Posted on 01/07/2004 6:12:00 PM PST by VU4G10
Proposals for a massive new "guestworker" program would: The politicians pushing a guestworker amnesty know that Americans staunchly oppose amnesty, and so they shy away from calling it what it really is, instead cloaking it in terms like "earned legalization" or "normalization of status." They are deliberately misleading the American public. THEY SAY that the overwhelming majority of people entering the country illegally pose no threat to our country and that if we allow them enter in a lawful manner, we will enhance our homeland security. THE TRUTH is that there are an estimated 8-11 million illegal aliens in the United States, and it only took 19 to perpetrate the attacks of September 11. Our immigration system has become overburdened and unmanageable due to mass illegal immigration. As a result, there is little reason to feel confident that, absent a massive infusion of new resources, which is highly unlikely given current fiscal realities, anything approaching thorough background checks can be conducted on applicants for a guestworker program. Even without the added burden of an amnesty, people like Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric who masterminded the first World Trade Center bombing, and Mohammed Atta, the leader of the September 11 attacks, managed to slip through the screening process. There is every reason to believe that adding new responsibilities to an overtaxed system will make us less safe. No one has yet explained how the millions of applicants would be given security checks or whether that’s even remotely feasible, given an already overburdened immigration enforcement system. Immigration officials would have to deal with hundreds of thousands of more applicants a year, to say nothing of how we would verify eligibility for any of the eight million potential applicants already here illegally, particularly with many of them armed with false identity documents. When the immigration system can’t adequately perform its most essential mission, adding in the responsibility for security checks, tracking, and removal when necessary for millions of participants in a guestworker program will guarantee disaster. THEY SAY that the legislation is not an amnesty, but that guestworkers who participate in the program will be eligible for permanent resident status. THE TRUTH is that the proposal would be an amnesty with an “apprenticeship” provision. Illegal aliens who are already in the U.S. would be eligible to apply. Thus, they would be excused for having violated our immigration laws in the first place, and then be rewarded again with permanent residency--thus making the law, in effect, a double amnesty. Calling it something else does not change the reality that this proposal is a massive amnesty program. THEY SAY the program will help regain control of the borders and stop illegal immigration. THE TRUTH is that the proposal does nothing to discourage future illegal immigration or enforcement of our immigration laws, ensuring that any guestworker or illegal alien who wants to remain in the U.S. can and will. In fact, about one-third of illegal aliens in the country right now arrived on legal visas and simply never went home. In addition, it does nothing to strengthen border security to ensure that only guestworkers, and not terrorists, are being admitted. THEY SAY that spouses and children of illegal aliens may also be eligible to participate in the visa program. THE TRUTH is that this would be an amnesty not only for those who qualify for this “guestworker” program, but a simultaneous amnesty for their dependents, whether or not they are workers. Aside from expanding the amnesty to include non-workers, it also grants a benefit to the dependents of illegal aliens that is not afforded to the families of other guestworkers who never violated the law. Moreover, it undermines the stated – if flawed – purpose of a guestworker program: that foreign workers come temporarily and then return home. Employers would be able to utilize a virtually limitless supply of guestworkers at low wages, while the expense for services like education and health care for dependent family members would have to be picked up by taxpayers. THEY SAY that an electronic job registry operated through the Department of Labor will allow employers to post jobs and American workers would have the first chance to apply. Moreover, the jobs would have to be offered again at the end of the three-year period, and that workers’ visas would be renewed only if no Americans are willing to take them. THE TRUTH is that in the estimation of the General Accounting Office and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, the provisions in existing guestworker programs that are intended to ensure that American workers get first crack at jobs have been a complete failure. Even if the political will existed to prevent employers from bypassing American workers in favor of foreign guestworkers – which there doesn’t – the Labor Department does not have the resources to monitor the hiring process. A federal government that managed to fine a grand total of 13 employers nationwide in 2002 for violating employer sanctions laws cannot be counted on to enforce the provisions of a guestworker program either. THEY SAY that BSIIA would be a market-driven program that will negate the reasons why employers hire illegal aliens. THE TRUTH is that under BSIIA, there would not even be a prevailing wage requirement, meaning that employers will be able to offer wages far below what most Americans would be willing to accept, thereby creating an artificial need for guestworkers. In effect, the law would grant legal sanction to employers who want to hire workers at low wages and limited leverage. One of the primary purposes of our immigration laws is to prevent employers from undermining wages and working conditions of American workers. THEY SAY that the program would prevent abuse of foreign workers by affording them mobility and the ability to file