Immigration issue roiling both sides of debate

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11442705/

Headline: Protests against proposals continue; Bush faces wedge issue for party

Thousands of demonstrators gather Saturday in the streets of downtown Los Angeles to protest legislation that cracks down against illegal immigrants.

<snip>

MSNBC News Services
Updated: 3:52 p.m. ET March 25, 2006

WASHINGTON - Thousands of demonstrators protested moves to impose stricter U.S. immigration laws in California on Saturday, while President Bush urged wary Republicans to take up his proposal.

More than 10,000 immigrants and their supporters clogged the streets in front of Los Angeles city hall to protest a proposed law they see as punitive to undocumented workers.

“This bill is wrong because this is a country for everybody who wants to live a better life and
this is a free world,” said protester Lionel Vanegas, who owns an accouting firm.

<snip>

I heard on the news that it's estimated up to 100,000 protestors were in L.A.

What's wrong with a country enforcing its own borders?

America has enough people.

<snip>

Some Democrats, such as Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, say Republican proposals like Frist’s are unsympathetic to immigrants.

Bush, who this week urged all sides to tone down their rhetoric in the emotional debate, said securing borders was a top priority of immigration reform but invoked the country’s history as “a nation of immigrants” to argue for a balanced approach.

Bush views the guest-worker program as way of courting Hispanic voters in key states like Arizona, New Mexico and Florida. But some conservative Republicans are focusing on enforcement as constituents vent frustration at what they see as a strain on schools, hospitals and other local resources from illegal immigration.

Although the guest-worker plan would offer the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants a chance to register and work in the United States for up to six years, Bush rejected any description of it as an amnesty plan. “I believe that granting amnesty would be unfair, because it would allow those who break the law to jump ahead of people who play by the rules and wait in the citizenship line,” Bush said.

<snip>

Charity begins at home

I guess I can't argue with you there, this is their country and we ought to get the hell out of it. Maybe if we ask nicely, they'll give us a few weeks to pack.

There are three options on the table:

1. The House Republican option (already passed the House) would basically wall off our borders and make immigrating without papers a felony, along with criminalizing anyone who helped an undocumented worker. Seems brutal, thuggish, and xenophobic, if not outright racist.

2. The Bush option: Guest worker program, plus more enforcement. I think this is better than the nazi bill coming out of the House. But it would kick people out after three years with no chance to gain citizenship.

3. The McCain-Kennedy bill. Would increase enforcement, but also create an amnesty provision that would reward those people who came here, worked hard, and kept their noses clean.

4. Or we could "just enforce the laws" and round up and deport about 10 million people. Get those cattle cars ready!

out of *'s mouth. #3 sounds like the best of the choices. Another wedge issue...just on time, KKKarl.

The law doesnt single out one group over another, its not racist and as for being "brutal" & "thuggish" we can say the same about Canada they require immigrants apply for a work permit to live there also its not xenophobic either we're not turning away people who come here LEGALLY.



Be honest if they started rounding up people who overstayed this program you would probably call it "brutal, thuggish, and xenophobic".



Since you don't want enforcement to begin with why would you be for increased enforcement?



...okay

Yeah, the law doesn't single out any one group, any more than the law penalizing crack more than powder cocaine is aimed at any one group.

Canada is not passing laws that make it a felony to enter the country without papers, nor is it building a giant wall along the border. Dude, you might want to look at who is sponsoring the House bill--James Sensenbrenner, that paragon of progressive Democratic values. Oops, Sensenbrenner is an authoritarian Republican!

But I'll concede one point: You're right, I'm not big on enforcement. I'm not big on borders. I'm not big on more, more, more cops. And I've got nothing against Mexicans, either in Mexico or here. I say the more the merrier.

Now, which plan is it you support?

What other Republican issues do you support?

Immigration is a force of nature: as long as there are companies in the US willing, even eager, to hire people for 20 times what those people would make on their side of the border, those people are going to want to come here and work - who wouldn't? What are you going to do to stop them? Shoot on sight every one you see in a border area? What if they're just a birdwatcher out looking for that rare, Rose-throated Becard? How are you going to know who's authorized and who's not? Ask everyone you meet for their "Papers, please!"? Or will you simplify matters and just ask people of color for their papers and the white people - or at least the well-to-do looking ones - won't have to put up with that sort of thing? How much are you willing to spend to support how many tens of thousadns of border patrol agents and all of the equipment and support staff that go with them? We already have some 50,000 out there already, it cost quite a lot to keep them there, and you can see for yourself how much good they've done - the migratory flows simply move around the areas that get built up, just like water flowing around a rock. Even if you can catch them, then what? If you put them on a bus out of the country tonight, as long as those jobs are here, they're just going to try again tomorrow night, and the night after that, and the night after that, until one evening they manage to sneak past you. So, to prevent that from happening, what? You going to lock them up and spend $30,00/year of the taxpayers' money to clothe, feed, house, and guard them in a secure penitentiary? What's the charge going to be? The sentence? Is trying to cross the border illegally deserving of a life sentence? Are they entitled to defense counsel or are you just going to detain them Gitmo style? Who's going to pay for all those attoneys?

