Tamar Jacoby is a peripatetic amnestibot, traveling from coast to coast and from guest editorial to guest editorial promoting comprehensive immigration reform from a supposed conservative viewpoint. President of Immigration Works USA and a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute.
In October 2005, I stumped her at an appearance in L.A. After she gave a speech supporting "reform" including a guest workers program, I asked her what happens after those "guests" had U.S. citizen children and it becomes much more difficult to deport "guests" who don't want to leave. She had no answer; she simply had not thought through all the impacts of the policies she was promoting, and that continues to this day.
When it comes to immigration, there are two basic sides: those who want more of it and those who want the same or less. The great majority of Americans are in the second camp: they want to keep immigration levels the same or reduce them and they oppose illegal immigration.
Luis Gutierrez: "I have only one loyalty, and that's to the immigrant community" (+the Hispanic MLK; Sharry; Munoz; Jacoby) - 11/30/10
Arian Campo Flores of Newsweek offers a puffball article about U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez called "Keeping Obama to His Word" . Rather than calling him on his clear ethnic nationalism or his many questionable statements and actions (see his name's link), Campo-Flores concentrates on whether Gutierrez' aggressive tactics are a liability or not for getting comprehensive immigration reform (amnesty) and the anti-American DREAM Act. Campos-Flores is such an amnesty-supporting hack that he uses the phrase "law-abiding illegal immigrants".
And, in the article Gutierrez says this:
I have only one loyalty, and that's to the immigrant community.
That's, of course, not accurate. In addition to his private loyalties, Gutierrez is loyal to Puerto Rico, his ethnicity, and maybe payday lenders too. However, whether he's loyal to veterans or to other Americans who aren't Hispanic isn't clear.
In addition to letting yet another questionable Gutierrez quote go unchallenged, Campo-Flores seems to have run through his amnesty-supporting Rolodex to get quotes about the supposed U.S. Representative.
"He's as close as the Latino community has to a Martin Luther King figure," says Frank Sharry, founder of the pro-immigrant group America’s Voice. ...Cecilia Munoz, a White House point person on immigration, calls Gutierrez “an important moral voice” and says that he and the president “are on the same side of the issue." ...He "transformed what had been a narrow policy issue into a litmus-test identity issue for Hispanics, and that made the debate a whole different ball game," says Tamar Jacoby, president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a coalition of business groups that rely on immigrant labor. Gutierrez is "incredibly effective at what he does … [But] there's part of me that always gets a little worried about identity politics."
Groups have "unprecedented amounts of money" to push amnesty; Dobbs leaving was "critical victory" - 01/11/10
"Especially on the left-of-center side, [groups that will push for amnesty] had unprecedented amounts of money in the past year, and they're organizing the field, coordinating among themselves, they're unrecognizable almost from what they were in 2006 and 2007... The business side hasn't had as much money pumped in and hasn't transformed as much, but it's also at a different level of the game."
"With (Lou Dobbs) finally being called to account, I think that's also sent a message to many of these people... At the end of the day, I think in the last two years that this debate has moved much much further in terms of the American people's understanding."
That, once again, shows the importance of handling the Dobbs matter in a nuanced fashion: he's still the bete noire of those who are far worse than he is, and completely throwing him overboard in a loud public way helps them.
On a more hopeful note:
...(Steven Camarota), research director for the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports stricter immigration limits, said the unity might be a myth. No matter how unified coalition leaders are, he said, they'll face a skeptical public — particularly with a high unemployment rate... He said "opinion leaders" are significantly out of touch with average voters on the immigration issue, which produces a wide but thin coalition pushing Congress to act... "There are a lot of generals but not many soldiers there. That's their fundamental problem: Most Americans don't agree with them," he said.
Read about CIR ASAP: "Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity Act of 2009" (Luis Gutierrez) - 12/11/09
[A DISCUSSION OF SOME OF THE PROVISIONS IS HERE, AND MORE UPDATES ARE BELOW]
On Tuesday, December 15, 2009 Rep. Luis Gutierrez will introduce an amnesty bill called the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity Act of 2009". His announcement (luisgutierrez.house.gov/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1406) provides no details, however:
1. Details on the bill will be provided here when it becomes available; expect it to be a bit on the far-left side and expect it to not go very far, except perhaps if it's watered down. In the latter case it might present a problem.
