Posted on 12/29/2004 6:21:51 AM PST by Ginifer
(CNSNews.com) - President Bush is moving forward with his plans to create a "Temporary Worker Program" that would allow millions of illegal aliens to remain and work in the U.S. for a minimum of three years with no fear of deportation or other punishment. Advocates of tougher immigration policies believe the president is ignoring the costs and potential dangers posed by illegal immigration.
In his final, scheduled, formal press conference of the year, the president criticized current U.S. immigration policy.
"The system we have today is not a compassionate system. It's not working," Bush said Dec. 20. "And, as a result, the country is less secure than it could be with a rational system."
Any proposed changes to immigration policy must take into account what the president calls "reality.""
\ldblquote There are some jobs in America that Americans won't do and others are willing to do," Bush said. "We ought to have a system that recognizes people are coming here to do jobs that Americans will not do. And there ought to be a legal way for them to do so."
According to a White House fact sheet entitled, "Fair and Secure Immigration Reform," the president's "Temporary Worker Program" would allow new immigrants to the U.S. and those currently here illegally to accept employment "when no American worker is available and willing to take a job.""
Ira Mehlman, media director for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, told the Cybercast News Service that Bush's proposal is, "a great plan if your objective is to destroy the middle class in the United States.
"If you are going to offer employers the opportunity to bring in unlimited numbers of guest workers then there is never going to be any incentive to increase wages in this country [or] to improve working conditions," Mehlman said. "Upward mobility will become a thing of the past if such a plan is enacted."
Bush says program would not provide 'automatic citizenship'
The program would last three years, but would be renewable. Bush insists he is not proposing amnesty, or an easier road to citizenship, for illegal aliens.
"Now, one of the important aspects of my vision is that this is not automatic citizenship. The American people must understand that," the president stressed. "If somebody who is here working wants to be a citizen, they can get in line like those who have been here legally and have been working to become a citizen in a legal manner."
Mehlman disagreed.
"Even he would have to recognize that a program that allows millions of people, who have broken the law, to gain legal status in this country is an amnesty," Mehlman insisted. "Even though he swears it's not an amnesty program, that's exactly what it is; it is rewarding people who have broken the law.""
Supporters of tougher immigration laws also doubt, according to Mehlman, that there will be anything temporary about the "Temporary Worker Program."
"He's talking about a three-year temporary worker visa, renewable for three more," Mehlman observed. "And at the end of the six years, these people will, of course, all say, 'Thank you very much. We really appreciate the opportunity to work here and now we're going home.' Yeah, right."
The Bush proposal also includes provisions to allow participants to cross back and forth from their country of origin to maintain family ties. President Bush said U.S. Border Patrol agents need to focus on more important duties.
"[W]e want our border patrol agents chasing crooks and thieves and drug runners and terrorists, not good-hearted people who are coming here to work," Bush argued.
'Preposterous' plan fails to address security concerns
Mehlman complained that recommendations by the 9/11 Commission to tighten immigration policy were removed from the legislation passed by Congress due to pressure from those lobbying to protect illegal aliens.
"Special interest politics and greed seem to even trump homeland security," Mehlman concluded, "despite the fact that we've seen what the potential consequences are from not enforcing immigration laws."
Mehlman believes security must be the primary concern in immigration policy and that it is lacking in the proposal to allow for millions of "temporary workers."
"The idea that they are going to do thorough, comprehensive background checks on all these people to make sure that we're not letting in criminals or potential terrorists is preposterous," Mehlman said. "They couldn't even do a decent background check on their own nominee for Homeland Security secretary."
Former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerrick withdrew his nomination for that post after allegations surfaced that he had ties to companies that have business dealings with the Department of Homeland Security and that he had employed an illegal immigrant as a nanny and did not pay his portion of her payroll taxes.
The president also argued that his plan would "take the pressure off of employers." Mehlman believes that is a mistake, as well.
"What we have to do is create disincentives against illegal immigration," Mehlman said. "Right now, we're creating incentives. We don't enforce the laws against employers."
