Defraying Illegal Migrant Juan's High Cost On Citizen Ernesto
Earlier this month, illegal migrant Juan Lizcano shot and killed Dallas Police Officer Brian Jackson.
Ernesto T., by contrast, legally immigrated from Mexico to the United States in the mid-80's. Ernesto worked hard to start his own business. He met a young woman whom he later married. Together, Ernesto and his wife and children own a home.
Ernesto is a citizen of the United States of America. He has the same rights and privileges as any other citizen.
Ernesto, and his family, have another dubious privilege: they are going to get to pay the bill for Juan Lizcano's expensive ride through our legal system.
The question Ernesto should be asking is, "why can't Mexico pay the bills of its citizens, who are here illegally, instead of those of us who worked hard to get here?"
The answer is: Mexico can, but it would take an act of Congress (literally) to start billing them.
Lizcano, who has a prior criminal history, sits in the Dallas County jail, as the legal system gets prepared to try him for capital murder. According to a March 8, 1992 news story in the Dallas Morning News, Lizcano's ride through our legal system will cost Texas taxpayers around $2.3 million dollars. Further, according to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, in the very likely event Lizcano is sentenced to death, he will be there an average of 10.43 years at a cost of $61.58 a day. This adds another $234,000.
Paying these bills are Mexican citizens turned U.S. citizens. They pay taxes along with hundreds of thousands of other Mexican countrymen here as legal permanent residents.
Many of the benefits that Mexico's legal immigrants should be able to expect are literally being vacuumed away from them by their neighbors who stream illegally into the country by the tens of thousands on a daily basis to freeload off of them.
According to California's State Association of Hospitals, many hospitals in the state are on the verge of collapse. Los Angeles County found that 60% of the county's uninsured patients are in the country illegally. Last year, Los Angeles spent $340 million dollars treating the uninsured--translating to an extra $1,000 bill per taxpayer.
The problem is so bad, in fact, that Congress recently appropriated $1 billion dollars to be distributed among hospitals to defray the cost of providing taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal migrants. This billion-dollar tax bill, which still isn't enough to defray the cost, comes directly from the pockets of American taxpayers.
That isn't all. One in 6 incarcerated inmates in Arizona is a Mexican citizen. Their bills are paid for by American tax dollars.
The U.S. Border Patrol also reports a dramatic increase in border violence and assaults, increasing their costs and putting lives at risk.
In the period from October, 2004 through September, 2005, the Border Patrol registered 687 border assaults on its agents nationwide (Mexican and Canadian borders)--almost doubling the 349 assaults from the year prior. Of those, 686 attacks (all but one) occurred along the Mexican border.
All of this adds up to tremendous costs placed upon the shoulders and pocketbooks of legal American citizens and residents of Mexican origin by an increasing number of "freeloading" fellow countrymen.
MEXICO'S ROLE
So what's the Mexican government doing to help the situation?
Nothing. Well, worse than nothing.
The Mexican government actually promotes illegal immigration.
The Government of Mexico produced this 32-page comicbook style "How To" book for Mexican citizens looking to cross the border illegally and freeload off of their legal American counterparts. The Mexican government is quick to point out that they inform readers that there are legal ways to immigrate to the United States. However, nowhere in its publication, are any of these legal processes explained or even referenced.
Instead, the guidebook bears illustrations of migrants swimming across rivers and running from U.S. Border Patrol agents. It warns future migrants to avoid drinking and driving, not because they might kill someone while driving drunk, but because they could be deported if caught.
LEVERAGING MEXICO'S ASSETS TO PAY FOR THE PROBLEM
The Mexican government has significant assets that, at some point or another, cross U.S. boundaries. Though the Government of Mexico as a whole is not well-funded by U.S. standards, there are still assets that could be siezed or levied to relieve the tax burden placed on American taxpayers--especially American taxpayers of Mexican origin.
