The Tony Snow Show, Thursday, March 30, 2006

Here's some stuff I started saving this week. Maybe everybody who wrote this stuff is lying. Maybe they are not.

March 14, 2006, 8:22 a.m. Jobs Americans Won’t Do? Think again. Rich Lowry

A core element of the American creed has always been a belief in the dignity of labor - at least until now. Supporters of a guest-worker program for Mexican laborers say that "there are jobs that no Americans will do." This is an argument that is a step away from suggesting that there are jobs that Americans shouldn't do.

President George Bush, a strong supporter of the guest-worker program, has long said that "family values don't stop at the Rio Grande." We are supposed to believe, however, that the work ethic does stop there - it is only south of it that people can be found who are willing to work in construction, landscaping and agricultural jobs. So, without importing those people into our labor market, these jobs would go unfilled, disrupting the economy (and creating an epidemic of unkempt lawns in Southern California).

This is sheer nonsense. According to a new survey by the Pew Hispanic Center, illegals make up 24 percent of workers in agriculture, 17 percent in cleaning, 14 percent in construction, and 12 percent in food production. So 86 percent of construction workers, for instance, are either legal immigrants or Americans, despite the fact that this is one of the alleged categories of untouchable jobs.

Oddly, the people who warn that without millions of cheap, unskilled Mexican laborers, this country would face economic disaster are pro-business libertarians. They believe in the power of the market to handle anything - except a slightly tighter labor market for unskilled workers. But the free market would inevitably adjust, with higher wages or technological innovation.

Take agriculture. Phillip Martin, an economist at the University of California, Davis, has demolished the argument that a crackdown on illegals would ruin it, or be a hardship to consumers. Most farming - livestock, grains, etc. - doesn't heavily rely on hired workers. Only about 20 percent of the farm sector does, chiefly those areas involving fresh fruit and vegetables.

The average "consumer unit" in the U.S. spends $7 a week on fresh fruit and vegetables, less than is spent on alcohol, according to Martin. On a $1 head of lettuce, the farm worker gets about 6 or 7 cents, roughly 1/15th of the retail price. Even a big run-up in the cost of labor can't hit the consumer very hard.

Martin recalls that the end of the bracero guest-worker program in the mid-1960s caused a one-year 40 percent wage increase for the United Farm Workers Union. A similar wage increase for legal farm workers today would work out to about a 10-dollar-a-year increase in the average family's bill for fruit and vegetables. Another thing happened with the end of the bracero program: The processed-tomato industry, which was heavily dependent on guest workers and was supposed to be devastated by their absence, learned how to mechanize and became more productive.

So the market will manage with fewer illegal aliens. In agriculture, Martin speculates that will mean technological innovation in some sectors (peaches), and perhaps a shifting to production abroad in others (strawberries). There is indeed a niche for low-skill labor in America. The question is simply whether it should be filled by illegal or temporary Mexicans workers, or instead by legal immigrants and Americans, who can command slightly higher wages. The guest-worker lobby prefers the former option.

If this debate is presented clearly, there is little doubt what most conservatives - and the public - would prefer. In his second term, President Bush has become a master of the reverse-wedge issue - hot-button issues that divide his political base and get it to feast on itself with charges of sexism, xenophobia and racism. The first was Harriet Miers; then there was the Dubai ports deal; and now comes his guest-worker proposal, making for a trifecta of political self-immolation.

There is still time for Bush to make an escape from this latest budding political disaster, but it has to begin with the affirmation that there are no jobs Americans won't do.

- Rich Lowry is author of Legacy: Paying the Price for the Clinton Years.
_____________________________________________________________________________

http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters0b9c

_____________________________________________________________________________

http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-oppin284678637mar28,0,7760914.column?coll=ny-news-columnists

_____________________________________________________________________________

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060327-091535-6668r.htm

_____________________________________________________________________________

If I was better on the computer I could, it may have been the Sunday show I can't recall.FR has had literally thousands of immigration threads over the past few years it's a topic we cover like no one else.

BTW, my parents always carried their social security cards. But then again, there were here legally.

Hmm, so if we give more $$$$s to Mexico and help them fix THEIR country, it will help stop the flow of illegals???

Immigration debate seen skirting root cause (Vicente Fox - Reuters interview)
Reuters on Yahoo ^ | 3/29/06 | Bernd Debusmann

Posted on 03/29/2006 6:29:54 PM PST by NormsRevenge

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - President Vicente Fox paused for a long moment before answering a question on how long it would take Mexico to reach a stage where citizens no longer want to cross the U.S. border to seek work.

"Generations," he finally said.

"It's a long way to narrow the gap ... between incomes in Mexico and on the other side of the border," he said in a recent interview with Reuters.

That income gap is the principal reason why hundreds of thousands of Mexicans cross the border with the U.S. illegally to seek work -- yet it rarely figures in the heated and increasingly emotional debate over immigration now raging in the United States.

