linda chavez

Linda Chavez

Columnist, Fox News analyst, and chairman of the Center for Equal Opportunity. Strong supporter of massive immigration. Serves as a director of the boards of two large companies that employ large numbers of low-wage workers: the janitorial company ABM and the chicken processor Pilgrims Pride (

She was appointed Director of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights by Ronald Reagan and was later an immigration advisor to George W Bush in 2000. He selected her to head the Department of Labor in 2001, but she withdrew because, in her words, "a decade earlier I had taken into my home and given modest financial assistance to a battered and abused woman from Guatemala, who at the time was illegally living in the United States" (link).

If you trust her position on immigration, please see the links below.

Last modified Sep 7, 2014
Discussed in (click each link for the full post):

NCLR letter for DREAM Act misleads (Richardson, Villaraigosa, Linda Chavez, Lionel Sosa) - 12/16/10

The National Council of La Raza has sent an open letter [1] to senators Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell urging them to pass the anti-American DREAM Act. That bill would let the illegal aliens covered by it take college resources from Americans: it would deprive some Americans of college educations. And, the NCLR's letter is misleading and signed by a small grab bag of very questionable people.

It starts:

As Latino leaders in government, business, entertainment, and sports, we urge members of Congress to support the "Development, Relief, and Education of Alien Minors (DREAM) Act." This modest and sensible piece of legislation would allow young people who were brought to the United States by their parents at a very young age to pursue higher education or serve in the military.

1. The DREAM Act ("DA") is a power grab by various forces: the Democratic leadership, religious leaders, the far-left, and so on. The NCLR letter makes clear that to a great extent it's a race-based power grab. Those signing on don't care about American citizens not being able to attend college; obtaining race-based power is a much higher priority.

2. The DA is hardly a "modest and sensible piece of legislation". It could cover one to two million illegal aliens, and those covered could eventually sponsor other family members. That would take many years, but it would happen. It would also encourage even more illegal immigration with others seeking to take part in a "DREAM Act 2". Passing one amnesty would give even more power to those who'd push for yet more amnesties in the future. So, it's hardly "modest".

3. There's no requirement that those covered would have had to have been brought here by their parents; some older children cross on their own. They have to have arrived here before they were sixteen, which is hardly "a very young age".

Then, the NCLR misleads about who'd be covered:

These students are success stories in their communities, serving as student body presidents, star athletes, and performers, graduating often with honors from schools in their hometowns.

Certainly, some are as described. However, the educational requirements in the bills are minimal; there are no requirements that those covered must have graduated with honors or anything similar.

They also reference a recent UCLA study (#9 here) and a CBO study; see those links for more information.

In addition to a few minor celebrities, those signing on include (see each link for more on them):

* Janet Murguia of the NCLR
* Antonio Villaraigosa (former leader of a racial separatist group)
* Linda Chavez (sits or sat on boards of two large companies that employ large numbers of low-wage workers)
* Carlos Gutierrez (George W Bush Commerce Secretary who promoted amnesty while in office; see his name's link for much more)
* Lionel Sosa (wanted to and may have taken money from the Mexican government to promote amnesty inside the U.S.)
* Henry Cisneros (see the other letter he signed on to at the link)
* Maria Contreras-Sweet (affiliated with Promerica Bank)
* America Ferrera
* Monica Lozano
* Federico Pena
* Bill Richardson
* Solomon D. Trujillo (U.S.-born business executive who led an Australian company but who left that country in disgrace)


Linda Chavez misleads: doesn't support true "market-based" immigration; "progressive-baits" enforcement supporters - 02/26/10

Linda Chavez - among other things a director of low-wage employers Pilgrims Pride and ABM - offers the misleading "Progressives and Immigration Reform" (link).

"Room for Debate": New York Times tries new immigration "reform" push - 03/12/09

Brace yourselves (

Starting this weekend, The Times will publish a series of articles on the impact that the latest wave of immigrants is having on American institutions. Education is the first theme, and in a previous Room for Debate discussion, experts shared their insights into what works best in teaching children who do not speak English. Here are excerpts of comments from readers, who shared their personal experiences and observations on the subject.