Mehlman acknowledged that federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents cannot arrest every illegal alien or catch every employer who knowingly hires them. He believes effective immigration law enforcement means applying "leverage" to selected companies.
"You go after some of the employers that have been hiring illegal immigrants with impunity, even though it's against the law. You fine them sufficiently to send a message, the same way that the highway patrol enforces the speed limit on the freeway when they want to," Mehlman said. "They don't stop every single speeder. But, if you're driving along at 80 miles an hour and you see somebody else being pulled over, you slow down."
Such an enforcement strategy would have a ripple effect, according to Mehlman.
"If you go after enough employers to give the rest of them the idea that we're serious about enforcing the law, they will then refrain from hiring illegal immigrants," Mehlman said. "The word gets back, 'Don't come to the United States illegally because nobody's going to take a chance on hiring you.'"
Mehlman believes such a policy would have a similar effect on illegal aliens currently living and working in the U.S.
"Many who are already here [illegally] would leave and go home," Mehlman continued. "The objective is to encourage more people who are here illegally to go home. If you cannot get access to a job, if you can't get access to anything but emergency social benefits, there's no incentive to remain here."
FAIR disputes economic argument for illegal immigration
Mehlman also dismissed the common argument that reducing the available pool of illegal immigrant labor would drive up food prices.
"The labor cost in agriculture is about 10 percent. So, a dollar's worth of produce today would cost you about $1.10 tomorrow if they doubled everybody's wages," Mehlman said.
What little savings consumers reap from lower labor costs are multiplied in other areas, Mehlman argued.
"Maybe you do save a few pennies here and there because there are low-wage illegal immigrant workers doing jobs in this country that Americans would demand a higher wage for," Mehlman explained, "but in return you are providing education for the children of these illegal immigrants, you're providing the health care because these employers are not providing a Blue Cross/Blue Shield (health insurance) program for them. All sorts of social costs are being added on."
But President Bush described his proposal as a more \ldblquote compassionate way to treat people who come to our country." Mehlman wondered about the president's compassion for unemployed and underemployed U.S. citizens.
"What we're wrestling with here is the impact that it has on this country, the impact that it has on people struggling to make a living and make a decent life for themselves and their families, the impact on schools and social services," Mehlman said. "The president didn't tell us who's going to pay to educate all the kids of these 'guest workers' he wants to bring here. Who's going to pay for all the health care needs that they're going to have when they get here?"
As we move toward a captive amerikan socialist state the intent as is historical is that the 1-2% who will be in power will rule over the 98 - 99% wealth diminished working class.
Bush's plan (and yes I voted for him due to the supreme court issue) is to eventually blend Mexico into the Amerika Socialist State. That is why we don't seem any longer to identify them as illegals. And border states are going broke under federal court mandates to pick up the tab for foreign workers education, medical care and welfare.
Southern state taxpayers will eventually loose their homes, through the innability to keep up with property taxes to a bloated federal immigration concept which will undermine American libert and sovereignty.
Obviously, the bigot is not one who stands up for his kith and kin and the continuity of his nation. The bigot is the one who is so full of hate that he cannot see that trying to preserve the character of your people is the only moral approach to building a civilization. The bigot sees everyone else through his own hate shaded glass--that is the essence of the SPLC.
William Flax
I note Mr. Tanton did not answer the questions. Doesn;t that evasiveness strike you as odd? OR how about what was outlined in the Wall Street Journal's editorial page on two occasions? I should note he also has admitted to taking money from the Pioneer Fund.
Here's the Google results on "Pioneer Fund":
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Pioneer+Fund%22
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004847
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005227
I certainly will take the word of Congressman Cannon, who I disagree with on internet gambling and broadcast decency, over John Tanton. Look at what he found - and maybe you cna undertsand why some conservaitves might just fund his entire shady network repulsive and want NO PART OF IT.
http://chriscannon.house.gov/press2004/march24.htm
Seriously, this is a case where the claims of racism are NOT somebody crying wolf - there are ample grounds on which the concerns are being raised; Tanton's background, Sam Francis's comments and background, Buchanan's comments and background - the stuff that is promulgated through groups/websites like American Renaissance and VDARE. And it seems that some prominent voices are okay with it - and that bothers me big time, and I'm not the type to be politically correct.
