White House to halt deportation of young illegal immigrants

Because that stance by Romney will anger conservatives and Romney's base. It's too early for that now. If Romney caves in on immigration, Obama can say something to the effect of "we may both have different views on how to get there but both of us want to do something to help some the immigrants that are here illegally not from their own choosing." Conservatives would be very disheartened by not having a choice on that for immigration.

Plus Mitt is in a everything Obama does is wrong mode right now. Whatever Obama says, Mitt has to come out against it by his own operating procedure.

Romney has already said he has a plan on immigration reform, but has been trying not to give many details at the moment. This forces him to either come out with his details (which might be something similar to the Dream Act, and Obama can say he's already tried that, but the GOP killed it.).

If Romney wants to hurt his chances in the election with his own base he can act like he has a compromise. But the way the GOP has been lately, compromise has been evil.

 

That only matters if they have the skills to do those other jobs and if those jobs are available. Given that we still have over 8% unemployment its not like there are tons of jobs out there to begin with.

Also consider that even though they now have work permits that only means that they compete on an even level with already legal workers. The few advantages of an underground economy, skirting regulations, are no long available to them.

 

This is certainly possible, though we've had a net decrease in illegal immigrants over the past several thanks to a combination of improved opportunities in Mexico, more aggressive deportation, and tougher laws on employers.

But now you're making mixed arguments. You're suggesting certain jobs will go down in wages thanks to increased labor, but others won't go up in wages thanks to decreased labor. Either the economics of labor applies or it doesn't - you can't really pick and choose to fit your argument.

Wait - why do these people have little skills? They are, at minimum, required to be honorably discharged from the military or have high school diplomas to even get a chance at a work permit. In many cases, the DREAMers most often cited are college graduates who are already functioning members of society that are technically illegal. Many have fake SS #'s as is and work at professional jobs already - they are simply not having to lie about it anymore.

 

He's not really shifting left. He's already been on board with the original DREAM Act which is more significant than this. The GOP was trying to stake some middle ground and attract Hispanic support with DREAM-lite, as being constructed by Marco Rubio. Obama basically just enacted that version on his own, taking the middle ground there. This IS the centrist solution that Romney would have taken.

This is why Romney, Rubio, and others are only focusing on attacking Obama on process and not substance - because he claimed the centrist position they were inching towards.

 

We are talking about unskilled labor here. What skills might they lack? You just gave 1 million people upward mobility into a new job market, how can you not agree it puts the squeeze on legal workers? Big business can hire illegals again without fear.

Among the few advantages the young, poor, unskilled, uneducated, unemployed american had, being of legal status is no longer among them.

 

I think it is about the lack of jobs
not the lack of people to take jobs

Rocket River

 

If illegals stop coming here, or move away because a lack of jobs I don't consider them employed. I call them unemployed somewhere else. It is impossible to document the employment status of millions of unemployed, undocumented workers paid in cash, but I don't usually consider someone standing on the corner hoping to get day labor 'employed'.

I'm not making mixed arguments at all. I am stating the simple fact that you just possibly added a million sellers of labor to a market of young, unskilled, poor workers. That market is controlled by law. The illegal job market will not increase in price because the supply is flexible, unregulated, unlimited.

A GED or Diploma does not a skilled worker make. Feel free to disagree.

If you wanted to add college grads to the market, double or triple H1Bs.

 

This is not about right or wrong
This is about BUSINESS

This will allow the laws of supply and demand to be curtailed
This move artificially allows the inflation of the number of people available for jobs to stay inflated
When you have more people available for a job than jobs available
this artificially allows companies to push the wages down . . .. and therefore helps businesses

This new 'competition' in the job market maybe good for them
but what about the rest of the unemployed?

We talk alot of crap about outsourcing jobs
but we wanna stand by and applaud this???
If they simply moved all those outsourced jobs back to america and then imported the people working there here as well . . .would that be better?

I cannot say I like this move

Can someone please explain how this will work going forward?

Rocket River

 

He is a flip-flopper for sure. Just a few months ago he said he will block anything related to Dream Act.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hFtWBxFzcx0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

The memo told ICE to exercise its prosecutorial discretion on a case-by-case basis, giving special consideration to a certain type of illegal immigrant. It didn't expressly order the ICE to not enforce the law. Technically, if they wanted to, ICE offices can still choose deport a young illegal like the memo describes.

