Thread: Senate on CSpan2: Immigration Debate Ramps Up

Originally Posted by Kate

Dorgan is just great. He is one of the few in the Senate who have not lost their minds. Dorgan is just very sensible, patriotic, concerned about the impact of everything surrounding immigration/illegal immigration on AMERICANS (imagine that!). Too bad other Democrats do not have the good sense or character to get on board with what Dorgan is saying. I wish he was among the Democrats running for President, instead of complete sell-outs like Hillary and Obama.

I couldn't agree with you more. He was excellent!

MW : Look back into the first page of this thread, Dorgan explictly listed the %s of each of the basic categories.

Not only is it more than 50%, in most cases it is like 75%+ some areas, up to 95%.

PhredE wrote:

MW : Look back into the first page of this thread, Dorgan explictly listed the %s of each of the basic categories.

Not only is it more than 50%, in most cases it is like 75%+ some areas, up to 95%.

I know, that's what I'm saying. Kyl is a big fat liar! Americans are doing these jobs and by a lot higher percentage than he quoted.

Kyl Finishes..

Sanders (I-VT) has the floor;

(Note: He is reg. Independent and former Socialist)

Notes importance of securing the border.

Outlines importance of imm. bill; how to 'carve out a path to c-ship' - which I support.

I support the Dorgan amendement - centers around state of working people around the US. Will have impact on millions of Americans.


Holds up note from R. Johnson from USCoC - from may 21 from WSJ:

"We do not have enough workers, ...blah, blah".

Let me suggest that Mr. Johnson are not being quite accurate when they make statement such as this. The problem is: we don't have enough good paying livable wage jobs for Americans.

Talks about stagnant minimum wage ..

Mr Johnson's group opposes rise in minimum wage.

Over last 5 years, over 6 million more americans have lost health
insurance.

Since boosh was in office, millions of workers have lost pensions...

(etc)

From 2000-2005, median household income declined 1000USD+,
despite Johnson's assertion, reality is: that all over people are looking for jobs which provide livable wage. Lowest tier of workers income has declined steadily.

(Making Johnson look like a liar or idiot...)

Points out gap between poor and rich.

Econ 101 in college - law of supply and demand:
Under basic proposition, if workers in short supply, then solution is to offer higher wages and better benefits - free market based solution.

I wonder how it is, that with a supposed shortage of workers, then why are wages / benefits going down???? [!!!!] Opposite is true.

Leg. is not about -addressing real needs of US workers. Not about improving wages / benefits. It is about brining in millions of low-wage workers.


Let me discuss 10 largest groups of employment in VT:

Most common:

1 Cashier Mean wage: $8.71/hr; many have no Health insurance
2 Retail Salesperson: $11.88/hr; less than 26k/yr.

Bookeepers: 14/hr+, etc. etc.

Asks for list of jobs in N. VT available today - by VT Dept. of Labor -

Lists job types, salary levels.
etc., etc.


How many $ does a person in a family need to survive?
(lists basic expenses - how much for a livable wage?)

For 1 person: in VT - $14.26/hr (is more than most common job type)
For single parent ...
etc.

Point: Despite USCoC assertion, that many great paying jobs are available, reality is not the case. Here is my concern about bill:

At a time in real earning erosion, bill would bring in millions of low-wage workers... what happens when even more people are forced to compete for same jobs....
Notes high-drop-out rate - what will be available for them?

This is not leg. designed to raise jobs, wage levels - it will lower wage levels - it is wrong and we should not accept it.

Corps. are claiming reasons to bring in more workers -
these same people said: according to AP article,


Tom Donohue ("Box of Rocks") said:

"Americans affected by off-shoring should stop whining".

"If one job is sent overseas is one too many, but the benefits of oursourcing outweigh the costs".


etc. etc.

Lists HP / Carli Fiorina - example about shipping jobs to India.

Sanders yields for question...


Dorgan speaks:

Refers to comments by Kyl of AZ - presumed need for GWs program.

If border secured, why would GW need be a problem?

If they can't come in illegally, why would you need GWs


Sanders speaks:


Recalls earlier debate over NAFTA -"we had to improve the economy of Mexico, so they wouldn't sent their workers here".
[Note: pre-Approval NAFTA he was speaking about I believe - that is an argument from 1992!!!]

[!!!!! - Thanks Bernie!!!]

Dorgan speaks:

The people that gave us advice on NAFTA, are also giving advice on this bill - they were fundamentally wrong.
Both agree that pespective is wrong - 2 sides of same coin, -middle class gets squeezed , corp. america pushed this idea.
Asks Sanders.

Sanders speaks:

...End result is same - offshoring, importation of cheap workers.

Behind a lot of imm. leg - stand the largest corp's in the world. One of them is Microsoft - vp said

"it's definitely a cultural change to use foreign workers, but if I can save a dollar'...

Steve Balmmer - 'lower the pay of US professionals, to 50k and it won't make sense to do business with...'?

[I can't keep up, but Sanders is letting the Corporate OBLs/ US CoC have it - go get 'em Bernie!!!]

I have heard Senator Sesssions refer to that 380 page document as the "fine print" several times.

I am not exactly sure what he means by that.
Anyone else understand what he is saying?

If the 380 is the fine print of the Bill, what is the rest of the 700 pages, smoke and mirrors maybe?

Sanders is making the exact same talking points I hold dear. Great to hear him speak on this.

The argument against a guest-worker program is strong, very strong! Hope it works come voting time.

I can't speak for you all, but Sen Sanders will be getting my call of thanks!

Big time!!!

Discussion of H1b professionals....