Gee, it sure would help if you would actually READ Larry Kudlow's article, which I excerpted and linked in my post.
Larry's point is exactly that we need to allow in SKILLED, and EDUCATED workers, which the Senate bill, in their infitie wisdom, limited -- the Senate is the one, who wants to limit educated workers, and let in everyone else.
Kudlow: "Amazingly, the Senate has passed another amendment to limit temporary workers to a mere 200,000 per-year, even though numerous studies say we need at least twice that amount. The Upper Chamber is also limiting the volume of skilled H1B workers, primarily engineers and scientists. These workers are crucial to American competitiveness, "
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/larrykudlow/2006/05/18/197947.html
"History has shown that immigrants in search of freedom and prosperity will climb over, tunnel under, or circumvent any fence. But if fencing helps pass a broad-based reform bill, so be it."
He discounts the effectiveness of a fence and fails to mention that our laws are being broken. If that is the case, then we will get more poor and uneducated workers coming into this country regardless of whether we increase the number of educated/skilled workers via H1B visas or not. These are not immigrant visas.
Kudlow states. "Wage differentials between Mexico and the U.S. are huge -- largely because of Mexico ’s failure to liberalize its economy. So, as long as American job opportunities and higher wages beckon, immigrants in search of a better life will stream northward into the U.S. -- fence or no fence. This has always been the heart of the problem."
So are we supposed to accept this stream of [illegal] immigrants streaming northward? They can't be stopped?
Kudlow: "The anti-immigration crowd also gets it wrong when it points out that the Senate compromise bill would increase the number of immigrant workers in the U.S. by roughly 61 million over the next two decades. This Heritage Foundation analysis has the fear-mongerers predicting a Mexican takeover of the United States . But we need these workers.
Notice Kudlow's canard about the anti-immigration crowd. We are anti-illegal immigration. Raising the legal numbers will just add to the illegal numbers. The Heritage study was just providing the parameters of the impact of the Senate bill, which was amended to cut down the numbers. We already take in almost 1 million legal immigrants a year. Raising it to three or five million annually will have a major impact on the size of our population. Do we really need those numbers, many of whom are not workers but family members who will need social services, medical care, etc.
Kudlow again:"Let’s also not forget that immigrants come here to work, raise families, and assimilate. They would in effect become a much-needed churchgoing blue-collar middle class -- an all but forgotten demographic that is crucial to a healthy America
For the most part yes. Legal immigrants will contribute, but unless we change our immigration rules, we will be receiving immigrants at the lower end of the economic ladder, "doing jobs Americans won't do." According to the Senate bill, employers have to certify that no Americans want these jobs.
Kudlow:"Hotheaded conservative populistswho equate temporary workers and a long-term path to citizenship with amnesty are dead wrong, and their calls for deportation are lunacy. Imagine U.S. security forces somehow putting immigrants and their families onto armed busses and shipping them back to Mexico . What would that say about our country?ad-of-night deportation raids smack of totalitarianism, not Americanism."
These comments are just meant to distort the position of conservatives and most of the American people for that matter. This inflamatory rhetoric is also untrue. The Senates temporary worker program has the workers applying for a green card as soon as they enter the country. This is a path to citizenship.
Kudlow: Bush addressed this very well: “There are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border recently -- and, someone who has worked here for many years, and has a home, a family, and an otherwise clean record.” His point is that henceforth, in the future, temporary workers will finish their jobs and go home before applying for permanent status.
What kind of reasoning is that? The longer you are here, the less illegal you become? The senate bill does not require the temporary workers to go home before applying for permanent status. And if we can't enforce our immigration laws now and deport illegal aliens, how are we going to find and deport "temporary workers" who won't go home and decide to stay?"
If Kudlow actuallysaid he opposed the Senate CIRA plan to amnesty 10 million unskilled illegal migrants, and focus instead on high-skilled immigration, I didnt see it... instead I saw: "hotheaded conservative populists who equate temporary workers and a long-term path to citizenship with amnesty are dead wrong," and other patent nonsense.
Hey, you think Kudlow or *any* free marketeer will like CIRA and its sham-nesty after they read this? ... thanks to Barack Obama's Bacon-Davis amendment and some other hidden Kennedy-written gotchs, we got *this*:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1088.cfm
"Alarms bells should be ringing at the idea of creating a new bureaucracy within the Department of Labor tasked with centrally planning labor markets for untold numbers of guest workers. This would be a mistake. ...The Senate has devised a guest worker program that would extend bureaucratic control over some 5 percent of the labor force, via wage controls on the private sector. Rather than establish a simple cap on the number of temporary visas issued each month (which could be distributed fairly in a simple monthly auction), the Senate bill would create of a new Department of Labor bureaucracy that would be nothing less than a central planning agency for the U.S. labor market."