Glance at Bush Immigration Changes Plan

AP ^ | January 6, 2004

[sarcasm]

Some details of the changes in immigration policy proposed by President Bush, according to senior administration officials who spoke with reporters Tuesday:

--The new ``temporary worker program'' would allow either one of the estimated 8 million illegal immigrants already in the United States or someone abroad to apply for the right to work legally in the country for a three-year term that could be renewed. The White House is not saying how long the term could be extended or how many times it could be renewed.

--An applicant for the program already in the United States must pay an unspecified registration fee and show they are currently employed. Applicants still in their home countries won't have to pay a fee, but must have a job lined up.

--The employer must show no Americans wanted the job.

--Temporary workers would get all the same protections afforded American workers.

--The worker must return to his or her home country at the end of the term.

--Dependants of the temporary workers would be allowed in the United States if the worker can prove they can support their family. The workers would be allowed to move freely back and forth between the United States and their home country.

--The White House also is calling for an unspecified increase in the number of green cards allowed to be granted annually.

--The plan also would provide incentives for the workers to return to their home countries, including the promise of access to retirement benefits and new tax savings accounts.

--Congress would have to write legislation for the changes to take effect.

[TheBattman]

--Temporary workers would get all the same protections afforded American workers.

This would be one of those clauses that opens up some interesting possibilities - like unemployment benefits, SS Disability payments, etc. This program, regardless of the "intent" indicated, still makes millions of current criminals "legal", even if for a limited time here.

[spodefly]

The employer must show no Americans wanted the job.

That should be easy to do ... (???)

[StWendeler]

I don't really see this as a problem. If you make being an illegal alien more difficult than being a legal guest worker, then it removes the incentive for illegal immigration. This means that (if the INS gets its act together), it'll be easier for the feds to track how many are coming in, where they are, who they're working for, and (more importantly from a political perspective) whether employers are obeying labor laws. (Politically, this is a way to beat up the dems over the immigration issue and their claim to care for the migrant worker.)

If this does get enacted, I hope Bush is able to articulate this and hit the dems with a right hook....

Only other option is to post 3 divisions along the border and shoot anything coming across. While I know that this may sound like a good idea, I think it'd be difficult to implement and Bush would be hammered from both sides.

[ClearCase_guy]

--The employer must show no Americans wanted the job.

An interesting proviso. I know I'm mixing apples and oranges, but it would be sweet if they extended that to H1B workers. Import a Java programmer from Calcutta? OK, but you have to prove that no American is looking for a job as a Java programmer...

[mtbopfuyn]

What part of "illegal" is so hard to understand? Bush is handing the country over to Mexico on a silver US dollar platter.

It's too easy to prove no American wanted the job. Stop by any of the day workers' corners and count how many Americans show up. If no American jumped in the back of the pickup then no American wanted the job.

[AmericanInTokyo]

That's just it. Notice the big thing about the Administration. Search, and search closely, for the use of the word ILLEGAL in any of their thought pieces, policy statements, press conferences, and the like on this issue. Very sparingly, I'd say.

What an abject sellout. How can this man ask for Conservative votes this year?

[AmericanInTokyo]

BINGO! EXCELLENT!!!! You have got to get that brilliant idea to LOU DOBBS of CNN.

[KantianBurke]

The Illegals Solution: Credit to Sabertooth.

---

Dealing with Illegals doesn't have to be the enormous burden on resources many imagine, not would it have to infringe on civil liberties.

I've posted this on a few threads, but I keep getting requests:

This problem is no harder to solve than wanting to solve it. We can get rid of Illegals rather effectively, by rolling up our sleeves and getting the Illegals to get rid of themselves.

The first order of business, of course, is to enforce existing laws on the books against Illegals and those who employ them. Also, politicians must be held to account when they pander otherwise.

Then...

1: Eliminate all mention of Section 245(i), even if expired, from the US Immigration and Naturalization Code. No more Amnesty, ever.


2: Get legislation through Congress that would enable States to deny goodies to Illegals, a la Prop #187.


3: Outlaw Mexican matricula consular IDs, and kick banks accepting them out of the FDIC. Legal depositors will withdraw from recalcitrant banks.


4: Beef up Border Security with manpower, resources, and a Volunteer Reserve, if necessary. No troops, and no messing with posse comitatus, this should be a civilian effort.


5: Beef up the immigration courts and set deportation hearings for two weeks after apprehension, with no bail.


6: Run sting operations at day laborer sites.


7: Establish two-way communication between the IRS and Border Security, and start apprehending and deporting Illegals using false SS numbers (no, the current overhyped voluntary program doesn't count).


8: Seize the assets of businesses knowingly hiring Illegals under the RICO Act, as they are ongoing criminal enterprises. Prosecute executives who knowingly hire Illegals.


