[MJY1288]

He'll say the same thing he always has, "We need structure an immigration policy that matches willing workers with willing employer" and nothing will be done. Been that way for three years now

[Pubbie]

Thank God!

I suspected this was going to be what Bush would do, but that WashingtonPost article had me worried!

[oceanview]

I can't even imagine a way to implement such a guest worker program. the ideal way would be to classify certain jobs as being eligible, and only allow guest workers to fill those positions. but how do you enforce that? who selects which jobs qualify? and once the guest worker enters the US, how do you prevent them from taking a job that's "not on the approved list"? how long before teams of immigration attorneys challenge the law, and some judge says that classifying only certain jobs for the guest workers violates the constitution, and opens everything up? it would be total chaos.

[oceanview]

well, not really. they are far more willing employers in the US who would want access to low cost labor. but many of these business, especially the larger ones, will not hire anyone who does not have legal status (unless they are snookered by people with false papers). A worker from Mexico is perfectly capable of mounting wheels on a car coming of an assembly line, or working to stock lumber at home depot. But they do not have those jobs. Give them legal status, and they will.

[rmmcdaniell]

He'll say the same thing he always has, "We need structure an immigration policy that matches willing workers with willing employer" and nothing will be done. Been that way for three years now

This is the same kind rationalization I heard during the CFR push. First after Bush said he would sign it I heard "Don't worry, it won't get trough congress." Then after it did, I heard "It'll be struck down in the courts, for sure."

Why can't Bush take a stand instead of BS strategery? What if something does get through congress, what will be your excuse then?