The “needs” of business for immigrant workers will only be met by an unabated influx of illegals. So from their perspective, the borders cannot be closed.
In a July 3 article on Townhall, columnist Michael Barone laments the possibility that Congress may not pass any immigration “reform” legislation this year. However, he pins some hope on a proposal being advocated by Representative Mike Pence (R.-IN).
Ostensibly, the Pence proposal would incorporate the “best” of both worlds, including provisions from both the Senate’s recently passed guest worker/amnesty bill, along with the House version that focuses on immigration enforcement and border security.
Unfortunately, the Pence bill would ultimately constitute no less a “sellout” on immigration than that attempted by the Senate, albeit this effort would be spaced out over a few years, which might be enough time to diffuse public outrage. Far from truly dealing with the immigration crisis, it represents the deepest desires of those who have no real intention of admitting the true nature of the problem. Thus it cannot possibly offer a real solution.
Hardly a matter of personal animus towards people of a different ethnicity, Americans are deeply alarmed over the immigration issue as it poses a threat to their country’s future. In order to comprehend the continued danger it represents, it is first necessary to analyze the present state of immigration and its adverse effects.
Illegal immigrants are moving into the country in hordes, taking jobs at substandard wages and with few or no benefits (thus suppressing the wage base for all working class Americans), and making up the difference by disproportionately accessing and exploiting the nation’s social “safety net.”
In essence, employers increase profit margins by shirking such expenses, compelling honest taxpaying citizens to pick up the tab. Moreover, the ravages of “multiculturalism,” along with an increasingly “nationalistic” and belligerent philosophy among the aliens, make it very unlikely that this growing subculture will ever assimilate into “mainstream America.” Thus the nation faces eventual “Balkanization.”
The Pence plan would do nothing whatsoever to address these problems. Instead, it would require a few token gestures by the illegal invaders, such as a brief return trip home for symbolic processing through a so-called “Ellis Island Center,” after which the individual could then return to the United States to take up business as usual.
Nor should anyone fall for the incessantly repeated mantra that these “Ellis Island Centers” could somehow better address the situation simply by being privately run. The only “virtue” that could be considered a universal advantage of private industry over government is in the area of efficiency.
What “efficiency” means is that profit margins of these centers, must undoubtedly directly result from their ability to rubber-stamp as many applicants as possible. Therefore, they would have little incentive to thoroughly screen or possibly reject any who come through their doors. And certainly, nobody expects the government to enforce such policy. It has not done so thus far.
Ultimately this entire process would amount to a meaningless “fig leaf” being applied to the problem. Yet in the minds of typical bureaucrats, the problem is thereafter “solved” and hence we can all rest easy.
This “fix” stands as grim proof that, outside of a few courageous stalwarts such as Congressman Tom Tancredo (R.-CO), Washington has no intention of addressing the problem. A few obvious questions about the present strategy lay the facts bare.
First, why does the Senate summarily reject any proposal that does not include a “guest worker/amnesty” provision?
The disturbing answer is simply that this is the only agenda item of any immigration “reform” that the Senate has any intention of ever implementing. “Border control” is nowhere on the radar screen among Senators, and if included in any bill it is assured to be denied funding, delayed, and otherwise neutralized in perpetuity.
The Pence proposal ostensibly offers “border control” as its initial focus, followed in two years by the guest worker/amnesty provisions. Yet such a strategy presumes that the borders will be secure in two years. Undoubtedly, this approach is a backdoor avoidance of the whole issue of “border control,” since no matter what condition the border is in at the end of two years, the guest worker/amnesty portion will proceed on schedule.
If Pence truly believed in his proposal as a workable solution, why does he not offer it in two separate bills? The Congress could conceivably pass true border control measures, concurrently vowing to craft and pass “guest worker” legislation once the borders are obviously under control and the actual circumstances of such a follow-up can be properly assessed.
In reality, the very nature of any legitimate “guest worker/amnesty” program would be completely at odds with unscrupulous business owners who thrive on a compliant “underclass.”
As Michael Barone points out, until only recently, Congressional Republicans had resolutely refused to consider any measure containing a guest worker/amnesty proposal. But that may be changing. Utah Representative Chris Cannon, despite being an open borders advocate, recently won his primary contest against a staunch border control opponent.
As a result, some Republicans in the Congress believe they may have a bit more room to waffle on this issue without reaping fatal political repercussions. In truth, their very willingness to reconsider such legislation proves that they were never serious about protecting the integrity and sovereignty of the nation in the first place.
Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, as has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.