May 18 2007

Guest Worker Program Success

Published by at 4:31 pm under All General Discussions,Illegal Immigration

Addendum: It seems that all across the right side of the blogoshpere the sky is falling! LOL!. I am so glad I am an independent. Hysterics over documenting undocumented workers is the exact kind of reaction I said would marginalize the right. The far right has officially jumped the shark. The far left has too. And contrary to the doom and gloomers, America will survive and we will elect serious leaders with serious ideas and prosper. Enough already with “the end of the world” wailing. You folks bet the farm and lost. Get over it. – end update

Yes, I know many on the right feel the effort to bring the immigrant workers out into the open and under a more controlled program is tantamount to treason, but I just cannot share these “Drama Queen” fears. And I know my visits will take another hit (as they always do when I post on my support for Bush’s plans for immigration) but so be it. The fact is the Rep Congress had their little test of wills and lost. And now that they do not run Congress Bush is able to do what he needs to get this needed program going. And from what I see it is pretty good plan (not everything I wanted, but I never expected to get what I wanted):

The plan would create a temporary worker program to bring new arrivals to the U.S. A separate program would cover agricultural workers. New high-tech enforcement measures also would be instituted to verify that workers are here legally.

The key breakthrough came when negotiators struck a bargain on a so- called “point system” that would for the first time prioritize immigrants’ education and skill level over family connections in deciding how to award green cards.

The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a “Z visa” and—after paying fees and a $5,000 fine—ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of household would have to return to their home countries first.

They could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed.

These features (and many more the media is just not reporting on) will deal with the 12 million illegal workers here now (and presumably who have some significant time in – like 2 years minimum). The entire national security component of this plan is to separate those associated with the minor infractions (working without proper papers) from those who are violent criminals and terrorists. Finding a needle in a haystack (the terrorists) is not hard when most of the hay will walk up and move out of the way so you can deal with the bad stalks and the needle you need to find ASAP. This is why those interested in National Security support Bush’s plan because it is the best balance of dealing with the compounded issues involved with illegal immigrants. The plan optimizes and expedites this separation process.

And for new workers the program is really reasonable all the way around

A new temporary guest worker program would also have to wait until those so-called “triggers” had been activated.

Those workers would have to return home after work stints of two years, with little opportunity to gain permanent legal status or ever become U.S. citizens. They could renew their guest worker visas twice, but would be required to leave for a year in between each time.

This is clearly not amnesty. With a fine and back taxes, and limited immigrant worker time and opportunity to stay permanently this is light years ahead of what we have now. I am looking forward to having my prediction come true. And while I will warn my friends on the right not to get all aggitated and angry and spewing names at people who don’t agree with them, sadly I know they will not listen. The anger on the right over this issue is as mindless as the anger on the left over the 2000 election. Logic will not penetrate it. But by the same token, the moderates in America will not tolerate disrespectful and demeaning attacks. So that fastest way to marginalism is to rant and rave about what was an obvious result of the far right’s attack on Bush – which started with Harriet Miers. Many times I predicted we would lose the next three years of the conservative agenda over the civil war the far right started with Miers (see here and here). The far right went from Miers onto Schiavo onto Immigration – and they lost the conservative agenda for 3 years – as I predicted.

I am fairly positive there will not only be hesitency, but outright resistence to the far right if they react in the same fashion which put them on the sidelines in 2006. The Immigration solution is well balanced. It is not driven by partisan ideology but by pragmatic prioritization. It is not out to ‘win’ but to pogress. And anyone who lashes out in anger because the ‘pure’ did not win out over the ‘best’ is going to get shunned. OK, I have given my warning. I am glad to see this success come about in the middle of the battle of partisan wills over Iraq. It shows some semblence of seriousness we have been missing for over year in DC.

188 responses so far

188 Responses to “Guest Worker Program Success”

  1. For Enforcement says:

    http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/70ab8c2c-9e0b-41b4-8ffb-279de0016934

    All the details of the new Amnesty bill are there. And as the saying goes, the devil is in the details. For EVERY rule and requirement in the bill, there are provisions for EXCEPTIONS. Just as in the old bill, NOTHING is required that wasn’t especially designed to be bypassed. There is just no ‘there, there’. It’s a Dimmycrat bill all the way, designed to make them look good and get votes.
    A snowball has a better chance in hell than this bill does.
    .

