The best immigration policy recognizes both the need for better border security and the need for immigrant workers. But given that the House and Senate can’t seem to agree on that, President Bush may be wise to consider an “enforcement-first” approach. Bush, who favors comprehensive reform, reportedly is now open to focusing first on border security — which both sides agree is needed — and leaving a guest-worker program and path to citizenship for another debate. The risk of such an incremental approach is that House lawmakers may be even less willing to face reality on the need for immigrant workers if they have already achieved their main objective: more secure borders.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- minutelady on Open thread 11/24
- minutelady on Open thread 11/24
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
13 Comments
“The risk of such an incremental approach is that House lawmakers may be even less willing to face reality on the need for immigrant workers if they have already achieved their main objective: more secure borders.”Posted by Phillip Brownlee
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THAT?
“President Bush may be wise to consider an “enforcement-first” approach.”
Great news! Too bad he didn’t understand this six months ago instead of six seconds ago!
The real problem with illegal immigration is that twenty years ago, most Americans wanted it curtailed, so Congress passed an immigration reform act that accepted the fact we had a couple million here, and gave them amnesty, in effect legalizing them after the fact, AND the act contained provisions to halt new illegal-immigrant employment. BUT, the latter provisions were toothless. This bred cynicism and abnegation for the law, not just among illegal workers, but illegal employers.
A cottage industry of fake green cards arose. But lawful employment requires the submission of quarterly W-2 forms with social security numbers to the federal government and state income forms as well in many states.
Basically, there should have been legislation that required all newly issued SSNs, and issuees’ dates of births, birthplaces, and parents’ names to be reported immediately to IRS. (Parents list their children’s SSNs on their tax returns, so IRS has a database of virtually all older issued SSNs.)
When employers intended to hire new people, they should have been required to telephone in the names, SSNs, birthplaces, DOB’s and parents’ names of new hires to IRS. This information could then have been computer-database-checked. If “Jesus Rodriquez Garcia SSN 543-12-6789″ gave his new employer a different birthplace, DOB and/or parents’ names from that on the IRS record, an INS referral would have been in order.
If IRS records showed that “Mr. Garcia’s” data were correct, but at the same time, he was apparently employed elsewhere according to W-2’s, a quick telephone call from the IRS to the on-record employer would demonstrate whether or not “Mr. Garcia” was still employed or had left. If “Mr. Garcia” was currently employed in a meat-packing plant in Colorado, and was working yesterday, it would be highly unlikely for him to be applying to work as a custodian in Arizona yesterday. So an INS referral would have been in order.
In these measures, high-tech, biometric, tamper-proof SS cards would have been unnecessary. The bottom line is, there are only so many valid SSNs. The forgers use the same numbers repeatedly.
This system could have applied to construction companies and homemakers utilizing “independent contractors”. If you wanted to hire laborers who don’t speak English fluently, you should have had to contact IRS to verify that person’s legal employability. For people who didn’t do this, and were caught, there should have been enforcement of criminal penalties, i.e. flarge ines for first-time infractions, and large fines plus jail time for subsequent infractions.
The real problem is that politicians placated the American public by passing “immigration reform”, but then did not design and carry out measures to actually halt, or at least minimize, illegal immigration.
If you are not up for re-election this year, ie. Senators, you are not likely to pass any real immigration reform.
The government actually wants illegals in our country. But they are trying to balance between their goals and the will of the people, which do not want and are tired of illegal immigration.
Democrats look at illegal immigrants as a potential pool of new Democrat voters.
Republicans look at illegal immigrations as a pool of cheap labor to help businesses that use them.
PanAmerica People!
Among the people in this country, I don’t see that much difference in attitudes about immigration. Liberal or conservative, I think we mostly agree that the border needs to be secured. Nobody wants to see the flood of illegals we have now. The problem is the politicians that are beholden to special interests. Both Dems and repubs want to influence the Latino vote. Repubs want to placate their business buddies. But the will of the people seems to be seal the border. We all need to remember how the Senate has conducted itself when elections come.
Its about time the government take anything seriously about securing our borders. I definitely believe that we need some type of guest worker program but I am a firm believer that if you come to this country, you should be able to speak english, drive a car and obey our laws.
Recently I heard a suggestion on the radio show “Nights With Alice Cooper”, u know the guy, the one who sang “Schools out for ever”.