These sorts of questions go on and on and on. You can't just make the simple statement "Let's enforce our borders." What's at issue here is not whether we would like to enforce our borders, of course, that's a no brainer. The issue is how much are we willing to pay, in money, in impact upon the economy, in reductions of privacy and civil rights, in compromises in due process, in added delays and bureaucratic procedures for legal border crossers (including US citizens), businesses trying to hire employees, schools enrolling students, social service agencies and hospitals rendering care to patients, hell, you get the idea, pretty much everybody, in order to achieve that end?

Oh, you mean enough brown people.

It certainly looked like it

They did it during the anti-bush protests in New York and they continue to do it.

In media land aka state controled media
100,000 = 10,000
5,000 = 500
50 = 5

*sigh*

needs people, it can float a green card for them. Why do these migrant workers have to be illegals? And if everyone knows they are illegals, why aren't they being arrested and shipped back to Mexico? They would be the people in the fields with crops in their hands. It sounds like there are a lot of facts missing from all this. And considering how much everyone but the farmers make on the food supply, there should be enough money to pay legal immigrants a legal wage.

Does anyone have real facts about the crop workers and the real illegals?

Congress limits how many people can apply for permanent residency each year and, depending upon which category of labor you fall into and which country you're from, the waiting list to get a visa number may be as much as 15 or 20 years. Many of these people would like to legalize their status and have employers who are willing to sponsor them, and could even pass the permanent alien labor certification process, which is a determination by the US Department of Labor, attesting that US workers would not be adversely affected by the employment of an alien in such and such a particular job in such and such particular location, but there would still be no visa number available for them because Congress only authorized a tiny number of visas for that category. So they have to wait and wait and wait, and, all the while they're waiting, they're in unlawful status and people bitch about them because they're here illegally.

There are Immigrant Worker Visas

There are Seasonal Worker Immigation programs

Why don't the greedy COPORATE FARMS USE THEM

BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT TO PAY SOCIAL SECURITY

THEY DONT WANT TO PAY INSURANCE COST

THEY DONT WANT TO PAY

I've run an Immigration Information web site for years now and we specialize in LEGAL IMMIGRATION This is just greedy corporate America 1 more time sticking to John E Taxpayer

If you know enough about visas to know about immigrant woirker and seasonal worker visas, then you also surely know - and are conveniently choosing to leave out of your tirade - the fact that employment-based visas are categorized according to the skill/education level of the type of employment and, if you have multiple PhDs and can qualify for the extraordinary ability categoy, then fine, your category is current and a visa number is available today. If you're an unskilled laborer, you have to wait many, many years in line for a visa number to become available, as the demand for visas exceeds - and has exceeded for decades - the miniscule handful of visa numbers Congress approves each year, so you just have to wait, and wait, and wait, and wait... so don't pretend that nobody uses those visa categories, every visa category not only gets used, but has a long line of people waiting to use them.

Mar 25, 2006




LOS ANGELES - Tens of thousands of immigrant rights advocates from across Southern California marched Saturday in protest of federal legislation that would build more walls along the U.S.-Mexico border and make helping illegal immigrants a crime.

The march followed rallies on Friday that drew throngs of protesters to major cities around the nation.

On Saturday, demonstrators streamed into downtown Los Angeles for what was expected to be one of the city's largest pro-immigrant rallies. The crowd was estimated at more than 100,000, said police Sgt. Lee Sands.

Many of the marchers wore white shirts to symbolize peace and also waved U.S. flags. Some also carried the flags of Mexico and other countries, and even wore them as capes.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/immigration_rallies;_ylt=A9FJqYaTuSVEVDQBdgas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--


Wow!

man, I always love turning out for big marches

We do... If they get pregnant then their baby is a US citizen

The government is paying for their health insurance or the hospital just eats the loss...

Anybody got an idea on who pays for this and if their children go to American schools and need extra help ... Who pays for this???

Hopefully these people will pay taxes ... that would help...

