See other Immigration Articles
Title: On immigration, conservatives need to give Bush a break
Source:
Post Gazette
URL Source: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06141/691654-108.stm
Published: May 22, 2006
Author: Jack Kelly
Post Date: 2006-05-22 00:28:48 by Zipporah
Keywords: None
Views: 139
Comments: 21
Sunday, May 21, 2006 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette What does this have to do with President Bush's plan for comprehensive immigration reform? Maybe lots. Medicare and Social Security are going broke chiefly because there aren't enough workers paying into the systems to support beneficiaries. Unless millions of new workers can be found to pay the payroll tax, the retirement of the baby boom generation will bust both programs. An Obrador victory likely would be a greater blow to our national security than the Ayatollah Khomeini's ouster of the shah of Iran has proven to be. Imagine the harm a Marxist dictator controlling a nation of 108 million people which shares a 2,000-mile border with us can do. President Bush has. You should. The No. 1 source of revenue for Mexico is remittances from Mexicans working in the United States. Threatening those remittances helps Mr. Obrador. Regularizing them helps Mr. Calderon. We should not institute a major domestic program primarily to aid a foreign ally. But a guest-worker program can benefit both our economy and our security. Supporters of a guest-worker program say there are jobs too few Americans are willing to do at anything close to prevailing wages. Opponents says businessmen are just looking for cheap labor to exploit. There is truth in both positions, but the weight of evidence supports the need for immigrant labor, at least for seasonal agricultural industries. Our economy is booming, so it is difficult to argue that immigrant labor is harming it. Unemployment is approaching all-time lows, so it is difficult to argue we could dispense with immigrant labor without serious economic consequences. A properly designed guest worker program can meet the legitimate needs of business, while sharply reducing the exploitation of illegals and the depressing effect that has on wages. Lawful guest workers with tamper-proof ID cards would end the excuses businesses have for employing illegals. If the Border Patrol didn't have to chase so many people who just want to come here to work, more of its time and resources could be devoted to hunting down those who pose serious threats to our security. Many are unwilling to see the potential benefits in a guest worker program and a path to normalization for illegals already here because they are angry, with good reason. In 1986, we were promised a "comprehensive" solution: strict enforcement coupled with amnesty for illegals already here. The amnesty was delivered, but not the enforcement, with the result there are roughly 12 million illegals now compared to about 4 million then. Americans don't want to be bamboozled again. But some conservatives are so angry they complain even when they get what they want. Columnist Michelle Malkin has been demanding a crackdown on employers who hire illegals. Now that that's happening, she says it's just for show. When President Bush announced enforcement measures its editorial board approved of, the Manchester Union Leader said his heart wasn't in it. President Bush has said the right things about enforcement. He'd better mean them, or there will be hell to pay. Voters in Herndon, Va., tossed out the mayor and town council because they supported an employment center for illegals. Rep. Tom Osborne, the Cornhuskers' football coach during their glory years, was an icon in Nebraska, but lost a gubernatorial primary this month because he backed a bill providing college tuition breaks for illegals. Anger shouldn't blind us to opportunity. What to do about the 11 million to 12 million illegals already here is understandably contentious. But the key issue is how to keep more illegals from coming in. President Bush hasn't done enough to secure our borders. But he has done more than Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, his dad and Bill Clinton combined. The surprisingly large vote in the Senate Wednesday for a border fence indicates the Osborne example has raised the consciousness of even many Democrats. The political atmosphere has never been better for enactment of meaningful enforcement measures. That atmosphere is unlikely to improve if we kick this can down the road to a future, perhaps Democratic, Congress.
On immigration, conservatives need to give Bush a break
Mexico has a presidential election on July 2. The leading candidates are Felipe Calderon, a conservative, and Andres Lopez Obrador, a leftist who has the backing of Venezuelan thug Hugo Chavez and Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 10.
#3. To: Zipporah (#0)
Has it ever occurred to these people that the reason communism and marxism made such big inroads in many countries was because the people were so poverty stricken and beaten down they had nothing to lose? Kind of like the Mexicans right now. I'm sure many if not most of those folks would rather stay in Mexico if they only had jobs and could keep their farms. We have only greedy and fanatical free traders to thank for the probable success of Marxism in Mexico.
I found this which I thought was interesting: http://www.theamericanresistance.com/articles/art2004jan04.html 2. Mexico is NOT a poor country. It has the fifth richest economy in the world, and by sending its teeming masses to our country, that status keeps on rising. Mexico has more resources per square mile than the U.S. and plenty of money to take care of its own people. Why should the taxpayers of this country subsidize Mexico's corruption? You are right though re the farmers..many were farmers who couldnt compete after NAFTA.. globalization which IS basically Marxism is what is destroying this country and has destroyed Mexico.. and the list is far longer of course.
I understand that is correct - Mexico has enormous natural resources and a lot of wealth, but it's concentrated in a small number of families and the vast bulk of the people have gotten poorer and poorer especially since NAFTA was passed. They're in pretty rough shape down there, that's why they're all trying to get up here. We'd have half of Mexico up here if nothing is done. Well, nothing will be done, of course. Mexico is the model for what the elites want for us.
Agreed.. the same model they want us to have .. two classes of citizens the poor and the wealthy.. sorta like royality.. a royal pain in the a**..
There are no replies to Comment # 10. End Trace Mode for Comment # 10.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#5. To: mehitable (#3)
Has it ever occurred to these people that the reason communism and marxism made such big inroads in many countries was because the people were so poverty stricken and beaten down they had nothing to lose? Kind of like the Mexicans right now. I'm sure many if not most of those folks would rather stay in Mexico if they only had jobs and could keep their farms. We have only greedy and fanatical free traders to thank for the probable success of Marxism in Mexico.
#8. To: Zipporah (#5)
#10. To: mehitable (#8)
I understand that is correct - Mexico has enormous natural resources and a lot of wealth, but it's concentrated in a small number of families and the vast bulk of the people have gotten poorer and poorer especially since NAFTA was passed. They're in pretty rough shape down there, that's why they're all trying to get up here. We'd have half of Mexico up here if nothing is done. Well, nothing will be done, of course. Mexico is the model for what the elites want for us.
Replies to Comment # 10.