Tancredo's "Brilliant Plan"
Tancredo's "Brilliant Plan"
Date: Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:50 AM
JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER
by Rob Sanchez
October 13, 2005 No. 1344
A new article is circulating around the internet that defends Tancredo's guest-worker bill - the "Real Guest Act of 2005, or H.R. 3333. The article is authored by Linda Muller and it's titled, "Setting the Record Straight - Tancredo's Brilliant Plan for Stopping Illegal Immigration and Reducing Job Loss".
Before I proceed, I would like to state for the record that Tancredo is brilliant, but he is also a politician, and sometimes politicians will do the wrong thing whether by intent or by accident.
It's discouraging that so many leaders within the mainstream immigration reform movement are putting blind faith in Tancredo's bill. If anyone but Tancredo sponsored this into Congress the immigration reform groups would be picking it to pieces. Tancredo's loyal followers will support it even though it's to their own detriment - and that's why this bill is very dangerous. Most of them haven't read the bill or even thought about it, they just put blind faith that Tancredo can do no wrong.
One of the reasons Muller gives for supporting the bill is that organizations that support more immigration think it's a bad bill.
Tancredo offers a comprehensive plan for dealing with the
pernicious effects of illegal immigration on our society.
Open border advocates dismiss it as racist. Corporations
disdain it as unworkable. Labor unions cannot fathom it.
Some conservatives find fault with it.
The comment above is a variation of the logical fallacy that goes something like this: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". There is an assumption that Tancredo's bill is good because our enemy thinks it's bad, but what if the bill is just plain bad?
After a meeting I had with Tancredo's immigration staff in Washington DC on Sept. 30, 2005, I was challenged to find one single pro-immigration organization that has anything good to say about the bill. I was skeptical and assumed that the challenge would take me about 5 minutes of googling to win. I accepted their challenge even though logic dictates that lack of support for the bill by the other side doesn't necessarily mean that it's something we should support. It appears that I'm going to lose that challenge because so far it seems that all of them condemn the bill, don't mention it, or say that the McCain/Kennedy bill is better. Chalk up one for Tancredo's immigration staff!
The basic question boils down to this - is Tancredo's bill worthy of support just because so many of our adversaries condemn it?
I spent countless hours scouring the internet for an endorsement by open-border organizations and the cheap labor lobbies but failed to find one whom supports it. On a whim I even sent an email to Harris Miller of the ITAA and asked him what his organization thought about H.R. 3333. I assumed that the ITAA would support anything that increases the number of wage-slaves that can get visas. Much to my surprise he answered the email. Miller wrote that the ITAA doesn't support it, and then he commented that "a substantial majority of his [Tancredo's] colleagues" aren't seriously considering the bill.
Harris Miller's statement about Tancredo's lack of support is worthy of examination. If the bill is a net positive for the immigration reform movement then there should be large numbers of sponsors from the Immigration Reform Caucus, especially since Tancredo chairs the caucus. The congressional record shows that reform caucus members haven't jumped on the Tancredo bandwagon. Does the immigration caucus know something that everybody else doesn't want to admit?
At the time of this newsletter H.R. 3333 only has 3 co-sponsors, despite the fact that the immigration caucus consists of over 80 members. I compared the co-sponsors with the list of members on Tancredo's website and found that only two of them were caucus members. I am loathe to admit that Harris Miller is correct on anything, but the small list of co-sponsors confirms his contemptuous remark.
Rep Burgess, Michael C. [TX]
Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. [NC]
Rep Johnson, Sam [TX] (not a member of caucus)
To see the immigration caucus members go to:
http://tancredo.house.gov/irc/members.html
H.R. 3333 has so little support it's doubtful it will ever become law. Considering its chances of getting through Congress, from a practical point of view, it's a very bad idea. Tancredo's image could suffer because many of his supporters want an end to exploitive guest-worker programs and this bill falls far short of that goal. Unintended side-effects may result from this bill as it languishes in Congress. Tancredo's followers may lose confidence and may even begin to speculate on whether he has sold out, and the pro-immigration crowd will use this bill as a way to ridicule him and to justify their own bills.