  2. wiley says:

    The argument for this “bill” (whenever that formally happens) and the previous Senate bill by those posting here (I’m discounting Sooth & his whacko ilk) is:
    1) that this is a national security issue and the only way to get an account of the illegals here is a carrot to get them to come out of the shadows, 2) that most of these people are decent, good, hard-working folks who are only illegal because of paperwork snafus and other minor infractions.
    Unfortunatley, anyone who disagrees because he/she thinks that this bill (what’s known about it) is lacking on border security and unwise because it rewards illegal behavior is labelled as extemist and hard-liner, etc. From what I’ve observed, most of the slinging by the “pro” side has been unwarranted, much in the same way liberals paint anyone dissenting with them as (fill in the blank — racist, bigoted, extreme, hard-right, etc.).

    In any case, the problem us hard-liners” have is that our govt is not equipped or capable or competent to process all the illegals as the bill lays out. Whether you agree with the bill or not, our bloated bureaucracies cannot do it now, nor in a year, … when? ever? And what’s to say that all the illegals are going to come out of the shadows? And while this circus is going on, which itself is strong incentive for other not-yet-illegals to illegally enter, our borders and other points of entry will still be a sieve (or a gaping hole per Apache). This nonsense about it must be done all at once, i.e. ,”comprehensive”, or not at all is absurd. We can secure our borders via a combo of walls, fences, electronic sensors, overhead surveillance, increased border agents, etc. Will it be 100%? of course not, but it can be pretty darn close (walls work). And yes, clamping down on other means of entry (student visas, green cards, et. al.) must be done. These elements of securing points of entry needs to be the priority, and should be implemented immediately. The secondary issue is what to do with the illegals here, and I think many of the so-called hard-liners would be more accommodating if the border/security gets traction. Attempting the massive undertaking of processing the illegals first or before proven securtiy upgrades is to repeat history (“deja all over agaian”) and make the problem double what it is today.

    Lastly, it is simply not true that the immigration issue cost repub elections last fall. As I & others have posted, the majority of voters do favor stronger measures on illegal immigration, including secure borders. Wherever immigration was a hot-button issue last Nov, the winning candidate (whether repub or dem) favored strong measures on border security and talked tough on illegals. Over the last dozen years, repubs struggle at the polls only when they stray from core conservative and traditional principles, which includes enforcing laws and securing the border.

  3. Bikerken says:

    Hail Irrelevance!!!!

  4. wiley says:

    … Guess I could have also mentioned the drain on the economy with the explosion of entitlements and other social services, and how those who do go thru the legal process are being slapped in the face.

  5. Bikerken says:

    You know Terrye, I have been reading a lot of your posts on some other websites and combining that with what I have read here brings me to one solid conclusion, you are full of shit! You are a dyed in the wool open borders liberal who pretends to be a centrist to establish some fake crediblility! Every thing you post, and you do post far more than someone who just does this for conversation, is all left wing, conservative bashing crap! I think you’re a phony conservative who uses the label of independent to cover their tracks. So many people have challenged you to dispute or debate the facts and all you do is this self pitying song and sad dance about how mean we are to disagree with you. You are full of shit!

  6. For Enforcement says:

    Here’s just a very small sample of all the exclusions: the whole bill is written just like this: from that Hugh Hewitt link above:

    Section 601(h) Treatment of Applicants

    (1)IN GENERAL –An alien who files application for Z-nonimmigrant status shall, upon submission of any evidence required under paragraphs (f) and (g) and after the Secretary has conducted appropriate background checks, to include name and fingerprint checks, that have not by the end of the next business day produced information rendering the applicant ineligible

    (A)be granted probationary benefits in the form of employment authorization pending final adjudication of the alien’s application;

    (B)may in the Secretary’s discretion receive advance permission to re-enter the United States pursuant to existing regulations governing advance parole;

    (C)may not be detained for immigration purposes, dteremined inadmissible or deportable, or removed pending final adjudication of the alien’s application, unless the alient isdetermined to be ineligible for Z nonimmigration status; and

    (D) may not be cosndiered an unauthorized alien (as defined in Section 274A(h)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)(3))) unless employment authorization under subparagraph (A) is denied.

