?William Finnegan in his 2010 article, "Borderlines," offers a detailed and informed take on the state of the immigration system within the United States. In his opening arguments, Finnegan elaborates on what he considers a disjuncture between the politics of illegal immigration and the reality. Accordingly, there have been calls from over sixteen members of Congress to increase border security, stating that “violence in the vicinity of the U.S.-Mexico border continues to increase at an alarming rate”. Finnegan dismisses this claim as untrue, stating that the Southern border, though far from being secure, is in better shape than it has been in years. He further laments that illegal immigration, though difficult to measure, has been declining. Finnegan supports his stance by presenting some F.B.I statistics which records the four safest big cities in the United States as San Diego, Phoenix, El Paso, and Austin, which are all ironically located in border States. ? Finnegan, in an attempt to bring to the fore what he considers the real problem of immigration notes that the problem is not a matter of “violent criminals storming the walls of our peaceful towns and cities”. Instead, it’s a socioeconomic issue of what to do with the estimated “eleven million unauthorized residents who are already here”. Finnegan further asserts that these immigrants are essential to large sectors of the economy, particularly as it relates to food supply. It is alleged that “the Department of Labor calculates that more than half the crop pickers in the United States are undocumented”. This according to Finnegan speaks to the economic importance of these blacklisted immigrants. Such sentiments are not held by Finnegan alone, as later in the article he examines Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s advocacy of immigration reform. Bloomberg was quoted as labeling the current immigration policy as “national suicide” in his call for a path to legal statu