Let me guess, the 15 point occupations are dominated by those that corporations have been howling need more H1-B visas to fill. Programmers, engineers, and other technical jobs that Americans now make good money from doing are targets and until they get those salaries down the corps won't rest.

Corps have already killed domestic interest in many high-tech careers because students are convinced that outsourcing will kill the future of those jobs.

Have shivs have been stuck into this bill aimed at high-tech workers? Since I don't trust Congress to protect our domestic IT industry there's no way I can trust, on faith, that this bill doesn't contain a handout to the high-tech industry.

I hope that removing those words at the base of the Statue of Liberty are in the bill also - we should have truth in advertising.

Without having seen all the particulars to this bill, but only going on what has been written to originate this thread, I find that we are continuing to perpetuate a political climate and economic environment which drags itself down to the bottom line for low-wage labor.

And since I live in the Sonoran Desert and live 'immigration' first-hand and daily, I find that of all the nation's public policies--good and bad, immigration is the one arena in which America has given itself the opportunity to "shine" and "shape" who we are as a nation of immigrants.

Emphasis away from family re-unification, will become a sad state of affairs and will cause another round of required "reform" in a few years into the future.

Jaango

The bill will not affect illegal immigration. Remember, we've tried a guest worker program that failed. The reasons for that failure have not been addressed. All of the incentives to come here illegally will remain in place; employer sanctions will never be enforced. We'll just see a couple of show trials.

As for those who say we should welcome the illegals because we are "a nation of immigrants", I pose this question in all seriousness. Why not remove the border and welcome the everyone who wants to immigrate. Why pretend that any laws apply?

It does not look too good. The bill is not just a trade-off between legalization and a bad guest worker program (although the guest worker program looks little better than indentured servitude; guest workers would only be able to stay in the country for two years at a time without any path to citizenship which will just lead to more undocumented immigrants in the future). It is a massive reorientation in immigration policy.

Replacing the current family-based immigration system with a "merit-based" system may not be the worst idea in the world. However, it is hard to see why it would be a good idea since the only reason to limit family-based immigration is because some people in this country think that there are too many latinos and asians here. The question is, do you think that a back-room deal with this white house which drastically changes the current immigration system would be good for the country? The answer is pretty clearly no.

But I won't give up hope. Last year a terrible immigration proposal was turned into a not-so-bad compromise bill that passed the senate, so, anything is possible.

"nation of immigrants"

Since I offered up this mantra, I feel I am obligated to respond.

There are two ways of looking at immigration. First, is the old WWII mantra of the construct of the Cousins, i.e., Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. The second, is the Merits of Indigenousness.

Thus, you can take your pick of either one. And if you are unfamiliar with either, I can hold your hand and walk you through the applicable rationales.

As to the geographical boundaries of Mexico and Canada, perhaps, the starting point for this approach is with the Christian-delivered Doctrine of Discovery. Another alternative to be considered is the notional for "fatalism". If this is too distasteful, I can prescribe another perspective. :)

Jaango

I could support a path to legalization with the awful guest worker program if the guest worker program had a sunset provision that would force it to be affirmatively renewed.

Nobody really knows the social effects of creating a permanent non-citizen guest worker class in the US so it's reasonable to include the sunset provision. I think 4-6 years is a reasonable time to see how things play out.

Permanent Underclass

Severe poverty is worst near the Mexican border and in some areas of the South, where 6.5 million severely poor residents are struggling to find work as manufacturing jobs in the textile, apparel and furniture-making industries disappear. The Midwestern Rust Belt and areas of the Northeast also have been hard hit as economic restructuring and foreign competition have forced numerous plant closings.

At the same time, low-skilled immigrants with impoverished family members are increasingly drawn to the South and Midwest to work in the meatpacking, food processing and agricultural industries.

These and other factors such as increased fluctuations in family incomes and illegal immigration have helped push 43 percent of the nation's 37 million poor people into deep poverty - the highest rate in at least 32 years.

"What appears to be taking place is that, over the long term, you have a significant permanent underclass that is not being impacted by anti-poverty policies," said Michael Tanner, the director of Health and Welfare Studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank.

