Posted on 01/24/2004 3:19:01 AM PST by dennisw
Is this amnesty?
A. You bet it is. Any program that allows millions of illegal aliens to receive legal status in this country is an amnesty. The difference between this amnesty and the one signed by President Reagan in 1986 is that this one includes an interim guestworker status for people transitioning from illegal alien status to legal permanent residency. Under the president's plan, current illegal aliens would be given guestworker status for up to six years and be eligible for Social Security numbers and driver's licenses. It is absolutely not credible to believe that under the circumstances any of these people will ever leave, or that they will not be granted permanent residence. In addition, because it allows them to bring family members to join them, amnesty will be extended to countless millions more.
President Bush also promises "enhanced workplace enforcement again those who violate the immigration laws." The obvious question is: Why has there been virtually no workplace enforcement over the past three years of his administration? Why should anyone believe, after years of empty promises by Republican and Democratic administrations, that this time they will keep their word? Why doesn't the president begin "enhanced work place enforcement" today? He does not need any additional legislation to do that. It is already the law.
Q. Will immigrants who participate in this program be eligible for citizenship?
A. Under the 1996 immigration reform legislation (again, never enforced), people who violated our immigration laws were supposed to be made ineligible for legal immigration status in the U.S. President Bush's plan will inevitably lead to citizenship for millions of immigration cheaters. It's just going to take a little longer.
Q. How will you determine that a job cannot be filled by an American?
A. The White House claims that "every reasonable effort" must be made to find an American worker for a job opening. However, "every reasonable effort" does not seem to include offering better wages or other incentives to attract American workers. In fact, when asked how the plan would establish that no American workers were available for the job, White House aides said "the fact the job is open will be assumed to mean that the 'marketplace' had determined that." This proposal amounts to a death-knell for upward mobility in the U.S. After employers have made "every reasonable effort" to find an American worker at a wage they wish to pay, they will be free to offer that job to anyone anywhere in the world, rather than have to bid for the services of American workers.
Q. What will happen to employers who have been illegal hiring foreign workers?
A. They get a free pass. No one will have to pay the consequences of having hired people illegally and who also often violated tax laws and labor laws. Employers will not be held accountable for the countless billions of dollars their low-wage illegal workers have cost states and local communities over the years. Why should anyone believe that the government will start enforcing these laws, and if they have the capability, why aren't they doing it already?
Q. If unemployment rises, will this program be suspended?
A. In this instance, the White House gives an honest answer: NO! If employers cannot induce Americans to work at the wages they wish to pay, they will be able to seek workers overseas, no matter what our unemployment rate is. Moreover, since our legal immigration admissions have been unaffected by economic circumstances in this country, why would we expect that the condition of American workers would have any bearing on this area of immigration policy?
Q. Would this proposal create a new enforcement burden?
A. An enforcement nightmare would be more accurate. The immigration system has proven beyond all reasonable doubt that it cannot cope with its existing responsibilities. Now the president would have these same chaotic immigration agencies investigate ten million or more applications from illegal aliens seeking to become guestworkers, applications to bring their families here, and untold millions more applications from prospective guestworkers overseas. The 1986 amnesty was so mismanaged that, by the admission of the amnesty's own sponsors, the majority of people who qualified under certain provisions received legalization fraudulently.
Q. How does the federal government maintain credibility in threatening future law enforcement?
A. There has been some additional attention to the border, but it clearly hasn't stopped the influx of illegal aliens. The problem has been a lack of interior enforcement and workplace enforcement. So far, all the White House is offering is lip service on interior and workplace enforcement. There is nothing in the president's proposal that will prevent millions more illegal aliens from entering the country in the expectation that they too will eventually be granted legal status.
Q. Will the family members of aliens participating in the temporary worker program be able to live in the U.S. with the principal worker?
A. The White House states vaguely that the "principal worker is required to prove that he or she can support family members" while they're here. What is the definition of support? Who is going to cover the cost of education for children, and health care for other family members? What about children who are likely to be born in the U.S. during the duration of stay here? Because being born on U.S. soil grants them automatic U.S. citizenship, all of these children will be eligible for the full range of public benefits, which will be paid by the taxpayers.
Q. If the program does not allow the worker to remain permanently in the United States, what incentive would an undocumented worker have to come forward?
A. All history indicates that "temporary" residency programs result in permanent U.S. residence. Current illegal aliens know, as do prospective "guestworkers" outside the country who want to come here, that once a foothold is established, the system inevitably yields and no one is ever required to leave. The administration also contends that guestworker status will give these people bargaining power with employers. Not so long as employers can simply bring in new guestworkers if the workers already here are not willing to accept the wages and working conditions being offered. Not only does the "every reasonable effort" proviso of the president's plan not protect U.S. citizen workers, it will not protect established guestworkers while there is a limitless supply of workers outside the country to be tapped.
The president's plan also includes eligibility for Social Security benefits for people who have worked in this country illegally. If they come forward, it appears they may be eligible to collect for the years they worked illegally under false identities and documents. At a time when one of the critical public policy issues faced by the country is the solvency of the Social Security system, this proposal will further burden a program that may not be able to fulfill its promises to U.S. citizens who have paid into it honestly throughout their lifetimes.
