Sen. Robert Byrd called ILLEGAL Immigration Amnesty Bill a Bad Dream

[Robson]

To quote: Sen. Robert Byrd (D) of West Virginia, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, called the measure to give automatic legal status to as many as 12 million illegal immigrants "a bad dream."

This bill is simply a repeat of the 1986 bill that rewarded illegal behavior of both the employers and their illegal workers.

The only way to get a handle on this illegal immigration problem is to first enforce the existing law and put heavy sanctions on any employer who hires illegal workers and then begin to put sanctions on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants. Once this is done many illegal workers will go home. BTW if this would have been done two years ago the conservative President in Mexico would have lost the election and Mexican workers in Mexico would have likely begun to share in Mexico's wealth today.

If after a couple of years we in the USA find that there truly aren't enough Americans to fill these jobs at reasonable and higher American wages (instead of sweat shop wages), then we can begin to offer more controlled immigration.

There is simply no way to realistically enforce the provisions and the massive logistics of this bill which involve making a determination and collecting fine of each and every illegal immigrant. This is all lip service just as was the 1986 bill. Bush and his friends likely see a privatization opportunity for the investigatory process that would costs us billions.

The spigot should be turned off right now with all employers and give Americans the opportunity to jobs with increased wages and benefits.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0521/p10s01-uspo.html?page=1

[Warren Stupidity]

1. I want all the ILLEGAL pot smokers deported.

All the speeders and jaywalkers too. THEY ARE ILLEGAL.

[Robson]

3. I can't understand your position on this

So you believe that citizen speeders and citizen pot smokers should be deported?

Yet those should stay, who entered illegally, have committed identity fraud, and have in collaboration with greedy illegal employers, stolen billions (if not) trillions in wealth from American workers in the form of lowered wages and higher taxes, cost of healthcare and social services ....should stay?

Actually I'd deport the illegal employers first.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. Absolutely.

They are ILLEGAL

Off to amsterdam with every last one of them.

[CTLawGuy]

19. so If I am trespassing on your property

you would be against throwing me off????

[Warren Stupidity]

24. What? You and mittens both?

Get out your varmit gun and get rid of those mexicans on your lawn. Hurry, they breed like rabbits.

[CTLawGuy]

26. look I find your racist statements about mexicans offensive

look you might agree with George Bush that illegal immigration should be tolerated so that corporations can exploit them for cheap labor, or so they can drive down wages, but there is no need to make racist statements.

[Warren Stupidity]

34. Right.

You want to deport 12 million mexican americans many of whose children are in fact US citizens, compare that situation to trespassing on your lawn, and I am the racist. Got it. In the 1950's we called the Eisenhower era mass deportation Operation Wetback. Now you and the rest of the racists like to hide behind 'ILLEGALS' and pretend that this is not yet another racist xenophobic antiimmigrant distraction designed to keep us fighting among ourselves while our overlords continue plundering the planet unconstrained by the unpleasant prospect of a functional representative democracy. Yeah, for sure I am the racist.

[CTLawGuy]

38. yawn

yes, im racist, you've found me out :eyes:

[pampango]

52. Thank you both for another episode of "Who can play the 'Racist' card first."

I love to tune in at DU (where racists apparently abound) to learn more about tactics of preemptive "racist" accusations (the best defense is a good offense), rewording another's post (if others can't tell he's a racist, I had better make it clear), and the old "if you don't agree with me, you must be a racist or freeper or RW talking point spouter, so we can now talk about my accusation instead of the topic at hand."

[Lasher]

54. Ha ha, it didn't take long did it?

And I think you must get extra points for labeling someone as a xenophobe. That didn't take long either.

[LostinVA]

69. The one poster wasn't being racist, but was making a point AGAINST racism

Especially against Mexican immigrants, whether illegal or not.

That's my take on it, anyway.

[treestar]

50. But what to do about it?

Deport them all so they have no jobs at all? I just don't see that their presence hurts the people who oppose them the most.

Or let the corporations outsource? We can't stop them from leaving the U.S. with the capital.