How is this new bill going to address the permanent underclass we are creating? Regardless of what side of the immigration issue you are on, it seems painfully clear that our current policies are only fostering more poor. It is no surprise that the largest numbers of severely poor people live in the states bordering Mexico. The immigration issue effects both sides, because of low wages being paid Americans are working and yet cannot escape the ranks of the working poor and because most immigrants are low-skilled and poorly paid they also swell the ranks of the working poor. I don't see anything in this bill to address this.

The Disputed Truth

It's easy for so many hear, who are comfortable and not in any danger, to stab your fellow citizens in the back for the sake of foreigners. You want to know why people don't trust Democrats? It's because you're unwilling to put Americans first. You're not willing to be good leaders, because good leaders take care of their people. They do not put the interests of the poor in other countries ahead of the interests of the poor in this one.
Not one single illegal immigrant is going to be sent home. This won't stem the tide one single bit. All it will do is add 500,000 new guest workers. 500k new guest workers, on top of the millions of illegal immigrants, driving down wages for unskilled Americans.

Americans you all apparently don't even kind of care about. Why would you. you all make far more than those Americans, and in your minds that makes you better than they are. You can all afford to send your kids to college. You all own homes. What do you care about those who have struggled for decades only to feel themselves slipping further and further behind.

I was a loyal Democrat for a long time. I'd have gone to war in 2000 if you all had had the balls to start one. I would have voted for a party that cared about the poor for my entire life. Now on every issue, it's becoming more and more apparent that the Democratic party couldn't care less about anyone but their rich ass campaign contributors. They won't stand up against a war that funnels money to defense contractors. They won't stand up for union rights, or fair trade deals. They won't prevent country from being flooded with cheap foreign labor. They don't deserve blood, effort, or votes.

It's easy for so many hear, who are comfortable and not in any danger, to stab your fellow citizens in the back for the sake of foreigners. You want to know why people don't trust Democrats? It's because you're unwilling to put Americans first. You're not willing to be good leaders, because good leaders take care of their people. They do not put the interests of the poor in other countries ahead of the interests of the poor in this one.
Not one single illegal immigrant is going to be sent home. This won't stem the tide one single bit. All it will do is add 500,000 new guest workers. 500k new guest workers, on top of the millions of illegal immigrants, driving down wages for unskilled Americans.

Americans you all apparently don't even kind of care about. Why would you. you all make far more than those Americans, and in your minds that makes you better than they are. You can all afford to send your kids to college. You all own homes. What do you care about those who have struggled for decades only to feel themselves slipping further and further behind.

I was a loyal Democrat for a long time. I'd have gone to war in 2000 if you all had had the balls to start one. I would have voted for a party that cared about the poor for my entire life. Now on every issue, it's becoming more and more apparent that the Democratic party couldn't care less about anyone but their rich ass campaign contributors. They won't stand up against a war that funnels money to defense contractors. They won't stand up for union rights, or fair trade deals. They won't prevent country from being flooded with cheap foreign labor. They don't deserve blood, effort, or votes.

Didn't mean to double post, feel free to delete one of them. must have gone through before I entered my E-mail.

I don't understand this whole 'nation of immigrants' argument. Even the indigenees found by Columbus and John Smith came here from Asia and Europe. Every nation is a nation of immigrants. That is beside the point. The lifeboat holds 60 souls--everyone who climbed into the lifeboat sought the same thing. But what if there are thousands who want in the lifeboat? Should the first 60 in line be clubbed and thrown overboard? Do the first 60 that made it into the lifeboat have anything to say about whether the lifeboat sails with 60, or is overturned and everybody drowns? These are the kinds of decisions we are talking about here. There are places in the US that now have gang violence for the first time in their history...

It's a nation of immigrants alright. We murdered millions to take this country. butchered them to the point where their culture will be dead in 100 years. We lied, cheated, and stole so that white businessmen could make money from their land.

I'm sorry if I see how this justifies anything now. I'm sorry that I don't see how this act was inherently moral. You must, because you're using it to try and spur us on to nobility now. I say we should feel a bit more ashamed of what we've done, and not try to use it to make ourselves out to be noble people.