Or is mentioning the shady stuff going a violation of a different set of PC rules?
As long as that wage is above minimum, he's entitled.
"I'm not entitled to pay only what I want to for a new car."
Stupid analogy, the owner of the new car is entitled to charge whatever HE wants to for the car.
"Labor has a market price."
You DO realize that you're channeling Karl Marx, don't you?
Luis, Luis, as always you yell "commie", "commie" because you have so little of any intelligence to say.
Labor has a market value. Skill sets have a market value. Try hiring a doctor for $30,000 a year. It is a market in which the employer is a consumer who must pay what the market demands.
That's how capitalism works. The market adjusting the cost according to supply and demand. Illegal immigration is the purchaser of labor breaking the law to flood the labor market and thereby reduce the market price of labor.
Actually, besides just passing a medical health inspection, immigrants coming through Ellis Island also had to pass a mental health inspection and a legal (background) inspection. Also, any immigrant deemed “liable to become a public charge” was denied entry into the United States.
FYI Rodney in the 1980s there was far greater economic growth than we are seeing now. During that period legal immigration was only 500,000 annually and mass illegal immigration hadn't quite taken off yet like it has now.
In addition, states like California were not on the verge of bankruptcy, quite the opposite they were still prospering.
You make it sound as if the US will collapse without immigration and has history has proven you're full of it.
bay: How would the kids know whether the employees are legal or not. I'm glad my parents didn't raise me to believe that I could never get a job because they all go to illegal immigrants.
"How would the kids know whether the EMPLOYEES are legal or not"? Hugh? WTF?
Hmm, try slowing down your reading to about 3 words a minute, amigo, you might understand things a bit better.
Bay : Why is it that the only people I've heard make statements like that are ones who can't keep any job more than a couple weeks?
I don't know. I'm 41 and have been employed since I was 16.
What's your excuse?
Ummmm, you're fading in and out of consciousness again.
Why is it everytime I read a post from an illegal apologist, I get sick to my stomach?
A majority of Americans are opposed to rewarding foreigners for violating our immigration laws. If it can be determined that we do need a guest worker program, foreigners who want to sign up for the program should be made to do so from within their home countries.
Mr. President, you are missing the point. Our concern is not so much about an easier road to citizenship for the illegals because they don't want citizenship or to assimilate into our society to begin with.
Our concern is that you are downplaying the importance in securing the borders from continuous flooding of additional illegals and then rewarding them by not prosecuting them by granting them legal status. Illegal entry into the USA is a violation of federal law. The presence of illegals inflicts monetary damage upon US taxpayers, yet you propose to grant them a reprieve from prosecution.
Robbing a federally insured bank is a federal crime. If I robbed such an institution, would you grant me a reprieve from prosecution and allow me to keep the money?
You're overlooking the difference between legal immigration and illegal immigration.
my post had nothing to to with uneducated hispanic labor.
it dealt with educated, hi-tech labor.
Chris Cannon, a MALDEF lackey:
On June 6, 2002, Rep. Cannon received the Excellence in Leadership Award from the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF).
America will change for the worse in the next 50 years...
Let's see: I'm 25 now, almost 26 so in 50 years I'll be, dead by then?
Not sure what you're trying to say here. In the long run, we'll all be dead. Is this a reason not to care? Perhaps only for the most nihilistic.
Temporary Criminal Program.
>I will keep writing until someone listens<
Thanks for the links, Ginifer.
Wrote again to GWB at president@whitehouse.gov to express my thoughts in a slightly different manner. But if we write at all, as O'Reilly says, keep it short and pithy.
I don't like to read volume length posts, and neither do the people who govern this country. There can be impact with brevity. HAPPY NEW YEAR, American citizens all!
VDARE, Sam Francis, and Joe Sobran cannot be posted on FR. If they are, the Mods will pull the thread.
I know. Yet some folks (like Michelle Malkin) have no trouble hanging out with those types.
I have to wonder why.
< with face hidden in elbow > Okay....;-)
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.