ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

SCHUMER: BORDERS NOW SECURE ENOUGH TO MOVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM

Rate this Entry
There are basically two big camps in the immigration reform debate and each has subsidiary interests that diverge in important respects from the bigger grou[. There is the pro-immigration camp which generally favors immigration reform proposals introduced over the last few years. Within the pro-immigration camp, there is the labor left which is in favor of legalization but balks at provisions that would provide temporary or permanent visas to workers that might come in the future.

In the anti-immigration camp, there is the major group which opposes any form of legalization and is of mixed thinking on future worker provisions. And then there is a more moderate group that is against immigration reform but is not against the concept of legalization out of hand. Rather, they want to proceed with immigration reform in stages. First secure the border, then move forward with legalization.

It is this last camp that Senate Immigration Subcommittee Chair Chuck Schumer (D-NY) seems to be courting when he told CBS News that the border was now secure enough to proceed with immigration reform this year. Being able to report to constituents significant progress in cutting down on illegal entries to the country will provide critical cover for legislators that are likely in favor of immigration reform, but dealing with skeptical voters.

As I've reported on this blog, the data backs up what Schumer is saying. The number of illegally present immigrants has been dropping and DHS is reporting significant decreases in illegal border entries. A surprising (and likely hostile) source of support could be groups like the Center for Immigration Studies which have been touting the evidence of decreasing illegal immigration as evidence that tough enforcement tactics are working. Of course, they would like the next step to be .... more of the same. Their end goal is getting rid of all illegally present immigrants followed by a virtual ban on all new immigration.

Pro-immigration groups can take CIS' claims, however, as giving critical support to Schumer's argument to the anti-CIS moderates. The borders ARE under control and the federal government is finally able to report significant progress on reducing the illegally present immigrant population in the country. It's time for the next stage of the reform process.

Submit "SCHUMER: BORDERS NOW SECURE ENOUGH TO MOVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM" to Facebook Submit "SCHUMER: BORDERS NOW SECURE ENOUGH TO MOVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM" to Twitter Submit "SCHUMER: BORDERS NOW SECURE ENOUGH TO MOVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM" to Google Submit "SCHUMER: BORDERS NOW SECURE ENOUGH TO MOVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM" to StumbleUpon Submit "SCHUMER: BORDERS NOW SECURE ENOUGH TO MOVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM" to Reddit Submit "SCHUMER: BORDERS NOW SECURE ENOUGH TO MOVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM" to Digg Submit "SCHUMER: BORDERS NOW SECURE ENOUGH TO MOVE ON IMMIGRATION REFORM" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
  1. George Chell's Avatar
    CIS is a racist organization which gives lip service to training Americans instead of hiring foreigners..nowhere to be seen in the current California budget debate. I will repeat this over and over again. Their goal is to keep America majority white even if it means destroying the country. Their goal is fewer foreign nurses in America even if it means the elderly will be adversely affected. Kirkorian, Camarotta and Vaughan of the CIS, Stein of FAIR and Heather McDonald of the Manhattan Institute belong to this racist camp. They have on their side racists such as Jeff Sessions, Jim DeMint and David Vitter among others.
  2. Alix's Avatar
    Just out of curiosity, is the decline in the flow of illegal immigrants across the border due to poor economy or due to increasaed enforcement?
  3. Jack's Avatar
    'The borders ARE under control'

    'Control' implies that it's mostly about what we're doing. The CIS survey indicates it's much more about what prospective crossers are deciding not to do--for now. I consider 'secure the border first' a red herring because it's well known (and once again shown by the CIS survey) that immigration flow isn't controlled at the border and won't be even with back up troops, a 17% increase in patrol, etc. So why should the public not conclude that any 'all clear for CIR' declaration is pretext? [In Schumer's defense, I have yet to see a 'border is now secure' quote from him in the articles I've read.]


    'Mexican and American researchers say that the current decline, which has also been manifested in a decrease in arrests along the border, is largely a result of Mexicans' deciding to delay illegal crossings because of the lack of jobs in the ailing American economy.'

    'But Wayne Cornelius, the director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California, San Diego, predicted that if the United States job market revived, border enforcement would become much less of a deterrent.

    The center has documented the causes of the decrease in Mexican migration though interviews this year with more than 1,000 Mexicans in California and in a Yucat?n village that has been a source of migrants. In the interviews, all of the Mexicans who did set out from Yucat?n for the United States reported that they eventually succeeded in crossing.'

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15immig.html?hp

    ALL? 1,000+ out of 1,000+?!
  4. Pete Murphy's Avatar
    Rampant population growth threatens our economy and quality of life. Immigration, both legal and illegal, are fueling this growth. I'm not talking about environmental degradation or resource depletion. I'm talking about the effect upon rising unemployment and poverty in America.