This concedes a lot of ground to the 21st-century globalist buccaneers:

"The bill inexplicably lacks a significant increase in high-skills visas, but the movement towards a more rational prioritizing system makes a lot of sense. For instance: Under the proposed system, nurses, whom we need, would start with eight points,and workers in occupations the Bureau of Labor judges as likely to experience the most growth in the next decade get 15 points."

Let's at least acknowledge that we're strengthening a global system that contracts out cut-rate education and training to feeder countries and then hopes to siphon off the skilled professionals while keeping a lid on their wages. The countries that supply us with nurses need nurses, too. If we educated our own nurses better and trained them better, we wouldn't need foreign nurses.

Unless we commit to and invest in international peace, development, and fairness, we're committing to a nation as a gated community--not defensible or sustainable.

Soullite

The 12 million undocumented immigrants in the US are not the Democrats' "rich ass campaign contributors." They are also not going anywhere. Also, hundreds of thousands of low-skilled immigrants from impoverished countries will be arriving in the US in the near future, regardless of how this latest round of immigration reform goes. These are inescapable facts that any immigration reform will have to take into account.

It is Bush and not the Democrats that want to turn new guest workers into serfs who will be used to undercut wages. The Democrats are mostly focused on legalizing the millions who are already here -- and who, again, won't be going anywhere. As part of a bargain, it seems that some are willing to accede to the Administration's demand for cheap imported labor as a price for regularizing the millions of working men and women who are here in the shadows. I personally don't think that is a good idea, and many Democrats agree. But we should be clear on where the impetus for the guest worker program is coming from.

Soullite said: "You want to know why people don't trust Democrats? It's because you're unwilling to put Americans first."

President Bush is a Democrat now? Please, take him back!

Spare us this pap. It was his idea, no Democrat raised this as an issue. Without Republican votes, it would be a dead issue.

Talk to your own guys, don't blame mine.

forgiven and joejoejoe raised the issue of a permanent underclass. We have seen what happened in Europe with these wonderful guest worker programs. But, we still refuse to learn from the failures of others or even our own failures. We did try this before, and the reasons for failure have not even been discussed.

This project is doomed and will only create another cottage industry for the coyotes.

Regardless of where you are on this, I think most will agree that amnesty is a real advance.

It helps diminish the exploitation of those 'in the shadows' and the economic prospect of those with whom they compete. IE, it's pretty much win-win, unless you run a business based on exploiting low-wage undocmented workers.

The only downside is it sends a message to those considering illegal immigration that it's ok to jump the queue, break the law. So, you've got to put enforcement first, which the Senate compromise purports to do, though the devil's in the details here, and the Bushies ain't exactly great implementers.

(Could we put a clause in here barring Haliburton from a contract...)

So, not saying the tradeoff Ezra notes is worth making, just suggesting that this is an area where disparate folks might agree.

" You want to know why people don't trust Democrats? It's because you're unwilling to put Americans first. You're not willing to be good leaders, because good leaders take care of their people. They do not put the interests of the poor in other countries ahead of the interests of the poor in this one."

But, but-- Robert Rubin says we must!

soul-lite---what is this strawman you are beating up on? Who is defending the decimation of native peoples in the new world by Europeans?

You're asking me to feel ashamed of Christopher Columbus cutting off the hand of any Caribe Indian who refused to mine gold?

Ok. I feel ashamed that I am a member of the same species. But I refuse to be held accountable for things that were done by other people in other times and places. That is fucking stupid.

I'm a legal immigrant to this country (although not Hispanic), and I was an immigrant to my previous country of residence too. And while I support Dems on many issues, this is one I don't agree on. I don't support amnesty. Illegal immigrans are here illegally, they are breaking the law. Now we want to just wipe that aside and say, hey we let it get out of control, so you're legal now. That is 100% BS. We give 12M amnesty now, and 15 years from now, we'll do it again for x more million. Why bother having rules at all then?

The interesting thing is that the business community is very much in favor of this. They want that cheap labor, and the savings will be passed down to the management (certainly not lower prices).

