Posted on 11/13/2015 7:24:51 PM PST by Kaslin
I can't possibly summarize the whole thing, as there's lots of detail. You should read it yourself, with the promise that you'll find plenty to like. Border wall? Check. Biometric screening system at points of entry? Check. An end to sanctuary cities? Checkity check. Criminalizing visa overstays? Yep, that too. Strengthening E-Verify? Oh yeah. Nary an enforcement mechanism is left unmentioned.
But it's not the provisions on illegal immigration that people are buzzing about on social media. It's what Cruz has to say about legal immigration. Isn't he the guy who called for vastly expanding the cap on H-1B visas two years ago, when the Gang of Eight bill was in the works? The Gang settled on 180,000 per year; Cruz had asked for 325,000. But that got him in trouble with some border hawks, who complain that too often H-1B visas operate as a vehicle for corporations to dump higher-paid American workers and replace them with cheaper foreign labor. That was a dilemma for Cruz, who's always tempered his criticism of illegal immigration with enthusiasm for legal immigration. What would he do about H-1B visas as a candidate?
That question has now been answered:
Suspend the issuance of all H-1B visas for 180 days to complete a comprehensive investigation and audit of pervasive allegations of abuse of the program: Initiate an immediate 180-day investigation and audit of the H-1B visa program and enact fundamental reforms of this program to ensure that it protects American workers. In recent months, more and more reports have become public of companies replacing American workers with cheaper foreign workers, contrary to the stated intent of the H-1B visa program. This will stop, and the H1-B program will be suspended until we can be certain that the program is no longer being abused.
That's not all. He also wants, among other things, more rigorous standards for applying for the visas requiring foreign applicants to hold advanced degrees, for starters, enforcing stricter accreditation requirements for those degrees, and mandating a cool off period for companies that have laid off an American worker before they can access the H-1B system. The 180-day suspension feels like a concession to righties without clearly backing off his earlier effort to raise the cap: He's not going to limit legal immigration but he will make sure that it meets organic demand among businesses, not demand manufactured by firing Americans. It's a compromise.
Actually, wait, hold that thought. Maybe he is going to limit legal immigration:
Halt any increases in legal immigration so long as American unemployment remains unacceptably high. The purpose of legal immigration should be to grow the economy, not to displace American workers. Under no circumstances should legal immigration levels be adjusted upwards so long as work-force participation rates remain below historical averages.
Is that the same Ted Cruz who said this to the Washington Examiner back in April after Scott Walker started talking about adjusting legal immigration caps in response to downturns in wages for U.S. workers?
There is considerable bipartisan agreement outside of Washington that we need to improve and streamline legal immigration so that we can remain a nation that welcomes and celebrates legal immigrants, Cruz said in an interview with the Washington Examiner during a brief campaign swing through Las Vegas.
I think it is a mistake for any politician to on the one hand embrace amnesty, embrace a pathway to citizenship for those who are here illegally, and on the other hand seek to restrict or punish legal immigrants, Cruz continued. I am the son of an immigrant who came legally from Cuba. [President Ronald] Reagan referred to legal immigrants as Americans by choice and there is no stronger advocate of legal immigration in the U.S. Senate than I am.
I think the right approach is to secure the border, follow the rule of law and embrace and improve legal immigration Cruz said.
He emphasized the distinction between embracing legal immigration and opposing illegal immigration as recently as three days ago at the Republican debate. It's always been key to Cruz's pitch. He wants to run on his bio in the general election as the son of immigrants, who made good on the American dream, and he knows Democrats will come after him hard as not wanting to extend that dream to others. That's why he's always been careful to extol the glories of legal immigration. Now, suddenly, he's cooling off. Hard to believe that's not a quick reaction to Rubio accusing him of having essentially the same stance on immigration. Cruz is searching here for a way to accentuate the differences, knowing that he's in trouble if Trump voters decide that Rubio's right about their similarities. This is one way to do it, I guess. In fact, there's another (smaller) flip-flop on that point: Although Cruz has consistently said in the past that we should get rid of birthright citizenship for illegals, he's also said that that can't be done by simple legislation. The Fourteenth Amendment protects birthright citizenship for all; if we're going to change it, we'll need an amendment, which will be difficult to the point of impossible. That was his way in the past of nudging conservatives not to obsess about that issue as it ain't going to change. In today's plan, though, he says, "As President, I will take immediate steps to pass legislation or a constitutional amendment to end birthright citizenship." Legislation? Does Cruz no longer believe the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship for illegals born here?
But wait. Haven't we forgotten the big question? Cruz has been needled (by, among others, me) for the past 48 hours over the fact that he won't clearly say what we should do with the 11 million illegals who are already here. Surely his new immigration plan will answer that question. Won't it?
Cruz again ignores direct question about what he'd do re the 11 million in US illegally. Note he called his plan "detailed."
Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) November 13, 2015
Amazingly, his otherwise very detailed plan doesn't address legalization. There's language about deporting illegals who have criminal records and there's vague language about enforcing the law, but Ted Cruz isn't a guy known for circumlocution. He speaks plainly and eloquently about America's problems. If he was intent on mass deportation instead of legalization, not only would his plan say that forthrightly, it would be emphasized at the very top in the security section. It isn't. How come?
fta... He wants to run on his bio in the general election as the son of immigrants, who made good on the American dream, ...
***********************
Cruz is not the son of immigrants. His mother was a US citizen when he was born.
Rubio is the son of Cuban parents.
The key thing from Malkin’s book is that the specific study Cruz cited several years ago as showing that H-1Bs help add additional American jobs to the economy was thoroughly debunked. They got behind-the-scenes records from the author that showed she kept cutting down the length of years she included in her study until she suddenly found a block of time where it looked like U.S. jobs went up at a higher rate than the level of H-1B hiring. If she had included the additional 3 years she originally did, it showed the opposite occurring, U.S. jobs being lost as H-1Bs went up. It was a nonsense study that proved no correlation between hiring H-1Bs and an increase of U.S. hiring.
See my post 22. Cruz cited a nonsense, manipulated study that me and others debunked on FR several months ago on the basis of common sense, and which Malkin THOROUGHLY debunked in her new book after getting access to all of the study author’s research.
Trump did say on O’Reilly this week that both Rubio and Cruz lack experience in the private sector and being job-creators. Just a couple weeks ago Trump wouldn’t say a bad thing about Carson. Look how that changed. Trump targets anyone who stands in his way to the nomination and he will savage Cruz if Cruz gets close. Then the conservative base will be split and at war with ourselves like we’ve never seen.
First of all let’s clarify one thing. He clearly said that it was “a cap not a requirement.”
Anyway, he cited five separate studies. Which one did you debunk?
What Trump doesn't seem to realize is that the President does not create jobs, and we don't want the President to create jobs - we want the President to help get the government out of the way and let the private sector create the jobs. If Trump wants to be the job-creator-in-chief, he should stay in the private sector.
Cruz must be snorting Koch.
Amazing, isn’t it, what happens when a “big name” like Malkin becomes associated with the issues of visa and green card abuse? Suddenly, the NY Post notes the book, a publicity tour is held (including the National Press Club), and CSPAN on Friday (yesterday) had a “kumbaya” session where all the callers on the air agreed with the authors of “Sold Out”.
It’s been happening for at least two decades now in the IT world. But now it’s to the point where ordinary Americans can’t find entry-level work as CNAs that would give them the “experience” to get hired on at the hospitals. Come to think of it, who is attending you in the hospital?
That’s why the Feds can be so choosy (when they want to) about which college grads they hire. Those grads that don’t have an in with a firm, or speak Spanish, face a tougher job market.
I meant grads that are not English/Spanish bilingual.
He DOES cite the worker participation rate rather than the unemployment rate as a criteria. Let the sheep sleep soundly.
Compared to Trump? Weak.
You don’t spend three hours together in NYC for martinis.
“Also, I was on the phone with a Cruz fund raiser and I told him as a retired IT guy that its a myth that we don’t have enough native talent.”
I do think there is a potential work ethic issue. I have had mixed success with native born co-op college students. The foreign born students here on student visas out-work and out-hustle the native born students almost every time. I said almost every time as I have had 1-2 good younger (18-25) workers, bit many in that age group just don’t want to work and do quality work. Have had better success with older students (35-54).
The usual anti-Cruz trolls show up to whine. Nothing Ted does at this point can make a difference with them. Sad.
One this one issue? Trump is a 10, Ted is a 9.
9 is acceptable to me.
.
Ted Cruz : EPIC Plan to DEFEAT Obama-GOPe Illegal Immigration and HALT-PROSECUTE H1B Visa Abuse
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3360258/posts
.
Trump has flipped flopped more than John Kerry.
Right now, I’ll take any flip or flop that has someone building a fence and deporting illegals. NO ONE else is promising that. So we know for sure, no one else, including Cruz, will do that.
The wall is already authorized by law, no need for the President to do anything but enforce the laws on the books + pass Kate’s law.
If we enforce the laws on the books as Cruz points out, illegals most will LEAVE no need for mass deportation.
Cruz is following principles laid out by Sun Tzu for fighting and winning a war. Trump is screaming like a Chimp and throwing feces against the wall.
Given that Trump has supported amnesty in the past why place blind faith in the guy. I though Cults of Personality were just for libs and commies.
https://www.aei.org/publication/message-to-the-gop-trump-supports-amnesty/
Cruz is stuck at 8%. He'll make a find veep for Trump. If the Wall is authorized, why didn't Cruz fight for that instead of biting for TPP and the Corker Amendment? No, Ted is a great guy but still a creature of Washington.
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.