Do they pay taxes???

Do they pay for Health Insurance Driver Insurance
hopefully they do...

This deprives our citizens of the health care they need.

Because of the US Healthcare Industry & the politicians it owns.

What really is the priority issue here? That a handful of immigrants might not get charged for an emergency room visit, or that 300 million Americans are being totally screwed by the health care, pharmaceutical, and insurance industries with the active aid and assistance of our elected officials? Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Although there are some truly underground sweat shops out there who employ illegal aliens under the table and do not disclose their earnings, most of the jobs in which undocumented aliens work are more mainstream businesses like agriculture and construction companies, companies who have to have a visible public face in order to do business. These kinds of places, whether they want to or not, have to file tax returns and report the number of workers they've hired, etc.. They consequently withhold taxes and Social Security from everyone's paychecks, whether the worker is lawfully present or not. I rather doubt they do it out of the goodness of their hearts, but, if a business in which labor is the principal cost of doing business were to file a tax return saying that they had sold a million dollars worth of asparagus that year, and hadn't needed to hire even one single solitary farmhand to help them pick it all, the IRS would know in a heartbeat that they were full of shit and would descend upon them with a host of investigators and proceed to crawl up their every orofice with a microscope. This is generally not a promising business plan for an aspiring business, so, in their own self-interest, they declare all of their workers and take the taxes out.

Ironically, undocumented aliens are actually a great financial boon at least for Social Security, as undocumented aliens put money into it - nearly half a trillion dollars so far, it is estimated by the Social Security Administration - which they will never be able to take out as their contributions were made under invalid Social Security Numbers, so there's no way to know how much any given individual undocumented alien contributed.

Isn't it simple enough for the gov't to detect that the company is filing taxes using invalid social security numbers?

We can debate whether the laws are appropriate. But shouldn't the feds be paying some visits to these companies who are filing with bogus SSNs?

... i.e., collecting taxes. IRS is not, and has adamantly resisted becoming, an immigration enforcement agency. They've got their hands full enough already going after tax evaders, they're not interested in becoming immigration agents. But you're absolutely correct, it is often the IRS alone that has a shot at detecting some of this stuff, such as two different employers on different sides of the country withholding taxes under the same Social Security Number. Obviously, one of those numbers is bogus, but how are you going to know which without conducting an investigation? And who's going to do the investigating? IRS has neither the staff nor the inclination, so they just cash the check and go on their merry way...

And, of course, tax records are private - the IRS is prevented by law from sharing their contents with anyone else.

Send employer EIN and all SSNs for which SS taxes are filed to the INS or FBI (or whoever in the gov't ought to be doing this), let that org's computers analyze and spit out the problems, then the enforcement org can figure out what to do about it.

There's no reason any other info would need to be sent to the enforcement org, unless and until it is needed for an investigation.

I'm sure DHS would love to see some mechanism like that develop, and it would certainly be consistent with all of the database linking that they're working on these days. As of this last fall at least, IRS had no such device in place, nor did they have any plans to generate one at that time.

They belong to somebody - just not the person standing in front of you. So it's harder to detect than you think. You don't get a statement of "balance" on a social security contribution. It's just a tax that becomes revenue. But you do get credit for quarters earned, and sometimes people figure it out when they get their quarter statement from SS administration and it shows more credits earned than they actually worked. But that's pretty rare.

I got a letter a couple of years ago from Social Security, asking for some pretty basic info that they should already have had. Instead of just filling it out and sending it back, I picked up the phone and asked what this was about (letters from the government asking me where I work and live make me nervous). The very kind woman on the other end said she'd have to check my case more carefully to answer specifically, but that normally the letter that I got is sent to someone whose SSN was sent to the IRS or SSA on a w-4 or some other government form--in another part of the country from where they had my residency listed. I still didn't get it, and she explained it more succinctly. "Someone, probably an illegal immigrant, used your number on a w-4 or something." I was panicked! Identity theft, I thought. Nah, she said, the person using it probably doesn't know anything else about me or even about the function of SSNs, and probably won't use it except on government forms. They have programs or lists that generate the numbers randomly. My filling out my form with my info would tell the government that someone was using my SSN falsely.

She assured me it was no big deal for me, but I immediately asked the credit bureaus to watch my credit for me. Nothing has ever happened, so I think the nice lady at the SSA knew what she was talking about.

It does piss me off, though!

to differ with you they DON"T... their healthcare is paid by US citizens...

I have seen them standing outside Home Depot waiting to be picked up for their jobs...

I wish they would get better wages...