They invite you to "join the conversation" by leaving comments at their various blog entries. While normally I'd oblige, their comments are presented in chronological order and has over 450 comments. I.e., no one's going to scroll to page 20,000 to read your comment. And, they moderate comments and many/almost all of the comments I've left on their previous entries over the years never got approved. So, I'll take a pass. But, you can feel free to knock yourself out.

For instance, in the very slight possibility that no one has pointed it out already, you can point out that their latest entry [1] features seven education "experts", including a representative of the National Council of La Raza. From the anti-bilingual education side of things, one of the opponents is Linda Chavez. Some debate.


Ask John McCain about his Hispanic outreach director, Juan Hernandez (former Mexican government official) - 01/25/08

John McCain's Hispanic outreach director [1] is Juan Hernandez, a U.S.-Mexico dual citizen and former Mexican government official who said the following in 2001 about Mexican immigrants to the U.S.:
"I want the third generation, the seventh generation, I want them all to think 'Mexico first.'"
He also said [2]:
"We must not only have a free flow of goods and services, but also start working for a free flow of people."
Now, he's working for John McCain.

However, what McCain knows is that no one in the MSM is ever going to question his hiring accepting the volunteer efforts of [3] a pro-open borders Mexican partisan and former Mexican government official. Based on his easy deflection of immigration questions - and the fact that almost no one has put his responses on video sharing sites (except, as far as I know, back in June), and the fact that the MSM covers for him - he knows he'll never get blowback from this.

So, that means it's up to you. If you want to sink McCain's candidacy, go to his campaign events and read those quotes to him and ask him to renounce them and fire dump Hernandez [3]. Then, upload his response to video sharing sites.

More on this here, here, here, and here.

Hernandez was previously Director of the Office for Mexicans Living Abroad until there was apparently some sort of falling out involving him or someone else. That office then became the Institute for Mexicans Abroad, with several of their members involved in pushing Mexico's agenda in the U.S. An Illinois state senator, Democrat Martin Sandoval, even serves on their board while at the same time pretending to serve U.S. interests.

UPDATE: Jerome Corsi offers this:
McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers emphasized to WND that Hernandez is "a non-paid volunteer to the campaign, and he does not play a policy role."

"Juan works with us to reach out to the Hispanic community to meet with the folks in the various states," Rogers said.

Asked if the McCain campaign has repudiated Hernandez's "Mexico first" declarations, Rogers did not give a direct answer.
Let's hope he stands by him a little longer, but even if he throws him overboard you can still ask him what he was thinking.

UPDATE 2: More on this here.

A roundup of his cable TV greatest hits is here; it includes him promoting a North American security cordon - just not a Union - as well as cheap vegetables. So-far-unwatched videos that might have something are here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. If he says something on those that can be incorporated into an anti-McCain video, please leave a comment.

You can hear his 2001 Nightline quote here.

From 2001 (link):
"I never knew the border as a limitation. I'd be delighted if all of us could come and go between these two marvelous countries," Hernandez, 45, said in a recent interview...

"Those who don't like [my activities with the Office and his dual citizenship], I'm sorry. But there are 20 million of us," Hernandez said. "There are 20 million people that have one foot here and one foot there."

...Hernandez has lobbied to make life easier for Mexican migrants in the United States. He has worked to cut the costs of money transfers, helped win lower tuition at Texas state universities and urged U.S. states to loosen restrictions on drivers' licenses [in addition to less controversial proposals]...
From 2002:
Writing in National Review (October 12, 1998) Jorge Amselle (like Linda Chavez, a pro-immigration Latino Republican) warned that, "The Mexican government through its promotion of bilingual education and of dual nationality and voting is actively subverting the assimilative process of Americanization…."

Amselle was referring to the official Mexican government policy of acercamiento ("getting closer" or "establishing a bond") to "Mexican communities abroad," meaning both Mexican citizens living in the United States and Mexican Americans who are U.S. citizens. This policy was started by the old PRI regime and has been considerably expanded by Fox. The spirit of this policy is exemplified by Juan Hernandez, a Texas-born Mexican-American dual citizen, who is Fox's cabinet minister for Mexicans Abroad...