I think we have to face reality. We have to compete with people in other countries too. There's no way around that. So we may as well have them here, where they can also be our customers/employers, than drive all the jobs abroad.

[Babel_17]

51. But the jobs in question

are mostly those that can't be outsourced.

[unlawflcombatnt]

61. "But what to do about it?"

How about enforcing current law against hiring illegal immigrants, and prosecuting document forgery as well?

And how about if we stop using the straw man argument about "deporting them all." No one is suggesting that. It isn't necessary. If illegal immigrants don't have jobs, they'll leave on their own.

[Robson]

70. Unlawful immigration costs all Americans but African Americans even worse.

All we need is enforcement of existing law against employers and they will leave on their own, just as they came here on their own. No deportment or forced separation of families is needed.

What will follow will be a rise in tide for all Americans and especially those unemployed and Americans living in poverty who are forgotten by those interested only in opening our borders for self serving reasons.

This unlawful immigration especially targets African American males who have extremely high unemployment rate. Unlike the illegals they neither wish to nor should they have to accept jobs that pay so little that it requires 3 families live in an apartment.

[Robson]

22. Sorry....it's getting a little tough to respond intelligently

When you throw out completely unrelated comments, I find it tough to debate and respond intelligently. These tactics don't get many points in debate class either.....:)

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Sorry but this racist anti immigrant crap deserves only stupid response.

And if you don't feel like responding, by all means don't.

[CTLawGuy]

are you in favor of free trade by chance?

NT

[Warren Stupidity]

35. Only if it is fair trade and only if it includes free labor.

But keep pushing the anti-hispanic nonsense. Karl Rove smiles on you, you've bought into his favorite wedge issue next to gay bashing.

[CTLawGuy]

36. so you're against it?

so what corporations should do is import all the cheap chinese labor then you'll be ok with it??? instead of sending the factory over, bring the workers here?

[Warren Stupidity]

41. Ok with me.

As long as they bring all the manufacturing plants and jobs back here too. Those Chinese folks are going to have to buy houses, cars, clothing, food etc. right here, going to have to pay the same prices we are paying, and are going to have to get paid our wage rates, not the $0.40/hr minimum wage they pay in China. Our economy will boom. Our social security problems will end with all of those new young tax paying workers. The real estate market will boom. It will be great. I love chinese food!

Oh ok, I'll be serious. We cannot have working people travelling around looking for good jobs wherever they might be found. It just isn't fair. No, I agree with you. From now on nobody can move anywhere without a government relocation permit. We can't have folks from Michigan moving to California to take jobs away from hard working Californians. That bullshit has got to stop.

[CTLawGuy]

43. ok...

First, who is going to make sure that they pay the chinese immigrants the minimum wage if no one knows they are here and if they don't understand they GET a minimum wage?

second, you can't compare in-state migration among economically similar Americans with internation migration between people with widely variable standards of living.

[treestar]

49. See this article that explains how NAFTA has led to immigration

from Mexico:

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/05/23/cornfueled_migration.php

[Chulanowa]

47. You're aiming poorly

The illegal immigrants are simply the most visible symptom of a larger and more deadly problem. They're also the least painful symptom of the problem. Maybe it offends your sense of pride to see some dude from Honduras filling your job, or something, but it's not as if he collaborated with your employer to throw you out as some sort of grand conspiracy by the to toss you, and you in particular on your ass.

Of course, that sort of reactionary fist-shaking is a hell of a lot easier to package and market than actual causes, and it's better for business and politics to spread hatred than to fix the issue. So it's no wonder that so many people seem to take it up, without apparently realizing it.