9: Compile biometric information on Illegals, and declare that they will be permanently ineligible for immigration and citizenship.


10: If the United States declares that the above proposals against Illegals will be diligently enforced after a certain date, many Illegals will leave beforehand, and a relatively small number of well-publicized cases of enforcement throughout the Lower 48 will result in millions of Illegals deporting themselves.


11: End the busting of immigration caps by limiting family reunification to spouses and dependent children, and counting them against the caps when they are brought in. Require all future immigrants to declare their future intent to bring in family upon arrival. This way, families can immigrate in a controlled, orderly fashion without the current deceptions being used against the American public. We must have truth in immigration.


12: Outlaw anchor babies, and give the option to the Illegal parent of taking the child with them upon deportation, or putting them up for adoption.


13: Outlaw bilingual ballots, and resume the English-speaking requirements for citizenship.


14: Establish English skills as a prerequisite for future immigrants. Let's start admitting folks who will hit the ground running toward assimilation.


15: Shut off new immigration to nations that offer dual citizenship. Disqualify current immigrants from those nations from future American citizenship.


16: Make Mexico and Central America our cheap import sources of choice with tariffs on manufacturing from other sources, especially China.


17: In return, Mexico must open up to American investment by allowing the sale of real estate to us and guaranteeing property our rights. Getting Mexico to fix its economy is crucial.


18: Establish a guest worker program where an initial bond is posted by the Illegal and his employer, say $500 each, with more withheld from the Illegal's earning, as security for his departure from the US by the specified date. Guest worker visas must be applied for in the workers' countries of origin, and participants are only eligible to be employed by their sponsoring employer. Violation of these terms will render the worker ineligible for any future visas or residence in the US. Any guest worker program can only come after anti-Illegal measures are in place. Handshake promises of future diligence will not be trusted from any politician of either party, including President Bush.
The list above is by no means comprehensive, and can be adopted piecemeal or in a single package. That said, incrementalism is probably going to be the way to go, especially politically.

These measures would provide a little carrot and lots of stick for Illegals already here to get themselves out. Some of them will need to be tested in the courts, which is another reason to adopt them piecemeal, so that an injunction against omnibus legislation can't stall the whole effort.

We ought to be looking initially at easy, politically safe legislation, like the new accounting for family reunification, Border Security/IRS cooperation, English speaking citizenship requirements, and a few others. Our politicians are a trembling, timid bunch, and need to gain a little self-confidence before they'll tackle more difficult issues.

Note a few things that aren't on my list: troops or walls on the border. I think they are a futile diversion from cost effective solutions. The best possible wall at the border is to let foreigners know that we respect our sovereignty, and they had best do the same.

Note that their are no house to house searches.

Note also that I don't call for an immigration moratorium, though others may. I think their position is within the respectable mainstream of a dialogue about immigration, and while it's possible that I might change my mind later, but I am not currently persuaded that an outright moratorium is or will be necessary.

The main problem is multimillion-strong mass of Illegals, and the secondary problem is how we currently select legal immigrants for rapid assimilation into American society. I believe my proposals adequately address both situations, but there is certainly room for debate on the back end.

Note also that I have a guest worker program that is actually honest and responsible, and not an Amnesty by another name. My program would ensure that law-abiding foreigners are background-checked before entry, rather than rewarding lawbreaking Illegals after the fact.

All of the above could be adopted while allowing politicians so-inclined to chant the "compassionate conservatism" mantra.

A few final thoughts...

My proposals will cost money and require an expansion of the federal government in certain areas. However, this expense and expansion is all well within the legitimate, Constitutional responsibilities of the federal government. There will be a greater expense initially, as we ramp up to deal with the backlog of Illegals, but a number of my proposals are at least partially self-funding. Also, success in these endeavors will eventually reduce the need for them, and as many Illegals would leave on their own.

In contrast, there would be also be an increased expense and expansion of the government if there is an Amnesty, as checking backgrounds and processing 8 to 12 million Illegals wouldn't be cheap. However, such increases and expansions would only serve to reward the lawlessness of Illegals and the cowardice of politicians, thereby encouraging more of the same in both, unless there were also enforcement proposals like mine in effect for the American Interior.

But, if we strengthened and enforced our laws consistently within our borders, then we don't need the phantom solution of Amnesty anyway.

[TomGuy]

The employer must show no Americans wanted the job.

That should be easy to do ... (???)

Been happening for years with the H1B program. Employer just signs a paper stating no local applicants available. Then they can hire foreign for must less than they would have to pay otherwise.

In the early 80's I worked for a co that typical hired H1B's at about 1/2 what it would have to pay locals.

This is just another way to allow companies to continue to hire cheap foreign labor and use the excuse that no local American would take the job.

