"FAIR Letter to President Bush About His Guestworker Proposal"
FAIR on Bush's press conference:
At this morning's White House press conference, you were asked a question about your plan to reform U.S. immigration policy. In response to the question, you repeatedly made the point that your proposal entails allowing workers in other countries to enter or remain in the U.S. legally to fill "jobs that Americans will not do."
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and millions of Americans throughout the nation are highly troubled by your policy proposal. First, your proposal both forgives and rewards businesses that have flagrantly violated laws against the hiring of illegal aliens with a novel approach to sustaining for them a never-ending supply of cheap foreign labor. Second, your proposal both forgives and rewards illegal aliens who have and continue to be in violation of our immigration laws by making your guestworker/amnesty program available to them.
The American public has a right to be clear about your intentions and policymakers in Congress deserve a degree of certainty about the consequences of adopting your policy proposal. Your position on this proposal could be much more clearly clarified if you would address the following questions publicly...
They ask five questions that a) Bush couldn't answer, and b) no reporter will (probably) ever ask.
The question relating to Kerik would be a bit of a low blow, but, then again, if they can't even correctly vet their proposed head of the DHS how well are they going to do with 10 million citizens of another country, especially given that most of them are from a corrupt third-world country?
Comments
John S Bolton (not verified)
Tue, 12/21/2004 - 18:59
Permalink
if there are jobs that only foreign criminals will do; let it be proven that we are better off by allowing those positions to be filled. Letting the lowest-paid and least-desirable jobs continue as such, when competition among employers could improve them, immorally increases aggression on the net taxpayer, insofar as the lowest-paid are on net public subsidy. Therefore the proposal is a gross affront to any morality which may properly be called such; it causes an increase in that aggression against the net taxpayer, by increasing the numbers of those on net public subsidy. It does this through the government which is primarily pledged to defend the states against the hostile foreigner.