Thread: Finding common ground in the minefield of illegal immigratio

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/in ... xml&coll=1

At first blush, it would appear there could never be agreement between Morristown Mayor Donald Cresitello and Hightstown Mayor Robert Patten on matters of immi gration.

Cresitello, fed up with a flood of illegals into his town, has asked federal officials to deputize local police as immigration agents. Pat ten responded to a federal immi gration raid by barring local police from enforcing immigration laws and launching a campaign to bring immigrants out of the shadows.

But as they sat in a room packed with some of the nation's top immigration experts and activists yesterday at Princeton University, the two men found themselves agreeing more often than not.

Patten nodded as Cresitello called building a fence along the U.S.-Mexico border "a waste of taxpayer money." And there was Pat ten, voting along with Cresitello in favor of an electronic national ID to keep illegal immigrants from get ting jobs.

Those moments of accord came during a remarkable debate on im migration reform that sought to find common ground, rather than pitting sides against one another.

It contrasted sharply with the increasingly shrill national immi gration debate.

"You had a good, honest and in telligent debate," Patten said. "If you had all politicians in here with TV cameras rolling, you would never get anywhere."

In addition to the two New Jersey mayors, the 22 panelists included leaders of Latino community groups, landscaping and res taurant owners associations, church groups, researchers, national immigration think tanks, and grassroots anti-immigration groups.

While Congress has been unable to pass a major immigration reform bill in decades, organizers wanted to prove that reasonable people, with widely different opinions, could agree -- even without changing their minds.

"I don't think this has been done before, this idea of bringing people together who really, given a chance, would probably slap one another," said Patricia Fernandez- Kelly, professor of sociology and an organizer of yesterday's discussion.

The discussion used as its basis the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill currently before the U.S. Senate. Debate on the bill, forged by a bipartisan group of lawmakers, stalled last month but could resume as early as today.

The proposal would provide tougher border security, require employers to check a Department of Homeland Security database be fore hiring new workers, and replace the current family-based im migration system with one that places more emphasis on immi grants' education and job skills. It also would create a path to legalization for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants living in America and create a new temporary guest worker program.

Yesterday's program, organized by Princeton University along with the Latin American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the League of Women Voters, appeared to accomplish what it set out to.

A mock proposal to increase an nual green card quotas received 18 votes in favor and one against. All but one person agreed to "vigorous enforcement of immigration laws." And all but one voted in favor of electronic ID cards that employers would be required to check before hiring new workers.

Laid bare were the clashing mindsets that different groups bring to the table in the raging im migration debate. Again and again, stat-wielding academics had their research scoffed at by anti-immi gration activists who insisted that only anecdotes from living, breath ing Americans can describe the ills of illegal immigration.

In one such exchange, Princeton Professor Douglas Massey, one of the nation's leading experts on Mexican immigration, cited studies showing illegal immigration has done little to drive down wages of U.S. workers.

Minutes later, Paul Streitz, founder of Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control, countered with his own data: the story of an acquaintance who worked as a clothes presser, only to lose his job to an illegal immigrant from Guatemala willing work for lower pay.

"We just do not believe statis tics," Streitz said. "The statistics are false, they're jimmied up. You want to tell him the statistics?"

Such arguments are what usually wind up in the highlight reels from political debates. But yesterday, what thrilled Fernandez- Kelly were those moments of agreement, printed up in a packet and handed out as the meeting broke up.

"We had five or six points on which everyone agreed. If we could have been the Senate, we could have produced a better immigra tion bill than has been produced by anyone," she said. "And we did it in a little over three hours."

Sorry but most of this info above is trivial. The real issues are that
1.Americans are already generously giving way above and beyond their means to create positive events throughout the Globe
2. Western technology is spilling over into the rest of the world at an exponentially increasing rate giving them previously unheard of advantages and opportunities.
3. Even poor countries now have significant access to the Internet and to modern communications, so even with the slightest encoouragement they are able to organize and improve their societies.

I have seen their spokepeople demanding "equality." We din't cause their problems in the first place; in fact many European conquerors benefited the native population when they overthrew hideous religious systems of human sacrifice. They should politely wait their turn for the free flowing benefits of Western society and not rudely invite themselves to the table.

Whatever may have gone on in the past--and there is a lot of room for argument as to who was the greatest benficiary--ignores the fact that now it is mostly a one-way steet of technologically advanced Westerners benefiting the Thrid World. Muddle headed liberals who keep playing the "xenophobic"accusation and the "New Civil Rights Movement" fantasy are, in their gross ignorance, trying to invoke a strategy of guilt on the rest of us.
Won't work on me!!

Minutes later, Paul Streitz, founder of Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control, countered with his own data: the story of an acquaintance who worked as a clothes presser, only to lose his job to an illegal immigrant from Guatemala willing work for lower pay."

Statistics might prove something to "experts"--but are totally meaningless when you happen to be the one who gets caught in the crossfire. People sometimes think the US is a nation of majority rule. Only partly true: majorities decide, but the rights of minorities are to be protected. Now we are going to see a swelling class of disenfranchised Americans reduced to dhimitude (i.e second or third class citiizens).