The Berlin Wall went up thanks to the weakness of John F. Kennedy. It came down thanks to the strength of Ronald Reagan.
Posted on 12/29/2005 5:53:27 AM PST by harpu
"We have a supply and a demand problem. The supply problem is coming across the border. We are in this bill doing something very specific about that with the inclusion of the amendment, with the passage of the amendment, to build some barrier along at least 700 miles of our southern border. I hope we continue with that, by the way, along the entire border, to the extent it is feasible, and the northern border we could start next." -- Rep. Tom Tancredo (R., Colo.)
So there you have it. Tom Tancredo has done everyone a favor by stating plainly the immigration rejectionists' end-game -- turn the United States into the world's largest gated community. The House took a step in that direction this month by passing another immigration "reform" bill heavy with border control and business harassment and light on anything that will work in the real world.
For the past two decades, border enforcement has been the main focus of immigration policy; by any measure, the results are pitiful. According to the Migration Policy Institute, "The number of unauthorized migrants in the United States has risen to almost 11 million from about four million over the past 20 years, despite a 519% increase in funding and a 221% increase in staffing for border patrol programs."
Given that record, it's hard to see the House Republican bill as much more than preening about illegal immigration. The legislation is aimed at placating a small but vocal constituency that wants the borders somehow sealed, come what may to the economy, American traditions of liberty or the Republican Party's relationship with the increasingly important Latino vote.
-big giant snip-
...At some point, the president of the United States will have to get behind the Statue of Liberty or Tom Tancredo's wall.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Maybe. lol.
Everything except for this, it's too broad of a statement and reminds me of the "willing worker, willing employer" line. We don't really know what the demand for labor is since companies routinely fire Americans then hire replacements at half the wage. The meatpacking, construction and tech industries are a perfect example of that.
The only way to know for sure is to close the borders and begin enforcing the laws then maybe we can get a truer picture of what sectors of the economy would absolutely, positively collapse without their slave labor.
Complete and utter equine skatology.
Does have some merit.
If you don't know that's going on or are willing to acknowledge it what are you doing on these threads? There are so many examples of Americans being terminated and replaced with lower paid foreigners and even forced to train their replacements that to deny it would make the person look extremely uninformed at best.
Interesting. Deport illegals and selected US citizens with whom you disagree.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll661.xml
See HOW YOUR CONGRESS CRITTER VOTED ON THIS BILL !!
We have agreement on most goals and their national importance. "Support for US demand for labor" is vague. Maybe something tied to unemployment rates? As US workers move up in education and skill levels, lower skill jobs become undesirable so I think a lot of those low level jobs would go unfilled without immigrant workers. The unemployment level remains at a level considered full employment but it never remains the same.
Do you have any goals to add to the list? I must have missed some important ones.
.............Ayes Noes PRES NV
Republican 203 17 11
Democratic 36 164 2
Independent 1
TOTALS 239 182 13
START CALLING YOUR SENATORS... Tell them to SUPPORT Tom Tancredo's BILL !!
What other jobs are going unfilled that we need so many low-wage immigrants for? Hotels and restaurants? If so maybe we have too many hotels and restaurants. Low paying jobs means the taxpayers have to pick up the tab for increased social costs and I don't see how they're worth it. I've yet had any of the open border enthusiasts persuade me they are.
In the fast food industry traditionally teenagers did that kind of work and in areas with large numbers of illegals they're stealing the jobs from them. Maybe they're not needed there either. We won't know until we start enforcing the law.
If it were up to me we'd keep immigration legal at moderate levels and for those with skills, no guest worker programs except for possibly agriculture. Even if we stopped immigration cold today several studies have concluded the birth rate will continue to climb for the next fifty years so I see no real reason to continue this flood.
-----------------------> PASS IT ON !!!
Bartlett (MD)
Boehner
Diaz-Balart, L.
