I always knew that if I voted for Bush that I would disagree with much of his domestic agenda and that I would have to be outspoken about it.

Well...it looks like there won't be any wasted time...

Bush revives bid to legalize illegal aliens...



Where to start? How about I start off by saying that this is a huge mistake. Nowhere have I heard any effort to review the current system (which is a big part of the problem). Handing amnesty to illegals is not the answer. All it will do is encourage others to come here illegally and we'll be in the same situation ten years from now, except that the burden on the economies of the states most effected will be greater.

I tried to find some of my old links to this issue and came across the organizationed mentioned in the link, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). According to information accessible on their cite...

- "California hospital losses totaled $390 million in 2001, up from $325 million in 2000 and $316 million in 1999. The crisis reaches throughout the state, with 80 percent of emergency departments reporting losses."

- "One-third of the patients treated by the Los Angeles county health system each year are illegal aliens, according to county health officials. In 2002, the county spent $350 million providing health care to illegal aliens, according to the Department of Health Services. Officials said that if that money had been available, the county could have avoided the closure of 16 health clinics and possibly two hospitals, as well as cuts in services."

It shold be noted also that King/Drew Medical Center in Los Angeles, one of the best trauma centers in the nation is facing closure. The facility handles many victims of violent and gang related trauma injuries in the area.

Here is the link for information on California. (FAIR) info on California

Here is a link to information by state. http://www.fairus.org/Research/ResearchList.cfm?c=9

According to the link, the California spends 2.2 billion on illegal immigrants' education in public schools. (I've heard 7 billion from elsewhere)

Just on these two aspects alone, one could easily question the logic behind President Bush's and Sen. McCain's logic for such a plan.

In my opinion, ther changes need to be made within the system itself, not handing green cards to people who chose not to do the right thing.

There are many loopholes in the system that need to be fixed. Many of these immigrants who seek citizenship are left in limbo because they are in the process of getting their resident alien cards, but don't yet have them, and are still subject to deportation. There are many other issues at hand, none of which are being addressed by this plan or administartion.

So, all that said...

Do you support the president's proposal or not? Why?

What do you think needs to be done to solve the growing problem with illegal immigration?

What do you believe are the president's motives in pushing this agenda?

Do you support the president's proposal or not? Why?
Absolutely not.

Let's start with the fact that the president basically wants to excuse an illegal act. This is basically the same as saying, we are going to release all prisoners in jail for robbing a gas station because of X. Given that the penalty for illegally immigrating to the United States is deportation, I'd consider that a fairly serious offense.

Secondly, this problem is killing western states and especially California (the problem is probably comparable in AZ, NM, and TX as well). As Titus cited illegals cause a host of problems and probably most significantly with the health care system. Because illegals don't have access to health care they are forced to go to hospital emergency rooms for any little thing that goes wrong. This takes beds away from people that really need them and it also costs the tax payers thousands of dollars because they can't pay for the services. The last time I went to the ER it cost $3K for something minor (thankfully paid for by insurance), I guarantee your average illegal doesn't have that kind of disposable income - so guess who foots the bill?

Finally I don't support it because it is a political ploy, and not an attempt at real reform - more on that below.

What do you think needs to be done to solve the growing problem with illegal immigration?
Well it starts with asking some questions if we want to make some real reforms. America is touted as a land of opportunity and a land for "the poor, the tired and the huddled masses" and I still believe in that. However, there is a process that must be followed.

So the question here is, why don't people follow the process? I don't exactly know the answer to that, but one very plausible answer I think is that it is too difficult. So, we need to look at legislation to make it easier to become a citizen and look at hiring more people to process the paperwork if that is where the bottleneck is. If there is one thing I know it is that if something is hard or takes too long, the majority of people are going to give up on it. This shouldn't be rocket science and we should be able to streamline the process so that people can get in and start becoming productive members of society, yet we can still catch people who shouldn't be entering the country. We really need to start evaluating a lot of government functions with the scrutiny a business would. I think that the government has a big interest in doing this for a few reasons:
1. Citizens Pay Taxes
2. Citizens Pay Taxes

The other big problem with immigration in general is that precisely because the whole process is such a mess it is probably very difficult to keep bad people (like terrorists, criminals, etc) out of the country. When the system is literally swamped with paperwork, that doesn't leave much time to actually find people that are a danger.

Secondly, we need to send an army of people out to factories, small businesses and farm fields in central California to find people who aren't citizens. We shouldn't deport these people because they are productive members of our society but we should be saying to them "Glad to have you here, welcome to America! Fill out your information here and sign. Great, you are now a citizen time to start paying taxes".

I have absolutely no problem with people immigrating to this country, more power to them. I do have a problem with them doing it illegally because it creates a drain on society instead of creating a positive impact. We cannot stop immigration simply because of what America represents, but we should make every effort to fix and streamline the system to effectively process people and integrate them.

What do you believe are the president's motives in pushing this agenda?
Two words - latino vote. There is no doubt in my mind that Bush is doing this to build rapport with the latino community. Perhaps not for himself but certainly for Republicans in general so they can in future elections point to this achievement as a reason to vote for them. I'm not going to speak for latinos in general - they may or may not fall for this, but I'd be willing to bet that many of them would be endeared to the Republican party for something like this.

This type of thing also isn't a new trick by politicians. In California the latino vote is a force to be reckoned with and when Gray Davis was in trouble and people were pushing the Recall he had to act fast. What did he do? He tried to offer drivers licenses to all citizens including illegals. At the time he proposed this there was absolutely no good argument in favor of it and therefore it never came to pass. But my belief is that he did it as sort of a hail mary in the 4th quarter to save his job.

So that is probably what infuriates me the most about Bush pushing this proposal. I support the spirit behind the proposal if we are talking about real reform (as I described above), but what I absolutely without a doubt do not support is political pandering to a demographic in order to grab votes and support.

When Bush is ready to make real reforms here both in the interest of our economy and homeland security then I'll be happy to support him, but as long is it is bread and circuses for the latino community he doesn't have my support.

What do you think needs to be done to solve the growing problem with illegal immigration?

I think that refusing services to immigrants is not a solution. If we can provide health care to people who need it, we should. I think the health-related facilities pressured by immigrants need more money from the federal government. Of course this would cost more, but we could cut costs a lot with a single payer health care system... but that is a whole other discussion.