The proper way to address this issue is to cutoff the reason so many illegals come here, namely the wages. We should impose draconian measures against businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants. That should be coupled with a broad spectrum of policies that will move Mexico into a position where their citizens will not leave their homeland in utter despair.

"The interesting thing is that the business community is very much in favor of this. They want that cheap labor, and the savings will be passed down to the management (certainly not lower prices)."

Passed down to management?

You wish.

I prefer Buh's plan of trickle down enforcement. It has a much better chance of success than trickle down economics. Kill off the illegal job market and you really put a crimp in the number of people here illegally.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned here (at the ripe of 29), but I think we need to install some real enforcement before handing out goodies like amnesty and guest worker programs. If the government can't do a thing about enforcing the laws we currently have, how are we assured that this guest worker program won't be horribly abused, both by employers and by the people who get into the country using it.

And what happens when a "guest worker" gets married to a U.S. citizen, or has a few kids while he is over here? Will he still be sent home? Unlikely. And how will the government decide if a business has adequately offered a job at reasonable pay to U.S. workers?

Regarding amnesty, this would be fine if we were fully enforcing businesses and enacting strong penalties against those using illegal workers. But without any real enforcement (which was promised in the 1986 bill too, remember), the amnesty will simply make even more illegals want to cross here and stay, knowing that they too will eventually get some amnesty.

I think it's a horrible fix to the problem we currently have. And yes folks, massive unrestricted immigration that destroys unionized jobs (in the service sector, manufacturing, meat plants, etc.) is a big problem. I think the government should pass a clean bill setting up a REAL enforcement plan to regulate and punish businesses that hire illegal workers. Once businesses become convinced that they have to follow the law, then you can start with this earned amnesty business.

But I will never support a guest worker program. And I don't see how a politician can go to his constituents, on the eve of a recession, and say "oh by the way, we're gonna import 500,000 people per year to take your jobs". It's political suicide once people know what it's about.

That should say "ripe old age of 29". Just so you don't think I was born in 1929 :)

Shorter Soullite: let's hunt down and kill those dirty Mexicans.

Well, you go right on ahead. Get Lou Dobbs to go out with you.

Because they're not going to suddenly vanish, no matter how hard you squeeze your eyes shut and wish it so.

And I say that as a legal immigrant well aware of just how broken the system is. Why? Because Americans rarely have to deal with it, and because elections are never lost by candidates who choose to hate on foreigners.

Those who say 'target the employers' forget that the easiest way for employers to control their workforce is by blackmail.

Immigration reform? What nonsense. We do not need "immigration reform" What we need is to enforce the laws we already have. Current law calls for $10,000.00 fine and 2 years in jail for anyone that hires illegal immigrants. Start enforcing those laws and no one will hire them and they will go back home on their own because they will not be able to survive here.
Think immigration is not a problem then take a look at my towns most wanted list http://www.raleigh-nc.org/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_0_306_202_0_43/http;/pt03/DIG_Web_Content/category/Resident/Police/Most_Wanted_Persons/Cat-Index.html
about 80% on that list are illegal immigrants. And anyone in here who wants to support illegal aliens I say give on your job!

Maybe I'm old-fashioned here (at the ripe of 29), but I think we need to install some real enforcement before handing out goodies like amnesty and guest worker programs.

The problem with the 'enforcement first' mentality is that it kicks bureaucratic reform down the road; when the time comes to consider bureaucratic reform, it's invariably overtaken by demands for more enforcement. Which misses the point.

There's a slim window for immigration reform before electoral politics (read: immigrant-bashing) takes over.

Immigration is the slaughterhouse of federal government: that is, no-one likes to know where their burgers come from while they're biting down on them.

(Heck, meatpacking is one of those industries gladly handed off to illegal immigrants.)

pseudonymous in nc you definitely need to look at Raleigh's most wanted because you are way confused. We do not need anymore Bureaucratic horse shit from Washington. What we need is enforcement of the laws already have.