...Two years ago, before Fox became president, his current national-security adviser, Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, advocated a policy in which the Mexican government would work politically with the "20 million Mexicans" in the U.S. to advance Mexican "national interests." In El Siglo de Torreon on May 5, 2000, Zinser attacked American attempts to stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border. He declared that "Mexicans are subjected every day to mean-spirited acts and their rights are permanently threatened by ambitious politicians who are hunting for the Anglo vote." After disparaging the "reactionary Senator Jessie Helms," Zinser recommended that Mexico "find allies in the U.S. political system" particularly among "Liberal Democrats, labor unions, civil rights organizations, and social movements."
UPDATE 3: Someone went to a McCain event and asked him about this; the question wasn't as good as could have been but at least it might have started the ball rolling. And, Mark Krikorian raises the possibility that Hernandez could be stripped of his U.S. citizenship due to working for the Mexican government, and also quotes from the oath that Vicente Fox gave; whether Hernandez' was the same or similar isn't known (link).

UPDATE 4: The backstory of Hernandez' office being replaced with the IME is here, including a few more quotes from him.

UPDATE 5: Even as he works for McCain, Hernandez serves on the U.S. Council of Mexico's PAN Party (National Action Party): link, link.

[3] Let's take John McCain's spokesman at his word that Hernandez is a "non-paid volunteer" to the campaign. Being very precise will also help avoid McCain trying to obfuscate the issue. Note that, as pointed out at the first link in UPDATE 2, Hernandez is a Senior Fellow at the McCain-linked Reform Institute, and I'd imagine he's receiving some money for that. However, if you ask McCain about this craft the question in such a way that he can't raise minor points.

Linda Chavez meddles in Prince William County Virginia immigration debate - 12/23/07

From this 12/14 article:
The chairman of a federal civil rights panel clashed yesterday with Prince William Board of County Supervisors Chairman Corey A. Stewart over the recent crackdown on illegal immigrants approved by the board.

Linda Chavez, a conservative commentator who heads a U.S.

E.J. Dionne, Chris Cillizza/WaPo realize: voters oppose illegal immigration (Niki Tsongas) - 10/19/07

Pundits have spilt a lot of ink trying to convince themselves that opposing illegal immigration is a losing political issue. Those include: Fred Barnes, Linda Chavez, Tamar Jacoby, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Arlen Specter, and Michael Barone.

Now, we turn to the Washington Post's E.J. Dionne ("Test Run For 2008", link). Note, of course, that the Washington Post explicitly supports illegal immigration:
In Massachusetts's 5th Congressional District -- a collection of mill towns and affluent and blue-collar suburbs north of Boston -- the surprise issue was illegal immigration. [Jim Ogonowski] made it the centerpiece of an anti-Washington campaign. An Ogonowski news release, for example, accused Tsongas of being "committed to giving cheap college to illegals at taxpayer expense."

...[Niki Tsongas], a community college dean, favored granting in-state tuition rates to the children of undocumented immigrants. In Ogonowski's translation of that, Tsongas believed that "Massachusetts taxpayers should foot the bill for the college tuition of the children of illegals."

Republicans think the immigration issue helped Ogonowski, so the country may be in for a lot more of this sort of thing next year. "Everywhere we went, people wanted to talk about immigration," said Matt Wylie, Ogonowski's general consultant. "It was just coming up over and over again."

[...SCHIP may have helped her win...]
Earlier, Chris Cillizza of "The Fix" wrote (link):
[Ogonowski] also found fertile ground by calling for a crackdown on illegal immigration and decrying Tsongas' support for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants as amnesty.

Linda Chavez needs your help to fight WaPo expose of her PAC's finances! - 08/13/07

Matthew Mosk of the Washington Post looks into the finances of Linda Chavez' empire in "In Fundraising's Murky Corners" (link). As a reliable supporter of massive immigration, it's a bit odd that they'd turn on her, but perhaps the fact that she's a conservative swayed them towards publishing it.

Jennifer Steinhauer/NYT frets massive illegal alien amnesty may have hurt GOP with Latinos - 07/01/07

Concern troll/"reporter" Jennifer Steinhauer of the New York Times offers "After Bill's Fall, G.O.P. May Pay in Latino Votes". It's highly similar to and just as wrong as other such articles and pronouncements from Dick Morris and others.

Open letter: no race preferences for naturalized former illegal aliens - 06/10/07

From this:

Ward Connerly, Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, along with 25 national and local leaders in the movement to end race preferences, signed an open letter for publication in the Washington Times calling on Congress to exempt immigrants that might be naturalized by the immigration legislation currently before the United States Senate from receiving preferences based on race, sex, national origin, or color.

