On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 18:31:56 -0500, sechumlib
wrote:
>On 2007-01-26 15:10:14 -0500, Hatunen said:
>
>> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 18:37:59 -0500, sechumlib
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I know this sounds insensitive. Frankly, I don't care. The US
>>> government has decided it is more secure to have passports presented at
>>> the border. Right or wrong, it's their prerogative to do so. Anyone who
>>> doesn't want to live with that constraint can simply quit visiting.
>>
>> It's not quite that simple. Much of the economy of Southern
>> Arizona is dependent on easy border crossing for locals. I have
>> seen estimates that as much as one-fourth of the money made in
>> Tucson from Christmas shoppers is from Mexican Christmas
>> shoppers.
>
>And why does that make it less "simple"? The same is true in northern
>border areas, with respect to Canadian shoppers. Doesn't make any
>difference to the Feds - at least not THESE Feds.
Because people won't pay for a passport. They may pay for a passcard
which is under development for land and sea travel and is supposed to
be a lot cheaper.
Passport cost $97 which is not cheap. Unless you happen to be rich.
This will effect the people who are day trippers that go over
everyday. Especially people who visit family. They will still
require a passport even if you have dual citizenship which I think is
stupid. They are already estimating 3 billion in lost tourist
revenue or more loss for Canada, Mexico and United States and other
tourist areas, if they do the land and sea requirement for passport
However, I think the U.S. congress will delay this passport
requirement so the Department of State and Department Homeland
Security can agree on what type of rfid passcard to use.
Greg Rozelle |