I think there are many short-term solutions, but the only real long-term solution is not brought up in immigration debates that much, and I think it is important. If people are coming from the US to Mexico in droves, then Mexico is a very bad place to live for many people. The basic problem, then, is with Mexico, not with the US. Therefore the long-term solution is for us to help Mexico develop an economy which can provide good jobs for the Mexicans.

Do you support the president's proposal or not? Why?

If there is one thing Southern Border State Republicans are at odds with the rest of the republican party is the influx of illegal immigration.

I am just going to state the problems currently found in California based on illegal immigration form Mexico and South America.

• lack of lower wage jobs for students and elderly
• over crowded schools
• taxes to build more schools for children of illegal immigrants
• taxes to support illegal immigrants in GED and JC schools
• over crowded hospitals
• bankrupt hospitals
• taxes to support closed and over crowded hospitals
• over crowded freeways
• taxes to support over crowded freeways
• uninsured motorist
• lack of a common language
• taxes to print ever government document in two languages
• taxes to supply every governmental facility with bilingual employees
• taxes to pay for government employees to learn a second language
• fear of al Qaeda using porous southern border to attack US
• al Qaeda working with Mexican drug lords and coyotes to transport al Qaeda terrorist and weapons

To this I ALMOST voted Kerry (major impact in California) but then I saw Kerry's agenda to allow more illegals into America, and decided it would be better to force the issue then work with someone who can't even see the problem.

What do you think needs to be done to solve the growing problem with illegal immigration?

I believe that southern border states representatives and other states being impacted by illegal immigration representatives to stand firm and ban against the president on this issue. And when a representative does not vote against the president, it must be take upon the people in that representatives neighborhood to bite the bullet and vote for the opposite party. Send a message to the president that those states that spend billions of dollars per year on illegal immigration must either be paid for the extra amounts of money they spend, or he must begin to secure the border.

This is more then poor South Americans looking for work, this is where the next wave of terrorist attacks will come from.

What do you believe are the president's motives in pushing this agenda?

Some say it is to get the latino vote, I am under the impression that this is a means unite North America under the same economic status. To make Mexico the same as America and Canada. Building a strong alliance as Europe unites, and the Middle East unites against the US, as Asia unifies to a capitalist market, the US is trying to unify South and North America. Unfortunately Mexico needs to remove its corruption. In order to make Mexico safe, they must remove the drug lords and established a police department strong enough to oppose the the corruption. Bush seems to think that the process can be helped by paying illegal immigrants exorbitant amounts of money to make them on the same level as the wealthy in Mexico. This process will take decades, and in the mean time how many terrorist attacks will the US be forced to deal with?

I agree with what everyone has posted so far, or, more precisely, the points being made about illegal immigration are compelling. I'll enumerate some of my thoughts:

1. Economic gradient

As long as there is a significant difference in the economies between Mexico and the US, there will be a motivation for illegal immigration.

2. Job availability

As long as businesses are not prosecuted for hiring of illegals, then there will continue to be jobs available.

3. Labor costs

Illegal immigrants work cheaply. As long as this remains the case, there will continue to be illegal immigrant workers. Additionally, health care is generally not provided; this reduces labor costs as well.

4. Standard of living

For the most part, illegal immigrants have a higher standard of living in the US than in Mexico. This is also a draw.

5. Citizenship of children

Children of illegal immigrants born in the US are US citizens.

6. Outsourcing/consolidation

Businesses will move to other countries for cheaper labor. Is it better to have illegal immigrants working here in the US "under the table" or have the businesses move?

What do you think needs to be done to solve the growing problem with illegal immigration?

On the one hand, illegal immigration is part of what keeps things like food costs down. Thus, stopping illegal immigration will increase the cost of living for everyone as food prices will go up. Even more consolidation in agri-business will ensue. I am concerned about monolithic agriculture. On the other hand, illegal immigration is part of what drives costs of emergency services and education upward. The question is: if we get rid of illegals today, will there be a net savings or a net cost down the road? It is hard to say. I am tempted to say it's a wash, but I don't have any economic studies/evidence to back up this claim.

As for solving the problem, we probably need a "carrot and stick" approach. We need economic incentives to stay and work in their countries. We need disincentives such as better enforcement of the laws which do exist. However, we also need to understand the cost vs. benefits of illegal immigration. You don't get something for nothing and there is always a cost of changing the way "business gets done".

What do you believe are the president's motives in pushing this agenda?

I don't know if I can properly address this. I can see there being economic and political motivations for Dubya's proposal.

I can not stand FAIR. Not only have they embraced a racist agenda..they were born from the political desires of the zero population proponents as well.

They are sloppy with their numbers and data...they constantly mix illegal and legal immigration data..and why? Because in all honesty they don't see a difference..they strongly oppose both. Every time I have to sit and fill the box out for my children and myself..origin of birth..I cringe knowing how this data gets distorted, misused and proposed for something I am very much against.


Is FAIR unfair?

The connection between FAIR and other anti-immigration groups.

The Puppeteer

No.

I agree with most of the posts. The key word is ILLEGAL. It they are illegal why the heck are we allowing them amnesty.

Maybe this is payback for the Latinos or Mexicans that voted for Bush.

Most of all I am very sick of having higher taxes to pay for their healthcare,etc. I have read of so many instances where a pregnant Mexican comes across the border and has a baby and the baby of course is a citizens of the good ole USA.

I am sure all the businesses(who supported Bush) are very happy about this. They are making record profits and we don't want anything to derail their BONUS.

How come it is always a race issue when it comes to illegal immigration? This has to do with people who break the laws, not with the race they are. The reason why one race seems to break this law more the others stems form the corrupt nature of their own country.

First I refuse to be called a racist simple because I am against illegal immigrations. How about real facts. $53 million lost to uninsured. Now some may think this a call that everyone need health care, yet who do think the uninsured are in California? If a company hires an illegal immigrant illegal, do you really think that company gives the illegal insurance? Secondly look at the studies. $1.5 million was spent lost to a hospital in El Centro, CA. Or Gov. Willson's study showing that California spends 1.5 billion in elementary and secondary education. (Source)

Or how about the cost in Arizona, $31 million spent in hospitals on illegals, $4.7 million on welfare, or the overall $1 billion a year to illegals. (Source) This does not include highway, police, fire, infrastructure and daily cost of running the government that illegals use.

You cannot wish this away by blanketing the entire anti-illegal immigrant community as racist. Or claim that their racist bias forces them to manipulate actual statics. The problem is real.

