Specter Pledges to Complete Immigration Bill; House Version Subject of Massive Protests
Monday March 27, 2006
Updated: 06.09 pm PacificJudiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) successfully moved a bipartian immigration bill (12-6) today. Last week, Specter embraced a form of immigration amnesty and had pledged to work through Monday night, if necessary, to "craft a historic immigration bill that would allow the unlawful workers to earn their way to legal status in the United States."
Originally the Senate was to take up the measure Tuesday, but the body has postponed action until later in the week. According to the San Jose Mercury News:
The committee bill would enable illegal immigrants in the country as of Jan. 7, 2004, to obtain visas and stay in the country for six years while they apply for permanent residency by paying fines and back taxes and demonstrating a proficiency in English and civics. At Specter's insistence, they would have to "wait in line" behind the more than 3 million applicants now seeking green cards.Regional Issue
For the 24 counties in four states aligned along the almost 2,000 mile border with Mexico, the issue of illegal immigration is real. It's costly in terms of social services, education, health care, prison facilities.
But for the rest of the country, anguished rhetoric about an America overrun with immigrants isn't reflected in Census data. As a percentage of population, in the 1990s legal immigrants constituted just over 3 percent of the 2000 population, relatively low by historical levels. That's about a third of the rate for the 1900s (9.56 percent).
Let's put one widely reported Immigration Department statistic in perspective: during 2001-2004, the number of legal immigrants (3.8 million) is greater than those who arrived in the 1890s (3.7 million). Sounds ominous, doesn't it?
First, the US population today is 290 million versus 63 million in 1890. Second, the decade before (1880) and after (1900) that one had significantly more immigrants (5.2 million and 8.8 million). [This begs the question, why were the 1890s selected?]
Third, immigration quotas were cut by a quarter for 2003 and 2004, relative to 2001 and 2002 (a byproduct of 9-11). And there were 9.1 million legal immigrants in the 1990s, with the largest rate of that decade occurring under a Republican administration.
America is not being overrun with legal immigrants.
HR 4437: Enforcement, Prevention (No Amnesty)
Liberals Guide Deborah White reports that a half million people rallied in Los Angeles on Saturday to protest HR 4437, "which makes it illegal for people, including family, and organizations, including churches and non-profits, to offer services or assistance to anyone who might be illegally in the US. Under HR 4437, services can mean offering Holy Communion, a meal at a soup kitchen or used clothing for babies."
There may be other costs associated with illegal immigration. For example, a Harvard study suggests that illegal immigration from Mexico has depressed income for US high school dropouts by 8 percent.
Adjusted for inflation, average weekly wages in the US have "edged down" 0.3% since 2000. Those at the lower end of the income spectrum -- the ones competing with illegal immigrants -- saw weekly wages drop 2.7% (10th percentile). Estimates are that we have 11.5 million illegal immigrants: that's less than 4% of the total US population.
OF illegals who have been here less than 10 years, 80% are from Mexico, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.
The Wall - East Germany, Anyone?
Thus it is not a surprise that the House bill authorizes a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border. It would also make it a felony to illegally enter the country. However, Specter appears committed to the guest-worker program, but the clock is ticking. On Tuesday, Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) is prepared to introduce his own bill dealing with enforcement, not amensty, if Specter has not crafted a bill.
Leading the charge for tougher measures: Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI). Reflecting the first in his party, President Bush backed away from his historical support of a guest-worker plan, a business goal. But on Saturday he ruled out citizenship for guest workers and came out against alien amnesty.
In 1986, a Democratic Congress and Republican President provided amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants. Employer sanctions for having hired illegal immigrants have not been actively enforced.
See Columbia Journalism Review, Macarena Hernandez on Immigration, Bill O'Reilly and No Child Left Behind: "[I]f I wasn't Mexican-American and if I only watched Mr. O'Reilly or Mr. Dobbs, I'd be afraid of Mexicans, too. They dedicate entire shows to villanizing Latino immigrants, as if they're all criminals." Also, David Neiwert and Kevin Drum.
Join the Forum Discussion (second thread)
Technorati Profile
Technorati tags:
Immigration,
Politics
gada.be tags:
Immigration,
Politics
Comments
Having worked with many illegal immigrants in entry level jobs both in the food service and warehouse industries in Indiana. I know that they believe that taxes and the immegration service are a joke. They are more upset when they have to buy new papers and obtain a new social security number to work under than the idea of being discovered and deported. I worked for a warehouse in Indiana for TJMAX where they had approx 450 workers. When they finally linked up to a service to check social security numbers they had to lay off over 300 people. That was just the social security numbers that had been reported stolen. Everyone talks about the impact economically they have on us with concerns to medicine, social services like education, jail expenses. What about the stolen identities? The ruined credit? The irs proplems when an extra $20,000 dollars is reported on that Social security number? They purposefully bump up there withholdings to 6, 7, 8, 9 deductions knowing that they will leave or move before they can be discovered. They pay a fraction of the taxes they should with this method or working strictly for cash for smaller employers in the food service, construction, and farming industries. They send considerable sums of dollars back to their original country that will never go to stimulate the local economy. They take jobs from Americans because employers know that they will take a job for 7 bucks an hour that an American would need $10 bucks an hour to be able to support his family on. All the while knowing they are breaking the law doing so. In states like Indiana where manufacturing has broken the states economy they florish in the new enviroment underbidding all the people with no jobs.
The real injustice is this. American companies profiteer off of cheap illegal immigrants. They face no real repercussions or fines for improving their bottom line. All the while foisting the cost off to the general American public in the form of wasted tax dollars. It amounts to nothing more than Socialism, state support of private enterprise. Americans are harder pressed each year to make ends meet and the constant influx of people sucking of the services and monies of the government in a parasitic infestation is reprehensible. Likewise the continued ignorance of Government and the reluctance to heavily fine and substatialy penalize American industry for knowingly propogating the situation and allowing these illegal immegrants to be victimized is equally abhorrent. I heard a study saying illegal immigrants are three times as likely to be hurt on the job. I imagine that they are likely fired with no recourse to receive compensation since they can’t advertise the fact they are illegal by being caught up in the legal system.
Hi, Tim …. thank you for your thoughtful comment.
I was not aware of the accident data. I’ll have to check that out.
It does seem - at least from how incidents are reported - that corporations face little repurcussion, unlike individuals who hire a nanny or housekeeper and get docked for not withholding social security. :-/
I’ll have to check the status of the Wal-Mart undocumented worker claim (a sub-contractor, if I remember correctly).