Don't think for a minute that the cheap labor lobby and the globalists will thank Tancredo for capitulating. They will use his bill as a means to crush him and all his supporters. Even worse, the McKennedy crowd will use this bill as evidence that a massive guest-worker program is needed. The Real Act is a distraction from what Tancredo should be doing, and it is a morale booster for those that want to use immigration to force Americans into global labor arbitrage.
Many of the mainstream immigration reform groups are trying to reassure people who are questioning the bill that there is no reason to worry because it has no chance of passing. Of course that begs the obvious question "if the bill doesn't have a chance of passing, then why did Tancredo bother with it in the first place?" I have heard several answers to that question but none of them consider the risks of sending bad legislation to Congress.
The most likely scenario is that a congressional committee will convene behind closed doors and decide what parts of each bill they can agree on. The fact that Tancredo's bill is so similar to the others will make it very hard for anyone to argue the case for American workers, and you can bet the committee members won't be pro-labor. My bet is that Tancredo won't even be invited to the committee meetings.
Gathered in a closed session the committee will throw a chart on the bargaining table that lists the features of each bill and then the bartering will begin for a bi-partisan agreement. The chart has already been made, now all they have to do is to call a meeting. To see what the chart may look like go to this pro-immigration website. Don't be surprised if they personally hand the committee their chart to use!
http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/mpi_legislative_proposals.pdf
***** MY CRYSTAL BALL *****
____
.-" +' "-.
/.'.'A_'*`.\
|:.*'/\-\. ':|
|:.'.||"|.'*:|
\:~^~^~^~^:/
/`-....-'\
jgs / \
`-.,____,.-'
I think the reason that politicians are racing to get guest-worker bills into Congress is that they plan to slip one into an omnibus spending bill in November. The omnibus spending bill will be necessary to finance the nation's expanding debt load. Omnibus spending bills are excellent opportunities to pass through unpopular legislation without having to vote on a specific bill because the are an up-or-down vote. As an example: the 20,000 increase in the H-1B cap was inserted in last year's omnibus spending bill without public discussion or a vote.
My advice to Tancredo is to quietly remove H.R. 3333 before it does more damage than it already has. There is no good reason to help the cheap labor lobby by adding fuel to the fire.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.forthecause.us/or
http://magic-city-news.com/article_4745.shtml
Setting the Record Straight - Tancredo's Brilliant Plan for Stopping Illegal Immigration & Reducing Job Loss
By Linda Muller
Oct 12, 2005, 11:57
"Tancredo offers a comprehensive plan for dealing with the pernicious effects of illegal immigration on our society. Open border advocates dismiss it as racist. Corporations scoff it as unworkable. Labor unions cannot fathom it. Some conservatives find fault with it. Yet Tancredo manages to plug most of the policy and enforcement holes that are responsible for the current untenable situation. His proposal may not be right for any particular group, but it is right for the United States of America."
Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) has come under massive criticism for his REAL GUEST Act of 2005, which seeks to provide remedies for many of the nation's most intractable illegal immigration problems, but without resorting to an amnesty or a promise of citizenship. Open border advocates, of course, condemn Tancredo's proposal with all the usual racist rant.
What is surprising, however, is the severity of criticism coming from a small number of Tancredo's traditional base. A few of these columnists and activists mistakenly claim the REAL GUEST Act:
Acknowledges a necessity for guest workers
Allows visa numbers to be set by employers
Does nothing to stop illegal immigration
These criticisms, raised by a few, nevertheless have been resonating through the nation's conservative talk shows and print media as if Tancredo has somehow sold them out. Nothing can be further from the truth.
In HR 3333, Tancredo lays out a practical blueprint for dealing effectively with illegal immigration from multiple vantage points. The proposal also includes the strongest enforcement mechanisms and penalties for violations of any plan yet introduced in either the House or Senate.
