|
|
May 22, 2013
|
|
Immigration Reform’s Rosy FuturePosted on May 29, 2007WASHINGTON—The immigration bill before the Senate is a source of great agony and a fountainhead of opportunity. Senators in both parties are deeply torn within themselves over what to do. Take, first, the Democrats. A substantial majority of them support giving 12 million or so illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. But they find two features of the bill particularly troublesome. The most disconcerting is a guest worker program through which about 200,000 immigrants would be admitted each year—but only for two years. After that, they would in principle have to go home for a year before they could try to come back again. The problems with this are both moral and practical. Guest workers are a bad idea, period. Workers should not be treated as if they were factors of production such as steel or plastic. They are human beings. The best way to guarantee the rights and wages of all Americans is to give every immigrant the opportunity to become a citizen, with all the rights and duties that entails. Advertisement The other provision that bothers so many Democrats, particularly Latinos, is a point system based on various qualifications, including employment and education, for determining who would get preference for green cards. It would have the effect of making it harder for immigrants to bring in members of their families. This idea has drawn fire from, among others, Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama said the proposed system “places a person’s job skills over his character and work ethic.” In pushing to change this part of the bill, Clinton said tartly: “For those who often speak about family values, this is your opportunity to match your rhetoric with your action.” (Here’s betting that Clinton wins this one.) These are real issues, but they must be balanced against the urgency of doing something about the illegal immigrants already inside the United States. Most Democrats, uncharacteristically, agreed with President Bush when he said at his news conference last Thursday: “You can’t kick them out. Anybody who advocates trying to dig out 12 million people who have been in our society for a while is sending a signal to the American people that’s just not real. It’s an impractical solution.” That’s the opportunity. Politically, it will be much easier for Democrats if a Republican president and a substantial number of Republicans in Congress push through legalization. Otherwise, Democrats might have to bear this burden by themselves—if they should keep control of Congress and win the White House in 2008. However they vote on a final bill, both Clinton and Obama (and every other Democrat running for president) have an interest in getting something done now. For Republicans, the politics are even harder. Their core constituencies are at odds. Business groups definitely want an immigration bill, while many social and cultural conservatives (though not all religious conservatives) think any form of mass legalization is “amnesty” and a sell-out. The loudest voices on the Republican side, including much of the conservative talk show army and many websites, despise the bill. They are furious at Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., for lining up with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., to push this compromise. But Kyl, who had a tougher 2006 re-election campaign than he expected, knows that many voters simply want a solution to the immigration problem. He has used the Democrats’ desire for broad legalization to extract some tough concessions, including a provision postponing the effect of most of the bill until a variety of steps against illegal entry are taken. And many Republicans also know that their share of the growing Latino vote dropped sharply in 2006 because they were seen as blocking action on immigration in Congress. The opportunity for Bush is to get credit for a major achievement at a moment when—well, let’s just say he could use one right now. His party could share in the triumph and staunch the flow of Latino votes the Democrats’ way. Just about everybody has a problem with parts of this bill. But just about everybody has an even bigger problem with the status quo. My hunch is that the politics of opportunity have a slight advantage over whatever agony may be called forth by this imperfect compromise. E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is postchat(at symbol)aol.com. © 2007, Washington Post Writers Group New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By Sean, February 3, 2008 at 3:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Civil Society Helps (civilsocietyhelps.org) helps perpetuate fraud against U.S. citizens. The courts in Minnesota are ill equipped and uninformed about the immigration fraud these kinds of groups promote. See http://www.marthasullivanlaw.com to learn about a common immigration fraud tactic.
With false accusations from an immigrant residency seeker and the help of VAWA laws, a stable American citizen can be reduced to living in poverty. All of your assets can be seized and given to the immigrant residency seeker even if you are not found guilty. You will immediately be forced to surrender a portion of your income to the immigrant residency seeker. The courts will order you to turn your motor vehicle over to the immigrant residency seeker even if the car is in your name and the residency seeker does not have a drivers license. Your illegal immigrant spouse becomes legal and you become illegal. The court system will abuse you and strip you of your rights while social programs that promote immigration fraud thrive.