In order to determine what is available and make levies against it would take action by the U.S. Congress on behalf of U.S. citizens.
In other words: a U.S. citizen can't just sue Mexico to repair the financial damage it has caused.
But Congress can.
Why hasn't this issue been explored? Because Congress hasn't heard from enough U.S. citizens to force the issue to the forefront.
For more information on contacting elected representatives, please visit:
If you write letters, please share your representative's responses with us here at Dallas.Org.
[Editorial Comment]
In preparing this story, I contacted several public agencies including schools and hospital districts. Getting a handle on exactly how many people are illegally receiving services is difficult since many Federal and State laws prevent documenting the undocumented.
In Texas, for instance, school districts are required to educate any child that walks through the door.
And this is the way it should be.
I'm going to go on record and say that I would like to see every child, legally here or not, get (and continue to get) a U.S. education. Our education system is the best in the world, and it may be the best (and only) hope for eliminating poverty, strife and the drug trade that plagues the Northern border of Mexico.
But the Mexican Government must be made to "step up to the plate" and pay for it.
And Mexico isn't the only government.
Jesse Diaz at LULAC points out that 43% of all illegal migrants are from countries other than Mexico. Their governments, especially if they're complicit in facilitating illegal immigration, should be held accountable.
I don't feel like this is too much to ask since some of the hardest hit are Mexican citizens turned American citizens.
Jesse had another novel idea: Mexican oil.
Mexico has a tremendous asset that can be leveraged to defray costs of American social and education services. And, in case you have forgotten $3.00 a gallon gasoline, oil is an extremely valuable commodity. So perhaps leveraging Mexican oil would be a good place to start.
One final thought: there are many more "Ernesto T.'s" living in this U.S. than Juan Lizcanos. There are many more hardworking Hispanic citizens in this country than there are criminals like Lizcano.
We in the U.S. are always talking about "family values." Some of the highest "family values" are practiced by our Hispanic citizens--and there are many of us who would do well taking lessons from them.
So rather than concentrating our efforts on building billion-dollar fences, or chasing people looking for a better way of life through deserts, why don't we concentrate on a billing system to return the cost to Mexico?
This way, everyone is treated fairly and everybody wins.
- 2579 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Stumble

Be careful what you wish for
I suppose nations could negotiate treaties for reimbursement of the costs of trying and jailing each others' citizens. But be careful what you wish for. You might get it. I predict a lot of American taxpayers would be upset if, say, China tried to bill the US $2.3 million for jailing an American human rights activist who ran afoul of Chinese laws. Just think. China could crack down on human rights activists and get the US to pay for it. For such a system to be acceptable to Americans, Americans would want some say in assuring justice is being done in the other country. But then, Americans would be asked to give other nations a say in how justice is carried out in the US. No thanks. I choose to keep the system as is.
Ed Cognoski ( http://edsops.blogspot.com )
Defraying costs back to governments
Here's one thing you're overlooking: they're not supposed to be here in the first place! I have no problem paying to jail American citizens or those who are here legally in the first place.
There's a big difference.
The Bill of Rights
I think the real problem is that the Bill of Rights seems to hold no distinction between being a person and being a citizen. Any person, and at times animals, should be treated with an amount of decency and afforded rights.
I am not sure of the circumstances under which Lizcano surrendered himself. I commend the police on their restraint.
I am scared if that is way you truly think. The Mexican Government can only just keep itself from falling into anarchy.
Why not treat everyone who lives in the United States with the same laws. Excuse me for believing this, but I tend to feel that America was created by folks who were more interested in freedom, rather than money, race or creed.
I guess that is why the US is such a popular place.
Why not instead of sending jobs to China, send jobs to places in our own hemisphere?
Wrapped By The Constitution
Yes, the Bill of Rights is wrapped by this thing called The Constitution which does draw a distinction between citizens and non-citizens. And just because someone jumps a fence or swims a river does not entitle them to live here and sponge off of their legal brothers and sisters.
