Mexicans are here already. Let’s make them Americans who will want to live in the former nation of Mexico.
Since we obviously cannot safeguard our border with Mexico, why not just annex Mexico? Let’s declare Mexico a protectorate of the United States and set about governing it in a benevolent, but self-interested way. In time, we could incorporate it as several new States.
The current illegal flow of Mexicans and Central Americans to the United States constitutes the largest diaspora in modern history. An estimated 10% of Mexico’s population of more than 107 million people is now living in the United States. About 15% of Mexico’s labor force is working in the United States and one in every seven Mexican workers migrates to the United States.
The immediate benefits of annexation are obvious. Mexico’s oil industry is its largest provider of revenue, but is very poorly managed. Its vast revenues are not benefiting the Mexican people who clearly feel compelled to emigrate to the United States. The Mexican government relies on oil income because its national tax evasion rate is more than 40%.
Given America’s growing need for oil, annexing Mexico and denationalizing its oil industry would permit the investment necessary to upgrade it while providing less reliance on foreign sources in the turbulent Middle East or Venezuela.
The second largest source of income for Mexico is the remittances Mexicans who are illegally in the United States send home. It is currently estimated at between $23 and $25 billion. That is equal to the foreign aid the United States annually provides to the entire world. It is nearly equal to what Mexico’s oil industry generates every year.
It is U.S. money that is literally going south while native-born and naturalized Americans are required to fund our education and health systems that provide free care for illegal Mexicans and their families, a vast number of whom qualify for welfare as well. The U.S. is literally importing poverty. Economist Robert J. Samuelson has noted that, “the ranks of the poor are constantly replenished. Since 1980, the number of Hispanics with incomes below the government’s poverty line (about $19,300 in 2004 for a family of four) has risen 162 percent.”
Meanwhile, a June 2004 agreement between the U.S. and Mexico that is waiting for President Bush’s signature would literally bankrupt the Social Security system if approved by Congress. The Totalization Agreement could allow millions of illegal Mexicans to draw billions of dollars from the U.S. Social Security Trust Fund.
A study by the United Nations Population Fund concluded that remittances to Mexico are, in fact, not helping that nation’s economy. The money is primarily spent on groceries and other daily expenses. A study by the Banco de Mexico, its central bank, came to the same conclusion, noting that reliance on remittances was itself a cause of poverty since it provides fewer incentives to seek other sources of income.
By annexing Mexico and encouraging American business and industry to expand there, creating new jobs, improving that nation’s prosperity, Mexicans would have less need to relocate in America. Even a Mexican government spokesman, addressing a press conference in January 2006, acknowledged that many of the illegals are actually seeking “a better condition of life despite the fact that they had work here.”
Then there’s the issue of crime. Mexico is a major corridor for the drug cartels that feed the addictions of American citizens. The cartels are violent and have corrupted the governance of Mexico at all levels. By annexing Mexico, we can more effectively battle this pernicious enemy that already threatens the peace of many southwestern cities and communities.
There is the language problem and, frankly, English will have to become a mandatory second language for Mexicans if they insist on coming to America to work or live here. Many Americans throughout the Southwest have had to learn Spanish just to converse with their neighbors and to conduct business. For generations, Puerto Ricans have routinely learned and used both languages.
Will we allow Mexicans to vote in American elections? Yes, but only when they become Americans! Initially we would need a long period of assimilation and acceptance of American values in the same fashion we currently mandate for those seeking citizenship through our naturalization process.
American laws and jurisdiction to facilitate trade, guarantee the rights of their citizens, and initiate a crackdown on the drug cartels that threaten the police, the courts, and other Mexican leaders would replace current Mexican laws.
There is more than a bit of arrogance for thousands of Mexicans, illegal aliens, to march in the streets of American cities demanding that we grant them privileges equal to Americans without the responsibilities of citizenship, i.e., paying taxes and obeying our laws.
The greatest benefit of annexation is that America would avoid becoming a de facto Third World nation.
Mexico would not cease to exist. It would become a functioning element of an expanded United States of America. Mexican-Americans would enjoy the full benefits of citizenship while retaining their unique history and culture. In the past, America has achieved this with millions of former Irish, Italian, Russian, German, and other nationalities.