Report thisBy DEE, May 30, 2007 at 10:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
WHAT JON KYL LEARNED IN 2006 ELECTION CAMPAIGN AGAINST PEDERSON: NO. OF MEXICAN VOTERS IN ARIZONA
THIS PROMPTED HIS LOOKING TO THE FUTURE ELECTION(S) AND THE REVERSAL OF HIS STANCE ON IMMIGRATION.
NATIVE “DESERT RAT”
Report thisAND OBSERVOR
By Janet, May 30, 2007 at 1:56 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
We need this bill in America. There is a long way to go, but at least it’s something. Right now, employers don’t have a way to verify that a person is legal… and if they ask people who “look illegal” for further identification, then they’re sued for discrimination. Don’t punish the employers until there is a better way to make sure all employees are legal. I really don’t think most of us in America (who are working) want our employers to go out of business for these kind of mistakes. We need a working system.
Report thisBy G. Anderson, May 29, 2007 at 11:25 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
It’s clear to me from this bill, that both the Democrats and Republicans have no appreciation or awareness of how hard American’s must work to support themselves in this country.
During the Bush adminstration, and now the Democratic majority, the rules of have changed for American workers, changes in overtime rules, outsourcing, rising gas prices, and food prices, bankrupcy reform.. have put a squeeze on us…
President Bush thinks, it’s ok to be scared when it comes to Al Caeda, but not when it comes to wave after wave of immigrants…
But people are afraid, their afraid of loosing their jobs, and of ending up homeless, because our congressional leadership has robbed us of the belief that if you work hard you will succeed. Instead people would rather gamble, because there’s more chance of economic security won in Las Vegas than in putting long hours in at your job.
If your really want to do something about immigration reform, take a look at the posts before mine. It’s because of US Corporate exploitation in Mexico and Central America that we have immigration problems. And no reform law will ever make a difference as long as that issue exists.
Report thisBy DennisD, May 29, 2007 at 9:02 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
The point isn’t that illegal immigrants will work the low paying jobs Americans won’t, but why are the jobs low paying at all. It isn’t to keep the things we buy cheap in this country. It’s to hide the erosion of the dollars buying power through the governments round the clock printing of colored paper with nothing to back it. Real wages have been virtually stagnant since 1980.
Report thisCut off the job supply and stop the free health care, social services etc. and the illegals will leave voluntarily. Allowing our government to have a new source of uneducated tax slaves to feed off while driving down American citizens wages even further is criminal and could only be something a politician could tell us is good for us. Common sense says differently. How many people are still waiting for Reaganomics to kick in - same idea - another bullshit sales job by the elite to screw the working man and woman.
By Leefeller, May 29, 2007 at 7:45 pm Link to this comment
euni84, I agree with all your points except one.
“I think the misconception in America is that they are stealing our jobs and resources, when in fact, they work jobs that the man who claims his job is stolen wont even consider working.
One example happend in our community which used to be a heavy logging community, some of the mills (who are now out of business from over logging) fired their long time workers, cut wages and hired illegals. I do not blame the workers, but I do blame greedy management. Dennis Kucinich address this in his campaign.
Your point may be correct regarding some types of work, but not all. It is the low wages of the job that is the problem and not be the jobs themselves.
Report thisBy Dawn, May 29, 2007 at 6:48 pm Link to this comment
euni84 is spot on about investing in infrastructure for underdeveloped nations. That is our best immigration policy. Get rid of CAFTA and NAFTA and stop allowing multinational corporations to steal the natural resources of sovereign countries while they deplete their clean water and leave toxic sludge from the manufacture of Pepsi and Coke. By the way, a boycott of Pepsi and Coke products might be a good idea here.