If you'll look again, you'll see that I concede at the outset that there is some under the table employment of undocumented aliens, on a cash only basis. And, truly, such people exist entirely underground, and pay no taxes, pay no Social Security, etc.. My point is that there are a great many undocumented aliens who work for "respectable" businesses, such as the big hotel chains, Mal-Wart, etc., and these companies do withhold taxes and Social Security from their employees' paychecks, simply as a matter of standard business practice, whether the SSNs given them are legit or not. Of course, there are the queues of people hanging out at various locations, waiting for day work, I never said otherwise. Where I differ is that you believe that all undocumented aliens fall into this category; I know better. The underground economy is the tiny tip of the iceberg. For years (until they finally got caught), Tyson's Chicken routinely paid smugglers to bring undocumented aliens into the country to work in their plants. Having themselves paid the smugglers to bring them here, they knew only too well that their workers were undocumented, yet precisely because they did not want to attract the attention of the IRS, they scrupulously withheld taxes and Social Security on every one of them, right down to the last penny. Marriott Hotels has been known to do much the same thing.

None of this changes the fact that, like any other population, including white people, there are poor people to be found amongst undocumented immigrants and such people do, just like poor white people, go to ERs for health care, having paid no more taxes than the poor, unemployed white people do who are standing there in the ERs with them. If what concerns you is poor people utilizing emergency rooms, perhaps you should go after all of the poor people native to this country who avail themselves of such services, you can be certain that they account for a far greater expense to you as a taxpayer than the handful of undocumented aliens who avail themselves of such services.

into a race issue... I know that if an American citizen can't pay their hospital bill they either have Medicaid pay it or they are hounded and have their wages garnished to pay the bill... or they have to declare bankruptcy... This is an economical issue of how do ilegal aliens pay for health insurance... if Tyson food witheld social security then that means they aren't getting healthcare either

if they come in the hospital be it Black White Yellow Brown or spotted
they get treated... now accept the fact that an American Citizen has documentation to trace back bills... and the US expects you to pay them though you are not put in jail... the game being played by SOME ilegal aliens not all is that they have no address no drivers license to be sent the bill... so if you can't find them to bill them what happens the Hospital eats the cost and the American taxpayer pays millions for it... There is no garnishing their wages either... also we deliver babies and provide them with the Wic program because the baby is a US citizen who goes on the Medicaid rosters... this is costing the American taxpayer millions and the hospitals millions... Now Americans who don't have insurance have to pay for it some way some how... or be on Medicaid This is not the same treatment a US citizen gets in a Mexican Hospital before they leave they must pay their bill or be imprisoned... I don't think its right but there is the reality... So then perhaps that why ilegal aliens though they provide us workers for cheap labor they also give us HUGE medical bills... just remember delivering babies is expensive and especially if the baby is premature... thats all paid for by the taxpayer...
Just putting things in a economic sense...

Also Why does an American who is treated in the hospital HAVE to pay their bills and not the ilegal alien???
That is a very big SORE spot and until Americans get Socialized Medicine that will be a big sore spot!!! because not only are they bringing our wages down they are increasing the burden of our deficits!!!

and other taxes on illegal aliens. They usually pay the workers in cash. They don't pay federal taxes of any kind. They don't have Social Security numbers and if they do they are fake.
My husband is in the business and his company is just about the only one left who asks for ID and Social Security verification. Of course, his company has to charge more because the crooks can bid less because of the cheap labor.

The above TRUTH doesn't mean that I want to have harsh penalties for immigrants. I think we should make immigration easier and make sure that these workers are LEGAL so they will pay into the system and the crooked businesses will also suffer.

My boss came in one evening and caught our janitor at the copy machine cranking out proofs of insurance for his buddies... crude cut and paste job, but good enough to fool the cops (and Border Patrol probably). Boss changed janitorial service, and guess what? The same janitor is back, wearing a different uniform!!!!!!!!! Maybe under a different Social Security card too (which can be easily bought for a few bucks).

the person had NO drivers Insurance...

I say if these people are hired have the companies pay social security and their healthcare and give them a decent wage!!!

Some of them have fake SS#'s, so they pay in & will never get anything out. They surely pay sales tax--Texas has no state Income Tax, so our sales taxes keep getting bigger. And property tax is passed on to renters. Do you really not know this?

What is "Health Insurance Driver Insurance"? The proposals to allow undocumented workers to get drivers' licenses would require most of them to buy insurance. But people don't like being "soft on the illegals."

