Another call for a guest worker program...
The National Center for Policy Analysis links to a Dallas Morning News article citing the immediate need for a workable guest worker program...
« January 2005 | Main | March 2005 »
The National Center for Policy Analysis links to a Dallas Morning News article citing the immediate need for a workable guest worker program...
Looks like it might happen. A tension-free Indian-Pakistani border certainly makes South Asia much safer - for them, and for us...
BTW, I've read and reviewed Stephen P. Cohen's India: An Emerging Power and am now working on his The Idea of Pakistan. Excellent books both.
Yesterday, I referenced Newt Gingrich's new book, Winning the Future: A 21st Century Contract With America, as it related to immigration reform. I also made reference to the book in a post on Southern Appeal about the Speaker's plan to "incentivize young people to go into professions other than the law." I concur with Gingrich's immigration plan which is essentially:
1. Control the border - His border control plan is, in essence, President Bush's guest worker program. He wants to "make it harder to sneak in" while also making it "easier for guest workers to enter the country legally and to work here as long as they obey the law." This is eminently sensible.
2. Turn immigrants into citizens by assimilating them - I think I covered this aspect sufficiently yesterday...
3. Get rid of dual citizenship - The Speaker correctly asserts that the "rise of dual citizenship in which people no longer have to renounce allegiance to any other government in order to become Americans" is "one of the most insidious assaults on American exceptionalism." Gingrich cites as an example of dual citizenship run amuck the Hackensack, NJ city councilor who ran for Colombian Senate in 1997. The city councilor "planned to hold both offices simultaneously."
4. Require immigrants to learn English - Last, but not least - poll after poll shows that Americans overwhelmingly believe that immigrants should learn English. This is crucial to effective assimilation. As long as pockets of immigrants continue to come to America and refuse to learn our language we will continue to have a bifurcated society where non-English speaking citizens are relegated to a lower class.
As to the Speaker's plan to keep students from attending law school... it sounds strange to me. That said, I will admit that there are plenty of people in law school that make me wonder about my chosen profession.
The book is essentially Newt's campaign platform in 2008. Why do I say this? Check the three and a half pages of acknowledgments - the man thanks everyone under the sun. He wasn't Speaker of the House for no reason, mind you. He's a sharp, sharp man. Gingrich, naturally, focuses on health savings plans and balancing the federal budget - issues he knows exceedingly well. Anyone that has paid any attention to politics over the years knows his position on these issues, but he does a very good job of succinctly making his argument for those that have been hiding under a rock for the past ten years.
It is a good book; one that a good Republican should at least take a look at seeing as how Gingrich is so influential in the party and will be looking to the White House in '08.
You can also check out the Speaker's website (with more info on the book) here...
I strongly encourage you to read Lengthened Shadows: America and Its Institutions in the Twenty-first Century. The book is a collection of essay edited by Roger Kimball and Hilton Kramer. Essayists include: Judge Bork (on the state of the law), Mark Steyn (on education), Jay Nordlinger (on music), Michael Lewis (on architecture), David Hart (on religion), Kramer (on modernism), and Kimball (on the dangers of multiculturalism). I tried to read an essay every night before bed - it was a good approach - gave me something to think about before bed.
A very enjoyable book...
On Saturday I posted my thoughts on Georgia state Senator Chip Rogers's legislation designed to "restrict access to schools, hospitals, jobs and highways for the state's exploding illegal immigrant population." My premise, and maybe I should have been more clear on this point, was that claiming this legislation as immigration "reform" is disingenuous when at its core it is simply the first step in closing off our borders - this isn't reform, it is Nativism. The merits of Nativism can be debated (and I'm not knocking it here), but I think it is important to recognize the legislation for what it really is.
Originally, I posted my comments on Rogers's legislation over at Southern Appeal. One reader responded by arguing thusly: "How about we deport the illegal immigrants in this country and impose a moratorium on legal immigration for a couple of decades?"
This is my rejoinder to those who would argue (click on comment section) that it is in best interest of the United States to 1) round up and deport all illegal immigrants and 2) close our borders - or set a moratorium on immigration.