grievances against abusive employers. THE TRUTH is that the mobility of guestworkers would still be very limited and their ability to change jobs would depend on finding another employer who was willing to go through the procedure of posting a job and wading through the bureaucratic red tape. The primary interest of the workers would be to hold a job for six years in order to qualify for permanent residency. Moreover, at the end of the “apprenticeship” period, when the guestworker would be granted permanent residency and would gain bargaining power, there is no reason to expect that the employer would not seek another guestworker who is willing to work at below-market wages. THEY SAY that the program would prevent deaths along the border. THE TRUTH is that U.S. immigration laws are not responsible for the deaths along the border – it is the violation of our immigration laws that is responsible. If there is any culpability on the part of the American government, it is in its failure to deter illegal immigration by aggressively enforcing laws that prohibit illegal aliens from working here or accessing public benefits. Sending a clear signal that illegal entry to the U.S. will not be rewarded would have the desired effect of dissuading people from placing their lives and safety into the hands of unscrupulous smugglers. Besides, when the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (BICE) adopted a measure that demonstrably cut down the likelihood of border deaths – by repatriating illegal alien crossers who were apprehended in Arizona to border towns in Texas – the open borders lobby protested, charging that the program was unfair to illegal aliens. THEY SAY the program will provide workers when and while they’re needed. THE TRUTH is that when the economy takes a downturn, there will be millions of guestworkers in the U.S. without a job, without a home, without health care, and with no intention of returning to their home countries. The guestworkers’ unemployment problems become the public’s burden.
People who are currently living here will have to pay a fine before applying to become legal residents (not citizens) everybody else will also have to apply. After we've decided everybody's had a fair chance to get there in act together illegal immigrants don't get to apply anymore.
The point is not to eliminate immigration. It is to control who comes in and how many to admit. When a nation cannot give an accurate count of the number of illegals in its midst, it is vulnerable to a host of problems. Increased crime, increased burdens on infrastructure, increased burdens on the educational and medical systems...to name a few. It is the failure to enforce laws designed to define national borders that contributes to a loss of sovereignty. Bowing to the demands of foreign states which demand that their unwanted be allowed to cross borders without interference is a loss of sovereignty. The euphemism "guest worker" used to describe this amnesty is a lie cloaked in fancy dress. Those illegals who seek legal status have no loyalty to this country, nor have they pledged fealty to the United States of America. They come for financial and selfish gain...period. Without fealty to this nation and our laws, customs and national and historic traditions, the illegal who comes for selfish purposes carries with him foreign cultures and traditions independent and alien to this nation and its best interests.
My basic point is that a guest worker program is one fashion of controlling the borders. You may like the idea or hate it, but it is a proposal for a law that controls the flow of workers from other countries to the US. That's 'border control'.
As for the numbers of immigrants. You're missing the point. It isn't aggregate numbers that matters here but the rate of immigration vs. our ability to assimilate. No nation in history has ever been able to absorb the staggering numbers (and percentages of it's 'native' population) of immigrants in the time frame we're looking at and still survive intact. It will utterly destroy the country. The rate of immigration to the US is high, but not much different from the rate between 1870 and 1910. The US was not destroyed by that in the least, but grew to the largest economy in the period. American history refutes your claim.
We'll quickly slide to third world status. Listen to me now hear me later. If implemented this is the beginning of the end of the greatest and most powerful nation in human history. Your hyperbole is laughable. Note that first - THE PEOPLE YOU CLAIM THREATEN US ARE ALREADY HERE ... So if this wave of migration is to destroy us, it already should have destroyed us. Hmmm, but it hasnt. Despite all the problems, the costs of it, etc, our country has survived. Perhaps you underestimate the resiliency of USA.
"Criminals", in that they flout our immigration laws. Wanton disregard for a basic law such as immigration does not bode well for the illegal's observance of any other US laws. If the illegal will not obey the immigration laws, he will very likely ignore any other laws which he wishes to disregard.
We already know that not the best nor the brightest are the vast majority of illegals. Jimmy Carter allowed in the scum and dregs of Castro's Socialist "paradise" and prison resort during Mariel. We seem to forget the thousands of crimes committed and the enormous disruption of civil life because of that wholesale influx of otherwise illegal mass. Vincente Fox goes Castro one better. He gets a president to agree to take his overflow of human surplus, thereby relieving himself of a teeming mass of unemployed and itinerant drifters who might otherwise join Mexico's "People's and Peasants" guerrilla movements. Instead of forcing Mexico into the 19th century and making Mexico respond to its fundamental weaknesses, we take them and thereby allow a latent cancer to infect our own economic, political and social institutions.
As if we don't have enough troubles to correct.
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.