Well why can't we offer health care for everyone... regardless of where they came from? If people need help why shouldn't we help nis this not america the greatest country that has ever been. Oh that's right we don't even help our own citzens...how silly of me.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060326/ap_on_re_us/immigration_rallies&printer=1;_ylt=ArJLRDWXDw.5WYt0STgKQ45H2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Immigration March Draws 500,000 in L.A.

By PETER PRENGAMAN, Associated Press Writer 22 minutes ago

Immigration rights advocates more than 500,000 strong marched in downtown Los Angeles on Saturday, demanding that Congress abandon attempts to make illegal immigration a felony and to build more walls along the border.

The massive demonstration, by far the biggest of several around the nation in recent days, came as President Bush prodded Republican congressional leaders to give some illegal immigrants a chance to work legally in the U.S. under certain conditions.

Wearing white shirts to symbolize peace, marchers chanted "Mexico!" "USA!" and "Si se puede," an old Mexican-American civil rights shout that means "Yes, we can." They waved the flags of the U.S., Mexico and other countries, and some wore them as capes.

Saturday's march was among the largest for any cause in recent U.S. history. Police came up with the crowd estimate using aerial photographs and other techniques, police Cmdr. Louis Gray Jr. said.

..Between 5,000 and 7,000 people gathered Saturday in Charlotte, carrying signs with slogans such as "Am I Not a Human Being?" In Sacramento, more than 4,000 people protested immigration legislation at an annual march honoring the late farm labor leader Cesar Chavez.

About 200 people protested outside a town hall-style meeting held by Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., a leading sponsor of the House bill. He defended the legislation, saying he's trying to stop people from exploiting illegal immigrants for cheap labor, drug trafficking and prostitution.

"Those who do that are 21st-century slave masters, just like the 19th-century slave masters that we fought a civil war to get rid of," Sensenbrenner said at the meeting. "Unless we do something about illegal immigration, we're consigning illegal immigrants to be a permanent underclass, and I don't think that's moral."

Since Thursday tens of thousands of people have joined in rallies in cities including Milwaukee, Los Angeles, Phoenix and Atlanta, and staged school walkouts, marches and work stoppages.

from the LAT
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigration26mar26,0,6454895.story?coll=la-home-headlines

I know there are some who think it's a quaint old custom, but I still favor the practice of punishing people who break our laws. If current laws are not working I think it's OK to enact new ones without asking for permission from anyone except Americans.



No, this is not a country for everybody. It is a country for Americans. At least that's the way I think it should be. This is not a free world, in the context of people having a right to move from one country to another as they please. Sovereign nations have laws that they use to control immigration. I think that's a reasonable thing to do, and I think we should do a much better job of enforcing ours.

I have a problem looking at that picture of 100,000 people protesting, and wondering how many of them are Americans or legally invited guests. It underscores our predicament to see so many who are likely illegal immigrants, injecting themselves so visably into our political process with impunity.

Into YOUR political process! Yes, you wonder how many of them have the "right."

How many full blooded Murkins sit on their asses rather than protest ANYTHING?

The protests were against a REPUBLICAN proposal. Gosh--maybe some of the protesters were Democrats. Remember them?

On many fronts.

My husband came to this country in 1993 and went through ALL the bullshit: the lines at 5AM in Arlington, VA, the endless paperwork, finally the lawyer, the condescending insanity with the INS: The LEGAL way. It took him 5 years to get a green card, and that process was only sped up after we got married. He paid his dues.

Why do these people think that because they came here illegally, because they have a job, that they should get amnesty? A big part of the problem is that we need to go after the businesses that encourage this migration behavior, companies that employ illegals. If they played by the rules, much of the nonsense would stop.

We're getting screwed by big business in America, they are shipping jobs overseas, and importing illegals to drive down wages. Goodbye American middle class!

I think you're absolutely right that a major part of the problem is US businesses encouraging illegal immigration. Tyson's Chicken actually paid smugglers to bring aliens across the border to work in their processing plants. Put yourself in that alien's shoes: an American company promises you a job making 20 times what you're making now and has even retained the services of someone to help bring you here. I think it's fair to say that's something of a mixed signal. I mean, on one hand, we're saying don't come, but then, on the other hand, we're handing them their boarding passes and telling them to show up for work by 8. What's wrong with this picture?

That said, I'm puzzled that, you and your husband having yourselves gone through the nightmare that is US immigration, your reaction isn't that the system shuld be fixed so that others won't have to go through what you yourself describe as "ALL the bullshit," but rather that, having suffered through all of that, by god, everyone else who comes after should pay the same dues you and your husband went through. Personally, I think our legal immigration system is a disgrace. We make it so difficult for people to immigrate, even when they have a basis we've determined through our laws to be a valid, acceptable basis for immigrating, such as a job, an immediate family relationship, whatever.

