Posted on 01/23/2014 12:12:06 PM PST by jimbo123
Ever since The Heritage Foundation announced it was hiring Stephen Moore to be the think tank's chief economist, there have been rumblings on the left hoping that the new hire signaled a coming policy change on immigration.
For example, Talking Points Memo's Dylan Scott reports:
Outsider observers in the conservative sphere were emphatic: Moore's hiring could be a turning point for Heritage, both in general and particularly on immigration, this Congress's best shot -- however remote -- to leave a meaningful legislative mark.
Alex Nowrasteh, immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, the libertarian think tank, who has called the Senate-passed immigration bill "a solid improvement over the current immigration system," told TPM that Moore's presence "bodes very well for an ideological policy shift" at Heritage. He compared the move to House Speaker John Boehner hiring the top immigration analyst at the Bipartisan Policy Center to his staff in December, which reform advocates also viewed as a potential turning of the tide on the issue.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
This article reads like head-in-the-sand, whistling-past-the-graveyard, wishful thinking, nearly along the lines of “I was against before I was for it.” I’m pretty sure they didn’t hire the WSJ amnesty beat writer to be a bridge partner for DeMint.
Because amnesty pimps need to put food on the table. Plenty of conservatives work for liberal companies and vice versa.
Maybe the obama economy?
I never trusted DeMint when he was in the Senate.
He always struck me as being a “convenience conservative”—Saying all the right things, and basking in the glow of a self-created aura of conservatism, but nowhere to be found when there was heavy lifting (e.g., filibuster) to be done. I’ve taken some abuse on FR for stating that perspective (and likely will again).
I was apprehensive, and very disappointed, when Heritage hired him. It now appears that my concern was warranted.
80% of new immigrant citizens vote for the Democrat Party.
And Heritage hires a Amnesty-Open Borders advocate to be their top economist?
Conservatives are truly alone.
Repeat this on immigration reform over and over and over:
OPEN BORDERS—NO BENEFITS
This was essentially the immigration policy of our country at the end of the 19th century. Why abandon it? Millions of European immigrants came to our country with nothing more than a suitcase and whatever savings they had, if any. They found work, built communities, churches, and schools, and contributed mightily to the GNP and the national effort. All without a dime of public assistance.
So our message to today’s immigrants should be—come to our country. Stay as long as you like. But like earlier immigrants—place no demands on your neighbors. You will not be hunted down and deported. But neither will you be government supported.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
The unfortunate fact is that Heritage has always been for replacing Americans in STEM fields using that tired old mantra about jobs Americans can’t and won’t do.
“And it is true. Heritage has always been for pro-growth immigration reform. Here, for example, is a 2008 paper calling for more H-1B visas on the grounds they will lead to more jobs and faster economic growth. “
Note Heritage will argue that by their very presence guest workers will create jobs. ROFL.
There are so many ‘guest workers in STEM field now that American compete with illegals in the STEM field. Heritage has always seemed oblivious to the fact that supply and demand affect the job market.
RE: “Why abandon it?”
From what I see, we haven’t.
In 2013:
(1) 1 million new immigrant citizens.
(2) 500,000 new Green Cards.
(3) 750,000 work visas.
(4) 11.5 million illegal immigrants.
Since the Reagan Amnesty in 1986:
(1) We now have the lowest percentage of native born Americans in the work force in 35 years.
(2) Stagnant or declining wages in all low and medium skill jobs for the last 25 years, in spite of HUGE gains in productivity.
Bottom Line financially - Immigration is a great idea until YOU lose YOUR job, or YOUR pay goes down, or YOUR political party is defeated at the polls.
Bottom Line politically - Democrats want new voters since they can’t win with native born whites. Some Republicans, and almost all Libertarians want cheap, obedient labor, which they cannot get with native born Americans.
By the way, there’s a very good reason millions of immigrants came to the USA.....
Between 1750-1950, America had the highest wages and the highest standard of living in the world.
That is no longer true.
If you turn off government welfare, you will turn off immigration, too.
Congresscritter Renee Ellmers was promoting women in Tech at IBM at Raleigh.
While the Tech industry imports mostly foreign men to do jobs some female STEM graduates could be doing.
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.