Well, well, what a very hateful and vindictive response.
How interesting....
And you seem to know all about me and my personality, as well...
Have we met somewhere, perhaps?

This is all about mutual respect and not slandering people for expressing a different opinion.
Your insidious way of attacking me for expressing a different opinion than your own is shocking and reprehensible.
Do you advocate censorship as well and curtailing of free speech?

It´s obvious that your disapprove of views who are critical to your own way of thinking and that this riles you for whatever reason.
A case of "Stockholm syndrome", perhaps?

I fully respect your opinions and ask you to kindly respect my right to express my opinions in a frank and open exchange of views.
Is that too much to ask for?

And yes, I AM a journalist, actually quite successful by the way, and yes, I stand by my previous comments to 110%.
I truly believe that international travel for ordinary people is likely to become more and more of a hindrance and burden in different ways over the next 10 years and not just regarding the US.

Let´s just agree to disagree on this obviously very contentious point.
And again, I very much resent your condemnation of me as a person and find that utterly uncalled for.

That will never happen. Canadians will always be visa free and there will always be a VWP. If they were moving in that direction, why did they just add several additional countries to the VWP? Greece? South Korea? Hungary? Czech Rep? They aren't eliminating it, they are expanding it.

Canada lets a lot of people in that the US doesn't want to come south. It's not unheard of for a terrorist to be caught at the Canadian border.

Up until a year or so ago, Canada allowed Mexico to come without a visa. So people from Mexico could spend a few hundred bucks, fly to Canada, and then try to walk over to the US.

If you have a fence around your house, would it make sense to have a big hole in it on one side?

Do you think if they increase security on the southern border that the people will just throw up their hands and go home, or try to find another way?

Don't play the journalism card like it will automatically give you more credibility.

I have to agree with you somewhat on this. Many travel restrictions have been put in place since 9/11 - by many governments, not just the US. I think this trend will continue - although i do not think visa free travel for Canadians or the Visa Waiver program will disappear any time soon.

I am not a journalist by trade, but I have heard anecdotal evidence of illegal immigrants from South America (not Mexico) sometimes transiting through Canada instead of Mexico because the Canadian/American border has historically been viewed as less guarded than our southern border.. I would not be surprised if this trend applies to illegal immigrants from other parts of the world, nor would i be surprised if this also applies to other forms of illegal transportation so to speak.

As a journalist, why don't you take a closer look at this, and come back with your findings. This is a serious suggestion, it is not meant as an attack on you, your profession or your views expressed on this site.

Down here in my neck of the woods, it isn't uncommon for husband and wife to be related by something other than marriage! Yes, seriously!

Ian

You know this is mathematically impossible, right?

Ian

Ian,

Yes, I´m aware of that....

I was up in Vancouver recently to have my regular meeting with USCBP officers up there. I was chatting with the assistant PD, and our exchange went something like this: "We're tightening up around here."

"You mean: the Canadian side of things?"

"Yeah. I used to work the Yuma [Ariz] sector and also the San Ysidro [Calif] sector. All of us know that when it comes to unlawful employment that takes away jobs from most Americans, it's the Canadian border that's the hot spot. I'm no fool. I know that the handy-man or the fruit-picker from México is not the threat to US employment that the educated Canadian worker is."

"Would you say your interdiction efforts should be less along the Southern Border and greater along with Northern Border?"

"Well, unlawful workers aren't supposed to be here. Period. But my family eats pears, broccoli, and strawberries, too. I know what would happen to the prices for everyday people if we locked down the Southern Border."

"Is this Agency policy now?"

Long, long pause. "I'm just telling you what I observe."

THIS from the assistant PD!

Incidentally, I also had a conversation with a Congressman on the House subcommittee on immigration. There is discussion of doing away with the provisions which make Canadians visa-exempt -- for security reasons.

It is NOT clear that this would ever get out of committee or that it would make it past the Senate, but the proposal is on the table.

For those of you who like the visa-exempt status of Canadians, I would not be too casual about thinking that this exemption will never change.

JCraigFong,

I´m referring to your posts # 22 and #23, which I found extremely interesting and informative.
Unfortunately, what you are relaying here regarding the as yet unofficial stance regarding the US-Canadian border in various respects, tend to corroborate my worst suspicions, some of which I was severely lambasted for by a well-known poster on this board earlier today.
She decried me for having a negative personality and spreading doom and gloom, when I was more or less prophesizing a frighteningly similar kind of future development as indicated by your summing-up of your recent conversations with the relatively high-ranking CBP officer at one of the US-Canadian border sections and with one Congressman on the House Subcommittee on Immigration.

I sincerely pray and hope to be proven wrong, but your two posts there confirmed my worst fears as for what might be coming to the Canadian-US border in the not too distant future, step by step.

What adds to this potentially dismal outlook is the fact that there is generally very little difference on this issue between most Democrats and Republicans.
A gradual tightening of the US-Canadian border and the US borders in general is part of an unfortunate siege mentality, which has been further underpinned not only by the horrible events in September 2001 but also by the severe economic recession.

Fortress America, indeed!

I have crossed at Buffalo/Niagara a few times in the past few weeks (trip to Niagara, trip to Buffalo). I am an E3. The first time, I got cursory questions about where I was going and how I knew my travelling companion.

This time, she asked who the E1 was.... doh. I told her the E3 is the primary visa holder. She asked where I work and what I do, and how I know my travelling companion.