Only a very few radicals amongst us here would assert that immigration should be shut down altogether; the majority of us here profess our support for legal immigration. Yet even those who have the basis for immigrating legally may face delays of years or even decades before they can do what we all seem to agree they ought to be able to do. To my way of thinking, such situations reflect a failure in the law: if you've got 100 people whom you agree ought to be able to come here, but you only issue 10 visas for them, the fate of the 90 left over without visas is largely our fault for having badly designed our law. It's therefore our responsibility to remedy that, either by issuing another 90 visas to the people whom we've determined are eligible, or by changing our eligibility criteria so that the number of people who qualify for visas matches the number of visas we're actually willing to issue. If we take the former path (see, for instance, the Bracero program), we shouldn't bitch about the immigrants being here; if we take the latter option, fine, then we need to get our companies to stop offering jobs to people we're not prepared to grant visas to, and we need to accept graciously that the cost of certain goods and services most assuredly will go up as a consequence.

Yet we don't seem to want to accept responsibility for anything - no, no, it's not our problem that our laws are badly written; no, no, it's not our fault that we'll only shop at places which offer the cheapest of the cheap goods; not our problem that our companies are bringing aliens across the border to work for the reduced wages needed to provide us with the ultra cheap goods we demand; nope, the fault lies with those starving aliens trying to feed their families, that's what we need to put a stop to, they're breaking the rules! Jeez, people, would you listen to yourselves? I just don't understand that mentality.

There are certain issues that will be determined by laws and policies, and then there are issues that are decided by boots on the ground. Illegal immigration is a "boots on the ground" issue. The weight of history and geography dictates that this nation will become more and more hispanic and that's just the way it is. Impoverished hispanics will always be attracted by our wages, and they will keep trying and trying until they get into our country, no matter what we do. And eventually they will succeed. And once they are here, it will never be cost effective to deport them all back. Have you noticed that not a single serious proposal calls for mass deportations? That will always be the case, and the immigration debate will always START with the statement "well, those of you already here get to stay, but ..."

I have mixed feelings about this issue. I hate what illegal immigration has done to the blue collar American worker. But I like the fact that the children of the illegal immigrants will likely vote Democratic and help prevent any future GW Bushes from coming to office. At any rate, it's impossible for me to feel any personal hostility to people just trying to improve their lives.

while the MSM IGNORED the democracy marches and anti-war
protests?

I believe TOTALLY, that the administration WANTS the amnesty
program, and ANY program that jibes with their cheap labor
conservatism. They have a problem in their own party over
this.

They play up the protests, pretend to give in to the will
of the "people" and extend amnesty. They get their cheap
labor, they avoid having business owners "criminalized"
for hiring illegals, and they come off smelling like
a politically correct rose. I'm sure there will be some
sop to their base, ie. build "the wall" or some fascist
symbol to keep others out.

Make no mistake, the administration is aiding and abetting
in the creation of this "movement". They WANT the amnesty.

You know, the ones accusing Democrats of supporting illegal immigration. These demonstrations are going to backlash hard, I'm afraid.

...WANTS the amnesty. They WANT and WILL HAVE the cheap
labor force. They will make it seem as if they are handing
dems a small victory for human rights.

Phony, phony, phony.

I bet the churches are being used to get people
onto the streets. I smell a big RAT.

I sat on the taskforce which advised McCain and Kennedy on their comprehensive immigration reform bill and what astonished me was how strong the consensus was among experts from both sides of the aisle on what needed to be included. Among those who have devoted their lives to studying and working on these issues, there's remarkably little disagreement. There are some minor differences of opinion about how much emphasis to place on enforcement versus services, but on the basic essentials, pretty much everyone shares the same conclusions. That goes for government agencies, thinktanks, nonprofits, labor unions, the whole gammut. Where it gets contentious is the politics of it, where the waters get muddied by anti-immigrant interest groups like FAIR (the group behind Prop 200 in Arizona), American Patrol (the group responsible for the Minutemen), etc., and by opportunistic politicians like Tancredo (who leads the House anti-immigration caucus) eager to divert attention away from their failed agendas by scapegoating immigrants.

