Thread: Wall Street Journal Comments About Amnesty

Immigration Opening

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Happens in a Downturn?
Robert Dean - Kinston, N.C.

Economies have cycles. what happens when the economy turns down and unemployment goes up? European countries face this problem and the guest workers do not want to go back home. Entering our country illegally is a crime. Criminals never should be rewarded for breaking the law. Rewarding them on a "humanitarian basis" only encourages more of the same. As far as I am concerned they have forfeited the right to citizenship by illegally crossing the border.





What Then?
Julie Mckinley - Austin, Texas

And after these 12 million elect a socialist-type government, as is the usual inclination in Latin America, and the U.S. has an unemployment rate like that of France (or Brazil), will the WSJ megabrains tell us how to fix the problem? Or will you all be living in gated compounds next to the Clintons in their new Dominican Republic retreat? And after you have succeeded in turning the U.S. into a Latin American plutocracy, where U.S. businesses have paid the "fines" for their indentured servants, a k a Z visa employees, and the middle class has disappeared, will you have any shame at all? Hasta la vista.





Where's the Evidence on Your Side?
Paul Malingowski - York, Pa.

"But there is no evidence that voters want millions of foreign families--many of whom have been here for decades and have American children--uprooted and forcibly removed from the country."

Really? Just what would constitute evidence to you?

Give me evidence that there is not. I see plenty of evidence that Americans do not wish to see a crime go unpunished and hiding here for a period of time does not dismiss a crime is being committed, although those in power seem willing to wink at it if it is to their perceived advantage.

Tell me then, please furnish a list of crimes which will be overlooked if I hide somewhere long enough. I'm sure Mexico is as liberal as you wish us to be.






Shut Up, I Explained
C. Vail - Holllywood, Fla.

Typically, the Journal looks at this new bill just as it does the entire immigration issue--through the prism jobs and the economy. Not a word in this myopic piece, or the Journal editors' brains, about cultural effects and social implications, nor any attempt to look way down the road and imagine long-term ramifications. Memo to Journal editors: Please, shut up.





Usually Right, Delusional About This
Bill Stiles - Tyler, Texas

High marks for Sens. Kennedy and Kyl? Much of the time you are right on about things in the world. You are delusional about this, however. Mr. Kennedy was wrong in 1965 about S. 500, just as he and you are now. Mr. Kennedy's committee behavior, political positions and personal life provide an excellent overview of the mess our civilization finds itself in today. Look around us. We are sitting in the center of societal ashes and you want to commend him for this? We have put up with the best of the least for way too long. The results are only too obvious.

Please give more thought to your position.






Bunch of Liars
Ken Zwick - Ocala, Fla.

Amnesty and citizenship to the millions (probably more like 24 million plus their families) of illegal immigrants in our country amounts to the watering down of our society and culture. These people do not want to assimilate into our society; they want to replace it with their own. This is most evident in the plaques they carry in their massive demonstrations demanding "rights" in our country and in the comments made when the illegals are interviewed. One even said he wanted President Bush to wash his dishes and pick up after him! They claim that America doesn't have the right to block their entry since it is a country of immigrants!

For years now "legal immigration" was touted as allowing in immigrants only to fill jobs American would not or could not fill such as shortages of doctors, computer experts and such. Also for years big business touted that workers were being replaced with technology and not nearly as many workers were required since machines were doing the work of many.

Our politicians are mainly a bunch of liars. They care only about being re-elected. No politician has ever left office poor! They are pushing for illegal immigrant amnesty and citizenship solely for votes and nothing more. They are laughing at us. It is the American people who are losing their rights left and right. It is the American people who are losing the power of the vote--the only power they ever really possessed.






First, Close the Border
Art Garland - Warner Robins, Ga.

In your opening you are wrong. We are not upset about documenting these people. We are upset with the part that makes them citizens, and then will all another 20 to 30 relatives along with them. The wait times will be reduced, as it will increase the Democratic base. Close the border, then let us talk about documentation.





Crashing the Gate
Kevin O'Reilly - Bronx, N.Y.