Guest workers
Critics say Tancredo's proposal is a sellout to corporate interests because it acknowledges America's need for guest workers.
While Tancredo does allow for the potential future use guest workers if market conditions warrant - meaning a palpable rise in the wages for American workers, none of the corporate interests that he has purportedly "sold out to" have any interest in advancing his proposal because there is no advantage in it for them. Furthermore, the REAL GUEST Act does not include any amnesty component or path to citizenship, and it delays implementation of his temporary guest worker program until long-promised enforcement mechanisms have been implemented and proven effective in stopping illegal entry and preventing temporary workers from staying.
Restructuring the visa program
In Tancredo's proposal, employers really do not control the number of visas that will be issued to temporary workers. In fact, the proposal puts stricter prerequisites on the issuance of such visas - while leaving little room for bureaucrats to supplant the administration's policy desires for the law.
In HR 3333, Tancredo proposes a restructuring of the current "H" non-immigrant visa programs, which will continue normal operations until his new program is implemented.
Tancredo would eliminate the current "H" visa classifications that have proven so troublesome in recent years, including:
H-1B (high-tech)
H-1C (nurses)
H-2A (agricultural)
H-2B (seasonal)
The current system is very lax in terms of requiring employers to prove there is a shortage of qualified American workers. In fact, big corporations can easily lobby Congress for visa increases to the point where the program is virtually meaningless. Tancredo's proposal replaces these non-immigrant visas with a single "H" non-immigrant visa for potential workers, using the same strict market test and employer prerequisites for both skilled and unskilled workers.
Foreign workers would be pre-screened before they would be made available to employers for additional, short-term labor, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not harmed. The mechanism works like this ...
Employers would be required to file a petition for an "H" worker with the Department of Labor. "H" non-immigrant visas would be issued only when no qualified and lawfully present workers are currently available to perform the work, and when no such workers could be trained in less than one year. In other words, if no Americans are immediately available to do the work, the next step would be for the employer to train them to do the work before resorting to the last-gasp option of seeking approval for guest workers.
The market test in Tancredo's bill does not mean that new "H" visas will be authorized any time American workers' real wages are rising, as some critics have asserted. Only when real wages rise for six (6) consecutive months, truly indicating a labor shortage, can "H" visas be allowed and then only in that region and job skill category. If wages became stagnant - even for a single month, indicating a loosening labor market, "H" visa petition approval is shut down again. Thus, the number of "H" visas expands and contracts with long-term market conditions - and not at the whim of an oft-lobbied Congress.
Tancredo would limit the stay of "H" non-immigrants to 365 days during any two-year period, but allow them to renew their visas upon the expiration of each two-year period. This ensures that workers retain the status of "guest" and that they do not make this country their new home.
But Tancredo does not stop there?He would require every alien seeking "H" non-immigrant status to sign a legally enforceable affidavit attesting to their understanding that they will be ineligible to adjust to lawful permanent resident status or to change status to any other non-immigrant classification. Immigrant workers also would be prohibited from bringing spouses and children with them into this country.
Current law would be amended to clarify that a child born in the United States to an "H" non-immigrant parent is not a U.S. citizen at birth, unless the child's other parent is a citizen or a lawful permanent resident.
Any alien who violates a term or condition of their "H" non-immigrant visa would be barred from receiving any immigrant or non-immigrant visa for 10 years. This provision of Tancredo's proposal would include visa overstays.
Adding bureaucracy
The same critics of the current lax enforcement of our southern border and who are calling for 15,000 additional border patrol agents, now take Tancredo to task for wanting to add more bureaucracy to the federal government.
Tancredo's proposal calls for more immigration inspectors, detention and removal officers, and criminal investigators for benefits fraud. He also wants more attorneys for the ICE Legal Program to free up the logjam that is responsible for so many illegal aliens being set free to roam about society.
