Thread: CA:State's fate tied to immigration policy shifts

ELIAS: State's fate tied to immigration policy shifts
Obama policy impacts

By THOMAS D. ELIAS | Sunday, March 15, 2009 12:10 AM PDT ∞


No federal policy shift under President Obama will be more important to California than what he does on illegal immigration. This will have more long-term significance to the nation's biggest state than even the taken-for-granted reversal of George W. Bush's refusal to allow enforcement of California's landmark greenhouse-gas emission limits on cars and trucks.

So what does Obama plan on illegal immigration, which some Californians blame for the state's budget mess and many of its other ills?

For a clue, it helps to look at the Web site his staff put on the Internet almost instantly after he took the oath of office in January, www.whitehouse.gov.

The immigration agenda outlined there bears an ironically strong resemblance to bills co-sponsored in the past by Obama's 2008 election rival, Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona. The statement accompanying his loosely outlined proposals also echoes McCain.

"For too long, politicians in Washington have exploited the immigration issue to divide the nation rather than find real solutions," Obama says. "Our broken immigration system can only be fixed by putting politics aside and offering a complete solution that secures our border, enforces our laws and reaffirms our heritage as a nation of immigrants."

Nothing there about assuring farmers and other employers of an adequate army of ultra-cheap laborers, but that is implicit, just as it was in the immigration reform bills that failed in Congress in 2008 and 2007.

For nothing is more important to the industries that hire illegals than keeping their workers here. In the case of farms, especially in California's Central Valley, when the number of illegal immigrant workers begins to dwindle, the amount of fruits left hanging on trees and vines skyrockets, not to mention cotton and other crops left to rot in fields. That's not a problem this year, with recession making surplus labor available, but it will be again whenever the overall job market recovers.

So the key part of the Obama proposal is his call to "bring people out of the shadows." He says he will "support a system that allows undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens." In short, amnesty.

Illegals already in this country would be allowed to stay, with legal standing allowing their employers to escape any sanctions.

At the same time, the Obama stance offers some satisfaction to the get-tough-on-illegals faction. He would, his Web site says, "support additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry."

That means the almost-completed "wall" along the Mexican border will not be coming down soon, even though Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano didn't care for it when she was governor of Arizona. The Obama statement also implies more electronics will be added to intercept illegal crossings along the most rural stretches of the border. And it means even more Border Patrol officers to supplement the almost 5,000 added under Bush.

Plus, Obama advocates a tougher crackdown on employers of newly arrived illegals in an effort to eliminate incentives for undocumented border crossings. To further lessen incentives, he proposes working with Mexico to beef up that country's economy, now in an even worse recession than America's.

Put these stances together and they could add up to a compromise immigration bill with a real chance for congressional passage. With a 58-seat Democratic majority that may soon become 59 (if Democrat Al Franken's current narrow lead over Republican Norm Coleman in Minnesota ends up becoming official) and several Republicans, including McCain, having long backgrounds in support of similar compromises, it's hard to see how this could be killed by a filibuster, the way similar bills previously were.

Even before any such bill comes near a vote, there will be another battle over reauthorization of the current E-verify system, which Bush required all businesses with federal contracts to use in order to confirm their new employees have legal standing. The system matches photos of legal workers to legitimate Social Security numbers, aiming to prevent job applicants from using fake identification.

E-verify should get a boost from unemployment numbers, which are at a 25-year peak and might rise further if E-verify disappears and it again becomes easier to hire illegals.

At the same time, several Hispanic voter groups that backed Obama strongly are now urging him to move quickly to end raids where immigrants not named in warrants are questioned by federal agents and to end a federal program encouraging local police to perform immigration checks.

Every one of these items has large meaning for California, where a compromise immigration bill combining amnesty and enforcement with a strictly managed guest worker program would be likely to cause the least economic disruption and come closest to making all sides at least somewhat happy.

Thomas D. Elias is a Santa Monica-based political commentator and author. Comment online at nctimes.com or contact him at Tdelias@aol.com.
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/03 ... 7c6e8e.txt

Every one of these items has large meaning for California, where a compromise immigration bill combining amnesty and enforcement with a strictly managed guest worker program would be likely to cause the least economic disruption and come closest to making all sides at least somewhat happy.

Why should Americans who believe in the rule of law have to make any compromises?This so called compromise would only make the pro-illegal, open border advocates happy. What makes this guy believe that legalizing 5 million illegals (or thereabouts) currently trespassing in Californa would be less disruptive to the economy? The mad dash to sign up for social services like welfare would be overwhelming.

Perhaps deportation would be less disruptive to the economy since those jobs stolen by illegals could then go to American citizens, who will not be wiring the majority of their paycheck back to mexico via Western Union! That money then stays in the economy and is reinvested in goods and services. What about that option? Why isn't that available?

Also, why does any sort of amnesty at all have to be extended in order for us to enforce existing immigration law? Why this compromise? There is no such compromise in other areas of law or society for that matter.

Why should we have to reward those who entered this country in violation of Federal immigration law with amnesty in order to enforce exisiting immigration law?

Not acceptable.

Every one of these items has large meaning for California, where a compromise immigration bill combining amnesty and enforcement with a strictly managed guest worker program would be likely to cause the least economic disruption and come closest to making all sides at least somewhat happy.

Sorry pal, but anything short of mass deportations will not make me or most Americans happy to any extent. Let's see, we add 20-30 million more "citizens" to our population and then let them legally bring an endless string of their relatives. That is national suicide. And in case this political commentator did not notice, the economy is rathered disrupted already.

California should be the battleground for this issue. Remember the saying "As goes California, so goes the Nation"? If the rest of the Country pushed back hard enough on this State I think the rest would just fall in.

California is pratically bankrupt and this guy argues that giving amnesty to hordes of illegal invaders in this state would have the least economic disruption! The state is already economically disrupted!

Good grief!! I hope this guy is not an Obama or Arnold advisor!

California is pratically bankrupt and this guy argues that giving amnesty to hordes of illegal invaders in this state would have the least economic disruption! The state is already economically disrupted!

Why sure it would help out California. All those here illegally would then start paying taxes and become upstanding citizens...yeah right. The thing is if they are made legal we would have no recourse since in 5 years they can start getting money from social services...wait they already are doing that. Then they can apply for medicaid...hmmm they already are getting that. How about free lunches for their children at achool...once again they already are getting that. Guess things wouldn't change much. Yep, the only recourse is to make sure NO amensty is passed and that they are all held accountable for breaking the law...yeah like that will happen either.

Originally Posted by boxersbear

California is pratically bankrupt and this guy argues that giving amnesty to hordes of illegal invaders in this state would have the least economic disruption! The state is already economically disrupted!

Why sure it would help out California. All those here illegally would then start paying taxes and become upstanding citizens...yeah right. The thing is if they are made legal we would have no recourse since in 5 years they can start getting money from social services...wait they already are doing that. Then they can apply for medicaid...hmmm they already are getting that. How about free lunches for their children at achool...once again they already are getting that. Guess things wouldn't change much. Yep, the only recourse is to make sure NO amensty is passed and that they are all held accountable for breaking the law...yeah like that will happen either.

Not only would things not change but they would get worse. Once the illegals are made legal they would want fair pay instead of the cheap wages they are currently getting. That would make employers look for more illegals to hire at slave wages and the cycle repeats itself just like it has from the previous amnesties. Does anyone see what this is going to do to America? Here is what it would do...

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/resou ... mbers.html