First the DNews opines that immigration is a federal issue, then announces
support for a Utah-initiated guest worker program that would grant temporary
legal status (read: state usurpation of the federal responsibility for
immigration and an over-riding of the federal responsibility to determine and
grant immigration status).Do the editors even know what the heck
they are talking about?
My guess is that Shurtleff, Sutherland, S.L. chamber, et.al. - know FULL WELL
their idea is goofy. They can't be THAT STUPID.First off: what
makes them think illegal alien invaders have ANY INTENTION WHATSOEVER in obeying
the law? Why SHOULD they even apply for a work permit? They're already here
gaming the system.Second: they slam the Arizona law, yet what they're
PROPOSING goes far beyond the Arizona law. Courts would laugh the state of Utah
out the door because ONLY the Feds have the right to issue work permits to
illegal aliens!This idea is just another way to DELAY the
deportation of illegal alien invaders!Dumbest idea I've heard all
week, especially with actual Utah LEGAL CITIZENS' unemployment running at 9%!
I have found one sure way to not get your comments posted,,, disagree with the
DN amnesty agenda, if you come up with a valid difference of opinion your
comments will never see the light of day.
Shurtleff, The Salt Lake Chamber, and the Sutherland Institute want to give
amnesty?Don't they realize that it was the 1986 amnesty that caused
this mess? Not only would it cost Utah a fortune in legal fee's,
court cases, immigration officers etc. But like the 1986 amnesty would have
people from all over the country claiming to have lived here, tying up our
courts for 10 years like the original amnesty did. And it would
start a mass immigration to the super sanctuary state of Utah. Think tank? for
Shurtleff lost my vote when he went to the Pro-Amensty ralley and in Spanish
told them he was with them. Refused a invitation to attend a Anti-Amensty
ralley. He is just not wanting to be left out of a solution. Don't trust him.
praxis | 11:06 a.m.Good point.These are good programs
(better than the run accross the border and hide, and if you can survive and
stay under the radar long enough they can't send you back)... approach.My company has sponcered several H2B workers over the years. It's a good way
to go. The government KNOWS they will have a job (and not just mooch of the
government) and they KNOW who they are (they aren't a security risk) and they
KNOW they have means of support (our company has to guarantee that).It's a good way to go for temporary work permits.
There is already a Guest Worker program - why does Utah feel they need -or even
can- create a separate program?No state can enter into agreements
with foreign governments and that is exactly what Shurtleff, Mero and Rep.
Robles are proposing. Utah creating a "guest worker" program is in direct
violation of Federal immigration law and the supremacy clause.Only
Congress/Federal Gov't can create a guest worker program and they already have:
-Permanent Labor Certification: A certification issued by the
Department of Labor (DOL) allows an employer to hire a foreign worker to work
permanently in the United States.-H-2A Temporary Labor Certification
(Seasonal Agricultural): Program for agricultural employers who anticipate a
shortage of domestic workers to bring nonimmigrant foreign workers to the U.S.
to perform agricultural labor or services of a temporary or seasonal nature. -H-2B Temporary Labor Certification (Non-agricultural): Program permits
employers to hire foreign workers to come temporarily to the U.S. and perform
temporary nonagricultural services or labor on a one-time, seasonal, peakload or
Lowonoil | 9:55 a.m.What "politically influential industries" profit
from illegal immigrants?I thought it was the small business owners
who hired them. I didn't know they had a lot of clout in Washington.If you know any BIG companies that systemically exploit illegal laborers...
you should turn them in. That's the only way to stop it you know. Once a few big companies get punished, and the punshment gets publicised in
the media, people will start thinking twice about hiring the cheeper illegal
worker insted of the legal worker (with less legal risk).Till
WE start doing that... what do you expect to change?Oh
Please | 10:00 a.m.What a Drama Queen. You made me laugh so hard.
Thanks.This guy's scared to death of the Utah legislature... because
he has "A hispanic NAME"! Haaaah! And YOU told him he BETTER be scared, and
start carrying his passport in Utah.... What a hoot!
I have a coworker with a Hispanic name. Born in Albuquerque, he's a 4th
generation US citizen. But he is now scared to death of the Utah legislature. I
told him he'd better start carrying his passport wherever he goes.
If you vigorously protect immigrants from labor exploitation you will rob them
of their relative advantages as potential employees. This is a political
nonstarter; the politically influential industries who profit from exploiting
illegal immigrants will put an end to it.
