estion is, do we address this by devoting more taxpayer dollars to enforcing immigration laws-which will always be broken-or do we raise the rights of these already present immigrants to the point where legal citizens of the United States can compete with them for employment opportunities? Obviously, the second course of action would be a blow to businesses, many of which thrive upon the availability of cheap illegal labor. However, it would also aid in narrowing the ever-growing gap between the rich and the poor in the United States-a major social, economic, and humanitarian problem. Still, the fundamental problem with choosing to more strictly enforce immigration laws is that it is a course of action that will inevitably cost billions of dollars, and simultaneously offer no significant social or economic payoff to working class Americans-the very individuals who are impacted most negatively by illegal immigration.
             One of the most pervasive problems with the notion of stopping illegal immigration is the perception that it is actually an occurrence that can actually be ceased through direct enforcement. There are an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States today (Weisman). This is a proportion of our nation approximately 50 percent greater than the size of New York City. To imagine that this many individuals can possibly be located and returned to their country of origin, at a cost that American taxpayers are capable of spending, is highly unlikely. Although the current Immigration Amnesty Bill being debated in the congress includes pathways by which current illegal immigrants can become legal immigrants, it also includes border security features, which will come at a substantial cost to current American citizens. These increases in security include: "Hire 18,000 new border patrol agents; Erect 200 miles of vehicle barriers and 370 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border; Erect 70 ground-based radar and ...