2. The way to deal with things like this is outlined on this page. It's also necessary to deal with those on the conservative/Republican side who'd take a fall; that includes the tea parties or at least their leaders as well as some major bloggers and pundits.
3. Those involved are from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Congressional Black Caucus, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus and Congressional Progressive Caucus and include: Nydia Velazquez, Yvette Clarke, Mike Honda, Lynn Woolsey, Judy Chu, Joseph Crowley, Pedro Pierluisi (Puerto Rico), Jared Polis, Jan Schakowsky, and Jose Serrano.
12/15/09 UPDATE: Per this, Gutierrez claims he has 80 co-sponsors, and his press conference including young people wearing t-shirts saying "Future Voter". Guess which party they'll be voting for. And:
One key Republican who said he was “disappointed” by Gutierrez’s bill is Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. Flake’s opposition is important because in past years he has worked with Gutierrez on immigration reform. But because this bill includes a lottery where 100,000 new workers could come in each year for three years, instead of a temporary worker program, Flake said he cannot support it... Flake said the bill “repeatres the mistakes of the ‘86 reform - massive legalzaiton without a temporary worker program to accomodate future labor demands.”
12/15/09 UPDATE 2: Per this:
The 700-page bill... will carry the name of Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, the longest-serving Latino currently in the House and selected by his peers to shepherd the legislation through Congress... The bill would create a Southern Border Security Task Force composed of federal, state and local law enforcement to crack down on crime, increase the number of inspectors at border land ports and provide more training and equipment for Border Patrol agents... It would include a worker verification program and visa reforms that promote family unity and expand those for agriculture-related work.
There's an audio report here; per another page on their site the fee to get on the "path to citizenship" is $500.
Among those cheering the bill are:
* UFW Foundation Director Diana Tellefson "said her group and agricultural employers backed the bill" (last link; that group is associated with the United Farmworkers of America).
* Rep. Sam Farr of California; he notes that the bill includes AgJOBS, the DREAM Act, and his "Proud to be an American Citizen Act" (link).
* Proud former MEChA member Rep. Raul Grijalva (link).
* The AFL CIO, which says that it includes the following from their "joint framework for immigration reform" (link):
- An inclusive and effective solution that allows a path for undocumented immigrants to come forward and regularize their status. Trumka says “this is fundamental to our ability to crack down on employers who are using unauthorized workers to drive down wages and other standards.”
- An independent commission to assess and manage future flow of immigrants, based on labor market shortages that are determined on the basis of actual need.
- Reform, not expansion of existing temporary worker programs immediately to stop the exploitation of workers and safeguard standards in impacted industries.
12/15/09 UPDATE 3: Per this:
A draft overview of the bill, circulated with the letter, ends some enforcement tools such as the 287(g) local police cooperation program, calls for an electronic verification system to replace the voluntary E-verify program, argues that there's no need for more U.S. Border Patrol agents or fencing, and establishes a long-term path to citizenship for illegal immigrants... That path would require illegal immigrants to pay a $500 fine, pass a background check and learn English and civics to gain legal status. After six years, they could apply for legal permanent residence, or a green card, which is the interim step to citizenship. There is no "touchback" provision requiring them to return to their home countries at some point in the process.
They also quote someone who I stumped four years ago:
"Of course [the high unemployment rate] complicates [the push for amnesty]. Of course the public's first reaction is understandable, it's why do we need more workers when upwards of 15 million Americans are out of work," said Tamar Jacoby, president and chief executive officer of ImmigrationWorks USA, a coalition of businesses pushing for immigration reform... But she said history has shown that there are some jobs that American workers won't take and immigrant workers will... She pointed to resort communities in Michigan that struggled to find workers this summer even though they were just a couple of counties away from Detroit, which has been devastated by layoffs... "Laid-off autoworkers in Detroit don't want to travel across the state, let alone across the country, to pick pears, pick apples," she said.
The example she provides is the same as that recently used by America's Voice.
12/15/09 UPDATE 4: I take a look at some of the provisions here; they're as bad as you'd expect.