    Section 601(h)(2), (3), (4), (5), and (6) lay out additional provisions concerning this huge –indeed almost certainly 90% plus?– portion of the illegals currently in the country that are not subject to the “triggers,” and even notes in subparagraph (5) that if an illegal is arrested or detained prior to filing hisor her application for Z permit status, “the Secretary shall provide the alien with a reasonable opportunity to file an application under this section after such regulations are promulgated.” Unless the computer spits out a no within 2 days of submitting the application, the illegal gets probationary Z status –before even one more mile of fence is built or a workplace verification system is constructed.

    Perhaps I am wrong, but I can only read Section 601(h) as a massive undercutting of the entire concept of “triggers,” an undercutting which various talking points have not underscored or quantified, which points to why the jam down demanded by Senator McCain is so reprehensible. Ordinary citizens have almost zero chance of figuring out what this bill intends and how its provisions will interact, and the proxies on whom they might rely will hardly have any opportunity to fully vet the language.

    As I noted below, the president and the GOP Senate leadership need to postpone any cloture vote until the law is examined, debated and amended.

  7. colin says:

    Hey everyone,

    As far as I can tell, this issue is doing more damage to the right than any other issue I’ve ever encountered, and at the worst possible time. The only thing holding this country together, and keeping this country safe, is the conservative coalition which, I believe, is now a minority in the public at large. In the midst of this immigration fight, the democrats are still delaying the supplemental funding bill for Iraq. It’s now been over 100 days since the President sent the bill to congress, and it looks like there will be at least one more veto before work on a real bill will begin in earnest. The only thing keeping those vetoes sustained, keeping the pressure on the dems, and keeping this country from losing a war and giving al Qaeda a victory in its global war on the free world, is the minority of hawks contained within that imperfect vessel known as the GOP. And now it’s tearing itself apart.

    I’m in the pro-comprehensive immigration bill camp, but really right now I could care less about the whole issue. I just want to do whatever is necessary to get the issue behind us, and get back to the gathering storm in the Middle East. The only problem is that now, the media and the dems will fry us all if we fall through on getting some kind of legislation passed. So, I want to know, what does everyone want out of a bill? First off, here are some ground rules for any bill. I think that, in the end, the President just wants to get some bill on his desk that registers all of the undocumented illegal aliens in some kind of database. That seems to be his only criteria for signing a bill, and I think all of us here can agree that getting all of the illegals out of the shadows (and I don’t care for what purpose — for work, to send back home, whatever. Just so that there are no longer 12 million unidentified foreign people wondering around in this country) is one necessity for any kind of immigration reform. Second, we need some kind of meaningful border enforcement. I think we all agree on that. The third part is the trickiest part. The draft bill needs to works its way through congress, and the dems are looking for any excuse to scuttle any legislation republicans want passed, only right now the public is clamoring for meaningful immigration reform, so they want to scuttle ANY proposal that comes into congress and place the blame on the GOP. This means any proposed changes to the proposed legislation has to be so bullet-proof that the dems are scared to oppose it. Right now, I think that amendments to the bill could make it past the Senate, and the main mover on the GOP side is Kyl, so I think he’d be amenable to any changes made towards toughening the bill, but Lady MacBeth over in the House plans on killing anything that makes it over there, so we’d need to find a way to scare or embarass a woman with no shame into accepting a bill that would only hurt her while helping her rivals.

