Posted on 03/06/2004 6:55:37 PM PST by JackelopeBreeder
Crawford, Texas - President Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox joined forces Saturday to promote Bush's plan for easing immigration laws, as Bush acknowledged that the proposal faces a tough time in Congress.
Standing side-by-side in bright sunshine at Bush's Texas ranch, the two leaders said Bush's plan for a new temporary worker program would help both countries by eliminating the underground market for Mexican workers. The proposal would let an estimated 8 million workers who are in the United States illegally gain legal status as guest workers.
"The people who come to this country make a significant contribution to the American economy," Fox told reporters.
Bush's plan, announced in January, has raised expectations in Mexico and among illegal workers in this country, but it has little chance of passing Congress this year. Republican critics say the proposal would reward illegal immigrants; Democrats complain that it does not do enough to help foreign workers become U.S. citizens.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Or El Blanco Grande --- notice Fox is as European-ancestried as most of us on here --- and notice it's the mestisos he's wanting out of Mexico. Fox is running one of the largest ethnic cleansings we've ever witnessed. He sees the mestisos as some kind of troops --- take away their jobs and land in Mexico so they're forced to participate in his reconquista.
Have you ever been to the border and seen the level of food stamp use? Try saying no immigrants get in on the food stamp program --- you'll quickly see who is feeding who. And check out the welfare offices --- around here you won't see many who aren't immigrants flooding them. Mexicans can't feed themselves even in their own country --- that's the reason their flooding over the border.
............................................................
Clinton’s Subtle, but Historic, Redefinition of U.S. Immigration Policy
............................................................
Commentary by Ira Mehlman
Federation for American Immigration Reform Spokesman
The Clinton Administration is now a part of history, and historians are just getting started assessing the Clinton legacy. There will be plenty to keep them busy. There were remarkable successes in managing an unprecedented period of economic expansion, the first budget surpluses in three decades, and of course there were notable failures in the area of health care reform and personal integrity.
Among the records set during the Clinton years was the largest sustained wave of immigration in America’s history. Some 10 million new immigrants arrived in the U.S. during his presidency, and by the time he left offices there were nearly 30 million foreign born residents, accounting for more than 10 percent of the population.
But perhaps more significant than the sheer numbers of people who settled here during the Clinton years, was the dramatic redefinition of the purpose of immigration policy and the relationship between immigrants and their adopted country. Two subtle, but significant shifts occurred during the last eight years that are worth noting: U.S. citizenship was turned into a political commodity, and immigrants became America’s “customers.”
After losing control of both houses of Congress in the 1994 election to the Republicans, Clinton embarked on a program to reshape the electorate in a way that was more to his liking. In addition to using his considerable powers of persuasion to win back public support, he set about creating a new American public. The administration directed the Immigration and Naturalization Service to mint new citizens in time to vote in the 1996 elections. Under the direct control of Vice President Gore, the Citizenship USA program was tasked with naturalizing as many noncitizens as they could possibly find in time to participate in the next election.
The plan succeeded. Democrats have eliminated the Republicans’ majority in the Senate and have significantly eroded their advantage in the House. An analysis of voting patterns across the country shows that voting by new citizens has been the deciding factor in numerous elections, and in nearly every case, has broken to the Democrats’ advantage.
That immigrants are playing a significant role in American politics is nothing new. What changed during the Clinton years is that altering the political landscape became an objective of immigration policy. In much the same way as employers have used immigrants to change labor market conditions to their advantage, the Clinton Administration used them to create an electorate more to their liking.
The second subtle, but important, change that occurred under Clinton was a redefinition of the relationship between immigrants and the American nation. One of the priorities set forth by Clinton’s INS commissioner, Doris Meissner, was to improve the agency’s “customer service.”
Certainly no one who has ever dealt with INS would dispute the need for improvements in the way the agency treats those who are going through the immigration process. But Meissner’s repeated description of immigrants as “customers” was more than a matter of semantics. The choice of words reflected a very significant change in attitude.
In the past, immigration was seen as policy designed to serve the interests of the nation. As such, there was a general belief that it was the responsibility of the immigrants to go the extra mile to accommodate themselves to the social, cultural and linguistic norms of the country. As customers, that relationship is reversed. It is the nation that must bend over backwards to accommodate the “customers,” and provide whatever services and programs they need.
Under the customer model, if immigration creates overcrowded schools, or exceeds the capacity of public health care system, you don’t reduce immigration. Instead you build as many schools and emergency rooms as the “customers” require. Under the customer model, it doesn’t matter whether immigrants have marketable skills, or that more than one-third have less than a high school education. It becomes the nation’s obligation to deal with the needs of the immigrants.
Very often it is the subtle policy changes of a presidential administration that define its legacy. Clinton’s subtle manipulation of immigration policy could prove to be among the most long lasting imprints he leaves on America.
......................................
End of article
...............................................................................
This explains what may have happened to California. Presidential elections between 1952 and 1988, the state went Republican all but once. Since 1992, its been solidly Democratic ( 1992 would be hard to gage because of the Perot factor ). I'm not saying that massive immigration into California is the only reason that the state has turned Democratic but it has to be a big one.
and about 95%
The key word is "about". The 95% is at the high end of my guess and that figure is debatable since there is no way of knowing an exact percentage. Feel free to put out an estimate on the percentage that broke the Democrats way and any of your sources.
No, it isn't racist it is common sense.
So I guess the obvious question to el Presidente is why he so anxious for these contibutors to LEAVE his country. Perhaps it's because he sees the US as a safety valve in much the same way as Castro does. If all the digruntled leave, then there's no reason to change the corrupt status quo in Mexico.
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.