I am all for immigration. Both my parents were immigrants, and I agree that we should permit more immigration to satisfy the needs of the economy. However, if we "legalize" 14 million illegals and fail to change the family preferences which permit parents, brothers and sisters as well as spouses and children of the "illegal" just regularized, we will be giving immigration preferences to at least 70 million additional people because of the illegal conduct of the first (on average, at least five per illegal and probably more.) I cannot sponsor a first cousin of mine from Ireland who is highly skilled. The current illegals have crashed the gate and you want to let more than 70 million of their relatives follow them. Insane!





You Get Us Wrong
Steve Perkins - Severn, Md.

The WSJ continues to misread us "voters." We do want all illegal immigrants removed, and they can take their children with them (no family splitting required). The move toward ending granting of citizenship to children born here in the USA is a good start (something no law nor Constitution grants, merely bureaucracy).

If we are to have a worker program, it needs to not favor the countries south of our border, but embrace the world. I agree that the skilled labor restrictions are ridiculous.

I favor the strong penalties for businesses hiring illegals. I do not favor the amnesty program in this bill. We have had other flavors of amnesty in the past, and they have not worked. There is no evidence that this will work any better than those in the past. Closing the borders, requiring a national ID, and ending the job market for illegals would give us an idea of what we need in the way of skilled and unskilled workers in the market. We do not need Congress telling us what business requires for markets--again, history tells us what happens when we get that.






It's Amnesty in My Book
Paul Cooper - University Park, Md.

Not being a Republican, I can't speak for their "restrictionist wing," but I believe that you unduly malign them when you say that "amnesty" is simply a political slogan designed to kill any deal.

Would you say the same thing about those who opposed income tax amnesty periods? Would you say that if the government proposed to let every street-level drug dealer in the U.S. come forward, pay a small fine, and go on about their business as long as they stayed away from the drug trade? At what point does a deal that offers a failure on the government's part to enforce the laws already on the books in exchange for a minimal acknowledgment from the criminals that they did something wrong stop being "amnesty"? And why is it that you have to resort to name calling and innuendo of base motives to make your argument?

You also note that there is no evidence that voters want millions of foreign families--many of whom have been here for decades and have American children--uprooted and forcibly removed from the country. Fair enough. But there is also no evidence that they don't. Maybe we should hold a referendum and find out.






I've Got Your Evidence Right Here
Alan Saunders - Springfield, Va.

My town is overrun by illegal aliens. Property values are dropping and every conceivable service is being choked by illegals.

If you are looking for "evidence" that voters want mass deportations, please take my email as the beginning of your compilation. Anything short of deporting the illegals currently in this country will get a "strongly disagree" with me.






Fed Up
W.G. Lindsey - Houston

I am fed up with the palaver about low-cost labor, breaking up families, etc. I see the men standing on the street corners and the explosion of births, the over crowding of hospital emergency rooms. the lack of medical exams to enter the country. How is it that we are picking up the bill for the failures of other countries? You get pregnant, sneak across the border, have a baby at my expense and then say you can't be deported because your child is a U.S. citizen. That goes against my grain. I work in a company the has people from all over the world , but the difference is that they are all here legally. I have no problem with that because the key word is legally.





$5,000 Isn't Small Potatoes
Michael D. McCaffrey - Yarmouthport, Mass.

Hats off to the United States Senate for its compromise bill on illegal immigration. Like all compromise packages, it has something to encourage and disappoint everyone. If Congress can't get together on this, it may be more than 10 years before anything else can be done. In that time, the problem will be exacerbated so much that finding a remedy will be even more elusive then now. Critics of this compromise will shout amnesty as if the biggest sin of all is to let people get away with something. Let these critics remember that a $5,000 fine for frequently poor people is not exactly a free ride.





As the Stomach Turns
Carl Withrow - Manassas, Va.

The "deal" that this White House and key senators put together is nothing more than a middle-of-the-night cheap shot against the country that they are sworn by God to serve and protect. At its very best this "Immigration Opening" is a stomach-turning betrayal of the confidence, faith and trust of the citizens living in the United States and the nation of Mexico. At its worst it borders felonious treason. But the really sad thing is the face value of the whole stinking mess, which can only be described as a huge, in-your-face lie to those who believed in them without hesitations or reservations of any kind.