How many born Americans (bA) actually do work in those same jobs throughout the Nation? How many bA's actually work as housekeepers, maids, work in fast food industries, food processing, etc., etc., etc.

These "programs" are nothing but more attempts to allow companies to hire cheap foreign labor at the expense of bA's. They can't get bA's to take the jobs because they have to pay a living wage.

Ironically, the amnesty will also fit into the Dems strategy and drastically increase the social service areas. The Pubs vote for hiring the illegals for cheap labor. The Dems vote for hiring the illegals to increase the socialistic programs. Both win. Actually, all 3 win--Dems, Pubs, illegals. Who loses? bA tax payers who have to pick up the slack in more social programs to subsidize the illegals to bring their standard of living and care up to the level of other Americans.

So, choose your poison: Get screwed in higher subsidizing taxes by the Republicans or get screwed in more subsidized social programs by the Democrats.

[MoJo2001]

This is what I resent about this program:

First, I feel illegal immigrants are being rewarded for breaking our laws.

Second, some governments from Mexico to the rest of Latin America are openly encouraging their people to break the laws to come here. Which tells me that most of Latin America sucks because they cannot provide for their own people. How pathetic.

Third, yes America is an immigrant country. Most of the immigrants in our early years came here to make a better life for themselves and to truly make America better. (Alright, not all..but most!)

Fourth, if they have these rights. They better start paying taxes. They should begin to learn English. They better start picking up the slack over here.

Another thing, for all those Mexican Americans who complain that they are always stereotyped as being "lazy and stupid", now is your chance to prove that these people are useful and ready to get the job done. If not, you disappoint the rest of the brown population in America. Quite frankly, we are sick of you already!

[dirtboy]

--The employer must show no Americans wanted the job.

Employers played all kinds of games with this requirement for the H1-B visa program. It's a joke.

[spodefly]

I appreciate your post, but showing that no Americans applied for the job is different than showing that no Americans "wanted" the job. Semantics (in this instance) but I am sure some American somewhere would "want" almost any job.

[jimt]

Dependants of the temporary workers would be allowed in the United States if the worker can prove they can support their family. The workers would be allowed to move freely back and forth between the United States and their home country.

This will be meaningless unless application for any goobermint giveaways results in immediate deportation of the illegal and his/her family. Further the "anchor baby" travesty must be eliminated.

[CasearianDaoist]

Fifth we should allow only highly skilled and highly eduated people in, preferably from eastern Europe.

The entire Muslim problem in Europe started in the 50s and the 60s when they started the notion of turkish "guest workers" - they never go home. They have families and those children are citizens.

The Republican party is commiting suicide here - it is just so stupid. We will be like Brazil or mexico in 30 years. A small eleite, no middle class, and a huge swelling mass of illiterates dependaed on a facist/socialist state.

The US as we have known it for over 200 years is coming to and end. We ourselves have done to this country what no external enemy has ever been able to do.

This is the beginning of the end.

[ravingnutter]

Been happening for years with the H1B program. Employer just signs a paper stating no local applicants available. Then they can hire foreign for must less than they would have to pay otherwise.

I don't know what the rules were in the 80's, but I know what they are now...they must pay they prevailing wage.

Wage Requirement

On the Labor Condition Application (LCA) the employer must attest that it will pay "no less than the greater of the following" :

(a) The actual wage level paid to all other individuals at the work site with similar experience and qualifications for the position in question; OR (b) The prevailing wage for the occupational classification in the area of intended employment.

Source

And I don't believe any employer would want to risk the following fines and/or sanctions if they are audited on the recruitment attestation:

H1B-dependent employers and willful violators (defined below) must attest that they have taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry-wide standards, and that they have offered job to any equally/better qualified U.S. applicant. Violations subject to $35,000 fine and 3-year debarment filing immigrant and nonimmigrant petitions.

Source

[sarcasm]

Note that there is no mention of who pays the medical expenses for these families or the cost of educating their children.

[RinaseaofDs]

Never a mention of who will pay, but always the assumption.

GWB said he was opposed to CFR too, and wouldn't sign it.

He did it anyway. Prepare to be boarded from the stern, me hardies!

[sarcasm]

[jimt]

Note that there is no mention of who pays the medical expenses for these families or the cost of educating their children.

I have to say I'm getting very tired of seeing the illegals in Section 8 housing a block or so away drop off their kids for "free breakfast" in their new cars.

I see it every weekday as I live across the street from an elementary school. Some do walk their progeny to school, but I'm sure they're heading for "free breakfast" because they're 45 to 60 minutes ahead of school starting.

Apparently the concept of being able to pay your childrens' way - before you whelp them - is a foreign concept, as it is to most welfare folks. We need more of these people like we need more holes in our heads.