Mexico as a separate nation on our southern border threatens our sovereignty by virtue of openly and deliberately encouraging millions of its citizens to ignore our laws, enter our nation illegally, and benefit from our economy.
Mexico as a protectorate and, eventually, a part of America, is a realistic, rational solution. Mexicans are here already. Let’s make them Americans who will want to live in the former nation of Mexico.
Impossible, you say? Probably yes, and, in truth, I am content to let Mexico be Mexico, but if you have begun to see how impossible it is for the United States to continue absorbing millions of illegal immigrants, then you will understand why the defeat of the immigration “reform” legislation is a victory for the sovereignty and security of the United States.
ACaruba@aol.com
http://www.anxietycenter.com/
Read more articles by Alan Caruba














You have got to be kidding. Mexico is almost three times the size of Iraq in term of geography and population. If you think the US is having trouble in that country just think what would happen in Mexico. We don't need to build a fence or occupy the country. All this country has to do is put the 101st Airborne, the 1st Cavalry Division and the 1st I.D. on the border and keep illegals out. The military after all was created and funded to protect the United States. Too many politicans are making something easy look very complicated when it doesn't have to be. But then, that is what politicans are suppose to do.
Danny L. McDaniel
Comment by DannyLMcDaniel | June 11, 2007
Read it and weep…a serious Mexican initiative has already been taken, much to the ignorance
of the American people.
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_final.pdf
Comment by mtrust | June 11, 2007
I agree with placing the military on the border but only if they are allowed to use their weapons, unlike the border patrol agents which are being railroaded daily. Mexicans forget that our troops were in Chapultepec park during the Mexican American war and we could have kept Mexico then but who wanted it?
Close the border, no amnesty, and confiscate the possessions of employers choosing to use illegals. Let the illegals try to get by without a job! Ask citizenship on every traffic stop, take vehicles of every unlicensed driver off the road for a month and deport the illegals.
Comment by Mickey G | June 11, 2007
This is one of my favorite ideas, for most of the reasons Mr Caruba gave.
But - not an annexation - and maybe not all of Mexico.
I think this would be better than the idea of a Guest Worker program.
I suggest we invite the states of Mexico which border the U.S. to vote to join the United States, with (initially) a similar status to Puerto Rico. We should offer the opportunity to become naturalized U.S. citizens via the same process any other immigrant follows, but we could make getting a green card easier to get than now. After some percentage - say 50% - become naturalized U.S. citizens, then consider a Constitutional amendment to admit them as U.S. states. we ought to consider the same for Puerto Rico.
BUT - we should not automatically grant them Medicare, Social Security, etc! They should have to pay a fee to get into those - how about $5,000 or so - instead of a "fine" like has been proposed in the current immigration debate.
We should look to the example of East Germany: It was expensive for West Germany to re-integrate the former communist East, and standards of living are not yet fully equal. But the Germans saw it as the right thing to do.
Comment by gz9gjg | June 11, 2007
Danny,
Iraq and Mexico are not the same. The situations are completely different. While Mexico would not be without it's unique challenges, it would be nowhere as difficult as Iraq (as Iraq…even with us barely trying…is nowhere as challenging as Vietnam was). Pointing to Iraq (which is slowly progressing, despite it's problems), and saying "They have problems…so we'd never be able to fix Mexico" is oversimplification to the point of absurdity.
It's almost as silly as saying "Hey, the paralysed kid can't run a marathon…therefore we can't teach the retarded kid to read."
Comment by WolvenBear | June 11, 2007
I think a better idea would be some sort of time-share program. At the present rate of illegal migration, Mexico should be pretty well empty in no more than 20 years. So we simply swap spaces! We'll deport all of the American citizens to Mexican land, and give the remaining Mexican holdouts in Mexico the option. Then we'll illegally immigrate the former American citizens back into the U.S. gradually over the course of several decades, and then we'll swap back again. We could do that every 60-100 years or so. It'd be a fun!
