will then chose to go without or at least, change behavior. While gasoline seems to be an exception, I don't think lettuce falls into the same category. However, I do not know how much pressure there will be on produce prices if labor costs are tripled (in replacing illegal migrant workers).

It depends on the product, and whether there are suitable alternatives. Gasoline is interesting - short term, you're right, people continue to buy it because they don't have much choice. There are no substitutes, and they're locked into their vehicles, commutes, etc. However, long-term, consumers are pretty sensitive to changes in gas prices - there's just a big lag because it takes a while for consumers to be able to make the changes to reduce consumption. You can see the price sensitivity to gas prices in the way the SUV market crashed and the hybrid market took off this year, but it takes a long time before those consumer preferences show up in the consumption rates.

[clintl]

I don't buy the "it's business" approach. All of the businesses big enough to command attention through large amounts of capitol are not able to hire illegal immigrants, because the penalty for doing so is too costly and they get audited, etc. It is primarely small employers who hire illegals. And quite honestly, they don't have much pull in congress. I mean Wal-Mart can't do it, they are losing law suits over garbage like amount of time used for lunch breaks.

It is the fear of losing a block of hispanic voters on the conservative side and the fear of losing your core supporters on the liberal side. The conservatives are afraid it will backfire and liberals see a new mass of poor people that will embrace their entitlement mentality.

I think you underestimate the power of small employers, especially farmers. Agricultural associations has immense influence with Congress. If they didn't, we would have seen the end of agricultural subsidies decades ago. As an example of the power they have, do you know why we have things like high fructose corn syrup as a sweetener in many of our food products? Because the US has a strict quota on the allowed level of sugar imports. This quota keeps sugar prices in the US well above the price on the world market. High fructose corn syrup could not compete with sugar prices if not for the quota. The quota primarily benefits two groups - midwest corn farmers and US sugar cane and sugar beet growers (because they get a higher price for sugar, too). But it costs the overall US economy (if I remember correctly from a calculation we did in business school, it depresses the economy by something like 0.5%). People have been trying to end it for decades, and the agricultural lobbyists have been able to block it every time.

[jamesUMD]

If I lived in a place where my basic standard of living never looked to get better, I had no chance for an education, and there were people just like myself now earning an honest wage in the country to the north I'd risk it to.

It might not be right by our standards and laws, but hell I have met plenty of guys who have come here illegally from Central and South America that much more epitomize American Values than alot of the human trash I see in our country sitting around absorbing money from everyone else's hard work and a dilapidated BS welfare system.

I can't imagine the desperation that many of these people feel to leave their families, places they grew up, and just make a leap of faith for something better, at the risk of their lives.

I just think it's way too easy to make judgements on illegal immigrants trying to come here, when we have no idea what their lives are like. We sit in our heated homes and drive to work every day, to earn our pay+benefits (healthcare, stock options, 401k's, paid vacation, etc, etc.) and probably can't come close to identifying what they go through.

Just my 2 cents.

[Cringer]

If I lived in a place where my basic standard of living never looked to get better, I had no chance for an education, and there were people just like myself now earning an honest wage in the country to the north I'd risk it to.

It might not be right by our standards and laws, but hell I have met plenty of guys who have come here illegally from Central and South America that much more epitomize American Values than alot of the human trash I see in our country sitting around absorbing money from everyone else's hard work and a dilapidated BS welfare system.

I can't imagine the desperation that many of these people feel to leave their families, places they grew up, and just make a leap of faith for something better, at the risk of their lives.

I just think it's way too easy to make judgements on illegal immigrants trying to come here, when we have no idea what their lives are like. We sit in our heated homes and drive to work every day, to earn our pay+benefits (healthcare, stock options, 401k's, paid vacation, etc, etc.) and probably can't come close to identifying what they go through.

Just my 2 cents.


Actually I have been pretty damn poor a couple of times in my life, including being homeless for several months at 18. But then again as I said, I do believe I understand why they do it, and I sympathize with them. Part of me still doesn't like it all the way though.

[Ben E Lou]

Back to the original story, there's now a video news report posted, with a bit more info:

http://www.11alive.com/video/player.aspx?aid=47981&sid=73668&bw=&cid=3

[JonInMiddleGA]

... plenty of guys who have come here illegally ... that much more epitomize American Values than alot of the human trash I see in our country sitting around absorbing money from everyone else's hard work and a dilapidated BS welfare system.

Seems to me that the appropriate response to the situation is getting tougher with the latter, not cutting slack to the former.

Not doggin' you at all, just commenting.