And who about the other racists? MEChA? MEChA can be found at high schools and colleges across America (here is a list of web pages). But what do they stand for? "Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan" or rather "Por La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada" ("For those in the race, everything. For those outside the race, nothing"). A racist orginization equal to the of the KKK found on most campus.

In the preamble to MEChA;s National Constitution it reads, "Chicano and Chicana students of Aztlán must take upon themselves the responsibilities to promote Chicanismo within the community, politicizing our Raza with an emphasis on indigenous consciousness to continue the struggle for the self-determination of the Chicano people for the purpose of liberating Aztlán." Allow me to interrupt the 'span-lish.'

Chicano and Chicana = boys and girls of hispanic descent
Aztlán = A part of American once controlled by Mexico
Chicanismo = boys and girls of hispanic descent
Raza = race

In other words, be political with your race to take back apart of America. That is what Hitler used when he invade Poland. Parts of Poland were once German, but were lost during the 100 year war. Is this not an invasions? 4000 illegals pour in across the border every day, and the people of MEChA, strive to allow these illegals access to welfare, health care, banks, roads, cars, schools, and ultimately Aztlán.

This is what the racist want for America. Being against the racist taking control over America, is nothing more then defending America. IT IS NOT RACIST.

I would like to see the amount of people that immigrate from developed nations where the quality of life is high or standard or moderate, against the amount that come in from places where the quality of life is not so well off. I dont know how much money is lost in border protection, prison costs, crime rates boosts or so on by leaving nations in large states of poverty. I am not saying that the u.s should do something about this, but it seems to be paying large amounts of money and various resources or energy anyways combating this issue with no real effect on ending it. I also dont like how we allow for international companies to move to these poor nations and take advantage of the people rather then raising the standard of living, and on the other end the blind consumer for the most part simply could not care. I was in good feeling about the clinton idea to make the countries themselves better, but it got the backdoor treatment by various people looking to make a profit. I still overall think that these people would not put themselves through all this if they did not have to, and it overall again just point to various problems humanity in general faces, like population growth. I think a well regulated WTO deal could help start various nations towards a more healthy path, but for the most part the WTO is filled with people looking to make profits.

According to the immigration report we had the highest influx of people legal moving to America from Mexico (115,585 out of 703,542) and most (51,269) moved to California. Which according to the stats recieves the most amount of immigrants (175,579 out of the 703,542). Now that is legal. And is easy to see where people come from and where they go and to see if people go to rich states or poor states and if they come from rich states.

Like German with the third highest economy in the world has 5,064 people moving here last year moving to various different states.

Illegal is an estimate, seeing as how they are undocumneted so there is no track of them. However the estimate show 7 million illegal residence in America as of 2000 and from that 2.2 million live in California. (Source)

Well enjoy yourself and refuse away..
I do not recall calling you a racist...did I? And yeah about the real facts I presented...did you bother to read any of them?

I singled out a particular group FAIR as it was their data and their research that was being quoted and used to substantiate an argument.

I said FAIR..not you...embraced a racist agenda..why not refute me on this?..instead of some made up accusations.



Are you going to claim with 43 million..I am sure it's more now... people in the US without insurance that the problem lies with illegal immigrants? Who account for what.....7 to 11 million? Are those the only ones not getting health insurance in this country...illegals? I doubt there isn't a state left in America that hasn't been facing problems like this regardless of their illegal immigrant population. And I don't know if you were aware of this but a lot of companies hire legals and don't give them insurance either.

CJ, this was John Kerry's basic position - find those that have been productive, hard working members of society here, people that have no record of causing trouble, and give them a fast track to citizenship. It's okay as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough.

Once we find those factories, businesses and farms that take advantage of illegal labor, the second thing we need to do, after offering to make those illegal aliens legal, is to enforce the law concerning the hiring of illegal aliens in this country. Arrest the owners/managers that allowed the hiring, and charge them with the appropriate misdemeanors/felonies, heavily fine the business, and confiscate their vehicles, and/or property.

Once we start enforcing the law in a strict manner, and the news starts getting around, I think we'll have a lot less people willing to put their assets on the line for the sake of saving a little money on labor.

No offense but this law is just stupid. How can it be truly enforced? All employers have to do is claim... well I asked for their papers..they looked legit to me. What are we going to have a gov expert approve every foreign born persons papers before they are allowed to be hired? Don't you think if the gov gets really strict on this that basically it will cause employers to discriminate against foreign born persons? You have no way of knowing if their papers are legit or not so why bother ..might lead to trouble.

This law is just unenforceable..and it goes against the American system. Employers have far too much govt. intervention to begin with..last thing they need is more.

I don't know if your thesis is true, bucket. There are things like working visas, green cards, etc. which an employer can use to evaluate the legalness of a foreign worker. However, even if one were, for the moment, to entertain your thesis as true, then what is enforceable are things like minimum wages, OSHA requirements and so on. Without some sort of "stick" for businesses hiring illegals, then immigration laws effectively have no teeth.

The problem I have with enforcement is that it's really heavy handed. I'd rather see market forces have emphasis. Indeed, things like "fair trade" and other similar practices permit the buyer to evaluate whether or not s/he wants to give money to the business based on more than just price. If there were some way for which a consumer could evaluate whether or not a given product involved illegal immigrant labor, then we may see economic disincentives (or incentives) modify the system itself.

One thing is for sure though, California depends greatly on immigrant labor (legal and illegal). If the system were changed overnight to eradicate illegal immigrant labor, the California economy would suffer greatly for it (at least in the short/medium term). Any changes which are made would realistically have to be phased in.

Generally excuses like "I didn't know" don't get you off the hook when it comes to following the law. Running a red light is against the law, most officers wouldn't let you off the hook if you said "gee officer I didn't know it was illegal to run a red light". Even if you had a plausible excuse like you were color blind, you'd still get the ticket and have to prove it in court.

The simple fact here is that hiring illegal aliens is against the law, period. Most respectable employers run background checks of their employees, even those that hire for blue collar jobs. It isn't that expensive and should be part of the cost of bringing on an employee. Furthermore, there are very limited types of documents which make it acceptable to work in this country and all of them can be checked with a simple phone call to a government office.

I'm sure there are some employers that do hire people that they don't know are illegals, but I'd say that probably 95% of the people that hire illegals know full well they are here illegally and they don't really care.

You doubt me CJ and logophage? That hurts.