Anyway the suggestion was that anyone from anywhere in the world may get instant citizenship if they committed to spend six years in the military, 2 in basic (in which they learn English, basic skills, etc…) and 4 in active combat. If they survive, they are allowed to exit the military and join society. Their families would get citizenship IF they go through the same 2 years of “basic training”.
This would allow these immigrants to enter society as well trained people that can really produce, being well trained by our military would make them perfectly capable of doing almost any job, rather than picking fruit.
Tony,I served in the Army with guys who enlisted so they could short-cut the citizenship barrier. Good for them; they were fine troopers all. The military has led the way on a lot of social issues – integration, etc., – but it still isn’t a big huggy-feely organization (well, maybe the Air Force pukes) and I’m not sure the military is the best place for this sort of social engineering. Maybe something like a a latter-day Peace Corps or that organization that helps inner-city folks.
Gittin,
Let me ask you this… When they enlisted, were there any types of special or separate classes or courses for the immigrants? Were they “specially handled” rather than just being thrown into the mix?
I believe the original thought behind this idea is that that exact type of social engineering WOULD take place by developing these types of programs where entire classes of basic training graduates would be immigrants and than distributed across into all branches of the military.
I don’t know, I’ve never been in the military and dont really have any plans on it (unless WWIII rolls around in my life time, entirely possible). Hence the questions here… What do you think about such a program?
I think this type of program would be great for training Doctors and Technical people… There’s a glutton of those type who want to come to the US to get training and just cant get here…
I think that Tony’s suggestion has merit. I think there should be some ramifications for fast track citizenship. I think the training received in no way demeans their heritage and they are welcome to celebrate their heritage, the training will provide a good ground basis to get started for careers – it will provide language skills and basic skills needed for everyday use in America. Maybe the additional 4 years service doesn’t have to be active military duty but perhaps a peace corp or other civic minded operation. Maybe if they go active military cut the service down to 3 years or whatever the minimum sign up is or if they go peace corp up the service to 5 years.I think it’s definately an idea worth considering.
I served in the Marine Corps with a few who were in for the citizenship and I agree with Gittin. They were good soldiers. No, they didn’t get special treatment, but as Gittin says, the military leads on a lot of social issues. The people I refer to did well adjusting to our language and ways and I’m sure they went on to be useful and productive citizens. There’s a lot to be said for a “melting pot” approach and maybe seperating out foriegners isn’t such a good idea. IMHO, that would tend to insulate immigrants. I know and work with a lot of Vietnamese. They struggle at first, but they seem to do pretty good at eventually learning the language and fitting in. But I give Vietnamese credit for being very intelligent and hard-working people to begin with.
In my line of work, I deal with a lot of foriegners. The ones who try to fit in seem to do very well. Those who try to maintain their national identity don’t.
Employers could help if they tried. The company I work for offers “English as a Second Language” classes on company time, and it’s been very successful. I’ve seen Hispanic, Middle Eastern, and Orientals go from no English to passable-good English in a reasonable time.
A person’s heritage is importiant, but if you’re going to become a citizen, you need to learn to be an American. We need to lose tags like “Hispanic-American”, “African-American”, etc. We need to be just Americans.
XXX,
I agree with your last sentence. I’m never in favor of people leaving their heritage behind, but classifying people by it, as you pointed out, makes a division that leads to more division, bigotry, and sometimes hate.
Joe,
Just so you know, I’m one Liberal Democrat who thinks enough is enough. I want stricter border control and believe all this talk is getting us nowhere. I want to see action. I understand that the cost and manpower to deport the number of illegals in this country makes it undoable (is that a word?), but that doesn’t mean I’m not concerned and wish there was some way we could thin out the numbers. I’ve also been called racist by people of my own “political party,” but it hasn’t changed the basis of my thinking all that much.
Julie,
I really like your idea. Makes one wonder why all those “intelligent and well-educated” congressmen and women haven’t come up with something similar. ;)
Shit! All the government needs to dois deport em all. I’ll drive the g-ddamn bus if i have to so those federali bloodsuckers won’t have to spenda dime.
“I never thought I would say this, but here goes: I’m proud of Sam Brownback. I don’t agree with the conservative Kansas senator on many issues, but he deserves credit for his brave and compassionate stand on immigration”Randy Scholfield is an Eagle editorial writerhttp://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/columnists/randy_scholfield/14557022.htmWE NEED TO REPLACE BOTH, A SENATOR AND A NEWSPAPER