James Ridgeway writes on Common dreams and Mother Jones

Key to the Bush administration’s approach to immigration reform is the controversial guest worker program, which preserves the flow of cheap, low-skilled labor to American businesses while limiting the potential costs to employers and taxpayers. Under the program, there will be no children to educate (since guest workers won’t be allowed to bring their families with them), no old-age entitlements to dole out (since workers will have to return home after working here for a maximum of six years), not even any health care to pay for (since these low-wage workers will be required to purchase health insurance).The very existence of this program as a central tenet of the Kennedy-Kyl legislation, the bi-partisan immigration compromise that has drawn attacks from the left and right and inspired some of the most overwrought rhetoric in recent memory, points to the essential hypocrisy of the anti-immigrant stance. It appears their goal is not to keep out immigrants, who are indispensable to the U.S. economy, but rather to control and exploit them more effectively. Why give them the opportunity to become citizens-or even permanent residents-if we can get what we need from them and then send them packing?

Once again, the left establishment is getting feedback they aren’t used to:
Comments include:

I agree — but, I’m afraid I disagree. There’s a band of us in California who disagree with this, most severely. We just want it to STOP!!

As a matter of fact, we’re convinced that there is some money behind it all.

When will it STOP!!

I wonder about the American who defends his “right” to be here. Do you really care about the illegal, or are you just a shill for the rich scum who are exploiting him, and depressing American workers’ wages. Or, are you just afraid of losing your nanny?

I keep hearing that America would not be able to survive a day without low skilled immigrant workers. Basic economics would state otherwise because American workers would fill the positions once the working conditions and wages are improved. Improving working conditions is what we should be doing anyway. If we are using low skilled labor instead of improving wages and working conditions we are exploiting the workers.

Now even Mother Jones is selling out low-income working families! These words, “…we couldn’t survive a day without them. These 12 million undocumented workers, who are for the most part employed, are only filling an obvious need. They are vital to the profits of American agribusiness (which also stands to be a primary beneficiary of the guest worker program) and form the backbone of the low-cost workforce in the service industries…” is the same snake oil Corporate America keeps spewing. We’re supposed to care about the profits of AGRIBUSINESS?

And as to the service industries, I’ll bet many readers here started their working lives (like I did) waiting tables, as bank tellers or store clerks, etc. — either right out of high school or to help with college tuition. Where are today’s teens supposed to get work experience? (Unless you think hanging out at the mall with your own credit card and cellphone is a character-building experience.)

My own comment:

James Ridgeway shows some fundamental ignorance of the immigration issue. He claims that immigrants are “essential” to the American economy. However, it is clear that we have examples like Korea and Japan that lack America’s natural resources, have virtually no net immigration, high levels of income equality and virtually no foreign borrowing have economies that are growing faster in productivity per worker than the US economy is.

I agree that current legislation is calculated to increase control over immigrants-it is also calculated to maintain control over US citizens and mine the economic value of citizenship. It isn’t just illegal immigration that is a problem. One of the groups most impacted by immigration policy have been US tech workers-one of the most skilled -and unruly-groups.

I would suggest that mass immigration is no more essential to the US economy than heroin is to addicts. Short run, withdrawal from Heroin is very painful-even debilitating. Long run, staying on heroin is deadly.

The US needs to move towards a sustainable and sensible economy. Mass immigration-and massive foreign borrowing-helps prevent the US from doing that. Just as heroin maintains the illusion of freedom from pain in the presence of poor health, immigration maintains the illusion of growth when real productivity, investment in human capital and is falling-and the value of citizenship is endangered..

Withdrawing from immigration will be extremely painful to the wealthy interests that have supported mass immigration-and the social/political interests that have maintained power through mass immigration.

The US currently gets over 10 Million immigration applications each year–and accepts fewer than 1 Million. It isn’t clear that the selection criteria here makes sense for either Americans or the source countries-but is largely motivated by wealthy and influential interests. We need a policy which makes the US a respected world citizen-and which is better for existing US citizens.