Roughly half of Mexico's population lives on less than $5 a day, according to government figures. The U.S. minimum wage is $5.15 an hour. Annual Mexican Gross Domestic Product per capita is just under $7,000. It is almost $44,000 in the United States.

The gap is now wider than it was when Mexico, the United States and Canada signed the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1992.

The treaty took effect two years later and was supposed to generate more jobs in Mexico, raise incomes and, as a consequence, reduce the number of Mexicans crossing the 2,000-mile border with their superpower neighbor, legally or illegally.

That has not happened and the number of Mexicans making the increasingly dangerous and expensive trek north has risen steadily over the past few years.

Mexican experts say that the rival immigration reform bills now being debated in the United States will have limited effect as long as income disparity remains as deep as it is now.

"Migration is a question of supply and demand," said Jorge Bustamante of the Northern Frontier College in Tijuana. "Demand in the U.S. for Mexican labor has been growing. The money is better on the other side. That's the main factor."

Said Jorge Chabat, of Mexico City's Center for Economic Investigation and Teaching (CIDE): "There are two ways to tackle the migration problem: improve the (Mexican) economy or introduce a more flexible (U.S.) border policy, more toward an open border."

That is not likely to happen. Public opinion polls in the United States show that a large majority of Americans are in favor of stricter border controls and even a border wall.

SPAIN, PORTUGAL SEEN AS EXAMPLES

"Average wages in Mexico will eventually rise enough to hold people here," said Federico Estevez, head of the political science department of ITAM, a leading Mexico City university. "It will take time. But huge labor migrations have been stopped before by economic opportunities. Look at Portugal and Spain."

Workers from the two countries used to migrate to Germany and France much in the same way Mexicans have been moving to the United States.

But when the European Union expanded in the 1980s and adopted new members, including Spain and Portugal, it spent more than $500 billion in aid to narrow the income gap between the newcomers and the most prosperous EU countries. Immigration dropped sharply.

The idea of providing aid to Mexico has not been part of the public discourse in the United States, where the economic conditions of its southern neighbors are seen as their own affair. U.S. proponents of EU-style subsidies to lift Mexico closer to its partners in NAFTA are few and far between.

One of them is Robert Pastor, head of the Center for North American Studies at the American University in Washington. Pastor has for years argued that the U.S., Canada and Mexico should set up a North American investment fund to finance infrastructure projects and shrink the income gap between Mexico and its richer partners.

An investment of $20 billion a year over the next 10 years in Mexico in roads and communications connecting the poor southern part of Mexico to the North American market, Pastor says, would attract new companies to invest in Mexico and encourage many Mexicans to stay home and others to return.

"The idea of funding development in Mexico may sound ludicrous to many," Pastor said, "and it would not end illegal immigration overnight. But it would end it eventually. And besides, it would benefit the U.S. economically."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1605851/posts

In a list of potential guests, yesterday, I inadvertenly left off JD Hayworth:

Vicente Fox Needs a Lesson in Civility
Human Events ^ | March 29 2006 | JD Hayworth

Posted on 03/29/2006 10:00:34 PM PST by Reagan Man

Earlier this week, President Bush urged that the debate on illegal immigration be conducted in a “civil and dignified” manner. I agree. And perhaps no one needs to hear that admonition more than Mexican President Vicente Fox, with whom President Bush is now meeting. President Fox has made it clear that he has nothing but contempt for our laws and our people. And his remarks have been anything but civil or dignified.

President Fox has called U.S. border control efforts in San Diego and Texas “discriminatory.” He said those of us opposed to illegal immigration are part of “minority, xenophobic, discriminatory groups.” And President Fox astounded us all when he declared that illegal aliens in the U.S. “take work that not even blacks want to do.”

President Fox called the Minutemen “migrant hunters,” yet calls Mexican illegal aliens “heroes.” He called the House passage of a provision authorizing the construction of a border fence, “disgraceful and shameful.” He refuses to even recognize that those who cross our border without permission are illegals, infamously telling Sean Hannity, “They are not illegals. They are people that come there to work, to look for a better opportunity.”

Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez has been equally intemperate and contemptuous of our sovereignty. Derbez called the House-passed immigration reform bill, “stupid and underhanded.” He recently speculated that one cross-border incident in Texas might not have involved Mexicans at all, but American troops masquerading as Mexican soldiers to help drug runners. He once even referred to Hispanic voters in Arizona as “our own Mexican-Americans.”

And we’re supposed to be the arrogant ones in the relationship?

Americans are tired of being told that they are bigots by the likes of President Fox and Foreign Minister Derbez, and President Bush should publicly make it clear to both of them that their clumsy, over-the-top rhetoric is unwarranted and unacceptable.