America deserves much better stewardship than elected or hired leaders of big business, government, special-interest groups and unions that are too pathetic to see the world outside of their own endless profit taking and power gain orgies. This math-absorbed and greed-inundated article says that the Senate bill only takes us halfway towards where we need to go. Judging from the swift outrage that crosses and saturates every partisan, social and religious divide in America, including the illegal Hispanic immigrants themselves, I believe that to be a true statement. It's ironic that the soul virtuous progress that's taking place is American's anger directed at themselves for having invested so much of their time, spirit and soul in George W. Bush. As such, a man they and everyone now see for exactly what he is.






It Won't Be Different This Time
William Batley - Riesel, Texas

I hardly find it "restrictionist" to expect that those entering our country be required to obey our laws. If we are again going to reward bad behavior expect to see far more of the same, just as the amnesty of 1986 did. Anything that offers remaining within our borders and a shortcut to citizenship is an amnesty, you might want to check your dictionary. We are still waiting for the border security and employer sanctions promised with the 1986 amnesty, are we expected to believe any different this time.





Too Many in L.A.
Andre Radnoti - Los Angeles

If there is a moment in time where the actions of a do-nothing Congress are needed it is now. Congress will be in the unusual position of being at the top of its game by doing nothing on immigration reform. I don't have anything against immigrants or the ones that are already here. My beef is with sheer volume that is coming across the border. Until that flow is considerably restricted, all transformational theories advanced by the pro-immigration agenda will increasingly prove to be incorrect as the realities of unchecked flow of migration manifest themselves.

A good example of the downsides of uncontrolled migration is what is happening to Los Angeles. As the middle class moves out of the city in significant percentages, the void is being filled with illegal and unchecked migration. As a result, the city has vast swaths of low-income migrant neighborhoods interspersed with a few remaining wealthy enclaves.

According to believers in immigration transformational theory, Los Angeles should be the model for the great contributions millions of undocumented citizens can have on a society. Examinations of basic empirical data will prove otherwise. Los Angeles County, according to a recent housing report, indicated average individual income for the city was $23,000 a year. That's three thousand dollars below the national average. So the wealth multiplier for average citizens is occurring among the wealthiest, who benefit the most from the depressed wages that immigration brings.

Since the overall wage base is significantly diminished, revenues for basic city functions is also reduced. It was a little over a year ago I was reading stories in the papers about the shortfalls in the city budget that required the mayor to make tough decisions on where to make cuts. Wait a minute, the economy at the time was supposed to be good and migration flow was as wide open as ever. This is contrary to what was being promised by immigration theorists. One of the areas cut was bus service that is now being followed with passenger rate increases. This puts low-income citizens in direct competition with illegal immigrants over diminishing services that can only make life more difficult overall for the poor.

As the problems of immigration cause more residents to leave it only exacerbates the structural problems related to providing basic services. The city has a limit it can tax the remaining high-income earners. I doubt if there is political will in Sacramento to give the city a huge injection of cash to provide better services for the poor let alone for illegal immigrants. So in addition to revenue structure problems the state also has a political problem the once again contributes to problems of unchecked immigration.

Personally, I am also reaching my limit with the flow of migration into the city. I see all the trade shops that once provided some opportunity for less-skilled U.S. workers to move up now being swamped with low-wage immigrant labor. Forget it. Immigration brings less opportunity to succeed in this city. When the right moment arrives I will join the exodus and let Mayor Villariagosa, Cardinal Mahoney, and the Los Angeles Times hammer it out with a do-nothing congress to figure out what to do with the mess they created with policies they advocated.


http://www.opinionjournal.com/weekend/h ... =110010099.

I love my fellow Texans. They Rock!

Dixie

I can't get access to the whole article, but I liked the feed-back from the readers. The WSJ is a rag IMO. It is a huge supporter of open borders and "free" trade. The article was probably typical globalist propaganda: The legitimized cheap labor will drastically reduce prices, and the revenue earned by companies employing them will be re-invested into the American economy creating more jobs. Americans will not do these jobs, and the economy would collapse without illegals. This country was built by cheap labor. Let the market determine our border policy.

*rubbing hands together*

This is delicious. There's no better strategy when dealing with the supercilious WSJ than putting the ball back in its court to defend the indefensible. Unless, of course, it's to simply point out the obvious.