We need to look at the combination of factors that have taken the US towards this bad turn. It was a mistake to allow mass poverty to persist in North America-when with relatively modest steps much of it could have been eliminated. It was a mistake to allow the concentration of wealth that has been associated with mass immigration-and the attendant concentration of political power. Those mistakes can and should be corrected.

Rather than yet another expansion of immigration(as proposed by current legislation) or a mass, rapid deportation, I tend to favor an immigration policy that is immediately accompanied less net legal immigration than we have now(which is what most Americans want). Those immigrants that find it necessary to leave should be largely encouraged to leave by financial incentives-and disincentives. This could be initially funded in large part by collection of the $25,000 per violation for employers that is already on the book-and the proceeds used to provide resettlement allowances and improvement of infrastructure in major source countries of illegal immigration.

Long run, the wealthy in the US and Latin America have a huge mess they profitted from and need to be held accountable for fixing.

VDARE.COM readers can join the conversation.

The left leaning Project Censored reports on stories that haven’t been given the attention they deserve. They previously wrote about the infamous H-1b program.

Of their latest batch, this one should be of particular interest to VDARE.COM readers:

#4 Hunger and Homelessness Increasing in the US

Sources:

The New Standard, December 2005
Title: “New Report Shows Increase in Urban Hunger, Homelessness”
Author: Brendan Coyne

OneWorld.net, March, 2006
Title: “US Plan to Eliminate Survey of Needy Families Draws Fire “
Author: Abid Aslam

Faculty Evaluator: Myrna Goodman
Student Researcher: Arlene Ward and Brett Forest

The number of hungry and homeless people in U.S. cities continued to grow in 2005, despite claims of an improved economy. Increased demand for vital services rose as needs of the most destitute went unmet, according to the annual U.S. Conference of Mayors Report, which has documented increasing need since its 1982 inception.

The study measures instances of emergency food and housing assistance in twenty-four U.S. cities and utilizes supplemental information from the U.S. Census and Department of Labor. More than three-quarters of cities surveyed reported increases in demand for food and housing, especially among families. Food aid requests expanded by 12 percent in 2005, while aid center and food bank resources grew by only 7 percent. Service providers estimated 18 percent of requests went unattended. Housing followed a similar trend, as a majority of cities reported an increase in demand for emergency shelter, often going unmet due to lack of resources.

Now I have previously reported on the link between this phenomenon and immigration policy. I don’t think this problem can be effectively addressed without addressing both regional poverty–and a realistic immigration policy that is in line with what most Americans want.

We need to fundamentally restructure both the US and the world economy.

Lionel Sosa made a career out of being an Hispanic Republican and friendly to Business. But the times are changing: an Hispanic is running for President (as a Democrat).

“Blood runs thicker than politics,” said Sosa, of San Antonio, who is helping organize a fundraiser for New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat who is Latino. “I’m not saying I would vote for a Democrat. But I’m saying I would not vote for a Republican who opposed immigration reform.”

(Immigration debate puts up a wall in the GOP By Peter Wallsten Los Angeles Times May 27 2007 Access requires free registration.)

Sosa’s remarks come right at the end of a long and conventional article postulating that the Republicans have to choose between losing the Hispanic vote by a moderate or by a large landslide. (The VDARE.com prescription would be get out the white vote!) But they make the article worthwhile.

Note that Sosa’s price for staying Republican is acceptance of immigration “reform” -aka Bush’s Amnesty/Immigration Surge, which will obliterate the American nation.

Once they feel they have achieved critical mass, ethnic particularists like this will shed their camouflage and become blatant in their demands. And eventually the Founding Peoples will respond the same way.

Thanks, Teddy Kennedy

Lionel Sosa is now chief executive office of “MATT Mexicans and Americans Thinking Together” Complain to Sosa.

May 28th is Memorial Day (formerly Decoration Day), originally established to honor our war dead. On that day may we all honor our nation’s war dead, and strive to be worthy of their example, by fighting to preserve the nation they died for.