Illegal immigration is a problem in this country, no doubt. However, President Bush's guest worker program is one solution to this problem - as opposed to closing the borders and deporting illegal immigrants. As Daniel Griswold of the Cato Institute has noted:
Undocumented workers should not be granted automatic permanent residence status, and instead should be issued temporary worker visas, valid for a limited period only. They should be assessed a one-time fine of a significant but not prohibitive amount. To gain permanent residence status, they would then need to apply for permanent residency through existing channels.
Whether or not paleoconservatives want to acknowledge the importance of economics on other policy issues is beside the point. The fact of the matter is that immigrants (legal or no) "make our economy more productive and efficient, lowering costs for consumers and raising real wages and returns on investment for native-born Americans." The cost to the American taxpayer of finding every illegal immigrant, detaining them, and then deporting them would be extremely high. Sure, the government does a great number of things that are expensive, but generally there is a benefit to the American taxpayer. What is the benefit here? we only damage our own economy in the long run.
Closing our borders to all immigrants would deprive the United States of foreign ingenuity and hardwork. Do we really want this? What is the justification for shutting our "doors" to immigrants?
The reader went on to argue:
1. "The American people simply do not want post-1965 mass immigration to continue to transform their communities and their nation."
This is simply not true. I responded to this argument by stating:
I'm not sure that it is immigration per se that some people object to. The rise of multiculturalism is a disgrace to traditional American values - this is the objection, not immigration itself. Historically, immigrants to this country have made, or were culturally forced to make, a concerted effort to assimilate. Now we are seeing entire pockets of immigrants that are not assimilating - this is the problem the US is facing - the bifurcation of American society. Instead of closing off the borders we should put a stop to the left-wing's institutionalization of multiculturalism. We should make sure that new immigrants embrace "the English language, the rule of law, respect for individual rights, and our industriousness and piety."
Newt Gingrich makes similar arguments in his new book, Winning the Future: A 21st Century Contract with America. Likewise, Roger Kimball argues in an essay, Institutionalizing Our Demise (found in the book Lengthened Shadows: America And Its Institutions in the Twenty-first Century), that immigration isn't the problem so much as a lack of assimilation on the part of many new immigrants.
2. "There is simply no moral obligation to admit millions of strangers into one's country, transforming it from what it was into something else, any more than there is such an obligation to admit strangers into one's home."
This is true - we have no moral obligation to allow for immigration into this country. But it is certainly in our economic interest. What about our historical practice of allowing for immigration - the Irish, Italians, Germans, Poles, etc.? Should this be taken into account? I think so, but I'm pretty sure that paleocons disagree.
3. "This is the one issue that will shatter the party if the GOP elites continue to force their immoral views on the American people." (boldface mine - SLS)
I simply cannot support the hypothesis that the immigration issue will "split" the Republican Party. There is a difference of opinion amongst Republicans on the issue, sure, but a split? No way. As to whether Pres. Bush's proposal is "immoral" - I'm not even sure where to begin... So, I'll just leave it alone.
And finally he asks, "[w]hat is the source of your hostility to average Americans who simply want to live in a distinctive nation they can recognize as their own, with its own norms, folkways and culture, not some leftist EPCOT-like mall of the world?"
Look, I've been called a lot of things, but hostile to average Americans isn't one of them. So this is a first. America is a distinctive nation with its own norms, folkways, and culture. Our culture, norms, and folkways have been shaped, in large measure, by the melting pot society in which we live. My WASP ancestors contributed immeasurably to our culture at its founding - our religion, our laws, our form of government - but to argue that American culture is solely Anglo-Saxon Protestant is absurd.
Just thought I'd share a word about some of the movies I've been watching as of late. I'll leave the heavy-lifting of movie reviews to others (one can always read the Amazon.com reviews). I'll just say that while each of the following movies is unique in its storyline, each is graced with uncommonly wonderful cinematography and outstanding scores/soundtracks (I'm a sucker for a great score/soundtrack).
1. Bon Voyage - (2004) French movie w/ English subtitles - Very funny French movie set in WWII France as it is about to fall to the Germans. The movie stars Gérard Depardieu and the absolutely lovely Isabelle Adjani.