I just want to know why it is ok for these people to be in the country illegally with little consequences. Why can't I rob a bank if I need money? It is illegal but I could really need the money. I may be evicted from my home. Why can't I beat someone up who is making me mad? It is illegal, but they really deserved it. Why draw the line with making it ok to be an illegal? Why not make other illegal things ok? It would certainly help the overcrowding in our prisons!

This proposed "compromise" immigration reform legislation is a crime against the American worker.

Any meaningful immigration reform legislation must require heavy fines and serious terms of imprisonment for employers (including the officers of corporations) who hire illegal aliens, and must impose the corporate death penalty on repeat offenders.

No legislation (or legislator who proffers legislation) that omits such measures deserves any respect -- or trust -- from the American worker.

As with the so-far secret "trade compromise" legislation, Americans must fight this "compromise" bill tooth and nail.

Pseudo, you seem to take the 'we have to throw our hands up in the air in defeat' solution that continues our path in handing the country over to our corporate overlords.
Enforcement has to be a key plank. It should start with employers while finding more humane ways to deal with the employees hired illegally.
A completely open immigration system without an immediate and massive increase in the minimum wage is just an attack on American workers.
To me the options are either all labor must be paid a reasonable living wage, untied from citizenship, or else we need to dramatically increase the demand for labor by tightening up and truly enforcing our immigration policy.

This is not, as so many imply and some say openly,about "hating on foreigners"!

America simply cannot absorb everyone in Central and South America that wants a better opportunity. Permitting illegal immigration says we can. And ignores the costs that states and communities must bear.

Open letter to the Editor of all Newspapers, my elected Representatives in Washington D.C. and my fellow American Citizens,

The current legislation before our elected Representatives (that they're going to ram rod down our throats) concerning Amnesty for Illegal immigrants is a bad idea.

This can not be good for the country to allow amnesty to illegal aliens who knowingly broke our laws. It is a difficult problem in dealing with millions of illegal aliens but we must do what is right for our future generations and honor our past generations. President Eisenhower removed 1.4 million illegal aliens in 4 months with just 400 border guards so it can be done if we had the will to do it! My great-grandparents came here and went through the process like I am sure yours did. So, why then would we want to allow these illegal aliens any other path?

Becoming an American should mean something! Not just a token moment of registration and then a little slap on the wrist and bingo you are now an American. We want and need immigrants to join us and become us. That means assimilation! By learning our language, becoming independent, and becoming an American first. I don’t see these time honored principals in anything I hear coming out of Washington D.C.

You've heard the saying "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…..it’s a duck!" Then this bill is nothing less than full amnesty for the illegals! My only question is "Have all our elected Representatives gone mad and forgot why they have been sent to Washington D.C.?" They were sent to represent us the American people who are here legally and elected them to office, which by the way our Representatives took an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, not Mexico!

There are already enough laws on the books right now that just need to be enforced. The one law that comes to mind is Article 4 Section 4 of the US Constitution which says "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion." I feel that's pretty clear don't you? So the bottom line here people is Pres. Reagan gave amnesty to the illegals in the 1980's and we were promised that they would enforce the borders etc back then also... Now 20 plus years later we're about to make the same mistake again and none of the promises from the 80's have ever been kept! What makes you think they're going to keep their promises in 2007 to enforce the border and build a fence?

So what our politicians are doing is running away from protecting our country from enemies both foreign and domestic as stated in the US Constitution ignoring the pending Medicare/social security crisis and now they want to sell us down the river to those who crossed the river illegally!

With representation like this who needs Islamic terrorists!

I will no longer vote for someone, Republican or Democrat, who becomes a traitor and votes yes on this legislation to allow AMNESTY TO ILLEGALS and I suggest you do the same!

DON'T LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN PEOPLE - GET INVOLVED & MAKE CALLS TO YOUR REPRESENTATIVES NOW!

Thanks

Paul
N.W. Georgia Chapter Co-Director Minutemen Civil Defense Corps

http://minutemanhq.com/

Pseudo, you seem to take the 'we have to throw our hands up in the air in defeat' solution that continues our path in handing the country over to our corporate overlords.

Not at all. Though I do take the attitude that Americans will need to pay more for an economy that's not based on cheap labor.

