Steven Hill of the CFR-linked "New America Foundation" offers "Time for a Tex-Mex Marshall Plan". In brief, he proposes ending illegal immigration by ending the U.S.: creating an "American-Mexican union" out of the two previously independent, sovereign countries with borders and things like that. (Fear not, un-Canadian hosers: Canada would be jealous and "not wishing to be left out, would ask for inclusion").

Of course, we'll need to give Mexico "massive subsidies" in order to get them to reform (of course, most of that would go to corrupt officials and criminals, but whatever). However, the upside is that "[f]ewer Mexicans would then want to emigrate north. Instead, they'd stay home, becoming consumers of U.S. products."

If all of this sounds like an un-American joke, unfortunately, it isn't. After all, he was able to get it printed in the Washington Post. And, here's the board for the Foundation:

newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=boardof&DeptID=12

See also Crack Based Editorials and note that one of NAF's fellows is Gregory Rodriguez of the Los Angeles Times.

Treason is so specifically-defined, so it's unclear whether those who attempt to make Hill's dream a reality would be traitors or not. But, should anyone who proposes such ideas really be considered an American at all? They aren't proposing, for instance, adding a new state to the union. What they're proposing would replace the U.S. with some other entity, with a new set of laws and reporting at least partially to Mexican and Canadian officials. Shouldn't they be considered akin to those who wanted to establish Communism in the U.S.?