Administration Acknowledges "NON-AMNESTY" WILL COMPLETELY ABOLISH IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS

I'm told that Margaret Spellings from the White House spoke today at a forum on the president's immigration plan at the CATO Institute. She made it clear that the plan would definitely include high-skilled workers. In other words, it would make H-1B obsolete.

(Among other things, it would mean no cap and no prevailing-wage requirement, though as I've often said, neither the cap nor the prevailing-wage requirement afford any real protection to U.S. workers anyway.)

Spellings' remarks should not come as a surprise to anyone who reads this e-newsletter. As I said in my posting here last week (enclosed below), what people (including many immigration experts) don't understand is that BUSH'S PLAN IS NOT ABOUT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. For the reasons I gave in my earlier posting (i.e. the employers of illegals today would not want to pay health insurance, Soc. Security, workman's comp etc.), most jobs done by illegals now would CONTINUE to be done by illegals. It wouldn't make even a small dent in illegal immigration.

Instead, the real effect (and likely, the real intention) of the Bush plan would be to open virtually all jobs in the U.S. to the lowest bidder--and, given the disparities in standards of living, the lowest bids will be very low indeed. In terms of tech jobs, I said last week that even if there were a stipulation that jobs covered by the Bush program not normally require a Bachelor's degree, employers would find loopholes around such a stipulation. But that was merely a "what if" statement on my part, certainly no based on any reports that Bush had been considering such a stipulation, and now Spellings has stated explicitly that that is all it was; i.e. she has confirmed that Bush has no intention of imposing such a stipulation.

If Bush does try to get Congress to draft legislation for his proposal, I guarantee you that virtually everything you see in the press (including from "talking head" economists) will focus on the proposal's relation to illegal immigration. But remember, it is NOT about illegal immigration, and would in fact have almost no effect on illegal immigration.

We are all waiting to see what the details of the Bush guest worker plan will be. But based on the broad outlines we've been told so far, it appears to me that this legislation, if passed, would produce a sea change in American society. Allow me to make a few predictions:

1. The jobs currently being done by "undocumented" workers will CONINUE to be done by them. They are hired today because they are cheap labor. The notion implicitly put forth by the Bush administration that the employers in the agricultural, restaurant, construction etc. industries will want to hire Bush's guest workers, complete with medical benefits, Social Security taxes, Workman's Comp etc. is absolutely absurd. In other words, the bill would not even make a dent on the main problem it's supposed to address.

2. The visa program will not say "Only current or former illegal aliens need apply, and only low-skilled jobs may be filled under this program." Most of the people who use the program will be filling positions in the mainstream job market. As long as the foreign workers have good English--and there are tons of people around the world with fluent enough English--there is no reason they couldn't be hired as clerical workers, insurance claims adjusters, airline ticket agents, teachers, you name it. The hotel industry, for instance, makes it sound like it would use the program to hire maids, but there really isn't any job in the whole damn hotel that couldn't be filled with a guest worker. They'd love to come and work for wages at the entry level or below entry-level for those occupations.

And even the programmer and engineer jobs would be vulnerable. Sure, the program structure could include a provision saying something like, "Not for jobs normally requiring a Bachelor's degree," but so what? The employers would suddenly decide that many programming and engineering jobs don't need a Bachelor's. If it weren't so sad, it would be comical to watch, say, Sun Microsystems, use this new program to hire sub-Bachelor's workers for the same jobs that Sun is now insisting require a Bachelor's degree (the requirement for H-1B).

3. Last year I myself proposed the idea of a jobs database, at which Americans would get first crack with guest workers being eligible for whatever can't be filled by Americans, in my H-1B reform proposal (see http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/Summary.pdf). But my proposal is constructed as an integrated package in which all the parts depend on each other. Bush's guest worker program undoubtedly won't be like this. It will simply say that if the employer can't fill the job with an American, then he can hire a guest worker. Well, all the employer will have to do is set the wage low (even entry level would probably be sufficiently low, especially since the large influx of workers would have the effect of making the entry-level wage lower and lower), and bingo!, there will be a "shortage" of American applicants. And that isn't even mentioning all the other tricks employers use today in defining a position in such a manner that only a foreign worker would qualify.

4. Fortunately for the tech industry, most programmers and engineers are wimps who won't fight the outrages going on with H-1B, but if as I predicted above this program hits the general middle in a big way (note that no one has mentioned a cap for the program), I can picture the populace in a very ugly, riotous mood.

>At least I'm hoping that's what the man's thinking.
"You're obviously a very hopeful sort."

HA!!
Hear that Sultan & Mudboy!?
(~from one cynic to another techie, it's a private joke.)

"Scrutiny? For education? The education lobby could say that we need to sacrifice our first borns for them, (we basically do already anyway) and most would go along."

I'm telling you, the world of acadamia has been without a *shred* of accountability for wayyyyy too long; &, yes I *hope* that's about to end.

That said, lemme share a recent experience I had which parallels this discussion in a neat kind of way.

In the process of buying an item I had the opportunity to have a conversation with a very nice young man from the great state of North Carolina.
The youngster's attending a university somewhere in Charlotte & 2 years away from earning a BS in EET with IT his interest.
Since he claimed the economy in his home state (& city) for his area of interest was presently in the shitter, that'd mean he'd -- begrudgingly -- probably have to begin thinking about the necessity of his having to move to another city if he wanted a chance of landing a job.

After telling him IT was in the pits nearly everywhere (and why), that I'd been a EE & know how tough engineering can be to break into if one has no experience? He had a host of questions concerning what he might do to enhance his employment opportunities.

I told him matter-of-factly & without hesitation what he should do is go down to the local electrician's local, just prior to graduating, & sign up for a union apprenticeship program.

The kid was floored that I'd suggest such a thing.
He was naturally very curious *why* I'd tell him to become a "grunt"; especially, after he'd invested the time, effort & expense of acquiring a BSEET.
I simply said you'll be an attractive candidate to the union with your formal education & viewed very employable. What's really needed in the nation [now] are people with real skills who can make things happen, not another shirt & tie.
That he must consider pursuing the apprenticeship with the idea that when he reached "Journeyman" status he'd work another 3 to 5 years in the trade. With the Journeyman's experience he could, if he chose, start his own residential/industrial electrician's business. I stressed the Universities will NOT & are NOT teaching students 'how' to become an independent businessman but that if he watched closely the business(es) he'd be working for during the entire union electrician trining program, will. That exposure & the hands-on experience will permit him to make a job for himself rather than rely on somone or something else.

This young man told me no one ever advised in in such a common sense way, thanked me -- profously -- & we concluded our business.

What I didn't tell the kid was the universities don't teach entrepreneurism because they've no one who'd know how if their lives depended on it. That most of acadamia couldn't find their ass with both or either hand.
Y'know the old saying, right? "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach."
Well I think it's true & never been truer than it is today.

The education establishment, all of it -- the whole shittin' kaboodle -- motivated by their selfcentered haste to featherbed themselves have finally stepped on it. Their socialist touchy-feely, completely worthless gobbledegook pap's gonna be comin' home to roost because after being soaked for 4 to 6 years there's nothing but a hellova logjam of "unskilled" college grads out there.
That's a reality parents with college bound children better think about.

The nation's educational system has failed our citizens in many more ways than most of us even realize; if, my conversation with this rather bright 20 year old means anything.

...& I think it does.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.