Whoa. I even pasted the FOXNews version so nobody complains about media bias. What do the more conservative people on the board think of this? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107644,00.html WASHINGTON — President Bush is proposing a plan Wednesday that would allow illegal immigrants working in the United States to stay here if their employers vouch for their jobs. The "temporary worker program" (search) would also allow immigrants to come to the United States if they can prove they have a job lined up and that they don't plan to be here indefinitely. The president's plan aims to relieve the pressures on hotel maids, meat cutters, landscapers and a host of other illegal workers who do much of the work that American employees refuse to do. "There are some jobs in this country, in our growing economy, that Americans are not filling," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "That presents an opportunity for workers from abroad who want to work." The proposal comes in advance of a meeting with Mexican President Vicente Fox (search) next week at the Summit of the Americas (search) in Monterrey, Mexico. Bush and Fox spoke Wednesday morning to discuss the details Bush will be providing in a Wednesday afternoon speech. The president had put immigration reform at the top of his agenda while campaigning for the presidency in 2000, but after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, it was placed on the back burner as administration officials and legislators worked to beef up border security. Now that Bush is into his second campaign for the presidency, he hopes to expand support among the Hispanic community, which broke ranks in 2000 by voting in considerable numbers for the Republican candidate. About one-third of Hispanic voters supported Bush in 2000. The proposal is also likely to sit well with business leaders who already employ illegal workers in low-wage jobs. Officials estimate that about 8 million illegal immigrants, half of them Mexican, live in the United States already, and work under fears of deportation. The president's plan would allow workers who live in the United States a reprieve from deportation if employers agree to give them jobs for three years and are unable to find an American willing to do the job. Would-be immigrants would also be allowed to apply if they line up a job in the United States. Under the plan, which would still have to be passed into law by Congress, illegal workers would pay a fee to apply immediately for a green card (search) for permanent U.S. residency. The applicant would still have to compete for the visa, but would not be deported for three years while the application is under consideration. The number of green cards will be increased, said one official, but the total number of new cards is not yet decided. Currently, the United States issues 1 million green cards per year, though only 140,000 of them are employment-based. The program would be separate from the temporary visa program that allows technical experts to work in certain sectors of the economy or industry. If workers' applications are not processed in the first three years of their employment — a scenario seen as likely considering the number of expected applicants — then workers would have to return to his or her home country to await final approval. The administration has not said how it plans to enforce the rules it is considering, but argues the proposal would increase security in America by giving the government a better idea of where illegals are residing, by bolstering the economy through legitimizing work now being conducted under the table and by showing compassion to illegal workers in the United States. Conservatives opposed to the idea of rewarding immigrants who break the law by illegally entering the United States say the president is basically giving blanket amnesty and encouraging more illegal immigration. Bush has sought to address conservatives' concerns by proposing incentives to encourage workers to return home when their visas expire, including allowing them to collect Social Security (search) benefits, which they would be contributing to as legal workers, after they return home. Other opponents of the program say it doesn't do enough to reform the system, despite provisions that would allow dependents to join their parents and freedom of movement inside the United States. "Extremely disappointing," said Cecilia Munoz, vice president for policy at the National Council of La Raza (search). "They're proposing to invite people to be guest workers without providing any meaningful opportunity to remain in the United States to become legal permanent residents." The Associated Press contributed to this report.
I welcome this action. These people contribute more to the country than they detract by not paying taxes by keeping wages low on lower class jobs. We need a source for cheap labor. Now perhaps we can even get them to pay taxes.
The true hypocrisy of conservatism, You want everyone to work their way up on their own, but you admit you want to keep wages low. Unbelievable.
I support the plan. These people have been contributing to our economy for years. They have earned their way here, despite their original situation when entering. The move will also improve relations with neighboring Mexico. This is just another instance of the Republican party doing more for minorities than the liberals. The Republicans are the ones lowering their tax burden and providing them with accommodative policies for starting new businesses. The Republicans are the ones rewarding their hard efforts with this temporary worker program. What exactly are the liberals doing for the minority cause? Nothing. In fact, not only are they doing nothing, they are r****ding minority advancement with their affirmative action handouts. It should come as no surprise that the people who complain about Bush's latest efforts are the ones who will be descending to the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. This policy change will go a long way towards developing the Hispanic economic situation in the United States. Immigrants typically arrive here with very little wealth. Over time, they build wealth. This is true of most immigrant waves/groups (but obviously not all). This policy will greatly aid Hispanics in this process, while others will continue their free fall.
While T.J., I didn't think you would make one of your most racist statements ever in this thread but you never fail to surprise.
People need to learn skills and get an education to advance. For the low-skills jobs that these immigrants typically take, absolutely I want to keep wages low. Not hypocritical at all.