The problem is that immigration is such a fantastically complex area which intersects with so many other areas of public policy, many of the conclusions to which a thorough, detailed, and objective study would lead you seem rather counterintuitive to a large percentage of the population. It's consequently a major challenge to try to explain to a reluctant public why things like an amnesty or a guest worker program are needed. It's a whole lot easier for organizations like FAIR to stand up and say that immigrants cost the American public in terms of jobs, wages, social services costs, and so on, because it sounds intuitively reasonable. Studies don't support those claims, but again, they're looking at a much more complex interaction of variables to reach the final conclusions they reach. It's a real problem.

trust me, if I even suggested marching in such an event, I'd suddenly become a displaced worker. I'm in a union town, and better not do anything that will undermine union workers if I want to stay here!

in the 2006 election letting the right off the hook for messing up the country. We are playing into the hands of the repubs by spending so much time on this issue.

You all are taking you eye off the prize. The war in Iraq, domestic spying, the growing deficit, the end to social programs, the end to environmental laws, dependency on oil all are not going to be issues in this upcoming election if we argue immigration to death for the next 8 months.

more Indians to take over high paying jobs Americans are working at...

They will get guest passes for 6 years and then they can become citizens... Why even have the HI-B

What the CORUUPT Politicians have to deal with is an IRATE American worker thats what they have to deal with.......cause when that worker looks at his life right now its not pretty...

I always believe in Karma and Bush opened the borders and let them in the millions ....... and I hope he gets a good look at the thousands of them out there protesting because maybe they will demand higher wages and fight this regime... and get us out of Iraq.......

To get an H-1B, you have to receive the Department of Labor's approval that US workers will not be adversely affected by the employment of the alien. Bear in mind, these are short-term, temporary visas, so the Department of Labor doesn't go to the same lengths as they would in a permanent alien labor certification, for which the employer would have to go out and actively recruit US workers and would only be approved if they failed to turn any up. Since the H is just a temporary visa, Labor only requires that the employer post notices saying that they want to hire so and so to do such and such a job, does anybody mind? If so, please contact the Department of Labor at blah, blah, blah.

One thing I suspect many Americans may overlook is the local availability of certain skill sets. You ask, are these jobs Americans don't want to do? No of course not, they're skilled, decent paying jobs, it's not a matter of not wanting to do the job. But not all Americnas are willing to move to where the job is; migrant workers, by definition, are moving to wherever the work is needed. It often may be the case that, say, Microsoft wants to hire 100 (I'm making these numbers up, you understand) software engineers, they find 50 of them locally, but that takes care of the entire graduating class from the University of Washington, they can persuade another 25 from out of state to move to Redmond, but that still leaves 25 openings unfilled. Again, I'm just making this up, but I think it is often the case that an employer may need to fill more openings than they can find locally and they are unable to find/persuade enough people from other parts of the country to relocate to come work at their company. So yeah, there may be US workers qualified to do those jobs, but, if they're settled down in their own communities and aren't available to move, it won't necessarily help fill the job openings. Supposedly, that's what the Department of Labor is signing off on for H-1Bs - that, based upon their studies of the local labor market, they acknowledge that, in this specific locale, people with X skills are in hot demand and short supply, so the local demand may well exceed supply and it's therefore not going to put any US workers out of a job if the employer goes ahead and hires someone under an H-1B. As for how well Labor is doing their job, I can't say, but I do know that they are supposed to be keeping an eye on that sort of thing and denying H-1Bs if the region has an adequate supply of US workers qualified to do the job.

I know there are also cases where H-1Bs are employed to help produce products for export to their countires of origin. For instance, Microsoft hires a great many software localization engineers, as they call them, to create country-specific versions of Windows products. So they'll hire a Korean to help create the Korean version of Windows, a Hungarian to create the Hungarian version of Excel, etc., etc.. In those instances, the foreign worker I think genuinely does have a unique ability which would be difficult to find among US workers. In addition, the presence of those workers in the US, creating a product for export, are helping create more jobs which can be performed by US workers.

One last point, H-1Bs are often used to hire recent foreign graduates from US universities. These are people who came here to study as F-1 or J-1 students and were offered jobs upon completion of their degrees. The sense from the policy point of view is that we have, to some degree, invested in these people's educations (as tuition typically does not cover 100% of the costs), wouldn't it be nice if the US economy could benefit in some way from having made that investment? So there's often a feeling that we're attracting these brilliant minds from around the world, educating them, and then they're going home just at the point where they're beginning to be capable of contributing to the economy.

So anyway, as usual, it's rather more complicated than it seems at first glance. I'm sure there are screw-ups where Hs are abused and US workers are hurt, but there are some safeguards to try to prevent that and I don't think the program overall is as damaging as people tend to want to believe it is.