The problem is over two decades of dissolving American labor, and just as long dismantling and assaulting nascent labor movements in other nations. Reagan kicked it all off, with his diehard union-busting and pandering to the wealthy elite. He made it an ownership society, provided what you own happens to be 51% or greater of a company's shares. Wages fell, prices rose, because they could get away with it. Taxes were diverted from the "welfare queens" (that being anyone without a fat 401k) and diverted to trickle-down economics (the trickle-down is, in fact, the sensation of urine creeping down your neck as the corporatistas piss on your head). In other nations, we supplied and formulated right-wing rebellions, police states, and enforced union-busting with an iron fist. We made deals wherin Latin America would owe us billions if we sent them a pittance of medical supplies. We were then told these nations were destitute because of left-wing politics, attempts at unionization, and hey, them brown-skinned people just aren't as good as we are! All this wrapped up with Clinton signing NAFTA - Perhaps the only piece of legislation I've ever seen that reads, verbatim, "We will fuck you up while fucking ourselves up. Sign on the line below"

So now we have a dissolution of the American job market. The wages are no longer worth the work given. Employers don't have to pay more than they want, so they don't. They are actively encouraged to pay their workers as little and work them as hard as possible, with fat welfare baskets if they generate so much money. If they fail in this pinch-and-stretch method, well, they get another welfare basket to keep them afloat, like so many airlines and auto companies. There's no incentive at all to maintain a strong work force. The unions today are a bare shadow of what they were - a fair number of them are simply sellouts that toe the corporate line at the expense of their members, because it's profitable for the leadership. What does this do to the American job market? Ir cornholes it. With a pinecone. And not one of those nice smooth pinecones from the Pacific northwest, but one of the hugeass longleaf pine cones from Florida.

Men and women quit because their wages are a pittance compared to the work they put in, or because their benefits are eroded away. Some are "laid off" or "downsized". Sure the company's turning a profit, but if we ditch half the workforce, we'll make MORE money because we have to pay fewer people. And the ones that are left will work harder, right? The American worker is exhausted now. Their wallets are empty, their pride is fractured. When once your average working joe or jane could, with pride, state that they manufactured, or gave good service, now they're chucking DVD's at blockbuster or learning how to make a triple latte mochachino decaff with extra nutmeg grande for the people who once employed them. Lack of wages, lack of benefits creates fractures in a society that's been weaned on the suburban lifestyle. There are entire towns in America that look like they could be somewhere in Somalia, because the factory moved, because the plant shut down, because Tyson Foods bought the land, because Wal-Mart went in downtown and sucked up all the money and paid far less than the other shops that once existed did.

Beyond our southern border, these neoliberal "free trade" policies have ruined an entire swath of nations, from the Rio Grande to the Straits of Magellan. People starve to death because of the lack of work to the south of us. Shantytowns spring up at the promise of a single job changing tires. And when word comes to these people about there being jobs - money - food up north, no matter how vile or degenerate those jobs may be, they will move in, and they will take those jobs. When the option is starving in Honduras, I suppose the thought of being locked in an immigrant concentration camp in south Texas is an acceptable risk.

This has the unfortunate side effect that, once the employers get these desperate workers, who have perhaps never heard of "unionization", for whom a benefits package might be a free bag of chips on friday, this becomes the standard. There is no legal imperative for these employers to set their work standards any higher, and so even if American workers finally do break down and crawl back, they have to start again, at the very bottom, alongside the folks from down south who were being exploited and used up before.

It's a pattern that has repeated itself through American history. Rich men in government rig the economic system to benefit themselves and their friends. The American workforce collapses. Immigrants from a part of the world rendered destitute by these same politicians - or the local equivalent - move in, regardless of any legal statutes, in order to fill their own bellies. And so the cycle continues, where these people learn about unionizing, workers' rights, benefits, fair trade, and become prosperous - so prosperous that, once again, the "bootstrapping" myth rears its ugly little head and they decide to screw the latest batch of low-income workers by stripping the unions, ruining the economies, and selling tax breaks to the highest bidder - inevitably shooting their own feet from under themselves, only to become the latest in a long line of reactionary fist-wavers screaming about immigrants and how they "terk ur jorbz!!!"