    I should introduce myself. I am the author of a book titled "Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America." To make a long story short, my theory is that, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption of products begins to decline out of the need to conserve space. People who live in crowded conditions simply don't have enough space to use and store many products. This declining per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.

    This theory has huge implications for U.S. policy toward population management, especially immigration policy. Our policies of encouraging high rates of immigration are rooted in the belief of economists that population growth is a good thing, fueling economic growth. Through most of human history, the interests of the common good and business (corporations) were both well-served by continuing population growth. For the common good, we needed more workers to man our factories, producing the goods needed for a high standard of living. This population growth translated into sales volume growth for corporations. Both were happy.

    But, once an optimum population density is breached, their interests diverge. It is in the best interest of the common good to stabilize the population, avoiding an erosion of our quality of life through high unemployment and poverty. However, it is still in the interest of corporations to fuel population growth because, even though per capita consumption goes into decline, total consumption still increases. We now find ourselves in the position of having corporations and economists influencing public policy in a direction that is not in the best interest of the common good.

    The U.N. ranks the U.S. with eight third world countries - India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Bangladesh, Uganda, Ethiopia and China - as accounting for fully half of the world's population growth by 2050. It's absolutely imperative that our population be stabilized, and that's impossible without dramatically reining in immigration, both legal and illegal.

    If you're interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, I invite you to visit my web site at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com where you can read the preface, join in my blog discussion and, of course, purchase the book if you like. (It's also available at Amazon.com.)

    Please forgive the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph. I just don't know how else to inject this new perspective into the immigration debate without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.

    Pete Murphy
    Author, "Five Short Blasts"
  5. Jim's Avatar
    If Globalization is flawed and America is to stop immigration from other countries, I think ALL American Citizens from other countries should be forced to go back to the US and as well as all American multinational companies should go back to the US and stop doing business on other countries FIRST. Plus, make sure all your debts to other countries are 100% paid for first.

    If America can do that, then maybe there is an argument to this THEORY of yours and everyone will follow suit and migrate some place else and do their business some place else other than the US.

    Also, until Sean Hannity goes through being water boarded for charity like he said he would and still thinks it is still not torture after experiencing it I will always think that particular pronouncement and all others he ever made and still making are farce. Same as yours.

  6. Legal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    Pete, there is a reason why you will never win a Nobel Prize in economics, and unlike you must think, it's not the left wing high brow conspiracy. Tt's because your "theory" disregards all the facts and logic, and is only aimed at proving your twisted views. You need a therapist.
  7. Sioux Kicking Bird's Avatar
    Pete,
    Until the white people came and started plundering this country some 400 years ago, this land was pristine. Your grandpa came with a trunk, (no visa restrictions), just get checked out for lice at Ellis island and grand pa and grand ma were citizens. Free to go around and slaughter my ancestors and steal the land.
    For Pete's sake, Pete read history on your grand pa's illegal immigration.
    -Kicking Bird
  8. George Chell's Avatar
    "Pete, there is a reason why you will never win a Nobel Prize in economics,"

    The reasons are two:

    The Republic of Singapore with the highest population density in the world;

    The Territory of Hong Kong

    And of course, a nation nose deep in debt has no sovereignty!

    Once in a while you get people like Pete..we have one in Australia..his name is Bob Birrell, a sociology professor masquerading as an economist and then there is the former Governor Richard Lamm of Colorado..all Pete has to offer is voodoo economics.
  9. George Chell's Avatar
    Rampant population growth has improved the quality of life in singapore with unprecedented prosperity until the Americans screwed it all up with their financial crisis. Immigration is fueling this economic and population growth. I'm not talking about Singapore's clear air or its resource base (it has no natural resources!). I'm talking about the effect upon rising employment and prosperity in Singapore and even during the recession the unemployment rate is not expected to increase above 4%.

    I should introduce myself. I am the author of a paper titled "Labor Migration The Virtue of Globalization and Its Consequences for Singapore." To make a long story short, my theory is that, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption of products begins to increase as it has done in Singapore. People who live in crowded conditions simply find innovative ways to use and store many products as they have done in Singapore. This increasing per capita consumption in Singapore, due to rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably lower unemployment and prosperity during the last three decades even as Singapore's population doubled from 2 million to four million mostly due to immigration.

    This theory has huge implications for U.S. policy toward population management, especially immigration policy. The antis attempts to reduce immigration are rooted in the belief of quacks that population growth is a bad thing, which fuels economic decline. Through most of human history, the interests of the common good and business (corporations) were both well-served by continuing population growth. For the common good, we needed more workers to man our factories, producing the goods needed for a high standard of living. This population growth translated into sales volume growth for corporations. Both were happy.