Nunes
Leach
Hobson
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Pearce
Radanovich
Ros-Lehtinen
Smith (NJ)
Souder
Thomas
Tiberi
Turner
Wilson (NM)
CALL WRTIE FAX E-MAIL ALL OF THE REPUBLICANS ABOVE AND TELL THEM TO GET ON BOARD WITH BORDER SECURITY !!!
LOL
I didn't need a study to know that.
I have a subscription, and always wondered why the editorials and the news section contradicted each other.
The 2 were and are total opposites.
The scary part is the WSJ liberals are a hell of alot smarter then the NYT ones.
You're just not going to get many of us to support legalizing the illegals here now. It will amount to amnesty because the government will never enforce the law and make them go home three or six years from now. That's the whole point of supporting an enforcement first policy. Other than that we agree.
Any others?
The major one missing from your list is an end to the anchor baby abuses. No guest worker program could be made viable without doing that.
BTTT
As far as where we disagree, I do believe that foreign workers, in some cases, are beneficial to the economy here.
So far we sing in perfect harmony
I am in favor of a tightly enforced TEMPORARY worker program. I can understand why many people here are against, or at the very least skeptical of this type of program. I myself am a bit skeptical, because I question whether it will actually be enforced. I am 100% against the McCain/Kennedy, but, atleast in theory, somewhat supportive of the Kyl/Cornyn Bill, it it were truly enforced. I, like many if not most others, am very confused about which bill, if either, the President supports.
To be honest, I know little of either bill. Nor do I know what the pres supports. I think most people want to see the flow of illegals stopped. I think that most people want to see the legal flow of aliens better supervised. I think most people want to see the people who are here already accounted for. I think that most people want the criminal elements among the illegals deported, with no possibility of return. These are all elements I can join in with anyone from whatever agenda they have.
If he supports a TEMPORARY guestworker program that pays reasonable wages to foreign workers when no Americans are willing or able to do the job, and the plan does not entail a path to citizenship as McKennedy does, I will support his efforts wholeheartedly.
It is interesting that during the years before our attempts to limit immigration, that immigrants from Mexico were offset by those who voluntarily returned, having made the money they needed and left. That corresponds with the normal inclinations of most Latinos who come here to do manual labor. They almost uniformly have no desire to stay. Moreover, federal law (passed in 1952) specifically forbade prosecuting ANY employer for hiring an undocumented worker. This made for a defacto "guest worker" program, where workers entered, made the money they needed to send back to Carmelita, and then left to enjoy both Carmelita and the money they had sent her. Workers rotated in and out, but there was no significant net gain, according to census records. Certainly nothing like the hordes we have now. Further complicating this situation, 40 percent of illegals (not just illegal mexicans) are not here because they are border hoppers, but b/c they overstayed their visas. That means a good guest worker program has to be either 1)"loose" enough to de-incentivize overstaying (why overstay if you are relatively sure you can get back in?) 2) VERY tightly controlled, thru some type of federal oversight over employers (which I am TOTALLY against! they have too much power now. i don't want to give them more) or 3) extremely curtailed, which would create real problems (I believe), especially for the labor markets in the border states.
I suppose you can see my prejudices from the way I present the above, but I really believe they are informed prejudices, and not just arbitrary.
I would only like to add that a temp guest worker program should be strengthened by the passage of some nationalized version of Prop 200, that forbids ALL federal benefits for ALL non citizens.
If I got everything I liked out of a program like this (I won't) I would put everyone who is here illegally on a guest worker program, contingent on paying back taxes, a hefty fine (even heftier if they want to get on a track for citizenship), proof that no illegal activity has gone down other than the stuff to get across the border and live here, and a clean bill of health. Part of the requirements for ANY alien who seeks citizenship should be the demand that no federal or state assistance is sought.
Many freepers do not realize that if we played this right, we could use the argument that hispanics and asians come here and PROSPER with no fed assistance, thereby giving legitimacy to arguments for dismanteling the whole welfare state.
The Berlin Wall went up thanks to the weakness of John F. Kennedy. It came down thanks to the strength of Ronald Reagan.
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.