If you have a fake twenty you got from the cashier at the Wawa and you take it to the bank..will they arrest you for counterfeiting? Or will they let you get way with it on account of ignorance..by just saying I had noooooooooooo idea the twenty was fake.

The papers one needs to get a job here in the US varies from state to state..a driver's license will do. You have any idea how many fake ID's probably circulate in this country. People buy and sell identities..they use their children's (who are legal citizen of the US) dead peoples, they steal them, they share SS#s... on and on.
I really do not think it should be the employers fault that the US gov doesn't have a handle on this problem.

The law is just dumb..it is so ineffective and meaningless and it just has no business pretending like it means something...it means nothing.

Still don't believe me do you?

So I found an article for you two to read..perhaps we just need to work on this trust thing a little more


I-9 Enforcement

Actually, I was being neutral on the subject. Thanks for the link though.


Yes, fake papers seems to be a rampant problem. The only realistic way to detect this situation is for the INS to do an audit on the business -- pretty heavy handed and expensive but nonetheless possible. However, solutions to reduce illegal immigrant labor can be found.

One way is to enforce the policies we do have of fair labor practices. This means that the reduced costs associated with illegal labor willing to work cheaply will be ameliorated. If there's less incentive for businesses to hire illegals, then there will be less incentive for illegals to cross the border.

Another way is a market check like I mentioned in a previous post. Businesses could follow the guidelines of "fair labor" practises and label their products accordingly. Assuming this could be verified in some way, consumers would be able to judge whether or not they want to bias their purchases towards "fair labor" or not.


I agree that if a law is effectively unenforceable that it is worse than useless. I have a similar problem with drug laws. Maybe, you are right. This is why I suggested that the "economic gradient" between the US and Mexico is ultimately the largest reason illegal immigrant labor exists. If this gradient were reduced, then the draw would be as well.

Um - yes. Who do you suppose approves legal foreign workers? It is the US government that issues green cards, right?
As has been stated, ignorance of the law is no defence.


You seem to have a very low opinion of the capabilities of US employers. They can read, can't they? They might even be able to use (for example) a UV scanner.

Jeez, we expect the illegals themselves to be able to properly use credit cards, with the chip & pin technology, signature matching from a receipt to the card, and so on, so we don't end up getting five times as much money taken when we pay for our groceries with plastic. How hard is it to ask for similar levels of competence from employers when interviewing?

Governments also expect businesses that handle cash to be able to spot forgeries, though they don't (as you said) mind too much if an individual passes one note.

But isn't the bulk of the problem in states like California not the odd illegal here and there slipping through a net, but employers whose entire workforce is illegal who just don't ask too many questions? A farmer might hire a gang boss in good faith to pick his fruit crop (or whatever). So throw the book at the gang boss (and the farmer too if he can be proved to be in on it).

One occurence of "his papers looked ok" might be all right, but when there are twenty people on the payroll and they all turn out to be illegals, shouldn't we expect something more from the employer than twenty rounds of "his papers looked ok".

And if this leads to legitimate foreigners being denied employment, the employers should be done under existing discrimination law.


Again, on the government intervention aspect, who is supposed to prevent the illegals getting into the country in the first place? Government, right? And the only way to make the border crossings completely secure would be to build a wall around the entire land and sea border of the USA, which sounds to me rather more expensive and intrusive than expecting employers to keep documentary records to a minimum standard for all their employees.

Of course, with all this stick, there needs to be some carrot, which means making staying in home countries more attractive to people who might otherwise try to illegally migrate. Stuff like improving minimum standards of employment, health & safety, and so on. Which will drive up costs abroad, meaning that the purchase prices have to go up, which in turn will mean American consumers (and everywhere else) will need to get used to the novel idea of prices going upwards not downwards. Perhaps that might also lead to a decrease in the trend for outsourcing domestic jobs even further afield.

And all this stuff has to be done by government, and it all costs money. So guess what? American taxpayers might have to grow up and either start paying their way (European tax takes of ~45% of GDP might be too much, but why doesn't any one dare say that the US take of ~25% might be too little, considering all the things Americans want it to be able to do), or stop complaining that government can't do what they want it to. Government costs money, unfortunately.

As for an amnesty on illegals currently in place, it might make some sense, if only so that resources can be redirected to the porous borders that allow people in first of all (if border controls can become more effective the problem goes away). amnesties are never a fantastic idea, always a pragmatic one. (And they can only be applied to people that have already broken a law - you can't sensibly have an amnesty for something legal.)

Knowing what I do about the Bush administration, I'd be surprised if there wasn't also some kind of anticipated electoral pay-off, but in this case I can sort of see where they're coming from. I'm not sure their proposals wil work, though, because they only seem to be addressing one end of the problem.

Labour is as much an international market today as goods or services, yet almost all the US effort in international trade bodies is about freeing up access of US companies to other people's consumer, capital, trade, and labour markets. Very little emphasis is placed on reciprocal access of other people's companies (especially 3rd world companies) to US consumer, trade, capital and labour markets - what access their is arises through the lobbying power of the other people. Everyone is pushing and nobody is pulling. Ultimately, all that means is that everyone will fall over.

Julian in my last post I provided an article on the I-9 enforcement...perhaps you should read this so you have a better understanding of how the system works here.
Green Cards are but one type of visa the US gov passes out..and I sure hope we are not advocating passing these out to any or everyone who wants to enter the US to work..a Green Card is your final phase to becoming a citizen..it is a perm. resident visa and not everyone who comes to work in the US needs perm residence status.
As I stated in my last post it really is not a matter of ignorance is no excuse...the gov is the enforcer of laws..not me, not the manager at Safeway, not my local farmer..the gov.


Actually no..I think I take a very pro-business/employer stance on the issue...again you must have no idea how many forms of ID are acceptable forms of verification for work eligibility in the US. HUNDREDS. They vary from state to state and it is written in the law that the employer has no right to specify which forms they will except. So why should the employer have to be an expert in verifying that every form he receives is in fact legal? Why should the employer enforce the law?
And what is a UV scanner?
The US gov wants to make cumbersome laws..then they should have to use their resources, their time and their money to implement them. There is already more than enough obstacles for employers...and these are even more exasperating to small businesses, to operate in the US. As a free market proponent I really find the idea that the employer must be held ultimately accountable..ridiculous.