    Okay, after laying that out, does anyone have any suggestions? I’d say start out with the current proposed legislation, and add or delete as you see fit. For myself, my first amendment would be to extend the triggers in regards to the border fencing until all 800 miles of fence are completed. In addition to that, I’d say amend the bill to say that anyone caught crossing the border or entering the country illegally while the fencing is being completed is detained until the completion of the border security measures, then deported and barred legal entry into the United States for a period of not less than ten years, so as to prevent a border rush while the fencing is being built. I think those are a couple of good, serious concessions comprehensive reform advocates like myself could make to the immigration hawks in order to get a bill constructed that will pass muster with all the groups.

    I do hope everyone will try and come up with their own suggestions, because I do think if we on this thread can come up with a workable solution, seeing as how there is a nice mix of comprehensive reform advocates like A.J, Terrye, myself, and crosspatch, and immigration hawks like For Enforcement and Bikerken, that at least the act in and of itself would turn down the temperature a little bit, and maybe add something constructive to the mix. It may be too late, and too many invectives may have already been thrown around, but I really do think that we all can find some common ground, even on this divisive issue.

    Sorry for the long comment.

  8. For Enforcement says:

    Colin:

    As far as I can tell, this issue is doing more damage to the right than any other issue I’ve ever encountered, and at the worst possible time.
    It is truly a sad state of affairs when people asking for the country’s borders to be secure and that our immigration laws be enforced is said to be doing damage to the people asking for it.

    I’m in the pro-comprehensive immigration bill camp, but really right now I could care less about the whole issue.

    ‘pro-comprehensive immigration bill camp’? what does that mean exactly? Here’s my interpretation. I want the immigration laws enforced. you don’t. You want some new laws passed. For what? to not be enforced also? If the “comprehensive” bill is passed, do you then become a hawk (hardliner) and want them enforced, or do you remain as you are and don’t want them enforced? If you don’t want immigration laws(new or old) enforced then why pass a new one?

    The only problem is that now, the media and the dems will fry us all if we fall through on getting some kind of legislation passed.

    What? and why? the dems are in charge If any bill doesn’t pass, isn’t it their fault?

    So, I want to know, what does everyone want out of a bill? First off, here are some ground rules for any bill. I think that, in the end, the President just wants to get some bill on his desk that registers all of the undocumented illegal aliens in some kind of database. That seems to be his only criteria for signing a bill,

    I think you may be just guessing here. Then why not pass a one paragraph bill requiring all illegal aliens register withing 6 months and do away with the other 699.8 pages of fluff designed to hide the fact that what they want to do is give everyone amnesty and not be held accountable for it and will buy the dimmycrats votes.

    Second, we need some kind of meaningful border enforcement. I think we all agree on that.

    You sure haven’t been reading the same comments I have.
    There are about 3 or 4 commenters on this blog that want meaningful border enforcement. The others want open porous borders.

    The third part is the trickiest part. The draft bill needs to works its way through congress, and the dems are looking for any excuse to scuttle any legislation republicans want passed, only right now the public is clamoring for meaningful immigration reform, so they want to scuttle ANY proposal that comes into congress and place the blame on the GOP.

    I think you may be on to something here. And it appears to be working. The Dimmycrats are smart enough to know that the majority of everyday Americans do want border security and control over illegals, but they (dimmycrats) don’t want that, so they are now making it look like us(hardliners; to use AJ and Terrye’s term) are the ones that are the obstructionists.

    Okay, after laying that out, does anyone have any suggestions? I’d say start out with the current proposed legislation, and add or delete as you see fit.

    We agree here. It’s about 700 pages at present. Take the title page, then throw away the other 699, then on the title page change the name of the bill to “illegal aliens registration act” write up about 10 sentences telling them they all have to be registered within 6 months or get the hell out. That should work nicely.

    I think those are a couple of good, serious concessions comprehensive reform advocates like myself could make to the immigration hawks I do hope everyone will try and come up with their own suggestions, because I do think if we on this thread can come up with a workable solution, seeing as how there is a nice mix of comprehensive reform advocates like A.J, Terrye, myself, and crosspatch, and immigration hawks like For Enforcement and Bikerken,

    What is an immigration hawk? I think you may mean anti-immigration hawk. If so, that doesn’t describe me at all. I am 100% in favor of immigration, as long as it is legal.
    .