In addition to friendlies like Heather MacDonald and Maricopa County Attorney Andr

Letter: last 100 conservatives who support Senate amnesty bill must band together! - 06/05/07

A group of about 30 conservatives have sent an open letter to the rest demanding that they band together and support the Bush/Kennedy/Kyl massive illegal alien amnesty bill. The letter itself is full of half-truths, such as their claim that "it will make sure that the law is enforced first, before any other provisions of the legislation take effect".

Linda Chavez: opposition to amnesy is just about racism, xenophobia - 05/25/07

Linda Chavez - recently mentioned here playing the race card in the case of the Fort Dix Six - just got back from the 99 Cents store with a bag full of cards and threw all of them - together with whatever small amount of credibility she had remaining - on the table:
Some people just don't like Mexicans -- or anyone else from south of the border.

Senate immigration amnesty bill: the supporters - 05/21/07

Outside a number of Senators, there aren't too many who support the Senate's immigration amnesty/"guest" worker plan. This post will keep track of them, and I urge everyone to hold those below accountable whether the bill passes or not. I also urge everyone to keep calling Congress, but, even more importantly, follow the steps previously outlined to help stop amnesty.

The supporters:

* Of course: president Bush, Sens. John McCain and Ted Kennedy

* From "Few senators support the illegals bill" (link):

Sen. Arlen Specter, one of the Republicans who helped craft the deal, said it's the best they could do... "It will treat the 12 million undocumented immigrants in a constructive way. It is not amnesty. They'll have to pay a fine. They'll have to earn their way to citizenship," he said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "It's better than what we have now." Georgia, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, one of the secret negotiators, was also booed [like Lindsey Graham] at that state's Republican convention... ...Meanwhile, Republicans' chief negotiator in the closed-door sessions, Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, wrote a column for the Arizona Republic newspaper yesterday saying he won't support the bill if major changes are made during the floor debate... "If the consensus we reach is not accurately reflected in the final legislative language, or is seriously undercut by amendments in the Senate or House, it will lose support, including from me," he wrote... ...Seven Republicans, including the party's chairman, Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida, Mr. Chambliss and Mr. Kyl, the Senate Republican Conference chairman, were at the press conference announcing the bill...

* DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff meanwhile challenged critics to offer alternative solutions instead of simply saying "this isn't good enough." (link; the obvious answer is, of course, that he should do his job)

* [Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez says] "I have the impression that perhaps for some people, the only thing that would not be amnesty is mass deportation... We don't think that's practical, we don't think that's logical, we don't think that's humane and that would hurt our economy. So it's not amnesty."

* [Sen. Lindsey Graham says (ibid)] "To my colleagues who have come on the floor to tear this bill down with no alternative, you're not doing this country a service and I will push back... If you’ve got a better idea and you can lead us to a better solution, I'm all for it. But if all you're going to do is embrace the status quo, I’m going to be your biggest critic.

* The Wall Street Journal editorial board offered "Immigration Opening" on Saturday (link), which was followed by several reader letters almost all denouncing the bill (link). Today, John Fund offers "Don't Run for the Border - America needs immigration reform, but not a law enacted in haste" (link), perhaps as an indirect acknowledgement of the bill's failings.

* Even deeper inside the compound, we find Tamar Jacoby, who's profiled in "An Advocate Rallies to Unify GOP" (link)

Last week after a deal was reached in the Senate, Jacoby held a conference call with 20 business owners Friday to explain the politics of the overhaul... [She's praised by] Randel Johnson, a vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce... ...Jacoby sat at a table in the Senate Chef last week surrounded by two Texas bankers, a cattle rancher and a guy who represents Rio Grande Valley orange growers, all of whom had flown in to put a last-minute press on their congressional representatives... "The most important thing is the temporary-worker program," Jacoby told them. Lawmakers "are going to go all out to cut it in half and unless business goes all out, like D-Day, they will surely win." ...She is willing to work with religious and civil rights groups, including the Roman Catholic Church and the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group, to achieve the goal... ...the leader of a Latino civil rights group tapped Jacoby on the shoulder. Brent A. Wilkes, national executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens...