This is how absurd the situation has become. In 2002, Mexico petulantly expelled on charges of domestic interference a dozen American college students that were legally in country. Why? Because they participated in a protest against a planned airport.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands of illegal Mexicans protest on our streets, disrupt our cities, and intimidate our citizens—and are celebrated by the mainstream media and cheered on by the Mexican government.

If America ever interfered in Mexican internal affairs the way Mexico interferes in ours, our diplomats would be expelled. So I say any Mexican diplomat found to have helped plan, organize, or participate in the recent protests should be expelled forthwith.

One columnist, Ernesto Portillo, went so far as to compare these outrageous protests to the Boston Tea Party, calling them “part of our rich tradition.” He wrote of the protestors, “their hope is to be part of the American fabric,” although the only fabric I saw on display in Phoenix and Los Angeles were the flags of Mexico, Colombia, Nicaragua, et al. And Portillo wants us to believe these people truly want to be Americans?

These recent protests also illustrate the sense of entitlement permeating the illegal alien mindset. Many of the marchers think they are special because the American southwest once was part of Aztlán, the mythical place of origin of the Aztec peoples, although to many it refers only to those parts of Mexico taken over by the U.S. in 1846. As Samuel Huntington pointed out, “No other immigrant group in American history has asserted or has been able to assert a historical claim to American territory. Mexicans can and do make that claim.”

Indeed, a 2002 Zogby poll found that 58% of Mexicans believe the American Southwest rightfully belongs to them, while 57% don’t think they need permission to enter our country. So it is not surprising that last week we saw protest signs like this: “I’m not illegal because this is my homeland.”

But the Mexicans aren’t the only ones who demand special treatment. In Washington a few weeks ago, Irish illegal immigrants protested for amnesty at the Capitol. One of the participants, lobbyist Niall O’Dowd, argued that Irish illegals were “a special case” because of “how much Ireland has contributed to America in the past,” a claim that could be made by almost every ethnic group in the world. O’Dowd’s goal is to ensure that “the Irish as a nation never have to deal with this issue of illegality in the U.S. again.”

Got that? A special open borders policy just for Ireland. As a columnist in the Irish Daily Mail put it, “[Irish illegals] express a kind of indignation that the Irish should have to get in the queue with the Mexicans and the rest.”

It is easy to understand why someone would want to flee Mexico, with its corrupt and backward economy. But Ireland has one of the fastest growing economies in Europe. Irish illegal aliens have no excuse for breaking our laws other than, apparently, they think they’re “special.”

But the only truly “special” people are the American citizens our government is supposed to protect and defend. It has often been said that America cannot be the policeman of the world, but neither can we be its economic overflow tank. It is time for President Bush to start paying less attention to Vicente Fox and friends, and more attention to our own people.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1605941/posts

That is for sure, it's tough to take into account every variable that goes with the illegal migration. There are just too many things to take into account.

Bottom line we need to obey the law.

Good point. That it may be tough to shove 12 million illegals out the door real quick. But one thing we do know is that it will be even tougher to shove 30 or 40 million out the door 10 years from now. We need to secure the borders and now.

If there were no welfare, there'd be fewer "jobs Americans won't do."

Tony is doing a hard sell on this illegal immigration business, but I am not yet persuaded.

What's he trying to sell us? I'm sound deprived this morning. Is he agreeing with the "Guest Worker" program, or the Kennedy McCain Bill?

Tony, you are right. Assimilation is THE key to the immigration problem....that and English only in schools. The Mexican people that I know don't LIKE the dual-language system in school, because it negates the necessity of being proficient in English to get ahead!

That's funny... I thought this was Kilroy mode:

"Kilroy Mode"

You mean Kilroy was here and I missed him!! ;>)

That's Bump to the top... a good thing.

Is he agreeing with the "Guest Worker" program, or the Kennedy McCain Bill?

Both, pretty much.

Se habla Ingles!

It's tough to base immigration law on what farmers need. There are good citizens all over the world that are far more deserving of U.S citizenship than many of the Mexicons we let in now. How biased can we get.

I have been waiting patiently for some Congresscritter to seriously suggest taking away the right to automatic citizenship to those born in this country.

Ireland passed an amendment a few years ago that stated a person born in the country must have at least one Irish parent before citizenship can be awarded. I'm still shocked that an EU country is further ahead of the game on this than we are.

Tony is doing a hard sell on this illegal immigration business, but I am not yet persuaded. What's he trying to sell us? I'm sound deprived this morning. Is he agreeing with the "Guest Worker" program, or the Kennedy McCain Bill?

Both. Snow has degenerated into the worst sort of White House hack.

CORNYN on the Senate floor now...he wants to talk about the 10-20 million illegals here now.

Snow has degenerated into the worst sort of White House hack.

That is just nonsense. These are his opinions. It's just that this time I don't agree with him. He is nobody's "hack."