Comment by Patrick Mulligan | June 12, 2007
gz9gig-
Puerto Ricans are American citiizens by birth. Any person born on territorial soil of the US is an American citizen. Yes, a Puerto Rican can run for President of the United States too. Puerto Ricans have a role in the selection process of both major political parties in the selection process of the nominees. Puerto Rico also has a spot at the two national convention but because of their territory status instead of statehood they cannot vote for President. It is a misconception that Puerto Ricans are semi-Americans. In fact, they are as American as myself and I was born in Indiana. If a Puerto Rican leaves the island and resides in one of the 50 states he or she can regristar to vote. Remember all the babies born on American warships during the evacuation of South Vietnam in 1975? Each one born upon an American flag vessel was a native born American!
WolvenBear-
You need considerable therapy to think that to invade and occupy Mexico would be easy! That sort of think has got us into trouble in Iraq. The only thing Americans will say after we exit that country will be, "What happened to the rest of the world while we were gone?"
Danny L. McDaniel
Lafayette, Indiana
Comment by DannyLMcDaniel | June 14, 2007
Actually, Puerto Ricans are Federal Citizens, just as if they were born in D.C.,
whereas those who were born in a State of the Union are Sovereign State Citizens.
Those babies born overseas in time of war are considered Sovereign State Citizens.
I was under the impression that the suggestion 'to invade Mexico' was tongue-in-cheek.
We have no Constitutional authority to invade anyone, either Mexico or Iraq.
Comment by mtrust | June 14, 2007
mtrust-
You said."We have no cvonstitutional authority to invade anyone." The Constitution does not prohibit it either. Find a clause that prohibits the United States from taking such agressive action. The Constitution does have a clause that requires a declaring war, but the Constitution does not say how to undeclare a declared war. Usually ended by Presidential proclamation. The Second World War didn't offical end until 12:00pm, December 31, 1946 - a year and one-half after the japanese surrender aboard the USS Missouri. It seems Truman deemed it necessary to have the phamtom "war powers" to demobilize the military.
Danny L. McDaniel
Comment by DannyLMcDaniel | June 16, 2007
"The Constitution does not say how to undeclare a declared war"…
OK, so, let me get this straight…the Constitution doesn't prohibit an undeclared war,
but if we delcare an undeclared war, then the Constitution doesn't tell us how to
'undeclare' an undeclared war?…and we can thank President Truman for setting
this example for President Bush?…Pretzel logic to the tune of over 3500 dead
American soldiers, and hundreds of thousands of dead innocents in Iraq.
Pretzel logic that we have saved more lives by taking more lives, all because lives
were going to be lost anyway? That is beyond patently absurd, and just another
example of our government's contempt for the American people, that we went
to Iraq to begin with or continue to stay in the face of the people's overwhelming
opposition. Pretzel logic to say we should have never gone but now that we are
there we can never leave. Just plain stupidity, insulting the heart of the American
people at the expense of the lives of their sons and daughters.
Comment by mtrust | June 17, 2007
DannyLMcDaniel-
I meant that the Mexican states, if thewy vote to join the US, could initially have a status like Puerto Rico, which is not a state, with a path to becoming states (which we ought to also offer to Puerto Rico and any other US Territory). Puerto Rico became part of the US many years ago, but it still isn't a state. If we invite Mexican states to vote to join the US, how do we handle the citizenship issue? I think they should be able to get green cards (or something similar) easier, and have a path to US citizenship and US Statehood.
I also think we need to extend a similar invitation to Cuba when Castro goes.
Comment by gz9gjg | June 21, 2007
The Federal United States isn't interested in more 'states of the union'.
They have an irrevocable international mindset, demonstrated in the
fact that this President has already signed a joint agreement with both
Canada and Mexico to construct a massive highway joining our three
countries. Our duplicitous Congress will only continue with more of
the same 'feel-good rhetoric', all the while facilitating an international
agenda. They will most likely convince Americans that it is in their
best financial interest that Mexicans attain whatever status they need
to obtain SS#'s, get jobs, and pay taxes. As it is, Congress has offered
only promises and budget delays regarding 'the wall' being built. It
will never happen. I repeat… It will never happen.
Comment by mtrust | June 23, 2007