The fault does not lie with the men and women crossing our borders to get a job, any job, to feed themselves and their family. It lies with the American system that speaks of the "self-made" rich man as if he were an independent and isolated pioneer who "never needed no help from no one", while the "welfare queens" are social scum and leeches and communists who need to be purged from the formers' firm young teat.
The problem is not desperate people who steal identities and fake for tax reasons (it's a problem, but not THE problem), but rather the remains of a Eugenicist immigration policy, wherin a British person with all the use of a tissue paper doily is welcomes with open arms, but a skilled man from Pakistan has all his cavities searched five times before being sent back and told to try again in three years. Our immigration laws are some of the most archaic, screwed-up things that are still in the books, and the hamhandedness of their enforcement necessitates criminal activity in order to protect yourself from it, if your alternative is going hungry, or watching your kids die from some disease a tube of antibiotics and a bowl of warm soup could clear up.

The people are doing what people do. Caring for themselves and their families in whatever way they can. If you want to shake your fist, shake it at the laws, politicians, myths, and systems we've put in place that makes our job market a ruined shamble, that makes theirs even worse, and that makes them need to conduct harmful activities just to eke out basic survival in this world.

[Robson]

57. Good post... and another thought

Good post and well written. The decline in labor that we see today is a direct result of aggressive free trade and union busting policies that were begun under Reagan.

Another thing that one could surmise based upon results, is that Bush and Vicente Fox collaborated on immigration and bypassed Congress and immigration law. Bush agreed to not enforce our US laws, while Mexico encouraged more illegal immigration to assure that the new Mexican President would be conservative and pro-business and willing to advance the screw labor movement in both countries. The immigration removed many of the poor and more liberal leaning voters from Mexico.

Are you convinced that many in the current Democratic Party, when it comes to these destructive labor and trade policies, are that much different than the GOP? GOP lite might be another word for the DLC.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

6. Absolutely Brother!!!11..........

Deport the lot of them! Scruffy lookin' hopheads and their blatant disregard for traffic laws! Hanging is too good for them!

:evilgrin: :smoke: :evilgrin:

[LoZoccolo]

60. Lame. n/t

[Celeborn Skywalker]

63. Yeah,

cuz that's exactly the same thing. :eyes:

[soothsayer]

2. I'm with him.

[TahitiNut]

4. Yep.

... but some seem hell-bent to have a non-voting working class so they can save a nickel on a head of lettuce and get their lawn mowed for $5.

[High Plains]

7. How does legalizing immigrants make a "non-voting working class"?

Seems just the opposite.

[TahitiNut]

8. Why don't you tell me? It was done 20 years ago. THEN WHAT??

I'm pretty sure people who ask this superficial and simplistic question are proud of themselves for the sophistry ... but the fact remains that this is a CONTINUING problem. Bailing a boat is fruitless until the leaks are plugged. Claiming one likes to swim isn't a "solution."

Insofar as the non-voting working class, IT'S NOT JUST 'ILLEGAL ALIENS"!! They include ...
(1) illegal aliens who have no intention of immigrating or bringing their families (i.e. "undocumented" guest workers)
(2) illegal 'immigrants' who live under the radar with some immediate or extended family who may or may not be legal residents
(3) "guest workers" admitted under poorly-run programs
(4) incarcerated felons serving time in a prison and working in "prison industry"
(5) ex-felons from our over-populated prison system who've been denied the entitlement to vote
(6) legal residents under a variety of work visas (e.g. H-1B) who allege no intention to immigrate
(7) permanent resident aliens ("green card") who have not applied for citizenship for a variety of reasons including language skills

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/TahitiNut/386

[DemBones DemBones]

17. Like Senator Byrd, we're old enough to remember this

being done before and to know it doesn't work.

This is not being done out of compassion for people who are here illegally. It's all about the money.

The Bushes (pere et fils) have bought a brazillion acres in Guatemala (I think it's Guatemala) with water rights to a huge acquifer.
They won't be sticking around when the shit hits the fan.

Edit: I should add that neither Tahiti Nut nor I are anywhere near as old as Sen. Byrd but I hope to be in as good a shape as he is if i live that long.