No actually it isn't....in the article I provided..it states..
Undocumented immigrants constitute a relatively small portion of the nation's work force. Numbers are difficult to come by, however. in a sample of the nation's employers in 1997, the INS calculated that about 195,000 employers, or about 3 percent, hired undocumented workers.

Also the highest estimation is...But a Department of Labor survey of agricultural workers showed that undocumented immigrants made up more than a third of the agricultural work force and were employed in significant numbers in the construction, garment and food industries.
A third hardly constitutes an entirety.


What does this have to do with immigration laws? And I pay more taxes here in the US than I did in Europe. The last thing the US gov. needs is more taxes.

I know this has to be done by the gov...it is exactly why I oppose making the employers of America enforce immigration laws.

Also this in not amnesty that is being proposed...that is just the propagandist term for it.


I am only going to address the points you made that relate to immigration..you don't need a work visa to sell in the US market, invest, trade etc.

That is not true...the NAFTA agreement opens the US labor markets to Mexico ..there are new work visas that have been created under this trade agreement.
The US is one of the last nations in the developed world who actively promotes immigration and a great many of our immigrants come from the third world nations. Please... the last thing one can argue on this issue is that the US somehow does not or has not been open to the idea of immigration.

logophage



Well yes I would agree that fair labor policies are important. Sadly a lot of those who are in fact employed with full knowledge they are illegal are basically indentured slaves.
Yet I disagree with you I know cheap labor is one of the enticers of illegal immigration but there are others. I also think the limited number of visas permitted to migrant workers is another. Not to mention most Americans don't live in the rural areas..are not willing to live a migrants lifestyle and want easier better paying jobs. Honestly who here believes min wage is desirable?
Besides most farmers pay more than I would imagine many here thought they did....
Wage Rates, by Type of Farm, by Region


There is a bill in the works just to get the farming industry to label where their product is made or grown and it is being fought..immensely. So this is not something I imagine would occur anytime soon.

Lots of good stuff there, bucket much of which I didn't know. The fact that there are hundreds of different possible documents signifying eligibility to work seems to me like a situation ripe for government reform. What would be wrong with ONE form saying who you are, what your business is and how long you intend to stay? So I'm with you that there is a lot that the government can do to make things easier, simpler (for the immigrants as much as anyone else by the sound of it!) and less bureacratic. Which would presumably save some tax dollars, too.

However, isn't it an offence to employ someone illegally in the USA? Surely an illegal transaction puts both parties at risk of knowingly taking part in it? So asking employers to check documents (especially if the system has been streamlined as above) isn't asking them to enforce the law, it's asking them to comply with it.

I'd have thought anybody would ask to see some kind of ID before taking on an employee just out of prudence, and that ID would have to include something that showed entitlement to work if it wasn't obvious (i.e. if someone wasn't an American citizen). But then I'm already amazed that most native US workers have no contracts of employment anyway - quite what this terrible burden of bureacracy is that's supposed to be holding US business back is a mystery to me, since they don't seem to have to keep many records at all.

On agricultural workers, my point wasn't that illegals were a majority, just that from what I've read, it seems that they tend to be more concentrated under certain employers. Especially where the farmer (or builder or other legitimate employer) pays a third party an agreed fee to fulfil a contract, and that third party maxmises their own profit by employing as many cheap illegals as they can find. The legit employer may never know who was actually on site doing the work, so they shouldn't be the person doing the record checking - it should be the thrid-party agent in such cases.

And on international trade, my point is exactly that American business has access to international labour markets. Not only is immigration a central, legitimate (and rather admirable) part of the American, but in recent years American business has been keen to use foreign labour abroad to continue it's activities. Individual Mexicans can become part of the US labour market. And American businesses can buy labour from the Mexican (or Chinese) labour market by moving their factories there. But drugs made in Canada by Canadian labour and financed by Canadian (or Swiss or British) capital can't be sold in America because it would decrease the rates of return on the American capital tied up in the US drugs business, all on the back of spurious "safety" fears. (Not because of concerns over American trade, consumer, or labour markets, because the defecit is already huge, consumer would be getting cheaper drugs, and "outsourcing" would happen tomorrow if the drugs companies could swing it, just as they have with their flu jab sourcing.)

But centrally, my point is this - in a free trade world, if capital and goods are going to be allowed to do what they like wherever they like, but labour is restricted, there is gogin to be some kind of imbalance, as all three are intimately linked. Illegal immigration is just a market response to market demand. The jobs are in place X, there are people prepared to do them in place Y, so either the jobs move from X to Y or the people move form Y to X. This is seen as natural or even desirable domestically, but neither choice seems to please policy makers when the movement crosses international borders.

Perhaps the solution is to start thinking harder about the way we let, or do not let, capital and goods move around the world, rather than imagining it's all to do with border controls alone. The best cure for tennis elbow is not aspirin, though that might relieve the symptoms - it's to stop playing tennis (or learn how to do it better. Someone tell Tim Henman, please.)

Well writing fraudulent checks is illegal here too...doesn't mean if I deposit a fraudulent check that someone gave me I too am an accessory to the crime. Asking employers to ensure control of fraudulent documents is enforcement. The law only specifies that the employer request and keep a copy on file of the employees ID showing they have legal status to work in the US. The employer bears no responsibility and shouldn't have to if the papers they were given are fraudulent.

Yes there are proposals for one card to be issued..a national ID card..FAIR and all her spawn support this idea of course..they wish for us all to be tagged like cattle.


Yes by law you have to prove to an employer you are legally allowed to work in the US and the employer must keep a copy of whatever ID you used to prove this. Again tho, in regards to illegal workers, most often these ID, papers etc are fake.
Actually Julian many Americans have employment contracts....it is just not compulsory.



Many of the drugs sold in Canada cheaper are also made in the US. It really has very little to do with the country they were made in. It is to do with our FDA system, our patent system and our lack of price controls on medications. And we do in fact allow Canadian, British, Swiss, French and German companies to sell their drugs here in the US...there is just a set channel through which the US gov imports these products.
How odd you would essentially reprove American employers for illegally hiring foreign workers but somehow sympathize with Americans who illegally import drugs..seems a bit of a conflict of opinion.


I agree that is why I mentioned I was a free market proponent as I feel my stance on immigration and open markets is one in the same. This is where my liberal beliefs pick up their neo-ness

There is a difference between those two scenarios Bucket. In the case of the fraudulent check, yes you could in fact be arrested for that (in reality it is a flawed example because you'd never be arrested unless you were behind a conterfeit ring) but when you got to court you could probably prove you didn't know it was fraudulent, the average person generally isn't expected to know whether they have conterfeit money or not.