* Safely outside the compound, Michael Barone phones in to say that he supports the bill, despite not having read it.

* In the basement of the compound, Captain Ed decides to be even more like Hugh Hewitt than Hugh Hewitt, saying today [1] that

"Conceptually, I think it could work -- but the bill doesn't quite match the concepts outlined in the announcement, either."

In a previous post [2], he offered this stock talking point:

Everyone agrees that the system is broken; in fact, that's about the only agreement to be found.

* In the subbasement, Dafydd ab Hugh shows how little he knows about this issue and continues to support some form of "regularization" (the same word the Mexican government uses) [3]

UPDATE: NAU apologist Michael Medved comes out in favor of it (link):

the bi-partisan Senate bill makes a point of rewarding only good behavior... ...And speaking of rewarding good behavior, and punishing the bad: those courageous conservatives (Senators Kyl, Graham, Isakson and, yes, McCain) who have worked constructively and seriously on immigration reform deserve our support, not our rage, while those politicians and media figures who have demagogued this issue in a way that only makes it worse, in no way merit our encouragement.

UPDATE 2: I knew this would come sooner or later. Instapundit says [4]:

WHY PEOPLE WHO HATE THE IMMIGRATION BILL SHOULD BACK THE IMMIGRATION BILL: Okay, I had this thought last night as I was drifting off to sleep. But the Nyquil wore off and I still think it may make sense. Lots of people think that the immigration bill stinks, and want to punish the GOP by staying home in 2008. Fair enough. But if you plan to punish the GOP in 2008, then you might want to support the immigration bill now. Why? Because if the Democrats win the White House and Congress in 2008, you'll get a bill that you like a whole lot less! So if you plan to punish the Republicans later, you should encourage them to pass their bill now... There's got to be something wrong with this analysis, I just can't figure out what it is. Anyone? Kaus? Anyone?

UPDATE 3: Here's another Chertoff quote:

"You know, Wolf [Blitzer], first, I understand there's some people who expect anything other than capital punishment is an amnesty. The reality is the proposal here requires people who came in illegally who want to stay to pay a penalty. Like a fine. That's a punishment. That's not an amnesty."

UPDATE 4: Jorge Mursuli, National Executive Director, Democracia Ahora (a project of People For the American Way) offers "Senate's Immigration Proposal Needs Work, but Is Salvagable".

UPDATE 5: Dick Morris: "Republicans should back immigration compromise"

UPDATE 6: Sen. Trent Lott says:

"Is the current situation in America with legal and illegal immigration intolerable and unacceptable? Yes. Everybody would agree. Is this bill better than the current law? Without a doubt, yes. Are we going to have another opportunity to do this better next year or the next year? The answer is no. We've got to do it. We've got to do it as good as we can. We've got to do it right now."

UPDATE 7: Sen. Mitch McConnell says he'll support the bill, and also says:

"This is a divisive issue... I don't think there's a single member of either party next year who is going to fail to be re-elected over this issue."

SPECIAL HACK UPDATE: Hacks - not all of whom specifically support the Senate bill - have started their rampage of smears against those who oppose massive illegal immigration: Linda Chavez, Michael Gerson, and Robert Novak.

SPECIAL "LIBERAL" HACK UPDATE: Eleanor Clift offers "Bush Is Right—On Immigration, Anyway". She and the preceding hacks aren't that much different. Let's count the lies:

Just as [Pete Wilson]'s anti-immigrant [lie] policies turned California into the bluest of Blue States [misleading if not wrong], the angry, racist and xenophobic rhetoric emanating from the Republican right [smear and largely false] is turning the fastest-growing voting bloc in America against the GOP... Seeing a way to rally the base and respond to the growing anti-immigrant sentiment [lie], House Republicans pushed and passed legislation that was racially divisive and punitive [lie], cracking down on those who aided illegal immigrants - even church groups [lie]. The bill sparked massive rallies across the country against the Republican Congress [some of the organizers of those rallies were Mexican political parties and those linked to the Mexican government]. Rosenberg's New Democrat Network monitored ads in 25 states picturing a Mexican immigrant side by side with an Islamist terrorist. [Chuck Schumer created a similar TV ad]


Sanctuary policies: Fort Dix Six arrested multiple times - 05/11/07

Not only were three of the "Fort Dix Six" illegal aliens, but they had multiple arrests and sanctuary policies - or lack of DHS funding combined with unwillingness to deport people - may have played a role in allowing them to remain here.