[TahitiNut]

18. Paraguay ... world's largest aquifer.

Yep. This entire charade serves the sole purpose of widening the gap between the "top 1%" and the "bottom 99%" ... reducing the bottom half of the working class to mere serfdom.

[High Plains]

40. Let's look at Hispanic voters, shall we?

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:-LbC1UgCiJQJ:ucdata.berkeley.edu:7101/new_web/projects/latino3/Chapter7.pdf+hispanic+voting+1980+1992+2004&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us

From an academic article on Hispanic voters in California (sorry, not able to quickly find national data, but I suppose this is representative):

"The composition of California voters—like that of the population at large—is increasingly Latino. Within the space of six presidential election years, the Latino share of the voting population has more than doubled, from 6.6% in 1980 to 13.9% in 2000. While the proportion of Latinos among voters has increased markedly, it remains disproportionately low compared with the size of the state’s Latino population. In 2000, Latinos comprised 32% of the total California population, substantially more than twice their share of voters. Although Latinos constitute nearly a third of the population, slightly more than 1 in 7 voters is Latino. In contrast, whites make up 70% of voters but only 47% of the population. The proportion of Black voters is closer to their proportion of the total population: Blacks make up 6-8% of both groups, while Asians are also underrepresented in the voting population (7% of voters compared with 14% of the total population)"

This makes it look like the 1986 bill led to a more than doubling of the Hispanic vote by 2000. Putting the current crop of undocumented workers on a path to citizenship should yield similar results.

Also, having a large population of people residing in the country who cannot vote is fundamentally anti-democratic. Note that the article also says Latinos are radically underrepresented when it comes to voting. Why might this be? BECAUSE THEY CAN'T VOTE? What better way to elect governors like Reagan, Pete Williams, and Schwarzenegger.

You are correct in arguing that some of these people won't vote, but incorrect or irrelevant on other counts. Guest workers or other legal residents not on a citizenship path will not vote even under regularization ("amnesty"). But "illegal immigrants who live under the radar" would be able to vote eventually if their status was regularized. Incarcerated felons who can't vote don't have anything to do with this issue. Permament resident aliens can't vote.

New Hispanic voters will help the Democratic Party. At least, that's historically been the case.

Again, your argument that this creates a whole class of people who can't vote is absolutely backward. Putting these people on the path to citizenship will mean millions of new voters in a few years, and it could lead to political earthquakes in places like California. That would be a good thing.

Are you arguing for tighter border enforcement? That's a separate issue.

[DemBones DemBones]

15. You got it. nt

[DemDem07]

59. So am I

[gulfcoastliberal]

9. I love how folks get up in arms - this plan is being pushed for by the corporate sponsors

of congress. That's why it's "bipartisan". They know they need to keep up unlimited population growth to keep the ponzi schemes rolling. Unfortunately, think of all the added road congestion, land spoilage, CO2 consumption that added growth brings. It's so obviously also a means to depress wages, but I guess economic equality isn't as pushed by the collective as being politically correct as "pro growth/pro open borders". Even though in any other country in the world they immediately deport you if you aren't there legally... including Canada & Mexico.

[originalpckelly]

13. You see that's the reason we're America.

What was that? Oh yeah:
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Now it's:
"Give me your vital, your rich,
Your masses of money yearning to be free of high taxes,
The wretched fact of high taxes on your shore.
Send these, the 5 home owning, taxation-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

[Robson]

16. I agree - this bill represents the "HAVES" working to erode our middle class

This country is turning into a plutocracy, controlled by the rich and powerful and that's what needs changed. But we also need to work on building of the middle class and its education level and skill levels.

This bill represents the "HAVES" working feverishly to further erode and destroy the middle class of the USA. When our country is once again fiscally strong with a strong middle class and the rich fully paying their way, then we can possibly assist other countries such as Mexico to establish their own strong middle class. It ain't going to happen with this amnesty immigration bill though.