2. Goodbye, Lenin - (2004) German movie w/ English subtitles - The movie is worth watching if for nothing more than its score. I actually bought the score immediately after watching the movie. The Amazon.com review explains the movie better than I: "The movie starts in East Germany before the fall of communism; our hero, Alex, describes how his mother, a true believer in the communist cause, has a heart attack when she sees him being clubbed by police at a protest. She falls into a coma for eight months--during which the Berlin Wall comes down. When she awakens, her fragile health must avoid any shocks, so Alex creates an illusive reality around his bedridden mother to convince her that communism is still alive."
3. Gosford Park - (2004) British movie - "The Academy Award winner for Best Original Screenplay, Gosford Park is a whodunit as only director Robert Altman could do it. As a hunting party gathers at the country estate, no one is aware that before the weekend is over, someone will be murdered - twice! The police are baffled but the all-seeing, all-hearing servants know that almost everyone had a motive."
4. Love Actually - (2003) British movie - So many plot lines, so little time. Great soundtrack, huge cast - Hugh Grant, Liam Neeson, Colin Firth, Keira Knightley, Emma Thompson, Laura Linney, Rowan Atkinson, Martine McCutcheon, Alan Rickman, etc. Basically, love takes many forms, we never know where we'll find it or what we'll do with it when we do find it.
5. Monsieur Ibrahim - (2004) French movie w/ English subtitles - Omar Sharif plays a wise Muslim grocery store owner in 1950s Paris who befriends a unhappy teenage Jewish boy, eventually adopting him. The director, François Dupeyron, does an exceptional job of capturing the "real" Paris.
Oh yeah, and Garden State is awesome...
Georgia state Senator Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock) wants to "augment what the federal government is supposed to do" about illegal immigration. Rogers has introduced legislation to "restrict access to schools, hospitals, jobs and highways for the state's exploding illegal immigrant population," according to the AJC.
President Bush's proposed guest worker program is truly immigration "reform" (I've written about this a number of times at AR). Legislation like Rogers' isn't immigration "reform" so much as a "halt" to immigration. Rogers's constituents and supporters don't want to reform immigration, they want to end it completely. I'm from Woodstock, I grew up there, went to high school there - I know these people, but whether it is a fear of "others" (Cherokee County is almost 93% white) or simply economic ignorance that precipitates his constituents desire to halt immigration I'm not entirely sure.
Bush's guest worker program would allow foreign workers to come to United States for specific jobs with specific employers, provided that no American workers could be found to fill the jobs. It would also require the return of these temporary workers to their home countries after their work period was over.
Rogers and his coterie do not want to see this program succeed. Why? Rogers's goal "is to make Georgia no longer a magnet for illegal immigrants." Awesome, thanks Mr. Rogers. Why is Georgia a magnet for illegal immigrants in the first place, sir? Could it be the explosive growth in industries like construction, agriculture, poultry, and carpet-making? These industries are vital to the North Georgia economy. Georgia is not a magnet because of lax enforcement of immigration laws. No, it is a magnet because of its booming economy.
Cherokee County residents don't mind illegal immigrants painting their house, mowing their lawn, washing their car, etc., but they seem to have an aversion to seeing these same people at church, at school, at the doctor's office, or on Towne Lake Parkway. There is a problem with illegal immigration in this country - that is why immigration"reform" is needed. The system needs to be cleaned up and made more efficient. I think President Bush understands the problem and has addressed it correctly with his guest worker program.
Making Georgia, specifically, or the US, generally, "no longer a magnet for illegal immigrants" is certainly not the answer.
Cross-posted at Southern Appeal
This week, Stephen L. Snyder, a Baltimore-area lawyer, has rolled out his own million-dollar advertising campaign, hoping to flush out the Moby-Dick of lawsuits: a billion-dollar case.
Snyder says that his firm has multiple $100 million-plus verdicts under its belt and that the 10 attorneys in the firm can handle a billion dollar case. You can check out his website here.
A million-dollar advertising campaign in hopes of landing "The Big One"? Ya gotta love this profession...
DC is getting excited as its new MLB team, the Washington Nationals, starts spring training in Viera, Florida. Pitchers and catchers are to report today.
Baseball is in the air - oh yeah...
This Washington Times article reports that Georgia's use of electronic-voting machines statewide led to a significant reduction in residual votes. As the article explains, residual votes are "ballots cast during an election on which voters failed to mark a choice or machines did not record it." Evidently, fears that electronic-voting would hamper the voting process were unfounded.
Query whether the Democrats are cheering this bit of good news?
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