"Open-Borders Advocates Distort Election Results" - 11/20/06

As previously discussed, massive immigration supporting hacks like Fred Barnes, Linda Chavez, Tamar Jacoby, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Arlen Specter, and Michael Barone among others have tried to claim that some GOP losses were due to opposition to an illegal alien amnesty. How this is wrong was discussed in NRO on Graf/Hayworth election results myth among other entries.

And, Mark Krikorian of CIS offers this:

...The open-borders crowd scavenged for results they hoped would confirm their pre-packaged conclusions. A favorite was the defeat of two Republican immigration hawks running for the House in Arizona, incumbent Rep. J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, who was seeking liberal Republican Rep. Jim Kolbe's seat. The problem with pointing to these results as proof of the public's support for the Bush-McCain-Kennedy "comprehensive" amnesty plan is that the very same voters overwhelmingly approved four good ballot measures related to immigration: denying bail to illegals, barring illegals from winning punitive damages in civil suits, prohibiting illegals from receiving certain state subsidies for education and day care, and declaring English the state's official language. Clearly, the actual policy issue of immigration control remained hugely popular and, while Hayworth's opponent endorsed a guest-worker program, he explicitly said on his campaign website, "Secure Our Border and Stop Illegal Immigration," "Hold employers accountable for whom they hire," and, "I oppose amnesty and will not support it." Hardly a Bush echo...

This is a wonderful opportunity to discredit hacks like Barnes, Jacoby, Barone, and the others, as well as those bloggers and other pundits who support them. Whenever they spread this line, come back with articles like this.

NRO on Graf/Hayworth election results myth - 11/17/06

National Review offers "The Legend of Arizona", a response to the mythmakers who've tried to claim that the recent losses of Randy Graf, J.D. Hayworth, and others were because of their pro-enforcement positions. They list our favorites such as: Fred Barnes, Linda Chavez (first link), Tamar Jacoby, and the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Plus, they inform us that the myth has also been spread by Arlen Specter (link) and Michael Barone (link). Then:
...Time for a reality check. This year’s anti-Republican wave was indiscriminate, washing away such immigration hawks as John Hostettler and Charles Taylor, but also such amnesty supporters as Mike DeWine and Lincoln Chafee. In other places, Republicans were able to withstand the wave in part because they opposed amnesty: Chris Shays was the only Republican congressman to survive in Connecticut, and Pete King kept his seat in New York...

...Even in Arizona, Sen. Jon Kyl, who voted against the open-borders bill, beat a Democratic candidate who supported it. Arizona voters also approved, by wide margins, three ballot measures cracking down on illegal immigration, plus one declaring English the state’s official language...

...A final piece of mythology concerns the Hispanic vote. Exit polling found that 30 percent of Hispanics voted for Republican House candidates, down from 38 percent in the 2002 midterms. To see the significance of this drop, it has to be put in context. The percentage of white voters who picked Republicans fell from 58 to 51 percent over the same period. Hispanics just followed the national trend...

Meme: Graf, Hayworth losses = support for "comprehensive immigration reform" - 11/09/06

As regular readers know, illegal immigration supporters will go to any depth to promote amnesty and similar schemes. One meme you can expect to hear over the coming months is that the recent losses by Randy Graf and J.D. Hayworth in Arizona mean that voters want "comprehensive immigration reform".

The quickest example of how that's wrong is presented by the fact that no less than four anti-illegal immigration propositions in Arizona passed by wide margins. And, in Graf's case he got shafted by the national GOP (whose contributors would have lost money if he'd won).

"Comprehensivly Wrong" (reply to WSJ open borders letter) - 07/29/06

In June, 41 prominent conservatives released an open letter calling for "enforcement first". A couple weeks ago, 33 "conservatives" published a reply in the WSJ. Now, here's the response:
...Unfortunately, the letter's principal argument rests on the false premise that the Senate bill strengthens enforcement.

"Linda Chavez Cleans Up With Cheap Labor" - 01/08/06

From 2002 comes this column about Linda Chavez. The column points out that she's a director of ABM Industries, Inc. (According to her bio, she still is).