Notwithstanding, I agree with you that everyone deserves to be treated decently and everyone in this country, legally or not, has rights.
But the systematic abuse of our legal Hispanic citizens really needs to stop!
The Mexican government's sponsorship of this activity must stop. Each time the Mexican government helps a person skirt U.S. laws, it is the equivalent of reaching into a Hispanic American citizen's pocket and taking money out of his or her wallet.
So why don't we treat everyone with respect, and ask Mexico to help defray some of these tremendous costs.
Yes, but...
First, the Bill of Rights, it actually was the wrapping paper for the Constition. But, that might make the Declaration of Independence a bow. Which would not work, and fitting in the Articles of Confederation, well that is beyond me. (As a metaphor)
Second, and possibly more to the point. Mexico does not seem to be a place that has the money to pay us. In many places electricity and indoor plumbing are not available. Further there is not much there we want, a bit of oil and lax environmental laws is the best we have. (See Puerto Rico for other places that lack stuff we want and thus can not be a state.)
Call me foolish if I am wrong that the Mexicans once owned many of the places they are now illegal in? Can the cost of the United States bill given to Mexico be defrayed by the US paying Mexico for the Annexation of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and California? Have we not moved the brown colored people off of everything we wanted?
But, the real problem with billing Mexico is that Mexico can not pay to be Mexico. They seem to be almost overrun with drug gangs built by the United States' thirst for Cocaine, and cheap labor. Thus many Mexicans leave.
Illegal immigrants are the best thing since slaves. They will work harder for less. And they are happy to do it. They do not "do the jobs that no one else will do", they are willing to do it for less. And they take the money they earn and send it home.
Next, I did not realize that "the systematic abuse of our legal Hispanic citizens really needs to stop!" I thought that it was the same for them as blacks and poor whites.
Finally, I also did not know that "The Mexican government's sponsorship of this activity must stop." Illegal immigration works well for the United States. A few weeks ago a Walmart construction site got busted by the IMF. They detained over 100 undocumented workers. What about American corperations hiring non citizens?
If we stop paying them to build it, they will not come.
Problems paying?
The bottom line is that California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas can't afford the cost burden placed on them by activity that shouldn't be going on in the first place!
I'm also aware of the Mexican economies-of-scale, work ethic, and the companies who break the law by hiring these guys to work in substandard conditions for low pay.
There are lots of things that need to come into compliance with the law.
Something that nobody has argued against, however, is why Jesse Diaz' idea wouldn't work.
Why couldn't, for instance, the Mexican government grant $0 leases to U.S. oil firms who would then pay the U.S. government market rates for oil? The money could go to the states in need of having costs defrayed.
The Mexican government would, in effect, be paying its bills without having to lift a finger.
With respect to the rest of it, we need to operate in the confines of the law as it exists today. We can revisit the past all day long, but until it's changed: the law is the law. So let's argue from that paradigm.
Why would they do that?
The "law as it exists today" is that U.S. law only applies in the U.S. We can only change the US, unless of course, we are going to get a dual citizenship and also vote in Mexico.
So, letting American companies free access to to Mexican oil is fair deal for me because? I see it enriching Exxon a bit, but doing very little for me. I think the current plan to build a new refinery (first in 30 years) in Arizona and a pipeline to it from the Nationized oil fields in Mexico is a bit better. It will create jobs in Mexico, thus reducing the number of hombres with out jobs coming North.
A more creative solution would be to auction off all the Marijuana we confiscate on the border and auction it off on Ebay in Amsterdamn. I know that is stupid, but I find you being equally as unreasonable.
You write like you expect a different Soveriegn government to change its laws to reflect what is best for you rather than them?
Call me foolish, but I tend to think that Mexico is going to do what is best for Mexico. They are making the United States a free market system. Why pay more for documented labor, when you can hire undocumented labor for less? If we want a free market, why pay more for labor; here or overseas?