As an employer, and especially an employer in certain industries, you are reasonably expected to know you could possibly be hiring illegals and you need to do a little checking. The problem is, employers do know that and they don't care and look the other way because it means increased profits. Every single employer that I or anyone I know has ever worked for has done a decent background check (and these aren't expensive), I wonder why it is that you don't see certain industries doing this.

So whether you think the law is stupid or not is beside the point, it is a law and it should be enforced. But as of right now it clearly isn't being enforced which of course contributes to a lot of problems.

And yet somehow an employer is expected to recognize fraudulent ID/papers/passports etc? How so?
The law states plainly and I have already offered information to back my claim up, that all the employer is required to do is ask for, obtain the employees ID/documentation that verifies their eligibility to work in the US and then use it to fill the I-9 form out. The End.
There is nothing in the law that requires the employer to validate or approve the authenticity of these forms of ID...in fact they are not even allowed to specify which ones they would prefer to accept and can in fact get in trouble for refusing any document a potential employee has to offer as proof. As I said and will say it again..it is a useless law..and every anti-immigration group I am aware of supports this view too.
An employer would have to just ignore the I-9 requirement altogether to be considered in contempt of the law.

And why should it be any different? Why should it be the employer's duty to ensure the authenticity of these county, state and federal forms of ID? Why do you not feel this is the government's job? We have laws in this country and we must process these laws if we wish to continuously promote our country's healthy and safe business climate. Much like we prosecute those who use fake checks, counterfeit monies and credit card scams in order to prevent employers carrying too heavy of a burden for these crimes. Immigration enforcement must ultimately be the govs function too.
The gov is responsible for the pervasiveness of these fake IDs that allow most illegal immigrants in this country to illegally work and it is their job to control their use.

Why shouldn't they be Bucket? Why is the government always the solution? Why can't a little responsibility from employers enter into the picture?

If you own a lettuce farm in central California you should know that you are going to run into illegal workers in the course of your hiring process. You also know that hiring illegal workers is against the law. Every other industry I can think of, even getting a job in the service industry flipping burgers, requires some kind of background check. So why doesn't the farm in Central California check? Because they know they'll find illegal workers and that will hurt their profits. This isn't a case of ignorance is bliss, you would have to be a fool to think that if you are running that kind of operation that all of your workers were legal.

It should be the government's function and the most effective way of putting a dent in it is to hold these kind of employers to the fire. We have laws, they should be enforced and ignorance is not an exuse for breaking the law, ask any lawyer.

Bucket, regardless of the scenarios you can throw out, the truth is that many of these employers aren't looking for proof of citizenship/documentation.

They get cheap labor which costs the employer less, which in the end is always good for them, and they rationalize it in their minds that it's ok since their keeping the price of a head of lettuce at $1.00.

Meanwhile, hospitals are closing, people's kids are being cramped in classrooms, and we have criminals who comitt a crime and flee *back* to mexico (a non extridition nation) and come back under an assumed name and come right back.



Uhh, by doing their homework? I mean, anyone who has checked documents for years, and done their homework should be able to spot a fake - if they look hard, let alone at all. And I really doubt that many of these folks have expensive fakes on their hands seeing as how they had to spend most of it paying coyotes to smuggle them over.

And as Cube pointed out, by deflecting responsibility to the State or Federal government, employers are turning a blind eye to hiring illegals and not giving anywhere a damn.

"If I don't see it, it's not (an) illegal."

That's the stand their taking and it's hurting all of us.

I dunno CJ I just happen to think the government is responsible in this scenario..with all the enforcement of law stuff that is required. If you don't have govt involvement in regards to I-9 enforcement what do you have? And why do you believe employers are responsible for ensuring the hundreds of possible documents/ID and forms that they must by law accept are authentic? Isn't it the country, state and federal govts. responsibility to ensure that fraudulent documents are not only easily available but widely used?

Having the employers take responsibility is exactly what is being done..they are required by law to fill out and complete the I-9 form. What more do you expect from the employers end of it? Why isn't the govt enforcing I-9 compliance? They have every right to request from any business their I-9 forms and to see copies or even the actual documents themselves to verify their legitimacy.



Again the employers comply to the law by simply filling out and obtaining the acceptable forms of documents specified by the I-9 form. Did you read the first article I provided? It explained it all..well the highlights. And just for your information not only does this law have anti-discrimination laws written into it..you know to prevent people from treating anyone who chooses to seek work at a "lettuce farm in central California" as an automatic illegal immigrant it also has good faith defense that basically allows for and makes exceptions for ignorance of document fraud.





Uhh what do you mean by doing their homework? Do expect now for every employer to be schooled or trained in document fraud detection? I don't think you really understand the scope of the problem from this aspect ....
Illegal documents boom to meet demand

Arrests Made in Fraudulent Document Sweep, Reports U.S. Attorney

As the above articles explain..this is a big business and it seems to be very highly organized and professional. Also most often the documents themselves are not fake..the fraud is the carrier of the card.


I am only throwing out scenarios to try and explain how the current law is applied. Sorry but I disagree with the belief someone here stated that this law is the way to control immigration.
The truth is no one has an honest number or percentage of illegal immigrants living and working in the US undocumented..the fist article I gave said the INS guessed it was at 3% :
Undocumented immigrants constitute a relatively small portion of the nation's work force. Numbers are difficult to come by, however. in a sample of the nation's employers in 1997, the INS calculated that about 195,000 employers, or about 3 percent, hired undocumented workers.

Gonna have to disagree with your assertion of what the truth is.




All Cube has pointed out is he seems to feel that American employers must bear a responsibility that is not there's to be burdened with. I absolutely disagree and could not disagree more with both of you.. control of county, state and federal documents and is not an employer's responsibility.

If you think the bulk of American employers are not complying with the I-9 requirements then I would like to see something backing this up...please.

Do you support the president's proposal or not? Why?

• Workers in the United States illegally can join a temporary labor program.

This certianly has an ethical question being that persons who broke the law are given visa's instead of being deported.

Though the implication of deporting someone who entered the United State's illegaly is a problem in the United States in and of itself and this seem's to be more of a cure than an added problem because those who entered illegally can be documented as opposed to remaining unknown.

• Those workers then can apply for permanent U.S. residency, but they will receive no preferential consideration.