American college in a ranked top 5 computer school just interviewed with Microsoft... you remember the company setting up larger offices in India ... he didn't get hired... He got hired somewhere else but Microsoft didn't hire him... He was educated and skilled ... I'm sorry that line about Americans not having skilled labor is bull.
its not that we are skilled its because we want higher wages... I hope Google gobbles up ever American Computer Science PHD and let Microsoft have its cheap labor... You get what you pay for...

and Microsoft just entered a flawed product again...

This is about Corporations wanting CHEAP LABOR!!! Its going to backfire on the Corporations and I will be smiling...reckoning day is coming...

Have you ever prepared an H-1B petition? It is a royal pain in the ass. You have to first obtain a prevailing wage determination from the Department of Labor, which will instruct you on what the standard wage for the position you're looking to fill is. Next you have to conduct an actual wage assessment to confirm that, not only are you going to pay the alien more than the prevailing wage for the industry, but that you aren't going to be paying them any less than other workers in your company earn to do similar work. Next you have to prepare an application for the Department of Labor's approval, attesting to the qualifications of the alien and your inability to find a US worker to fill the slot, your ability and willingness to pay the alien at least as much as the prevailing wage and no less than other workers in your firm are earning. You have to set up a set of public inspection files and open yourself up to discretionary audit by the Department of Labor and the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services to crawl up your ass with a microscope any time they happen to feel like it. After the Department of Labor's had a chance to digest and approve all of that, then you get to go to Homeland Security and file another petition for permission to hire this particular alien. The process takes months, costs thousands of dollars in filing fees and legal expenses, all so you can pay an alien not one penny less than you would pay an American worker, for a period of three years, at the end of which, the alien's visa expires and you're back to square one. Now, please explain to me why anyone would subject themselves to this sort of hassle and expense if they didn't have a bona fide need to?

With all due respect, you've got to stop assessing this in purely anecdotal terms. Everyone's got some story about how they applied for a job and didn't get it. There are about a bazillion different reasons why any one individual wouldn't be given a job, some legit, some not so legit, but almost none having to do with immigration. God knows I've applied for jobs I didn't get, haven't you? That doesn't mean immigrants are responsible for that. I'm sorry your friend didn't get the job at Microsoft. Maybe the opening they were filling required some specific combination of skills your friend simply didn't have. Maybe one of his competing applicants had an inside connection to someone on the hiring committee. Microsoft discovered some years ago that it was cheaper to farm out their work to subcontractors to whom they didn't have to pay any benefits and they've consequently been hiring far fewer workers than they once did, maybe that's part of the problem. The point is, one person's individual anecdote does not a trend make, particularly when you've already got a theory in mind you're trying to find evidence to confirm. You stare at the clouds in the sky long enough, you can eventually find the shape of your name written in the clouds, but it doesn't mean God's trying to talk to you, you know?

I was telling my wife last night, I find this whole conversation so ironic because I agree with so much of what you say: I do believe that corporations are totally fucking evil bastards who do everything in their power to screw over their workers, just like Microsoft going through subcontractors to escape having to pay for beneifts. Where we differ is I don't think you can lay those behaviors at the feet of immigrants who are just looking for a job like all the rest of us. We've got to identify our issues here: what's concerning you and me both isn't migration per se, it's that there are too many Americans who are unemployed or underemployed. If every American had a great job and there were still jobs left over needing to be done, would it still bother you if immigrants filled some of them? Probably not, right? So the issue really is, too many employers are following the Mal-Wart business model and downsizing and/or outsourcing their jobs, paying lower wages and offering fewer benefits for those they do hire. You feel comfortable stating that migration is a contributor to that problem. I say, there are so many factors which contribute to that problem, it's not clear whether immigration is "the," or even "a," primary contributor. Personally, I think one of the biggest contributors to that problem is that Americans refuse to put their money where their mouth is and accept higher prices for goods and services. I mean, we all bash Mal-Wart for outsourcing jobs, producing all of their goods in Third World countries where there are no labor or environmental protection laws and workers get paid 13 cents an hour, yet how many of us continue to shop there? The Tyson's Chicken fiasco made national news, yet how many of us continue to buy their chicken? Hey, good price on chicken, only 79 cents a pound this week! And sitting right next to it on the shelf is the locally-produced, free-range, organic chicken, but it's selling for $5/pound. Honestly now, how many of us are going to buy the $5/lb chicken? That's right, almost nobody. And we sit around wondering why jobs in the US pay less and less? Maybe we ought to try taking a look in the mirror rather than trying to go after immigrants.