The Ayn Rand Institute would have you believe that it is correct for this corporate theft to go on while indigenous populations starve (such as Nigerians sitting on top of oil fields that Shell is stealing right out from under them). Colonialism is genocidal not quaint. Time for Central Bankers to have an epiphany on the Road to Damascus.
Report thisBy euni84, May 29, 2007 at 5:28 pm Link to this comment
The problem with illegal immigration is that, at the core, poverty exists all over the world, and it is especially prominent in South America. Building a wall or arresting people for attempting to cross the border will not dispel the fact that the prospect of escaping poverty supersedes the consequences. I think the misconception in America is that they are stealing our jobs and resources, when in fact, they work jobs that the man who claims his job is stolen wont even consider working. Why do you think Bush has this visitor program? Because our economy needs illegal immigrants to give you your 99cent hamburger! Why aren’t people looking for a solution? All of these immigration and illegal immigration talks are but band-aids to the problem.
The problem isnt the illegal immigration, its the extreme poverty that people live in. If our government really wanted to halt illegal immigration, it would spend money on helping lesser-developed nations grow economically. Supporting the UN Millennium Development Goals to end poverty would a great step to take, rather than funneling money into inefficient border patrol. According to the Borgen Project, just $19 billion annually would end starvation. Put into perspective, we have a $522 billion military budget. I may be socially liberal, but I am conservative when it comes to the economy and spending the Millennium Goals would be a better place to invest the money than endless war.
Report thisBy Jack Williams, May 29, 2007 at 2:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I’m so disappointed in the democrats, when I heard they had won both houses I was thinking, at last!!
Report thisAfter they sold out to bush, I total give up, what a difference they could have made, instead they turn it into a dog and pony show.
By Leefeller, May 29, 2007 at 10:56 am Link to this comment
I have a hard time believing that the Senate is in great agony over treating workers as human beings instead of factors of production, especially if you compare the Senates agony over the treatment of the people of Iraq.
Mexico has oil, this is due cause by itself if you tell Bush. The vast immigration to the north is caused by low wages caused by big business and the government of Mexico.
If we were to take over Mexico, make it a state. Increase minimum Wages higher then here in the USA, some of the immigrants already here would go back home and few would bother coming north. The Senate would not have the agony and worry about immigration, I do not think people from different states are called immigrants, unless you live in Georga.
The USA could save a fortune, (not that saving money is important) and look how small the southern border of Mexico is, we would even have a smaller border patrol.
Report thisBy fpal, May 29, 2007 at 8:39 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Since in inception, America has actively pursued policies and actions that create an underclass of people. Typically it has been based on race and has its most visibility in its socio-economic effects, there are excessive slums, poor, disenfranchised, uneducated people.
The guest worker program continues this disgraceful aspect of American history and life.
Report thisBy Greg Bacon, May 29, 2007 at 6:37 am Link to this comment
No jobs for US citizens without Homeland Security approval
Submitted by Canada IFP on Sat, 2007-05-26 18:00.Americas | United States | News
US citizens who apply for a job will need prior approval from Department of Homeland Security under the terms immigration bill passed by the Senate this week.
American Civil Liberties Union pointed out that the DHS’s Employment Eligibility Verification System (EEVS) is error plagued and if the department makes a mistake in determining work eligibility, there will be virtually no way to challenge the error or recover lost wages due to the bills prohibitions on judicial review.
Even current employees will need to obtain eligibility approval from the DHS Within 60 days of the Immigration Reform Act of 2006 becoming law.
http://pressesc.com/01180202266_eevs
The line forms to the left. BTW, the salary has been cut in half and there are no more benefits.
Why? Hmm, seems like we have an abundance of candidates for your former job.
GOOD LUCK!
P.S. Why aren’t any of the so-called “progressive left” writing about what is so glaring about this amnesty bill?
It will give the Bush-Cheney War Machine several hundred thousand more “volunteers”, to be used as more cannon fodder for the Empire’s never ending wars.
Report this