They would also have to qualify for a green card in which only 140,000/yr are given. Out of the estimated 8 million illegal immigrants in the US to be given this program, green card's are normally filled by other's coming into the country. The permanent residency is far from guarentee'd, though they are given the opportunity. I dont see this as a problem, I have no issue with someone that has proven themselves to be productive after a three year time period.

• Employers hiring these workers must show they cannot find U.S. laborers to fill the jobs.

Im not sure how reliable these procedure's would work, but I hope the "common sense" factor would come into play for the Dept. of Homeland security while reviewing the case the employers are making. This add's protections to the system in that it will have less of an impact on current US citizens finding a job.

• These undocumented workers get guaranteed wage and employment rights.

I wonder if business that are currently running sweat shop's will apply to the program in order to "come clean". Again this proposal seem's to be more of a blessing than a burden for the curret problem of illegal immigration.

• These workers receive a temporary three-year visa, renewable once. They are expected to return to their countries once their visas expire.

They will also recieve "incetives" to return to their home country. This will make it easier for the government to be able to track down current illegal immigrants because they are now documented which would cut down illegal immigration after a time period.

• Congress will be urged to increase the current annual limit of 140,000 green cards.

Criminalizing illegal immigrant's legally is correct, but is it correct moraly? I do not believe so.

• The U.S. Department of Homeland Security will administer the program.

A step in the right direction due to security concerns.

What do you think needs to be done to solve the growing problem with illegal immigration?

Illegal immigration will not go away if you simply will it to. "Locking" up the border does not "cure" illegal immigration because if they are illegal immigrants they are allready in the country. It may help to prevent further expansion of "the problem", but what is the core of this problem? Is it the people that are coming over the border? Or is it that because they did not gain access legally so they cannot obtain health insurace, car insurance, or pay taxes? And if you granted them visa's all of the sudden they have access to these luxeries and contribute to society with taxes. Most illegal immigrant's want to pay for themselve's, that is why they come into the country in the first place, but they wont be able to pay a $100,000 doctor bill or $10,000 for a car wreck, but if we where to give the option of paying for insurance in such and instance, it would cut down on the problem of hospitals closing, kids being cramped into classrooms (because of tax revenue now that they are legal, think of an additional 8 million people paying taxes), and help prevent them from fleeing back after a crime because of having documention of their existance opposed to none. How many criminals would the police be able to catch if everyone in the US did not have a form of legal ID?

What do you believe are the president's motives in pushing this agenda?

It will help to curb current illegal immigrants as well as the host of problem's caused by them. Just read the explination that he gives.

Sure, they'll just "return" to their own countries. I have a bridge I can sell you in Arizona...

In my opinion, this point alone sinks the whole plan. I'm just not sure what the point is other than a vote grab. This basically means that in 6 years, we are back to where we are today with illegal workers. Furthermore it says nothing in regards to the people which would conceivably be coming over the border on a daily basis - is Bush just going to offer anyone 6 year amnesty?

6 Years coincidentally is just enough time for Bush's term to be up and (he hopes) a new Republican put into office. This plan does nothing to address the actual problem, it is bread and circuses for the latinos, pure and simple.

I never said they would return to their home countries, but only that it will help the government to be able to track them down so they can be deported in the first place.

I dont understand the animosity against this plan, I think it's more of a "knee jerk" reaction to hearing the words "illegal immigrants" and "given a visa". Even by people who would like a closed border. Sure it does nothing to address the "border problem" but it goes very far in addressing the current illegal immigration problem within the US.

Do you have a better solution? How do you propose we track down current illegal immigrants, randomly go door to door in targeted towns? Wouldn't that be unconstitutional?

The only problem that I see with this plan is that of moral principle because it gives illegals - legal status in which they have access to health insurance, car insurance, documentation of their existance and location, are up for deportation after three years, and also have to pay taxes.

Does it contribute to the problem or does it contribute to a solution?

You pick but please look at the entire plan and what the results would be first.

The only thing those two links provided were stunning insight into who is seeking them and why (quote from the WashTimes link)...



...and a story on an isolated incident.

Now tell me, how many illegal aliens get their "genuinely fake" documents from people who work -in the system-? Not many I imagine.

Let's see what we can gather from that earlier link from the Washington Times...



Now we could play with math here and hypothesize how many illegals were going to benefit from these schemes listed. (We could use at least the 66 apprehended aliens or half of the number of documents seized, 2 docs per alien gives us 1,750 aliens), but in the end it is a drop in the bucket either way compared to the 2.2 million illegal aliens who are believed to be living in the state of California (check FAIR website which claims number gathered from 2000 Census).

As far as your statistics go, sure, 3% is a good looking national number. But of those 195,000 employers, how many of them are located in California and how many are located in, say, Rhode Island. What about North Dakota? What about Wisconsin?

Last time I checked, Rhode Island wasn't suffering from an illegal alien invasion.

Your "truth" appears to be flawed as it does not reflect the issue regionally.



I disagree. It should be their burden, for many reasons. First off, with much of local law enforcement handcuffed by idiotic policies regarding not enforcing immigration law due to their assailment by minority groups over "discrimination", employers are, in reality, one of the last lines of defense.

Secondly, all I-9 requires is a glance at documentation to make sure they weren't created with magic marker and construction paper. This provides an "igornace is bliss" or "if I can't see it, it's not (an) illegal" attitude which many employers would take advantage of.

There have been, though, efforts to create fraud-proof forms and even a 1-800 number to the SSA to verify Social Security numbers to keep illegals and employers from circumventing the system, yet, as this link will detail, those efforts have been hindered.

[URL=
http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_1_the_illegal_alien.html]City Journal: "The Illegal Alien Crime Wave" by Heather MacDonald[/URL]



The responsibilty should fall on both employers and the government alike. And to say it's not the employers' burden to help bear is irresponsible and illogical.

I think that was the only thing you were willing to learn from the articles.




Enough where it is a problem. Do you somehow think we should ignore this and just let the employers sort it all out..yeah that sounds fair.
Also some gov. agencies requirements for ID etc. are too lax and it is easy to receive a real document for fraudulent reasons. I know post 9/11 here in VA. they had the change all the requirements to receive a state issued ID because the system had been apparently systematically breached.
There are also plenty other ways these people have access to real documents.
You know I must admit your total rejection that this is a problem and the biggest hindrance to the ability for I-9 enforcement is very bewildering to me. Please explain why you feel this is such a non issue.