Both times I did carry my LCA and visa paperwork etc, but noone asked for it. These were my first experiences at a land border so I don't know if it was usual or not. The longest I had to wait was about 15 minutes and that was a long weekend.

After almost 30 years in the legal profession, I have learned that one will rarely lose a wager, betting that the US will get more conservative in its approach to immigration -- whether at the border, or due to enforcement measures, or benefit programs. True: there have been times when the nation has lived according to its principles -- in immigration and elseways -- but I'd have to say that the devil is in the details.

Having said that, I think I recognize and understand in those who might challenge or be frightened by your observation about the border a wish -- realistic or not -- that it might not be so. That this nation will live up to its highest self, rather than reacting to its basest fears. As one who has specialized in civil rights and constitutional law for so many years, I understand the frustration, seeing my country move one way while our best principles exalt us to go another.

Finally, I am certainly no stranger to being attacked by some contributors on B.E. I will no longer get into a spitting match with such a person, and I leave such a poster to assert what he likes, despite the fact that people could rely on such postings to their detriment. I wish I could say that you should not take such attacks personally; however, I think I understand that it is hard not to do so.

In the end, I remind myself that we must be better than our worst selves. Sometimes, I succeed.

I have only crossed the US-Mexican border twice into the US (last time in 2008), and on both occasions I wasn't asked any immigration questions. Judging from the speed at which the cars were moving, neither were most other travellers. The CBP officers seemed to be mostly interested in what we had bought in Mexico. On the last occasion, the only Mexican in our group (a LPR) was asked when he immigrated to the US, and that was it.

Thanks JCF, the voice of calm and reason. You're so right IMHO that one day in the not to distant future, the Can/Am border will be tightened even more than it is today. Also think that they will institute a type of system similar to the ESTA for Canadians who that they, too, can be checked out before crossing. Will the need to do so be only because they are fearing illegal immigration by Canucks? Don't think so. Honestly believe it is because of the high useage of the Can/Am border by illegal immigrants to Canada who find this an easier way into the US.

Remember how upset and up in arms my in-laws where to learn that they would need passports to come to the US. Perhaps they will do something like our NYS driver's licenses that, for a higher fee, include our US citizenship as part of the drive's license and is good for the border crossing.

Never in our 13 years of courtship and marriage has my husband been grilled at the US portion of the border but he has incurred rude and obnoxious behavior by several Canadian agents when attempting to enter is own country.

That's only anecdotal evidence, though - just like one time a few years ago when I crossed back into the US by car after spending 4 days on a visit to Canada. I was still an LPR at the time, and tried to hand the inspector my red norwegian passport and green card. The inspector did not even look at my documents, and waved me through after a question on if I had anything to declare (two six packs of Canadian beer and a carton of cigarettes from the duty free store) and confirming twice that I resided in New Jersey based on the tags on my vehicle.

Again, what does that experience prove? Nothing, it's anecdotal evidence. The CBP inspector was in a good mood that day.

On the other hand, the fact that I now as a naturalized US citizen have to carry a passport when I cross into the US by land from either Canada or Mexico support J's observation that immigration procedures are slowly tightening up.

Another example to support this observation: I entered on a K1 visa in the summer of 1984, and was granted permanent residence in early 1985. Yes, AOS took a while back then, too. I was given a green card with no expiration date, which I carried until I naturalized in 2008. There were no requirement to remove conditions on my residency after two years back then. The requirement to remove conditions on permanent residency based on a marriage less than two years old was not introduced until 1986. At that time, green cards with a 10 year expiration date was also introduced.

And don't get me started on the 1996 changes in immigration law and the effect they have on many US citizens and their families.

So, as an immigrant who has resided in the US for 26 years, I have to agree with J's observation that the trend in immigration regulations over the years has been towards making things stricter.

That being said, I do not believe this trend is limited to the US. There is a growing resentment towards current immigration and asylum policy in Norway for example, and if the Norwegian media is anything to go by, there seem to be a trend towards stricter enforcement and stepped up deportation of people with denied asylum claims.

Naturally, since I was born in Norway I don't follow other countries as closely, but I would not be too surprised to find similar trends elsewhere.

It's probably all rooted in human nature. We are territorial beings after all, - what is the purpose of fencing in a suburban yard other than marking our territory? No matter how sophisticated we think we have become over the last 10,000+ years or so, we are not that biologically different from our cave dwelling ancestors. Back then protecting one's territory was a survival mechanism, and that instinct is still in all of us today, whether we like it or not. Think about it for a second, what is a border really? At the most basic, it is nothing more than a line in the sand marking the edge of what a large tribe has defined as their territory.

In an ideal world there would be no need for borders or marking territory, and we would all live happily ever after. However, I am a realist and know that Utopia does not exist in real life, nor will it ever exist in my lifetime - if ever.

Discover has a point. We are talking about anecdotes. However, one value of a bulletin board like B.E. is the fact that when we aggregate enough anecdotes, we begin to see patterns.

Others might try to console themselves and others that the regulations preclude such patterns. Or that the border guards aren't supposed to do such things. Or that the law was not intended for such a result. Anyone with real-world experience with Department of Homeland Security knows that regulations are broken as often as they are observed by the regulators.

The patterns tell us that our experiences are real, despite what the regulations and law say. One of the hardest parts of immigration law practice is knowing when to rely on the law and when to rely on experience.