The U.S.A. has 164 national cemeteries, and 24 of them are outside of U.S. territory. At all 164 of them, ceremonies are scheduled on Memorial Day.

Probably the quietest such ceremony will be that of the U.S. National Cemetery in Mexico City, a one-acre plot unknown to most Americans. It’s actually the oldest national cemetery outside U.S. territory.

This graveyard, located by a busy expressway , is visited by few American tourists , most of whom haven’t even been told of its existence. It is the final resting place of 1,562 Americans who died in Mexico City, 750 of whom were soldiers who died in the invasion of Mexican City in 1847.

Among the others buried there are former Confederate officers who moved to Mexico after the Civil War, including General James E. Slaughter.

If you’re interested, check out this Arizona Republic article about the cemetery, which contains more information and commentary.

On Memorial Day (which is just another day in Mexico), a ceremony is planned for the U.S. National Cemetery in Mexico City. The U.S. ambassador to Mexico and a Marine honor guard are scheduled to be there, but no Mexican officials are expected .

On Memorial Day, remember the U.S. National Cemetery in Mexico City.

Julie Hirschfeld Davis writes at Associated Press

The Senate voted Wednesday to slash the number of foreign workers who could come to the U.S. on temporary visas as part of a broad bipartisan immigration bill.

A new guest worker program would be capped at 200,000 a year under the proposal, which passed 74-24 over strong opposition by the Bush administration.

Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said the change, proposed by Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., would interfere with a “central component” of the White House-backed immigration measure. That plan provided for 400,000 worker visas annually, plus an option to increase that number to 600,000 if market conditions demand it.

Now, the question is “Why have these guest worker visas at all–and if we are going to have any, why allocate them free of charge to the employers?”

400,000 visas per year could easily bring in $40 Billion/year in federal revenue. That is enough to notice. Why should the Federal government be borrowing when it has such an easy source of revenue. Now, what they’ll find is it won’t be farmers paying for those visas. What we also have to be realistic about is what it costs to provide those visas. We shouldn’t be admitting folks unless their contributions to the folks that are already here outweigh the costs they generate.

Apparently some people in New Jersey are following Paul Nachman’s lead and hitting the phones:

Telephones at the offices of New Jersey’s congressional lawmakers began ringing soon after Senate and White House officials announced a deal on immigration reform.
It’s been more than a week and the calls haven’t stopped.
Lawmakers say they’ve gotten hundreds of calls, mostly from people angry that the Senate proposal would allow an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants to remain in the United States.

(Lawmakers hear get-tough message on immigration By Raju Chebium Gannett News Service May 26 2007)

New Jersey generally has been soft on immigration issues (the Americans for Better Immigration grade for the whole Congressional delegation is a wretched D+) so this is encouraging. And it may be having an effect:

Rep. Rob Andrews, D-Haddon Heights, reiterated Thursday that the legislation would have to be significantly changed before he’d vote for it on the House floor after the Senate approves it — if at all.
While it’s impractical to deport all illegal immigrants as some critics favor, Andrews said he wants to make sure undocumented workers granted temporary legal status break no other law, work to learn English and pay some back taxes.
Constituents are right to be upset that some of their tax dollars go to pay for health care and other benefits for illegal aliens, he said.

Andrews ABI career grade is D-, so it appears he is shifting quite a bit. Picking up some Democrats would be hugely beneficial for the patriotic cause.

Others, more insulated from the electorate, are not listening. While demanding more favors for immigrants, Senator Robert Menendez (Career grade: F) arrogantly proclaimed on the Senate floor this week

we must never subscribe to the policies of fear and division driven by xenophobia, nativism and racism.

This of course is an encoded denunciation of anyone who cares about preserving the character of the historic American nation, or who might oppose Hispanic privileges.

New Jersey’s other Senator, Frank Lautenberg, claims to be undecided. Patriots should not hold their breath. Few men have more effectively subordinated the country’s interests to special – and foreign – interests than Frank Lautenberg.