Spencer Hsu of the Washington Post discusses a press conference Senate Democrats held earlier today to discuss their plans for comprehensive immigration reform (link). As previously discussed, Charles Schumer supports a national ID:
"I'm sure the civil libertarians will object to some kind of biometric card -- although . . . there'll be all kinds of protections -- but we're going to have to do it. It's the only way," Schumer said. "The American people will never accept immigration reform unless they truly believe their government is committed to ending future illegal immigration."
It's quite difficult to believe the government is committed to following their own laws since most political leaders support or enable illegal activity, with some even outright promoting it such as Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Schumer said legislation should secure control of the nation's borders within a year and require that an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants register with the government and "submit to a rigorous process to convert to legal status" or face immediate deportation. Rejecting the euphemism "undocumented workers," he said: "Illegal immigration is wrong -- plain and simple."
See secure the border and amnesty require. And, if he wants to immediately deport those who won't take part in the program, why can't he do that now? Regarding the last sentence, that's just posturing. However, if you get a chance, it would be a good thing to bring up when discussing this issue with him or other leaders.
Few companies contacted by ABC News were willing to talk on the record about their experiences with E-Verify. For instance, the giant poultry company Perdue sent the following statement :
"We are doing all that the law allows to verify each applicant's identity and employment eligibility. If we find that an associate has presented false information on an employment application, that person will be immediately terminated."
Perdue confirmed it uses E-Verify, but referred questions to (Tamar Jacoby) at ImmigrationWorks USA.
There's nothing wrong about that, it's just a bit curious. Are they a client, or just a fan? She did conduct a seminar that included one of their officials: immigrationworksusa.org/index.php?p=127
Tamar Jacoby pins immigration "reform" hopes on Obama-induced "reformist mood", bad policy, racialization - 05/07/09
America's favorite immigration "expert", Tamar Jacoby, takes to the pages of the Los Angeles Times with "The immigration debate, again" (link). It contains the usual smears ("there's a danger that populist resentments will curdle into xenophobia", Lou Dobbs and Tom Tancredo are "anti-immigrant" with "inflamed, angry followers") together with things like this:
Neither the economic downturn nor enhanced enforcement has driven 12 million illegal immigrants to leave the country. Enforcement is still far from effective, either on the border or in the workplace.
That "enhanced enforcement" has been just for show; George W Bush had no intention of reducing the numbers of illegal aliens in the U.S. She's not being completely misleading about the "enhanced" part due to the second sentence, but she doesn't reveal to her readers her thoughts on whether truly increased enforcement - together with reduced non-emergency benefits - would reduce the numbers. Obviously, she knows that it would, and that's why she doesn't mention it.
USCIS Task Force on New Americans releases "Building an Americanization Movement for the Twenty-first Century" - 12/21/08
In 2006, George W Bush tasked the USCIS with creating a Task Force on New Americans to spend a lot of time and effort looking into assimilation of immigrants and related topics. Now, they're released their final report, "Building an Americanization Movement for the Twenty-first Century" (summary link, PDF available in the sidebar at that page).
It's 65 pages, so a full treatment won't be offered. However:
1. Page 6 says:
The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that America will be a nation of minorities without a dominant racial or ethnic group by 2042. By mid-century, whites, 67 percent of the population in 2005, will comprise roughly 47 percent, with Hispanics at 29 percent, blacks at 13 percent, and Asians at 9 percent... Recognizing the early trends, the bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform in 1997 called for a modern-day Americanization movement that would uphold American unity through a shared understanding and practice of the values enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, as well as emphasis on communication in a common language.
In other words, they came up with a quite possibly ineffective solution to a side-effect of their policies.
2. While some of the "Participating Individuals and Organizations" include those on our side, others are not and include Tamar Jacoby of ImmigrationWorks USA, various people from the Migration Policy Institute, someone from the National Immigration Forum, and someone from the Mexican government-linked NALEO.
"while (a Lamar Alexander report relating to amnesty) doesn't overtly mention assimilation, it is very strong on the patriotism and traditional american [sic] values language in a way which is potentially dangerous to our communities."
3. Another ironic participant was Jose Luis Gutierrez from the State of Illinois Office of New Americans Policy and Advocacy. He's an aide to Rod Blagojevich, and that office (immigrants.illinois.gov/NewAmericans.htm) was started in cooperation with the Mexican government-linked Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
4. The report uses various weasly left-wing phrases along the lines of diversity being strength and so forth.
If anyone sees anything worthy of greater discussion in the report, leave a comment.
UPDATE: Eunice Moscoso offers this:
(Alfonso Aguilar, head of the U.S. Office of Citizenship) said the report is not recommending "an ugly, English-only approach," but "a friendly, pro-active literary effort." ...The task force also recommends that every state create a "state integration counsel" comprised of state and local government officials, businesses, faith-based organizations, civic organizations, and nonprofit groups that work with immigrant communities...
In practice, that means groups that are far-left, interested in little more than racial power, linked to the Mexican government, or some combination thereof.
UPDATE 2: Stephen Wall of the San Bernardino Sun has a report here, including an uncharacteristicly non-extremist quote from Armando Navarro where he simply praises multiculturalism and demographic change. However:
"It's total nonsense," (Elsa Valdez, a sociology professor at Cal State San Bernardino) said. "We have had immigrants coming for over 200 years. America as a country has never become Balkanized, and we haven't had a civil war with different groups fighting each other. The only reason you have enclaves or segregated communities is we haven't done a very good job integrating the different immigrant groups economically and socially in terms of jobs, health care and education."
Obama, McCain, Clinton at LULAC convention (illegal immigration supporters; reconquista quote) - 07/07/08
Barack Obama, John McCain, and even Hillary Clinton will all be speaking at this year's convention of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), an illegal immigration-supporting group that was once patriotic but has since been radicalized. As shown by the attendees discussed below, the convention will be a nexus of those who do not support what's in the best interests of the U.S. For example, here's a 2007 quote from their national treasurer Jaime Martinez, who'll also be appearing at one of their workshops:
El Paso BP chief Victor Manjarrez promotes immigration "reform", busboys-style (Alicia Caldwell) - 04/30/08
Alicia Caldwell of the Associated Press offers "El Paso border chief urges immigration reform" (link). The person in question is Victor M. Manjarrez Jr., chief of the U.S. Border Patrol's El Paso Sector.
Apparently "attrition" - the plan to enforce our immigration laws and thereby encourage many or most illegal aliens to go home and discourage future illegal immigration - has the New York Times scared, namely because they think it would work.
E.J. Dionne, Chris Cillizza/WaPo realize: voters oppose illegal immigration (Niki Tsongas) - 10/19/07
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."Earlier, Chris Cillizza of "The Fix" wrote (link):
...[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...]
[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.
Devona Walker/NewsOK sells dire consequences of no-match; illegal aliens leaving Oklahoma? - 09/18/07
Peter Prengaman and Travis Loller of the Associated Press offer "Anti-Immigration Forces Warn of Plot" (original AP title). It discusses those that favor some form of "reconquista" and those who oppose them and tries to downplay the influence that those favoring "reconquista" have. On the other hand, it's good to see the AP at least acknowledging that such sentiments exist and publicizing them.
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".
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.
* 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." ...in 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.
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  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 , 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) 
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 :
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 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]
...[an] unrealistic faction of Republicans, though willing to admit an extra 400,000 workers a year, is insisting that they stay only temporarily - that no matter how well they do in this country or what kind of roots they put down here, every single one of them must go home at the end of a three-yea
The lider of the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times, Andres Martinez, has announced changes to their lineup. Some, such as CFRer Max Boot are out; some, such as Gregory Rodriguez, remain; and there are some new contributing editors  including:
* Tamar Jacoby. What more needs to be said?
* Gustavo Arellano of the OC Weekly.
...During a daylong conference in Clearwater [hosted by Florida TaxWatch, "FTW"], more than 50 [Florida] business leaders agreed on the need for a louder and more unified Florida business voice to pressure politicians in Washington.
Tamar Jacoby becomes a caricature of herself (again), offering "Stop chasing that busboy" (via this). That's part of an online debate with Mark Krikorian of CIS.
For those who haven't been following along, the "busboy canard" is a stock talking point from the massive immigration/pro-illegal immigration crowd. The argument is that our border guards should chasing terrorists and such, and chasing busboys, gardeners, greenskeepers, and the like distracts them from that mission.
I've already dealt with one of her "arguments":
It was all but impossible to enforce Prohibition.
Now, let's deal with another:
But the most effective way to get control of illegal immigration isn't on the border; it's in the workplace. It's about ensuring that every available job - every job for which an employer can't find an American worker - is filled by a legal immigrant. Because once we do that - once illegal immigrants can't find work in the U.S. - there will be little or no incentive for them to make the long, difficult trip from their home countries.
Obviously, those same companies that employ illegal aliens in order to achieve a lower cost for labor will play similar tricks if all they have available are legal workers. For instance, many current H-1B scams involve placing ads with an impossible list of requirements, then, after no "qualified" citizens can be found, doing what the company wanted to do in the first place: hire a lower-wage and/or more compliant foreign worker.
And, even with that there's no guarantee whatsoever that illegal aliens couldn't find work in the U.S. There are plenty of crooked employers (and banks) around, and they have a tremendous amount of influence. If Bush won't enforce the laws now, what makes anyone think a future Bush clone would enforce them at that time?
Note also that the "guest" worker schemes from the various Senate bill had only a limited number of visas; a greater demand would equal a greater chance for future illegal immigration, and that would be allowed and enabled by those same forces that are currently allowing and enabling it.
The Skull, aka Michael Chertoff is here...
In September of last year, the "Independent Task Force on Immigration and America's Future" - "convened by the Migration Policy Institute in partnership with Manhattan Institute and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars" - released their report called "Immigration and America's Future: A New Chapter".
Two members of the "task force" are former elected officials (Spencer Abraham and Lee Hamilton), but four of them are currently supposedly working for us: Howard Berman, Jeff Flake, Edward Kennedy, and John McCain.
Another member is Fernando Garcia, executive director of the El Paso-based Border Network for Human Rights. He's also a Mexican citizen with a green card. The article "D.C. hears El Pasoan's ideas about reforms" by Louie Gilot has a profile of him and his work, which includes organizing pro-illegal immigration marches in El Paso. Most of his organization's funding comes from a $375,000 grant from the Ford Foundation.
The MPI is a private organization, and it's not completely questionable that former elected officials might want to seek out foreign input. However, when current elected officials do it, and they have views more to the open borders side of things than not, it seems quite unseemly. One wonders exactly how many minutes McCain, Kennedy, Flake, and Berman have spent seeking out the opinion of pro-borders Americans versus the time they've spent hobnobbing with open-borders Mexicans.
Even the MPI seems to have realized this whole scheme is borderline, offering this footnote on their page:
Because of their legislative roles, currently serving members of Congress were not asked to endorse the Task Force recommendations.
A full list of those involved in the "task force" reads like the cast of a horror movie with the U.S. as the unlucky teen campers. It includes Doris Meissner, Thomas J. Donohue of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Tamar Jacoby, Janet Murguia of the National Council of La Raza, and Frank Sharry of the National Immigration Forum among many others.
A group convened by the Migration Policy Institute in partnership with Manhattan Institute and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars which published "Immigration and America's Future:A New Chapter" ( link) in [[September, 2006]]. Supports a "new, secure Social Security card" (possibly a national ID card) and "path to legal status for unauthorized immigrants" (a massive amnesty for illegal aliens).
As of creation time, this is the list of those involved:
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.
...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...
Rep. J.D. Hayworth had been holding out for all absentee votes to be counted in his race against Harry Mitchell, but has now conceded defeat. Tamar Jacoby, Fred Barnes, David Brooks, and Vicente Fox could not be reached for comment.
...Immigration was the dog that didn't bark. It did not prove an effective wedge issue. And as far as could be determined, it decided few if any contests.
Or, for instance, they'll say something like, "Real immigration reform will vault over border fence".
The Christian Science Monitor article "As Congress stalls on immigration, a backlash brews" by Amanda Paulson might have been read as complete propaganda in favor of "comprehensive" reform if it didn't contain a very slight hint that the actual backlash would come if Congress passes any sort of amnesty scheme.
...the National Republican Congressional Committee is spending more than $122,000 on television ads for state Rep. Steve Huffman. The primary is Sept.