Randal Archibold of the New York Times offers the two-screener "At the U.S. Border, the Desert Takes a Rising Toll", mostly about one Mexican who tried and failed to be smuggled across the desert, dying along the way. While the emotionalism isn't as incredibly high as it could be, it certainly appears to be an attempt to make the reader want to do something to end these border deaths.
And, in fact, there are only two things that would greatly reduce the number:
1. Open the border completely and pass out citizenships or at least work permits at the border, or
2. Stringently enforce our immigration laws so even people in deepest Mexico realize that trying to cross won't work: they won't be able to find work and they won't have access to non-emergency public services.
The U.S. is never going to do the first, leaving the second as the only realistic option to reduce the number of incidents.
Oddly enough, the New York Times is somewhere between the two. In fact, by excusing illegal immigration every chance they get, they help the U.S. become a sort of attractive nuisance . Every time someone tries to build a fence around a neighbor's swimming pool, the NYT advocates cutting holes in the fence.
In brief, the NYT is partly responsible for the border deaths they decry.
Immigration2007b · Sat, 09/15/2007 - 08:40 · Importance: 1