[TahitiNut]

23. It's been working for 35 years. Why should they stop now?

[High Plains]

42. Hyperventilating paranoia. It's a time-honored American tradition.

All this talk of a corporate plot ignores the agency of the millions of people who decided to take great risks to come here. It ignores the agency of the hundreds of thousands of employers (big and small) who hire them.

The reality is that we are in a unique position. The world's economic powerhouse shares a 1500 mile long border with a Third World country. In the short term, the problem of uncontrolled immigration across the southern border is probably not solvable by anything less than the kind of harshly repressive police state measures we hate. In the medium term, only a rising Mexican economy will substantilly reduce the flow. Or we could move toward--gasp!--a North American union. Europe doesn't seem so bad off these days.

[Robson]

45. BUT....we're no longer the "worlds economic powerhouse"

You've obviously been listening closely to George Bush and his corporatist minions that have foisted UN-free trade upon the USA, as your statement falls lockstep in line with their "club for growth" propaganda, but is far from reality.

We're a debtor nation with TRILLIONS UPON TRILLIONS of direct debt to foreign nations and off the balance sheet obligations to American citizens. We're burning the family heirlooms to keep warm as we sell off public assets.

So you think increasing the population of our country with 100 million unskilled people will make life better for our citizens? On one aspect you are correct as it will make the capitalist elite very happy as they can go back to manufacturing in the USA and pay China like wages.

I'm for helping others, but I'm for saving the economic prosperity of this country first.

[originalpckelly]

10. Why are there illegal immigrants?

Do you really think these people would have picked a "stroll" through the Sonoran Desert over a comfy bus seat across a controlled border checkpoint?

If they could have come here legally, I'm certain all but the people up to no good would have.

Remove the immigration caps and there will be more legal and less illegal immigration. I'm not saying remove the standards we have for immigrants, just remove the cap on the number of legal immigrants per year.

Of course, if you have a problem with increasing the number of legal immigrants, that suggests your real problem is not that these people are here illegally, but that they are here at all.

[Robson]

14. Manipulated by the forces of greed

My problem with the bill is a number of things, the least of which is the use of political correctness as a reason for open borders and a reason for some of the manipulated masses and those with conflicted interests to believe it should continue. I use the term manipulated masses because they (or you) are being manipulated by the forces of greed.

I agree with a previous poster.

The root problems in our country are GREED at the expense of fairness and common sense.
. Greed by employers demanding continued influx of cheap labor to increase their profits.
. Greed by the business sector looking for never ending market growth with irrational population growth at the expense of our infrastructure and the ability of the country to assimilate.
. Greed by rich and well-to-do to have nannies and gardeners and landscapers and shift the costs to other less fortunate Americans
. Greed of everyday Americans to save a few cents today while costing the country en total billions and trillions in the long term as in the Wal-Mart effect.
. Greed at the expense of our environment (from greenhouse gases to traffic to farmland). At the current rate of sprawl from population growth we'll soon have chewed up most of good farmland and will be forced into importing instead of producing food.

[VP505]

21. So you don't think that::

Two million people legally admitted to the United States each year. In addition - 14 percent of those, by the way, those people given permanent residency are from Mexico. Two million people legally admitted to the United States. Four hundred thousand skilled foreign workers and their families receive H-1 visas each year.

Nearly 900,000 other legal foreign workers are admitted on some type of employment visa. Six-hundred sixty thousand student visas are issued every year. And 455,000 people given temporary employment transfers. Are not high enough???

[doggyboy]

56. I don't

I'd like to see the 2million figure doubled

[bbgrunt]

11. k and r

[AzDar]

12. ' Z-visa' = legal slave labor pool. This bill, like everything else proffered

by this Administration, is a DISASTER.

[CTLawGuy]

27. what this is really is "insourcing"

there are certain jobs that by their nature can't be shipped to china or india, like construction. but those industries want to take advantage of the cheap labor bonanza as well, so Bush and his corporate buddies tolerate illegal immigration so they can "insource" jobs away from Americans and legal immigrants to illegal immigrants whom they can give a much lower wage to.