'Punish the employers' is something of a cop-out if you're still buying the groceries and taking advantage of the services underpinned by sub-min-wage illegal workers.

Oh, and the NW Georgia Minutemen? That's hilarious. Which border are you guarding: the Chattanooga one? You looking for those swarthy types coming down from the Carolina mountains to take away your carpets? Yet another pasty white man's brigade.

Once again we're off chasing the Red herring. Senate bill Bill, S1348 has little to do with helping poor Mexican immigrants and everything to do with providing a cheap, dependable source of non-union labor.

S-1348 includes a temporary worker program, under which 400,000 to 600,000 foreign workers could be admitted to the United States each year.”

The bill contains the SKIL legislation which will double quotas for skilled foreign
workers in the United States. Those with doctorate degrees or with special skills, will be exempt from the quotas entirely.

Representative Rahm Emanuel, Democrat of Illinois, head of the House Democratic Caucus, has said the proposal would create "a permanent underclass of imported workers to fill American jobs."
No Shit.

S1348 is a continuation of the K-street agenda of outsourcing American jobs and importing cheap foreign labor.
This ain't about fruit pickers anymore Bill; it's about skilled tradesman and middle management executives.

Recently, a company running shipyards in Mississippi and Texas began recruiting welders, housing them in a confined compound (like a concentration camp), then demoting or deporting any "complainers".
Smithfield foods virtually recruits undocumented workers at the boarder with conditions so terrible that they possess an almost 100% yearly turn-over rate. How much nicer for them to be able to "document" their employees and be able to threaten deportation.
With S1348, this sort of behavior will not only be commonplace, it will be sanctioned as official US policy.

What S1348 (and the secret fast-track trade "compromise" now in progress) shows us is not new spirit of brotherhood to our fellow man, but the true agenda of Congress.
Make no mistake about it, this legislation was written on K-Street not Sesame Street; it has almost nothing to do with helping immigrant families and everything to do with cheap, dependable, docile labor ... and plenty of it.

On another point, I’ve been trying to envision this mass exodus and repatriation of 12 million Mexicans from all around the country. One wonders what incredibly efficient government agency is going to handle this process, on either side of the boarder.
…and what happens in Mexico ? Do they touch the freedom pole, pay their 5000.00 and then return?
One should remember that the Mexican government, who apparently would actually possess the freedom pole, would probably want their cut.
Would the pilgrims be herded into one large city or would this more closely resemble Caesar’s taxing of the ancient world, where each is sent to his city of birth?
But more importantly, does anyone believe that this is actually going to happen?
… In point of fact, don’t we have to conclude that what this amounts to is one big dog and pony show designed to cover up the real meat of this legislation … the importation of cheap foreign labor.

This from the SKIL Act of 2006, contained in S-2611, which was passed by the Senate almost exactly one year ago, and has been hanging like the sword of Damocles over American workers ever since.
The SKIL act of 2007 was incorporated into S1348 with very little change.

“Subtitle B: SKIL Act - Securing Knowledge, Innovation, and Leadership Act of 2006 or the SKIL Act of 2006 - (Sec. 522) Amends INA to exempt from the annual H-1B (specialty occupation/fashion models) visa cap an alien who has: (1) earned a master’s or higher degree from an accredited U.S. university; (2) been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States; or (3) is employed at a nonprofit organization (currently, employed at a nonprofit research organization).

(Sec. 523) Sets annual H-1B limits at: (1) 65,000 for each of FY2004-FY2006 (currently, 65,000 for each fiscal year after FY2003); (2) 115,000 for the first fiscal year beginning after enactment of this provision; and (3) a market-based calculation for each subsequent fiscal year, with a 20% increase for the following year if the previous year's quota is reached. (This provision is similar to, but not identical to, the amendments made in section 508(c) of this Act.)”

This is what this legislation is about.
Being able to hire skilled workers from overseas to take over hi-end American jobs.
The rest is just media fodder.

What surprises me in all this is that none of the legislation deals with the "anchor baby" syndrome which is one of the major sticking points with those who advocate immigration reform.

m498k