Immigration law (as it currently stands) states that illegals caught and granted deferred action or even awaiting deportation are allowed to get work permits.

I agree that such an action could set a dangerous precedent. Give the President the latitude to "recommend" how enforcement agencies exercise prosecutorial discretion, and you're essentially giving the President the power to pick and choose whom to punish for breaking federal law.

If the furor over this memo grows, I think the Supreme Court would strike it down. Either way, the damage would already be done. It's definitely a bold political move as well as a strong message to Congress to get their act together and do something about the immigration situation.

 

Except this isn't remotely a new precedent - it's just SOP. Just look at the "drug war" and how it has changed over the years as an example of different administrations creating different policies over how they will enforce the law. From changing of focus between drug lords and users and dispenseries, etc - these are changes that are routinely made in the White House (Office of National Drug Control Policy) despite laws not changing.

 

Except if you are already here illegally you dont qualify for H1Bs. I personally know some who have graduated from UT, UH, and A&M with degrees in education and engineering yet they work as servers. I don't consider this people to be unskilled.

 

I was shooting down an argument that the people this action would involve are skilled. The percentage of illegals with engineering degrees from american universities that overstayed their F1's is too low to mention.

 

I'd be inclined to agree it's SOP if Napolitano's memo were written less authoritatively (but more like John Morton's from a year ago), and if the administration weren't so blatantly (IMHO) using prosecutorial discretion to push their own desired changes to the law.

Just my opinion...

Don't get me wrong though. I'm liking that the administration isn't allowing itself to be handcuffed by the most bizarrely uncooperative/uncompromising Congress we've had in years.

 

I hope the SC strikes this down so we can just keep piling on the evidence that this is one of the most political Supreme Courts in recent memory. People should be mad about how the Supreme Court has acted, but they aren't really, at least not in great enough numbers.

Deferred action and the granting of work authorizations have been used for YEARS and selective enforcement of Immigration priorities has been used for just as long. Administrative agencies are able to operate because they prioritize their responsibilities. Immigration enforcement has always been something that is up to the discretion of the executive branch because it was part of a Constitutional delegation of powers.

So, if the American people want this policy to be stopped in a manner, they should go through Congress or elect a president who will change course. Additionally, they should raise or divert some more tax dollars to pay for the deportations they want. To attack this policy as dangerous precedent or as an unconstitutional exercise of power by the executive branch demonstrates a distinct lack of understanding of delegation doctrine, how administrative agencies work, and separation of powers.

I also take umbrage at the stupid trope that it is politically motivated. YES OF COURSE IT IS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED - everything done by government is politically motivated. The fact that this was undertaken during an election year doesn't provide evidence that this action is more politically motivated than most, because the groundwork has been laid for this over the course of the past 1.5 years with the 2 prior Morton memos. Detractors use the phrase "politically motivated" as a orthogonal attack because they are too cowardly to attack the merits. Same goes with baseless, and for those who know better, disingenuous assertions, about the Constitutionality of the policy.

 

I blame Obama for the immigration problem.

 

I have to bring this up every time "immigration" or illegal immigration is cited as a risk to good ol Americans...

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/mariel-impact.pdf

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/news_events/sdd/card_immigration_sdd.pdf

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/04/krueger_immigra.html

Yeah, when two of the leading labour economists in the field weigh in, I tend to throw out the ticky tack, uncited assertions based on (god knows what) that seems to surround immigration half the time.

 

Your cited sources are from studies based on data from 1962 and 1980. Has the life and wages of unskilled workers changed much since then? Has US manufacturing? Wage Gap? TIA

Texas is tied for the largest share of the population working at or below min wage. Service industry workers make far below the national average. Second most illegals as a state and probably most as a percentage of workers. Good for business. Good for professionals. Bad for uneducated and unskilled workers.

 

http://www.choicesmagazine.org/2007-1/immigration/2007-1-10.htm

Right, you keep on throwing out your ad hoc assertions, I keep on pulling reams of literature. I would actually enlighten you on the shifting labour market, but that would require you to read more Card (which I heartily recommend though.)