[Robson]

33. Thanks to US Chamber of Commerce and other "Haves"

Agreed, it wasn't enough for the "Haves" to just out-source our good jobs to take advantage of cheap out-of-country labor.

The "Haves" have also lobbied and bribed to prevent our government from defending our borders so they can get away with in-sourcing cheap illegal labor for those jobs that are not out-sourcable.

Now that thoughtful Americans are beginning to see through their greed and tactics, they want to legalize it with unending cheap labor, fully subsidized with the remains of our social security trust and last vestiges of all entitlements for working Americans.....through the McCain-Kennedy sponsored amnesty bill.

These "Haves" are shrewd as they manipulate and appeal to ethnic self interests, and political correctness, to get more support for their pillaging of our country.

[cherokeeprogressive]

20. Adopt MEXICO's immigration policy

Go read about how they control THEIR southern border against immigration from Central and South America.

We should do nothing less than THEY do.

[Freddie Stubbs]

64. Because Mexico is such a better county than the US

Perhaps there is a reason that our country is so much more prosperous than Mexico.

[Sanctified]

28. Corporations love the idea of Legalizing illegals...

because it will lower wages across-the-board.

[CTLawGuy]

29. shut up you racist

;)

[Critters2]

30. Hehehe. Yeah, the good people know that exploiting the poor

on behalf of the corporations is an expression of compassion. Somehow.

[QC]

31. Lenin called such people "useful idiots."

He was far too kind.

[Robson]

39. Stomping of feet

Hear that sound? That's the sound of those who are "stomping their feet" saying it just isn't right that multi-millionaire, billionaire "haves" can't have all the cheap labor they want, even if it takes economic strength of 90% of Americans, from the very poor to upper middle class.

[CTLawGuy]

44. poor billionaires

Bush and others who tolerate illegal immigration feel for them...

[Warren Stupidity]

37. No actually they prefer the current situation.

Where undocumented immigrants can be exploited without any regulation. They would also prefer if the Democratic Party leads the charge against all of those Mexicans as they truly fear that their long term political prospects will be damaged by the Hispanic demographics if they cannot split the Hispanic vote.

[Sanctified]

46. You are still flooding the labor market with a lot of unskilled labor

who are going to do blue collar jobs cheaper than Americans. This is only going to bring the price of labor down where corporations want it. Anytime Republicans are in favor of something like this you should just assume big business is behind it.

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.0
==================



This week is our second quarter 2007 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend on donations
from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for your support.

[treestar]

48. OH for pete's sake, what have these people really done to you?

so a bunch of poor people far from home get a break. And you're so damn worried about punishing them for just trying to survive. There are murderers and robbers out there, rapists, etc., and you're worried about people who broke a set of immigration laws that are so unrealistic they are delusional.

We have to compete with everyone else. We aren't that special. That's why we have outsourcing. We can't force the employers to hire us just because we're American. We have to face reality that we have to compete just like everyone else. Instead we stamp our foot and scream because someone born on the wrong side of the border is the employer's pick. So they move the whole factory there. Get it? We're not inherently better workers just for being born here.

[Robson]

55. A bunch of poor people?

"A bunch of poor people"?

How about 20 million predominantley unskilled workers that will grow to 100 million in 20-30 years, all requiring disproportionate social services, healthcare, schools, stressing our already overcrowded and underbuilt infrastructure, all tapping into our defunct social security, and all willing to undercut American workers, and the US Chamber of Commerce is foaming at the mouth at the money making (and cost reduction) opportunities this presents for them.

In today's pro-business, screw average Joe environment, its the individual taxpayer like you and I that pays most of the taxes to run our government. Business usually gets a relatively free ride proportionately, so for them this influx will be the "boondoggle bonus of all bonuses" while most Americans will pay and pay and pay in many ways.

We don't need more unsklled workers in our country. We need to make higher education much more affordable for those children who belong here. Instead the result will be that college will become even more unreachable.

BTW I don't have much faith that those who were more than willing to break laws to get here, will be more than willing to pay their taxes, even though taxes at that minimum wage level are usually little to nothing.