It seems Hugo Chavez heard your cry. CITGO, the government owned oil company of Venezuala has dumped a few million barrels of heating oil on the cheap to needy families in the Northeast.
The price of illegal immigrants in the United States has not exceeded the cost of stemming the flow. If it does, the United States will get serious about making it harder to move into the United States.
Marijuana and Amsterdamn
I don't think I've ever heard anyone propose selling confiscated dope on Ebay before! Maybe you're on to something! I may not always agree with what you post, but I love your creativity!
With respect to Mexico, I'm certain that if we were truly interested in defraying costs, there are Mexico state assets in the U.S. that could be levied. The problem is that we've let it get so far out of hand that it is going to take some time to bring it back under control.
I just don't want to see it swing so far in the other direction that we end up not giving potential legal immigrants due consideration. If we concentrate on the money, everything else will follow.
And besides, you've given me a new way to spell "Amsterdam!!"
A can of worms?
It was funny way to spell it. Thanks for appreciating it!
Taxing other countries, our should I say, having the assets of other nations levied, is a can of worms. It would follow that other countries could levy our assets based on decisions made in the courts of their nation.
If you want a quick short term solution, start a reverse tariff. Make it harder to send money out of the United States.
The longer term solution may involve a better way to distribute the nations wealth.
It almost seems that there are two economies at work in the United States. The "Ownership" society and the workers. Some of us call ourselves the Middle class, but that is being made smaller everyday.
When did you last buy something that was made in the United States?
The middle class is the middle man... We have stopped being a producer nation and are consuming nation. We have become a nation that is more interested in making money than making a decent place to live.
It blows me away that we both live in the wealthiest nation in the world and the greatest debtor nation.
Wow, Naphtha9, that's pretty messed up.
What Naphtha said:
"Next, I did not realize that "the systematic abuse of our legal Hispanic citizens really needs to stop!" I thought that it was the same for them as blacks and poor whites."
What I heard:
What about the blacks that are all poor and the whites that are all rich? (You say poor whites, but not "poor" blacks. Is it because you take that as a given?)
Just because someone is white, does that make them more affluent than someone of another race?
If so, I must have been missing out, because I'm not wealthy, and I'm just as white as snow.
Good Point
Yes being white makes you more likely to be affluent. You must doing something wrong if your whiteness has not brought you any benefits as of yet.(Kidding) It seems in our society, someone of color is likely to judged as being less affluent because of the color of skin. And in dealings with police, those of color, or anglo and shabbily dresses tend to be at a disadvantage when dealing with police. Even advantaged people of color seem to have extra troubles, Sean Taylor comes to mind. But, I should have said, poor folks of any color, tend to be less succesful working with the system.
Here is something that has got a bee in my bonnet. They will only tow cars with out insurance that have been in an accident. That seems to encourage people with out insurance to drive off if the can so the car can't be towed.
Also a good point....
Yes, I agree that many people have prejudices against those of color, or those that are poor. Many times these prejudices present themselves in who gets stopped and detained, and who gets off with a warning. But it also makes the difference when those in authority have to decide who to go after:
a) the car that's speeding
b) the car that's blasting " F Da Police " (by NWA, for those interested in this musical "gem" )
Maybe they go after those with..... unique taste in music?
But seriously, going to my school, I see a lot of kids that just ask to be targeted by police as victims of their "brutality" in the way they dress, speak, or behave around our police officers.
When a 20 year old senior in high school "throws" a known gang sign to a cop, while wearing color-coordinated hats, shoes, shirts, etc...... Can you really blame the officer for wanting to beat the tar out of them?
About those cars getting towed because they have no insurance, I'm pretty sure it's clearly stated somewhere that the great state of Texas requires everyone to have insurance. So maybe, just maybe, those cars without insurance get towed..... to encourage people to have insurance on their cars? Maybe it's because those people broke the law?