It is simply a fact of life that it takes more people to secure our borders as it does to enforce the law after illegal aliens get here. Both require a stronger federal response and there's no way this can be avoided, particularly after the problems posed by illegal immigration have been allowed to fester for so long.
Stopping illegal entry
Let's be honest - there is no way to totally stop illegal immigration. A 50-foot wall would help, but people will always find a way. What we can do is rigorously discourage this type of illegal activity by taking away the incentives that make it worthwhile to sneak into this country in the first place. One way to do this is to go after employers who routinely exploit illegal immigrants for their cheap labor.
HR 3333 increases the fines on employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. Company executives would be subject to imprisonment if they are found to have engaged in a pattern or practice of such violations.
When half of a company's workforce is composed of illegal aliens -- such as the Cargill meat packing plant in Schuyler, Nebraska -- who have purchased fraudulent social security cards and birth certificates, that would constitute an undeniable pattern of illegal activity. Just one successful prosecution of a company executive would send a clear message to the rest of the business community.
Tancredo also wants to establish identification standards for receiving federal benefits by requiring states and localities to meet certain minimum standards for issuing birth certificates. While many states are enacting birth/death registries already, which will help, we are only as strong as the weakest state's law, which is why Tancredo demands uniform adherence to a standard.
Unlawful presence in the U.S. would be a felony, punishable by fine, imprisonment, and asset forfeiture. Violators would be automatically ineligible for a non-immigrant work visa. In addition, state and local law enforcement officers are reminded of their inherent authority to help enforce federal immigration laws.
These provisions of HR 3333 alone would greatly stem the flow of illegal aliens into this country, plus assist law enforcement at all levels by giving them the proper tools to arrest and prosecute illegal aliens, instead of just relying on an absurdly under-resourced and seemingly disinterested ICE bureaucracy.
These measures, if implemented, would make it difficult for illegal aliens to live, work, and remain in the United States illegally. These measures are designed to force attrition --- most illegal aliens who face a high risk of apprehension, are unable to find work and are unable to profit from their presence in this country will have no choice but to return to their home countries voluntarily.
Tancredo's proposal also calls for the presence of U.S. troops at or near the border to deter illegal border crossings. Troops conducting training exercises on the border would make an effective barrier to illegal immigration.
He would also amend the criminal statute barring use of the Army and Air Force as a posse comitatus to prevent unlawful entry into the United States.
Minimizing other impacts on society
To relieve the pressure on our healthcare system, Tancredo would have Congress appropriate funds to fully reimburse providers of federally mandated emergency medical treatment of illegal aliens.
The current policy of not fully reimbursing healthcare providers for these costs has resulted in the closure of 84 hospitals in California alone in recent years. When hospitals close, this financial burden merely gets shifted to the hospitals that have managed to stay afloat. Eventually, they will succumb as well, denying even more people access to timely healthcare and driving medical costs even higher.
To qualify for the reimbursement of emergency medical costs, Tancredo would have the healthcare provider collect and report to DHS all citizenship information and other non-clinical information concerning each illegal alien treated.
The bottom line
Tancredo offers a comprehensive plan for dealing with the pernicious effects of illegal immigration on our society. Open border advocates dismiss it as racist. Corporations disdain it as unworkable. Labor unions cannot fathom it. Some conservatives find fault with it. Yet Tancredo manages to plug most of the policy and enforcement holes that are responsible for the current untenable situation. His proposal may not be right for any particular group, but it is right for the United States of America. That's all we want from our elected representatives.
As co-founder of For the Cause - forthecause.us - Linda Muller has spent the over 15 years working for various conservative candidates and causes, including Rep. Tom Tancredo's Team America and the presidential campaigns of Pat Buchanan. She can be reached at this email address: lindamuller@forthecause.us
www.ZaZona.com
Support this Newsletter and ZaZona.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm
To Subscribe, Unsubscribe or to view the Archive go to:
http://www.zazona.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm
Back to archives