Do you dispute that certain people rise and fall in the socioeconomic chain over time? This is factual, not racist. Your inferences are what is questionable here.
While I really don't have a problem with this policy, because I agree that illegal aliens are willing to do work that other's aren't, I just think your post sounds a little harsh. Secondly, I don't think you are going to get the results you expect as far as wages are concerned. Right now, illegal immigrants keep wages low because their wages aren't reported so there is really no way to know what they are being paid. Once you set up a system in which these workers will be organized and made legit, I think the next logical step is for them to demand wage increases, and workers compensation, and other benifits Americans receive.
Does anyone really believe the GOP and Bush want this passed? This is political calculus... Wink at the far right who are against immigration reform, offer a bone to the Latino voting block and simultaneously try and drive a wedge into the Dem base by making them take a position that counters either the Latinos or the Unions (American jobs to immigrants). Why do I get the feeling that this is another "No Child Left Behind" type of proposal that will not solve the problem and not be funded? I won't be surprised if this never passes (probably due to the GOP putting such egregious passages in the bill that the Dems are forced to filibuster just in time for Spanish ads to be run on local radio stations just before the election saying Dems are against immigration and racist as well) or somehow ends up becoming a gurantee of low cost labor to corporations?
I agreed with you for a while that keeping the illegal immigrants in would keep wages low, but after looking a little more closely at the proposal, I think in fact the exact opposite would occur. Take a look at: http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040107-105948-8515r The important part is paraphrased here: Under the proposal, illegal immigrants working in the United States would be guaranteed the legal minimum wage. In fact, the greatest benefit illegal aliens give to American citizens/permanent residents is in the way of lowered costs. Illegal immigrants (up until now) were nto required to be paid a minimum wage, and unlike you or me, they lacked the ability to seek the minimum wage in court. This loophole kept labor costs down, which resulted in lower service and commodity costs passed on to you and me. That's one (of many reasons) why housing and hotels and restaurants are so much cheaper in Houston for instance. Now that they will be earning the minimum legal wage, commodity costs will rise slightly. I did some personal research/analysis and wrote a technical paper on this a while back as an undergrad. It was admittedly simplistic from an econometric standpoint, but what I found was that the elasticity of living costs with respect to illegal immigrant population was -0.4 (and was stastically significant at the 99% level). Basically, what that means is that a 1% increase in illegal immigrant population in a metropolitan area would result in a .4% decrease in cost of living (holding all other effects constant, such as different income levels, tax rates, population densities, climates, housing distributions, zoning laws, regions, etc.) Granted, I only used a single period cross-section (I believe 1995) of data for the 75 largest metropolitan stastical areas in the US, and since I've developed econometric skills greatly since then, I would've liked to try more sophisticated inference methods, but the basic message still holds. Ceteris paribus, holding illegal immigrants to the legal minimum wage will raise living costs. I personally do like a more open immigration policy, but bear in mind, this proposal will raise living costs. It also seems to be a (welcome) departure from what I believed the Repulican stance on immigration was.
The US is built on the backs of illegal aliens working on factory farms and in factory slaugherhouses. This wasn't always true, but by not enforcing the law, we've made it cheaper to hire illegal aliens. If we can't export the job to the third world, we'll import the third world here.
It's a play for Latino votes in the same way the failed proposition by Pete Wilson in California was a play for the fear of Latino vote. They're trying to make up for lost time.
Isn't it true though? Hasn't it helped us gain a big, big edge? From slaves to waves of immigrants paid substandard wages to modern day illegal immigrants, it seems like nearly free labor has been an enormous benefit to the financial health of the country.
The guy who wrote "fast food nation" wrote another book "Reefer Madness: Sex, Drugs, and Cheap Labor in the American Black Market" In it he explores how we got to where we are. As an example, slaughterhouse meatcutting used to be a middleclass job, now it's a job with few benefits that is populated mostly by illegals. Migrant farm workers weren't always illegal aliens. There are many crops that can only be picked easily by hand. But factory farming has made it so they can reap huge rewards *if* cheap illegal aliens are used for labor and the government looks the other way. By letting them do the work, we get cheap labor that pads Dole's pockets. By not educating their children or providing healthcare or guaranteeing safe working conditions, the state and federal government save money.
Guess that means that Migrant workers, since they would be legal, would have to be paid minimum wage, which is currently set at $5.15 per hour in Texas. 5.15 x 40 hours per week, 52 weeks in year, that's $10,712 per year gross. Most field laborers still earn between 40 cents and 45 cents per bucket. According to latest U.S. Department of Labor statistics, 3 out of 5 farm-worker households live in poverty. Half of all farm workers earn wages of less than $7,500 a year. I'll be shocked if this A. goes through and B. their standard of living actually gets better.
They do pay sales & property taxes. You make it sound like they don't contribute anything to society.