    There is no optimum population It is not in the best interest of the common good to stabilize the population, as it has nothing to do with the erosion of our quality of life through high unemployment and poverty. If that is indeed the case Belarus and Russia would be prosperous and Singapore and Hong Kong would declone. Hence it is still in the interest of corporations to fuel population growth because, evidence from the two densely populated countries (Singapore and China) indicates that per capita consumption increases sharplyu. We now find ourselves in the position of where sociologists and environ-racists influence public policy in a direction that is not in the best interest of the common good...ie., in the direction of Belarus and the Russian Federation.

    The U.N. ranks Singapore and Hong Kong with several third world countries - India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Bangladesh, Uganda, Ethiopia and China - as accounting for the most densely populated in the world. It's absolutely imperative that our population not be stabilized, to protect our social security and for the future prosperity of our country and to make sure that our housing market recovers.

    If you're interested in learning more about this important economic theory, I invite you to visit the East West Center (Hawaii) website and read the two articles on Singapore published by prominent economists.

    Please forgive the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph. I just don't know how else to inject this counter- perspective into the immigration debate without drawing attention to the the two papers on Singapore which shows that Pete Murphy is a quack.

    George Chell
  10. JoeF's Avatar
    "If you're interested in learning more about this important new economic theory"

    Oh geez. Yet another isolationist posing as economist.
    How about coming back when you have gained credibility, e.g., by getting a Nobel Prize in Economics???
    Until then, you are just another isolationist loonie.
  11. JoeF's Avatar
    My comment was obviously directed at Pete, not at George's post...
  12. George Chell's Avatar
    "My comment was obviously directed at Pete, not at George's post..."

    It was evident by your implication. Thanks


  13. Legal_Alien_from_Roswell's Avatar
    Greg

    I have a suggestion to make, it would nice if you could implement a feature whereby when quoting a response, the quote could be in a different color/format followed by our response, so the reader can easily distinguish between whatever's been quoted in the response and the response itself, it all reads/seems as one now and disturbs the reading experience.

    thanks
  14. Greg Siskind's Avatar
    "I have a suggestion to make, it would nice if you could implement a feature whereby when quoting a response, the quote could be in a different color/format followed by our response, so the reader can easily distinguish between whatever's been quoted in the response and the response itself, it all reads/seems as one now and disturbs the reading experience."

    I rely on ILW for managing the blog's technical specs, but will pass on your suggestion.
  15. Jim's Avatar
    The border is secure indeed. We can add Texas' border with the US to keep out unwanted Americans as another good example.

    http://www.theonion.com/content/news/texas_constructs_u_s_border_wall

    Governor Perry's earlier comments on seceding may have some merits after all. Seems like he is preparing to at least try.

  16. George Chell's Avatar
    "Governor Perry's earlier comments on seceding may have some merits after all. Seems like he is preparing to at least try."

    White Texans will never allow that to happen. They will be invaded and taken over a bunch of non-whites (at least that is what America considers Hispanics, but the rest of the world does not), impose Spanish and intermarriage will increase as in Hawaii. For the white skin worshipping white Texans that is a strict no, no!! And I would say more so for the other white southerners such as Georgians and Mississippians! A young lady from Alabama moved to Hawaii late last month and visited the church I attended (now I am back in DC)..and she could not keep her eyes of all the multi-racial couples in the church. It was totally alien to her..a culture shock! She said that her family would "kill" her if she ever got into one such relationship. I am pretty confident that Texans wont go it alone! The white Texans love too much being white and they want to pass it on from generation to generation..the yankees are at least mostly white, their "traitors" vote for Obama not withstanding!
  17. George Chell's Avatar
    Sorry for my blunt comments. Know that Greg is from Memphis. I am referring to the Bible thumping Evangelicals, back woodsmen and southern separatists such as the League of the South who worship the murderer Nathaniel Forrest the founder of the Ku Klux Klan..they do make a majority in the south..very evident from election results!
  18. Xu Ma's Avatar
    Hi Greg,
    Do you think offering amnesty to illegal aliens again will cause the stunning backlog caused to the EB categories today as a result of the 245(i) enacted in 2001? That would be a big downer for legals who have already been choked by illegals clogging up the line 8 years ago. To those who might jump on me for asking this, please remember that I have asked the question with good intentions and concerns so please save your energy for the real freaks. Thank you very much.
  19. Xu Ma's Avatar
    Hi Greg,
    Do you think offering amnesty to illegal aliens again will cause a repeat of the stunning backlog caused to the EB categories today as a result of the 245(i) enacted in 2001? That would be a big downer for legals who have already been choked by illegals clogging up the line 8 years ago. To those who might jump on me for asking this, please remember that I have asked the question with good intentions and concerns so please save your energy for the real freaks. Thank you very much.

  20. JoeF's Avatar
    INA 245(i) didn't cause the EB backlog. The July 2007 fiasco, with the PD being current, then not, then again, resulted in the current EB backlog.
    INA 245(i) resulted in lots of family-based applications, which worsened the processing times.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: