8/13/2017 - Bruce Bialosky Townhall.com
Who needs
Games of Thrones when all one needs to do is watch a White House press
conference? President Trump endorses the RAISE Act put forth by two U.S.
Senators (Cotton and Perdue), that is meant to create legislation regarding
just one facet of our immigration policy, and the world goes off its axis. What
would happen if we confronted our national challenges regarding this issue?
Mr. Trump
campaigned on shutting down the inflow of illegal people principally from our
Southern border, but has met resistance on measures proposed for accomplishing
his goal. Forget his silly campaign pledge of having Mexico pay for the wall.
There are three ways to cut the flow of illegals into this country:
- Scare the dickens out of them and they will not come. That appears to be working to some extent since Mr. Trump ended the cavalier attitude of his predecessor toward enforcing our border laws.
- Construct a barrier (wall, fence - whatever you want to call it) that deters people from coming in.
- Hire more patrol guards to catch those who are coming illegally from doing so.
Even if you
are an open borders person, you should endorse steps 2 and 3 as we have serious
problems with criminals (MS-13, for instance) and drugs (heroin, cocaine and
fentanyl) flowing in and harming our citizens. Yet Mr. Trump has met heavy
resistance to doing both 2 and 3, largely from people saying neither is
necessary. I would love to hear their solutions, as there never seems to be any
except charges of racism.
Then comes
a real proposal by two U.S. Senators which is endorsed by the administration.
It is a starting point for discussion on one of the central aspects of how many
people should be allowed to become members of our community – the United States
of America.
The rules
really go back to the mid-1960s. First, President Johnson killed the Bracero
program in 1964. It was originally initiated in 1942 and then expanded and
successfully operated, allowing temporary workers to fill needs in certain
seasonal industries. Johnson killed it to win the backing of unions in his
upcoming election. Though the numbers had slimmed down, the numbers of
participants reached over 400,000 in some years. If businesses have temporary
employment needs, why did we never reestablish this program? It is because of
continuing union resistance.
The
Immigration Act of 1965 changed the flow of immigrants from being based on
country of origin to focused on skills and immigrants’ family relationships.
That may have worked in 1965, but the world has changed a tad since then.
Not only
did we have 194 million people in 1965 versus 325 million now, but also our
needs have changed. Our economy is largely skills based and our under-skilled
people are already losing their jobs to machines, giving them fewer options
just to find a job. No amount of training programs will solve all of that. It
has not yet; why would it in the future?
Stephen
Miller shows up to answer questions on this preliminary proposal that needs to
work its way through committees in both the House and Senate, to the respective
bodies, to a conference committee, back to the House and Senate and then the
President’s desk. Miller answers questions for 28 minutes. They were mostly
just tough questions from the White House Press Corp. They did skip essential
and basic questions. For example, why was the level of 500,000 legal immigrants
chosen? Why did they choose to emphasize knowledge of the English
language as a key skill?
Miller
starts the press conference for five minutes explaining calmly, plainly and
coherently the proposal which alters the existing program by establishing a
points-based system including skills, will they be paid a high wage, can they
speak English and will they be immediately employable. The point system mirrors
one established in Canada and Australia.
Let’s first
address the English speaking rule (which is not all determining). This is not
the 1880s. English is the language of the world. My wife and I are near
traveling to 70 countries. We have only once have had a problem – in
Japan – which is fascinating because every one of the Japanese studies English
in school. We were told it is a cultural thing; they do operate a fairly
closed society. At least they speak the world’s other most important
language – baseball.
Our
favorite story comes when I surprised my wife and took her to Cabo San Lucas
for a big birthday. On her actual birthday we did something very unBialoskyish.
We went to a straight- out-Mexican restaurant and did shooters. But through the
haze of the tequila I noticed that even the busboys spoke very clear English.
The next night we went on a sunset cruise which was run by an American expat. I
inquired why that was. He said, “because if you do not speak English in Cabo
you don’t get a job.” I observed that I wished that were so at most restaurants
in Los Angeles, where you better know the Spanish word for water or you may go
thirsty.
As for how
many people around the world speak English: we just visited a country (India)
that probably has more English speakers than we have in our entire population.
Yet, a
reporter went after Miller because of this and his perception of why the French
built and gifted to us the Statue of Liberty. What was skipped over in this
highly-unprofessional encounter with Miller was the reporter’s biggest act of
unworthiness; He told the story of his father arriving in the U.S. in 1962 as a
refugee from Cuba. Thus, we should base our public policy 55 years later on his
family’s experience at that time. Maybe we have become unhinged. At least a new
term entered our lexicon from this encounter – cosmopolitan bias.
It is clear
that there is a certain element of our society that has obliterated the
distinction between illegal and legal immigration. Their use of terminology
such as “undocumented workers”, and their reflexive hysteria upon use of the
legal term, “illegal aliens”, accentuates that desire. Most frequently, they
just use the term immigration with zero differential between the two facets,
acting as if there exists a universal right to take up residence in our
country.
Addressing
the issue of how many new immigrants we should have each year, could someone
explain to me why in the state of California such a high number of people who
work for our tax agencies not only are foreign born, but speak less than
comprehensible English? Is it because these are jobs no Americans will take? Maybe
as part of this discussion we can do a study of what jobs these immigrants are
taking to provide background as to how many we should bring into the country
and with what skills. Wouldn’t that be rationale policy?
We are at
historic highs in the history of our country for legal immigration. This has
been going on for 25 years. We might consider higher levels of legal
immigrants, if we did not have so many illegal immigrants. That needs to be
discussed. For 50 years the means by which we have prioritized our immigrants
has been one way. Does that way still make sense? These are vital questions for
all of us to review and answer. This has nothing to do with race, gender or
religion, the fallback position of the weak.
Our
Congress needs to commence a responsible, grown-up discussion. The future of
our nation depends on it.
Guest Worker Guidelines
ReplyDeleteI Have Sent the Following Guest Worker Guideline to Several Congressional Members. I Encourage You To Do the Same.
The following guest worker guideline is to be considered a rough draft and therefore open to discussion.
However, in that the fundamental concept that the guest worker program is for the benefit of the employer and guest worker, the costs of the program must remain with those participating in the program.
What cannot be lost in any discussion is that the concept that the cost of a guest worker program may not include any charge to non participating U.S. citizens or taxpayers.
100% of the cost of any guest worker program is to be borne by the employer and/or the guest worker.
NO taxpayer funds are to be used to support a guest worker program what so ever.
All costs of the program and its maintenance are to impact ONLY those participating in said program.
I am willing to discuss the intent or implications of any or all of this program. Feel free to contact me if you would like. Be advised however, that effort on your part -as my senator/representative- to support a guest worker program that violates the intent of this document will not be looked upon favorably.
You are, after all, elected by the citizens of this state and country, NOT the guest workers OR illegal aliens within our country.
Respectfully submitted,
Proposed Guest Worker Guidelines {Part 1 of 2|
ReplyDelete1) No guest worker applicant could have previously violated our laws _ any of them, including, but not limited to, immigration law. And, they would HAVE TO apply from without, not within, the U.S. All entrants would have to be above the age of 18 to seek guest worker employment. No one can participate as a guest worker without an active and available job. Termination of the job terminates the program for the guest worker who must promptly return to their country, or otherwise leave the country.
2) Guest workers would not be eligible for the benefits of citizenship, the employer/employee relationship would have to spell out and pay for those benefits, health care of the employee, education costs, etc. They could only hold one job. Upon termination of that job, they would immediately be required to leave the U.S.
3) No guest worker could purchase real estate or own a vehicle. If the employer needed them to drive, the guest worker must understand English adequately to read road signs, be identifiable, and the employer would own the car, and it must be identifiable from the outside of the vehicle. If the guest worker must interface with others either on the job or outside the job, that communication must be in the language of our country, English.
4) An additional 20% (or whatever it would cost) tax upon the employer, to be used to monitor and track employer/guest workers via an independent audit process. This would include the records of the employer. Quarterly verification of residence, taxes, debts, etc., should be paid for from this fund, and violation of the rules by either the employer or the employee would terminate the right to further participation in the guest worker program by the employer, as well as cause immediate deportation of the guest worker. Social Security contributions by the employers would have to be paid to the Social Security fund, the employee would be exempt from their part of the contribution - and exempted from ever being able to collect social security.
5) The employer accepts all liability for the actions/costs of the guest worker, and loses their right to participate in the guest worker program if the guest worker violates any of our laws. The employer, as their sponsor, is responsible for the any obligation incurred by the guest worker. Unsatisfied costs occurring as a result of the actions or presence of the guest worker permanently suspends the employers rights to participate in the guest worker program and brings about immediate deportation of the guest worker, at the expense of the employer. A DUI conviction of the guest worker terminates the right of the employer to participate further in the program, and brings about immediate deportation of the guest worker at the expense of the employer.
6) The guest worker program would never have anything to do with the granting of citizenship. Guest workers would apply for citizenship just like anyone else. The only difference being that they get to apply from within the country, but they get in the same line _ just like any other applicant.
7) Jobs would have had to have been posted and gone unfilled by U.S. citizens for a given reasonable time period prior to being offered to any guest worker. The pay scale offered to citizens prior to listing the job in the guest worker program would have to in excess of the accepted pay scale average for the job being offered. Guest workers could not be offered or paid less wages/benefits than U.S. citizens.
8) The program must evaluate the cost to the economy of the U.S. The goal of the guest worker program must be to benefit the job needs of the employer in getting the unfulfilled job accomplished. It could not significantly hurt the U.S. and its citizens by the financial drain on the economy due to money which would be shipped out of the country. If such financial drain should become apparent, an offsetting tax would be applied to monies leaving this country under this program.
ReplyDelete9) Jobs must pay at least an acceptable and comparable wage and benefit scale of what that job would pay if a citizen was being employed. The financial requirements or other responsibilities created upon the employer because of the requirements set forth in this document could not influence the wage/benefit scale being paid the guest worker.
10) Reasonable housing would have to be maintained for the employee. The employer would be responsible to see that six cars parked on a lawn _ because there are six different drivers living in a single apartment unit or dwelling, etc, would not be in violation of acceptable local neighborhood circumstances. Local codes would have to be met.
11) If the employer does not follow the rules, they lose the right to participate forever. ONE strike and they are out of the program forever. Guest workers who because of their own actions, cause their deportation, may never return, either via the guest worker program, or other programs, such as VISA's. They would not ever be eligible for citizenship via any other path or program.
12) Guest workers would have to return home within a set length of time, and would not be eligible to reapply or otherwise participate in the guest worker program for a period of three years.
13) Guest workers would not have the ability to vote, register to vote, or be counted in our census.
14) The guest worker program may not include members of the guest worker's family, unless they are participants/applicants in their own right, and with their own job. Under no circumstances may a minor gain access to this country as part of the guest worker program. No education benefits or part thereof, are to be paid for any guest worker by anyone other than the guest worker or the employer of said guest worker.
Multiculturalism Good or bad?
ReplyDeleteI admire those that speak more than one language. I really do.
But, one of the things that unites citizens in this country is their common language. This is an essential and important factor in the unity of our country. We all can communicate with one another if we choose to do so. This is the United States. We are united and we are one - because we can all communicate with one another. The present effort to support multiculturism in our schools, the diversity efforts that we routinely hear about are, in the long run, detrimental to our country and its unity.
Examples of this are right next door. Quebec speaks French, unlike the rest of their own country, Canada. Guess what? They have been talking secession from the rest of their country for years. One day, they may actually succeed. It is the language barrier, of which they are very proud, that helps promote this destructive behavior. Like our little Havana's or China Towns, where different languages are routinely spoken instead of English, language differences only support a forced separation of the people involved, and ultimately hinders their assimilation into the mainstream culture.
Yes, it's neat to be able to speak foreign languages. That's fine. But, we need to remember that they, in fact, are foreign, and should not be elevated to the level of being part of our fundamental fabric and culture nor ever be allowed to become an accepted part of our in-house culture within our own country. Allowing this to happen will only splinter our citizens into isolated groups who cannot or won't communicate with each other, and will promote an unhealthy diversity, leading to irreconcilable differences between isolated segments in our own fundamental culture.
The issue is not as simple as this, but this conveys the message none the less: This is America. We speak English here. Join us if you wish, but when you come, expect to "join" us.
Those that come here need to recognize their reasons for coming here. The underlying reason is that their own culture has failed each of them in some manner. Yet, many are pushing these failed cultures upon us under the guise of multiculturalism and diversity being good for us. They in fact, are the beginnings of a slippery slope, leading to yet one more failed culture exactly like the one these immigrants have abandoned. Few understand that these failed cultures are what these immigrants desire to bring with them when they come here. Most of these cultures have failed their citizens so badly that their citizens have resorted to running from them instead of attempting to fix them. Assimilation into our culture is a far better option than bringing their broken cultures with them, only to place themselves in a similar situation that they ran from.