Tamar Jacoby is so easy to dislike.
One of her particularly annoying tendencies is to be dishonest, and to hide what she truly wants. For example, she call for "more honest immigration quotas". What does that mean? Well, of course it means massive increases in already large-scale legal immigration, but of course she's not going to come out and say that. So instead she uses the word 'honest', which doesn't make one damn bit of sense, and is especially galling coming from her.
And the original letter in question does indeed make it sound like these 'conservatives' belive that foreigners have a right to come to the US to work. It just does.
That she goes on to both speak well of, and criticize the Pence/Hutchison plan is very telling. That a radical like Jacoby likes the Pence plan tell us that the Pence plan is garbage (even though Pence is an otherwise excellent conservative), but the fact that she dislikes it tells us thatt the Pence plan isn't radical, or bad, enough for her tastes.
First of all, the Pence plan requirement about English is just like all the other English requirements from all the other 'reform' bills, in that it is meaningless. Today the law says that to become a citizen, one must demonstrate command of English, yet for some reason we have Voting-Rights Act mandated foreign language ballots all over the nation. Why would that be necessary if we enforced the existing English requirements to immigration/naturalization law? And lets face it, most of the contenders for 08 would be as bad or worse than President Bush on this issue, so any enforcement from them would likely be as nonexistent as it has been under the current President, and the last one, and the one before him, .....
This English thing is just a smokescreen, an empty bone thrown out to try and mollify conservatives.
All the talk about amnestied illegals and guest workers not being eligible for permanent status for so long is also meaningless. The fact is that the 'guests' will be allowed to stay, and since most will have broought over part of their families while still technically 'guests', then its almost a sure bet that most 'guests' will choose to stay. So what if they have to wait a few more years to become citizens. They have the prize -- which is permanent residency in the US. That Jacoby wants to make their path to citizenship quicker is very suspicious seeing as how it is the same thing as increasing the Democratic voter rolls more quickly!
By this time in the article, however, Jacoby has let in a little truth, as she describes the so-called 'temporary guest workers' as what they truly are; long time legal immigrants. Now if only the Jacobys, Kennedys, and McCains of the world could be as honest when labeling their proposals. But I guess its easier to sell the fraudulent 'Earned Citizenship and Guest Worker Program' than it is the more honestly titled 'Multi-Step Amnesty and Gigantic Increase in Permanent Legal Immigration.'
But her honestly is short-lived, as by the close she is back to using calls for a more 'rational, realistic immigration policy.' Why can't you just be honest? Why not admit that your method for solving the illegal immigration problem is to so massively increase permanent legal immigration to such an extent that it meets all or most of the demand of foreigners wanting to come here; and if that means 2, 3, 4, or 5 million per year, then so be it? Why can't they just say that?
And her calls for assimilation would be easier to take seriously if she weren't calling for the above-mentioned enormous increases in immigration, which is not assimilation-friendly at all. Increasing the flow will only weaken assimilatin and strengthen all the forces opposed to it. And of course the onus to adapt should always be on the immigrant. If public resources are required to help the immigrant along, then that is another indictment of immigration policy. Taxpayers should not have to spend their money to futher along what is already a gift.
"Today the law says that to become a citizen, one must demonstrate command of English, yet for some reason we have Voting-Rights Act mandated foreign language ballots all over the nation. Why would that be necessary if we enforced the existing English requirements to immigration/naturalization law?"
Because this law mandates it on two years, not when, and if, they become citizens (which they won't be elibible for, for 17 years)
Very well put and your analysis nails her disingenuous butt right to the wall. The problem with all this talk by the left about helping these immigrants is that when their rhetoric is compared to reality their arguments carry no value.
We're told all they want to do is work, but the reality is they cost us tens of billions in welfare related services......we're told 'all they're looking for is a better life' but we see that many have no occupational or language skills so they latch onto we taxpayers for support, sucking us dry of $ that would be better spent on the future of our own children......we're told they 'do the jobs Americans won't do' but in reality it's obvious many employers choose to let go of Americans and hire illegals so they can EVADE several payroll taxes and pay a substandard wage because they know their employee living expenses will be supplemented by taxpayer $......
It's obvious we've been fed a lot of BS by our (alleged) leaders on this issue and it's sad more Americans have not woken up to this scam.