[sandnsea]

53. Guest Worker is the problem

Not citizenship. Doesn't matter though. People will kneejerk to the word 'amnesty', and the political philosophy doesn't matter one bit. The entire country is just stupider than dirt.

[unlawflcombatnt]

58. Byrd is right on target with his speech

We should put heavy fines on employers who hire illegal immigrants and landlords that rent to them.

[flying_monkeys]

62. Would *you* work in a poultry plant? Or pulling produce from fields?

Those are the jobs that have fallen to the "illegal immigrants" in my state - - and the jobs were taken because so few "Americans" wanted to work them. The poultry plant pays fairly well - - but those jobs went unfilled until the "illegal immigrants" and some legal immigrants took them. Not too many "Americans" want to handle dead chickens under the time pressure needed....


I say let in all who want to work here - - but we have to taper down the notion that a CEO is somehow worth 400+ times more in salary than the average worker. If the top tier stopped sucking up so much money in salary, there would be more than enough for everyone here (and wanting to come here) to live comfortably.


NO ONE *neeeeeeeeeds* over a million a year in pay - - that elitism should stop.

[Sanctified]

66. Hell yes I would, if it paid a livable wage.

See that is the issue, the farmer and the rancher have no need to pay a livable wage as long as there are people available to do it for dirt cheap.

[Robson]

71. On the CEO pay I agree; but Americans did that work for years and they will at the right $$

If any business can't find legal Americans to work there, it is because they simply don't pay enough. Instead they go out and find illegal workers that cut wages and makes the statement "they do jobs Americans won't do" a self fulfilling prophesy. Business made it that way.

If Chicken plants started paying higher wages than Wal-Mart for doing less desirable work, they would find that workers would leave Wal-Mart for the higher wages. Then Wal-Mart would pay higher wages and better benefits to retain them.

Every product and service has a price that will entice others to buy or provide in a truly free market. In America the free market law is only available to business interests. They are able to import illegal labor to cut costs, but if Americans import or buy counterfeit products (such as free music downloads, or drugs from Canada) they are prosecuted.

[PsN2Wind]

72. Here in the desert Southwest

we are told by the homebuilders that if they had to pay at union scale, the cost to potential buyers would increase tremendously. They fail to mention that the CEO of KB Homes, one of this countries, and areas, larger builders made 43 million dollars one recent year.

[PsN2Wind]

65. I have to agree with the good Senator

I feel the potential impact to the nation is such that there should be no "Amnesty" or "Path to Citizenship" (take your pick) that benefits "Illegal Aliens" or "Undocumented workers" (again, you pick).
Unless, the country first has a test program to see if there is, in fact, a benefit or if the consequences are not beneficial.
This could be done in a small population so it could be easily monitored. I suggest New Hampshire as the ideal test bed. It's a fairly small state in area and population so would require little effort to gauge the effects. The population is almost lily-white so the benefits of this new diversity, again would be easy to gauge.
If the country asked for minorities, without regard to legal status, to relocate there until the demographic reflected the approximate racial ratios of the U.S. as a whole, then paid them a stipend until they found jobs there would be a fairly small cost.
The benefit or lack thereof of increasing diversity would be made known next year as all the presidential candidates flock to that state in an attempt to shake every hand and kiss every baby. The citizens there expect and receive a much greater input into our government than most of the other states so their experience would be immediately conveyed to all those wanting to lead the nation and we can be certain that those candidates would pay attention.

[Jim Warren]

67. It's about the numbers

http://www.numbersusa.com/index

[PsN2Wind]

68. Thanks for the graph, Jim

When my mothers parents immigrated from Bohemia the U.S.A had a need for people to populate areas of the country almost devoid of inhabitants. They were allowed to homestead in the Oklahoma Panhandle, and if successful and they survived, gain title to 160 acres of land. At that time the population of the country was only about 76 million much of it concentrated in the large cities. We are now at over 300 million. I see little benefit to adding tens of millions more except for those corporations wanting a steady source of cheap labor to compete for the jobs they can't export.