Posted on 01/14/2004 5:35:13 AM PST by Theodore R.
And if it doesn't work, there is no going back. It is the end of the America we all loved. Why is President Bush taking this risk with our country?"
Pat Buchanan makes the assumption that this hasn't already happened. I think it has. Actually, I think that Pat knows this but isn't ready to concede the point.
Twenty years ago a high school drop out could get a job in construction, trucking, or manufacturing, and still do pretty well for himself. Well enough to own a car and afford some type of housing, by the age of twenty.
One by one these jobs have been outsourced, or filled by a wage suppressing immigrant, lowering the expectation and living standard of many Americans. Such is not suppose to be the case. In raising the boat of third world nations we have sunk the boats of many average Americans. Meanwhile those that stick it out through college are finding their jobs outsourced and their options limited.
You are merely parroting the propaganda of the enemy like a good little public school student. There are not that many white collar jobs and in fact all jobs have been artificially manipulated out of the country, or by immigrants in country all due to deadly socialist government policies and freedom robbing Free Trade.
52 posted on 01/14/2004 5:15:38 AM PST by MissAmericanPie
I agree.
This needs to be repeated and repeated. As I've said before this may very well be Bush's (and our) undoing. Let one of those "guest" (barf) workers commit a violent crime and we'll have Dean in the WH.
The first step is to identify those illegal immigrants who just want to make some money and go back home. Identify them and offer some monetary incentive for them to return to their country of origin at the end of some period, say three years. In addition, insure that they are paid minimum wages and receive benefits equal to the benefits received by American workers. What this would do is reduce the difference in cost between illegal and American workers and therefore reduce the incentive for business to hire illegal workers. Sounds like Bushs plan to me. However, this is only the first step.
The second step is targeting those illegal immigrants who are criminals. The deportation process must be streamlined with more judges, lawyers, holding cells, and INS workers. Instead of taking ten years to deport a criminal, it should take only a few months. Lock them up until the deportation process is complete, then put them on an airplane back to their country of origin. We havent been able to do this yet because of the pressure from businesses that need cheap labor and the social activities who think all immigrants will be targeted. Most of that pressure will have been eliminated by step one.
Step three is to eliminate welfare benefits for illegal immigrants. We havent been able to do this yet because of all the pressure from social activists who think that all immigrants will be targeted. These social activists are usually folks that are employing an illegal immigrant as a domestic servant and since step one makes that servant legal much of this pressure will be eliminated.
The first three steps would eliminate the majority of our illegal immigration problem. Those folks who want to stay here permanently might be induced into the temporary worker status if there was a mechanism to eventually obtain citizenship. I am not opposed to eventual citizenship for temporary workers provided that the requirements for citizenship are strengthened, including an English language requirement.
Step four involves the sensitive question of anchor babies. If a person is born in the U.S., they are an American citizen regardless of whom or what their parents are. Although I dont think we can or should change the constitution on this issue, how much of an anchor the baby is can be changed by immigration policy.
Far from offering amnesty to illegal immigrants, I think Bushs plan would be a good first step in solving our very real illegal immigration problem.
My brother-in-law graduated from high school on the city's east side in 1979. About two-thirds of his graduating class had non-Hispanic surnames. By 1997, the same school had a large Hispanic majority. Two decades ago, the church (Presbyterian, USA) that my in-laws attend had over 100 attendees on a given Sunday and an active children's and youth Sunday school program. Average Sunday attendance has dropped to 40, many of whom are retired servicemen and their wives, and there are no children's or youth activities simply because there are no children or teenagers to minister to.
Trends like this go usually unnoticed in the local media, much less in the national press. We may not like it, but as long as the Feds are unwilling and/or unable to enforce immigration laws, such trends will continue.
The other point was there is no specific provision in the constitution allowing an illegal, or any other temporary visitor, to have an anchor baby. Rather, its a contemporary interpretation of the 14th amendment, though IMO not an accurate one. All it would take to remove this misinterpretation is some clarification by congress, which again would be supported by the vast percentage of the population.
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.