Q. Will the government be able to implement such a large-scale immigration program and enforce the immigration laws?
A. In 1986, the American people were promised a well-run, one-time-only amnesty program for illegal aliens living here at the time. It was neither well run, nor apparently a one-time offer. The 1986 amnesty was riddled with fraud and it did nothing to solve the illegal immigration crisis. In fact, judging by the fact that we have an estimated nine to eleven million illegal aliens living in the U.S. today, it exacerbated the problem. The second part of the 1986 immigration act was the promise of employer sanctions that would punish employers who continued to hire illegal aliens. Employer sanctions have never been enforced and there is no reason to believe that the government will be any more serious this time.
More recently, the government has mismanaged the H-1B guestworker program, which has brought hundreds of thousands of high tech workers to the U.S. This program has been widely abused, and there is incontrovertible evidence that thousands of American workers were either passed over for employment or displaced because of the availability of H-1B workers. The government's track record of protecting American workers from unfair competition from foreign guestworkers is so poor that it would be reckless to place any faith in promises to protect American workers if a far more massive guestworker program is enacted.
I can already hear the Central American nations and South American nations complaining. There are tons of illegal Colombians where I live. They scam their way in via tourist visas then hire a scumbag lawyer to tie the INS up in knots.
I think they have that already, but of course, participation is "voluntary" for employers, so it's of no use.
What we really need is a President willing to do his job. We won't, unfortunately, get that until January 2009 at the earliest.
Anyone who starts out with this question has immediately invalidated themselves as a credible source of information. The answer is so simple that even the most meager attempt to find the answer will result in the answer. The writer is either flying blind, or already knows the answer and being intentionally deceptive.
Under the current law, an employer must verify legal status of an employee or they can be fined and otherwise penalized. The employer verifies legal status when the employee present two items from a list of 24. If the employee presents the two items, the employer is off the hook from that point.
The fact of the matter is that the items are easy to forge. The employer does not have to verify the accuracy of the documents (even if they are pathetic forgeries) and in fact the reverse is true. If you verify for one worker, you must verify for all workers thanks to anti-discrimination laws (courtesy of court rulings). So, simply by having the potential employee flash two easily forged documents in front of their face, the employer is now in compliance with the law.
The underground communities of illegals know what the rules are and how easy it is to get around them.
Here is one on line SS number data base. http://usinfosearch.com/Free_ssn_search.htm
I tested it and it works. But it has to be more sophisticated, run by the INS and employers must be compelled to use it by law. As of now, participation is "voluntary" for employers, so it's of no use. As of now all an employer must do is look at the phony work documents submitted.
In case you haven't noticed, the birth rate in the United States is quite low and getting lower. As our economy continues to grow, the need for immigrants will grow with it. The problem is more about controlling the process to insure the quality of the immigrants than controlling the numbers.
The United States can support a population much larger than it currently has, but the huge underground economy built on illegal aliens is not very efficient and is a breeding ground for crime and corruption.
I think this is what dagnabbit was referring to. It's already set up and has been in use in several states; it's operated by the government; and it ties into Social Security and immigration databases. The legislation just signed is to expand it nationwide. I think the main flaw from an enforcement standpoint is that use of it is entirely voluntary.
Richard W.
There is the potential to use Homeland Security as the lever to make it work. Let them keep the database and employers report new employees and exiting employees to them. As an information clearing house, they would benefit both security and immigration control. The mantle of homeland security would perhaps slow down interference by the courts.
I agree. Show me where Bush's proposal says this wouldn't be done?
I have zero confidence this will change if GWBush gets his wish to grant amnesty to 13 million illegal aliens.
Please, there we go again. It's not an amnesty because there is no pardon, illegals are punished with a fine. It may not be the punishment you would prefer, but they are not forgiven for breaking the law.
It's up to 13 million now? Fine, I'll let folks inflate the number as much as they like, I'll grant you that there is no way of knowing for sure how many are here.
Say there are 13 million illegals.... they pay the fine and apply for guest worker status. Those with criminal histories are booted out and those without a job are booted out... that will leave how many? Folks aren't being intellectually honest by pretending they will all be eligible to stay here. Our most significant concerns about illegals have always been criminal activity and sucking up welfare/social services... Bush's proposal sends those leeches home.
The definition of pardon is "the excusing of an offense without exacting a penalty." Under the current proposal, is there some form of penalty (monetary or otherwise) that someone currently residing illegally in the US must pay to gain guest worker status vs. someone who has not entered the country illegally? If so, arguments over its size may be valid, but the term amnesty would not apply.
I will always believe in the United States! There is not a nation on this earth than can match it economically, politically or socially, despite whatever problems we may have.
It doesn't matter what I believe when looking at the Census numbers and the demographics they present. Without immigration, legal or otherwise, the population of the US would actually decline on a year to year basis. A declining population cannot support an expanding economy. That is basic economics, not personal belief.
Your little litany of "who will..." is just a pathetic attempt to avoid a rational examination of what the real issues involved in immigration are. However, without a rational examination of those issues and the true needs that a solution must meet, no solution will ever be found.
That's rich, coming from a thread packed with folks voting against the GOP.
Third-party twits aren't "real" Republicans... they're not even as semi-valuable as actual RINO's are...
Third-party twits are just third-party twits.
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.