An invasion? Fear mongering aside...last time I checked immigration happened to be a federal responsibility. So why would we address the issue regionally? Are you advocating a more federalist approach to immigration in the US?



Your local police dept. is not the enforcer of immigration laws..or I-9 enforcement. Again this is a FEDERAL issue and so the FEDERAL gov. is supposed to be the one enforcing these laws.

Again I believe that most employers abide by the I-9 requirements..and that most illegal immigrants have fake or fraudulent documents that happen to not be created with marker and construction paper. I have already asked once that if you felt this wasn't the case then please present some evidence.

So employers have taken on their burden. There isn't anymore they can do...legally. So if you wish for them to have to do more..then you are asking for new laws..not current ones to be enforced.



This article itself did not focus on fraud proof measurements taken by the US gov. And it actually portrayed the current situation dishonestly. The 1996 IIRIRA included a little piece about the gov providing some kind of verification database accessible for all employers. It is currently operational but still in the pilot stage in various states in various forms. It is not a mandatory requirement of employers to use this verification system.. so again it is not a matter of the laws not being enforced..but changed.

If you wish to argue that attempts for this employer database have been hindered by anything other then gov. bureaucracy or that any of the concerns Americans may have of a system such as this is just hysteria please provide a more appropriate source of information.

I hardly consider the fact it has again been approved for renewal and even expansion as a public law a hinderance to the program.

Basic Pilot Program Extension and Expansion Act of 2003

Findings of the Basic Pilot Program Evaluation

Yes, I do. We stop sugarcoating the issue, and treat them like what they are -- foreign invaders. Secure the border with minefields, Apache's, tanks, etc. I think they'll learn fast. As far as the ones that are already here, in addition to making it illegal for them to work, make it illegal for them to rent an apartment, or receive health care, and watch how fast they'll leave. Simple. This problem could be resolved in a mater of weeks. Unfortunately our government will never have the testicular fortitude to do something like that.

LOL, I agree dispatch the Apache's. Your sarcasm is, unfortunately, a reality of some people's thought's. Ive heard many time's that people want to dispatch the national guard to the border as if it where a war zone.



Do you realize what the consequences of this would be? If you setup a 1-800 what's my ss# and is it good hotline?

A 1-800 number to verify a social security number would be a scam artist's dream -- and there's plenty of them out there. Wouldnt that make it easier for "illegals" to obtain a valid ss# -- and use it illegally?

No sarcasm, Vampiel, rather pragmatism. If someone breaks into my house late at night, I don't know if they are hungry, and want to raid my fridge, or if they want to rape my wife and kidnap my son. I wouldn't know. And I wouldn't wait to find out, either. If self preservation is an instinct you possess, neither would you. Why should the same not apply to the country? When someone is breaking into your country, are you really suggesting we wait to find out their intentions? Are they a terrorist who has been provided with an easy way in, or just your average illegal coming over here to send our economy to the toilet? It IS a war zone, because we are being invaded.

This is one area where I vehemently disagree with the Libertarian Party.

I dont advocate that we should allow anyone that would like to come into the US be allowed to. This plan does not "provide" an "easier" way in for terrorist's, and nowhere would the plans implementation result in that outcome. It will make it easier to track down terrorist's as well as free up resources and generate income.This is a realistic alternative to contribute to a solution.

Mining the border, sending out Apache's, Bradleys, FA-18 SuperHornet's, U2's, B-2's, F-16's, Godzilla, and M-1A2 tank's to the Mexican border to defeat the "foreign invaders" is a bit of an overreation. That would be a great opportunity to test the FA-22's capability against ground targets to sqaush the evil "foreign invaders". Should we declare marshal law in Texas and California? That would be the virtual outcome of cracking down on millions of illegal immigrants.

Sure your "alternative" might work - but it will never happen. Let's just kill them off by denying them critical health care. Force them to live in the street's, which BTW would require a complete overhaul of the current laws and strip away more privacy from American citizens. I do believe they should be denied basic health care, but not if their life hangs in the balance. I do not dehumanize illegal immigrants. The military should not be involved in domestic dispute's short of an uprising.

Eliminate welfare for immigrants, but America should welcome any and all immigrants who want to come here to work and contribute to the economic strength rather than get a handout.

Those statistics from FAIR fail to adequately take into account the contribution made by immigrants to the economy.

I agree with Bush's policy on this.


~~
Disclaimer: I'm an immigrant myself.

First off, if you mine the border you'll end up mostly killing human beings who come here seeking better opportunities .. Do you honestly believe that's punishable by death ?? It's not going to teach the person who tries to cross a lesson .. cause well .. he or she will be dead. I believe its wrong to liken all people trying to come here illegally as murderer rapists and deserving of being killed. Yes there are a few bad guys coming across too .. but if you were to mine the border the people you'd kill would be those trying to come here just so they can be able to have a decent job and escape the crappy mexican government and labor conditions there. Are you really OK with killing them for wanting to escape the conditions they were born into? Last I checked many americans are descendents of immigrants many of whom came for economic reasons as well (irish & italian immigration at the turn of the 20th century?).

Not really. I have some sympathy for what I think are the driving goals & considerations, but I don't think this is the best way to approach them.


Illegal immigration looks a lot like illegal drug use to me. And like drugs, it's a fairly simple, but very tough problem. First of all, like with drugs, there is a demand for illegals. In some places and industries it's overt. In other situations it's more casual/recreational.

If illegals weren't finding what they are looking for, they wouldn't be coming here. And that isn't just free trips to the emergency room or free school for their kids. They are here for Jobs. Hire them, and they will come.


All good political decisions try to get multiple birds with one stone, and this illegal Mexicans amnesty is an excellent example.

We have a Latino, Hispanic vote in America. Mexican expats send a lot of money back to Mexico. But the reasons become more forceful, when the benefit of low-wage, low-rights workers to certain industries in America is factored in.

Whole service industries have arrived at the point where they can no longer function, without illegals.

More generally, there are a lot of jobs that need done in America ... that fewer Americans all the time will still consented to perform. Furthermore, there are fewer & fewer younger Americans to fill menial positions.

There. There's the word: menial. "Come on now - who'll take this menial job? You! Little brown fella in the big hat ... come right on over here."

America is aging, and the birth rate has slacked way off. Look at Europe: they are a couple decades ahead of us on this curve. They have massive guest-wor