"Guest" workers: Mehlman, Bush win; America, GOP lose

The Los Angeles Times reports on the Republican National Committee supporting a "guest" worker scheme in Amid Rifts, GOP Backs Guest-Worker Plan by Peter Wallsten:
...Bush aides and senior Republican strategists say that taking a hard-line stance against illegal immigration risks alienating Latino voters, just as California's 1994 campaign for Proposition 187, which GOP then-Gov. Pete Wilson supported, helped turn California into a Democrat-dominated state.

...Pullen withdrew his resolution Friday after the full committee voted almost unanimously to side with Bush, urged on by a series of speeches by committee members who said they or their relatives were immigrants...
So? Ending illegal immigration doesn't imply ending immigration. Perhaps someone should make that point.
Cultural conservatives charge that illegal immigrants are taking U.S. jobs. But businesses, another key piece of the GOP donor base, rely on immigrant labor.
How many lies can you spot in that one paragraph? Not all "cultural conservatives" oppose illegal immigration, and nowhere near all opponents of illegal immigration are "cultural conservatives". And, those who oppose II have other claims than just taking jobs. And, only a small percentage of businesses rely on "immigrant" labor, with some mainly relying on the illegal variety.
...Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman told reporters that allowing workers from abroad to work legally in the U.S. was the only way to control the flow across the border...
Obviously, controlling the flow is well within our grasp. It would, however, take a GOP leadership that wasn't corrupt to its core.

And, the WashTimes offers GOP backs Bush on guest-worker plan by Stephen Dinan:
"The question is not 'Is there an issue?' -- the question is 'How you deal with it?' and I think we have to deal with it in a comprehensive way -- we don't have to deal with it in a way that's anti-immigrant," said party Chairman Ken Mehlman, who said the resolution "reflected where the president was."
There are basically only two groups calling moves to stop illegal immigration "anti-immigrant": the Democrats, and the GOP leadership. Obviously, that claim is false. If the GOP leadership weren't corrupt, it would work to show how false that claim is.


One reason they want a continual flow of illegals is that the ones who are already here soon get the picture about supply and demand and use it. My contractor friend tells me they have unionized to an extent. They keep newcomers away from the day laborer site in town and then demand $10 an hour plus lunch, etc. If the government ever stops the flow, their wages would of course go higher, which would hurt the businesses who rely on cheap labor to up their profits.

Being anti-immigrant or anti-illegal immigrant may be dangerous for the democratic party; but being anti-taxpayer or anti-net-taxpayer is even more dangerous for the republicans. There is mendacity in saying anti-immigrant; it implies a personal animus, and it's dishonestly over-generalized. Anti-immigrationism, restrictionism or anti-illegal immigrationism would be more correct. On the other hand, if all you have is slurs and dishonesty where reason would demand a rational argument to be given, perhaps this is a confession that the smartest political and business leaders can come up with nothing in that line. The question is why there should be an increase in the aggression on the net taxpayer, through continuity of illegal immigration. The illegal immigrationists have the burden of proof, in that they propose to change the country, and by means of tolerance of an increase of aggression in our society.