ABM is a very large janitorial firm. Apparently they are or were very stringent about checking the legal status of their workers, and good for them. However, the column wonders whether that helps explain in part why she is more or less a cheap labor pimpette.

Linda Chavez' "ethno-centric rant" - 10/08/05

Remember the Linda Chavez column where she supported illegal aliens taking Katrina rebuilding jobs?

A letter to the editor of the Daily Republic in Northern California responds to her article:
[Chavez] speculated that the reason we don't see sob stories about the 200,000 Hispanics from New Orleans is that they had their act together so much better than other minorities.

Linda Chavez supports illegal immigrants take Katrina rebuilding jobs - 09/21/05

Linda Chavez offers "Hispanics and Hurricane Katrina". She was watching TV and looking for others of her race:

...Most are immigrants -- often illegal -- from Honduras and Mexico. Then, just when I thought they were nowhere to be found, I spotted a few Hispanic men in the television footage this week of crews cleaning up the debris...

It's not their fault - 12/17/04

Helmet-haired demi-MILF Linda Chavez provides this bit of surreality:

...Whether we care to admit it or not, most of us benefit from the services of illegal aliens, even if indirectly, and the law that ensnarled Kerik has turned many good people into scofflaws...

...I have special reason to be concerned.

A "Conservative" Statement of Principles on Immigration - 02/09/04

A statement/open letter/mess of lies entitled "A Conservative Statement of Principles on Immigration" appeared in Friday's Wall Street Journal (more about the WSJ here and here).

The WSJ is subscription-only, but a copy is available here:

[America is a nation of immigrants, heart-warming platitudes, etc. etc...]

Conservatives believe in legal immigration.[related folderol deleted]

Conservatives oppose illegal immigration. We believe there is a right way and a wrong way to immigrate to the United States. However, as conservatives we believe that our laws must reflect reality and common sense, and be both fiscally responsible and avoid the loss of innocent life. Our current immigration laws do not pass this test.

Bzzzt! It's not the laws at fault, it's our current level of enforcement of them. See this for examples. For a quick example: "In San Diego County, only one owner, whose company hired workers for major hotels, has been prosecuted since 2000, and he was given probation. No business has been fined.".

Between 1990 and 2000, the United States increased the number of U.S. Border Patrol Agents from 3,600 to 10,000. During that same period illegal immigration rose by 5.5. million.

What statistic did they forget to include that would give a clear picture of the problem? Oh yeah, the bit about workplace enforcement being sharply down from past years. And, the several amnesties in the past two decades haven't done much good either, as illegal aliens have come here in droves expecting to be rewarded with yet another amnesty.

Moreover, over the past 8 years, more than 2,000 men, women, and children have died attempting to cross into America and seek the opportunity to work and achieve a better life. The status quo is unacceptable and clinging to the status quo - or tougher versions of it - is neither conservative, nor principled. It has become clear that the only viable approach to reform is combining enforcement with additional legal avenues for those who wish to work in our economy, while also addressing the situation of those already here in the United States.

It's unfortunate that those people have died. Perhaps if employers weren't able to employ people regardless of their immigration status, and perhaps if there weren't so many incentives to come here, many fewer would attempt to cross the desert. Most nations - especially those that have been invaded - would be quite grateful for such a natural barrier to invasion.

[Speaking for all conservatives, we support the Bush/Fox Amnesty, etc. etc...]

[We believe strongly in assimilation, etc. etc...]

signed by: Stuart Anderson, Jeff Bell, Linda Chavez, Larry Cirignano, Cesar V. Conda, Francis Fukuyama, Richard Gilder, Hon. Newt Gingrich, Ed Goeas, Tamar Jacoby, Hon. Jack Kemp, Steve Moore, Grover Norquist, Richard W. Rahn, Hon. Malcolm Wallop


UPDATE: The fact that the Other Side always predicates its arguments on omitting key facts makes their conclusions trivially easy to refute.

Perhaps just once someone on the Other Side could say something like, "We realize the laws work. It's just that we can't enforce them. Racist organizations will use the liberal media against us, and the large manufacturers, agbusinesses, and retailers whose teats we suck might dry up the milk. Plus, we like the idea of a serf class."

Fat chance of that happening, but at least it would be intellectually honest.