Another Perspective | 9:32 a.m.Good point. I was thinking mostly
about slowing down the flow of illigal immigration.But the 1986
reform DID help some people who were already here illegally, and helped them
become legal and live productive lives (instead of living in the shadows).But that generation has just been replace by yet ANOTHER 12 Million
people who decided to take their chances and come here illegally... hoping
another amnesty program would cover them, or they could stay long enough to have
kids (so the soft American's wouldn't send the parents of these legal children
home leaving the children orphans in the USA).It just didn't
work to slow or stop future immigration problems. It just put off any real
solution.But you are right. It probably helped many people who were
in a tight spot in 1986 (the same tight spot 12 million NEW people are now in
Question | 9:19 a.m. July 2, 2010 re Ultra Bob | 8:30 a.m.Read up on the "Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986". Hint... It didn't
work. ---------------These people are now documented,
leading productive lives, paying all their taxes, giving the USA labor of the
kind we really would rather not provide for ourselves. Seems like its working
pretty well to me.
Ultra Bob | 8:30 a.m.If you think the guest worker program is a good
idea... first read your history. We already tried this and it DIDN'T work.Read up on the "Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986". Hint... It
didn't work. And it went down this same path.The third part of the
act was...- Granted a path towards legalization for agricultural seasonal
workers (hint... Guest Worker Program).Did it work? Obviously
not!The other two prongs of the attack also didn't work
(but are being touted as "THE ANSWERE TO ALL OUR PROBLEMS" again today). They
were...1. Require employers to attest to their employees'
immigration status, and granted amnesty to certain illegal immigrants who
entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there
continuously 2. Make it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal
immigrants (immigrants who do not possess lawful work authorization) These were the 3 major parts of the "1986 Reform Act"... IT DIDN"T WORK!!!
We didn't send the message that if you cross illegally you WILL get
caught and punished... The message was... Come_illegally. Have_a_baby.
Get_a_lawyer_and_everything_will_be_fine!So we are where we are
The guest worker idea is great, it allows America to aid and support other
nations. However, we should not allow unscrupulous businessmen to
do harm to America by bypassing the laws and regulations that Americans have
worked for over the centuries.Wage scales and working conditions
should be those determined by American standards and not the standards of a
re JMT | 6:36 a.m. July 2, 2010 --------------You seem
to be in favor of re-introducing the Bracero Program, is that correct?Yet you say that people weren't allowed to bring their families. If we benefit
by the labor of these people, why do we want to institute a program that makes
them spend months or years away from their families, when we could easily allow
them to be with their families.How would you like it if your
employeers said to you, .. "So long as you are employeed by me, you shall be
away from your family"?We should be in favor of what is good for
families, not opposed, we should be in favor of strong family values, not
opposed. You need to re-think your position. We can do better than what the
people did back in the 1950's.
An Arizona law should definately be off the table. This approach is unfair to
AMERICANS who happen to look as it they might be foreign. Lets keep in
perspective that punishing Americans because others are breaking what amounts to
a civil law that is akin to jaywalking or speeding, is really making a mountain
out of a molehill.Other approaches need to be looked at. At the very
least, people who are here willing to do work Americans shun should be
documented and given the chance to do so. Documenting them has the added
advantage that it makes it more probable that both the workers and employeers
pay all taxes and fees, all this is good.People who work hard and
play by the rules can only be a benefit to our community. Lets not throw the
baby out with the bath water, lets keep the hard working ones. Lets also go
after gangs who commit crimes of all stripes, lawless gang menbers of what ever
their national origin need not be tolerated.Utah can lead the nation
by example, and show others there is an enlightened way to turn this problem
into an advantage.
Thomas Jefferson, in the Declaration of Independencesaid to the King of
England, in complaint:"for that purpose obstructing the Laws for
Naturalization of Foreigners;"Please discuss and make these words
fit your own view.
The writer poses a good idea, however guest worker and immigration programs must
be addressed at the federal level. There is a program for agriculture that would
do what Mr Brady proposes, it is calle AgJOBS and has languished in the U.S.
Congress far too long as a political football caught in the never-never-land of
partisan politics. It is time to pass AgJOBS legislation, as sponsored by CA
Senator Fienstein and co-sponsored by many others THIS YEAR to preserve and
protect American agriculture.Frank A. GasperiniExecutive VP,
National Council of Agricultural Employers, Washington, DC
America used to have a great guest worker program. It was called the Bracero
Program. While it was in place roughly a million workers a year came to America.
They did not overload our education or health care system as they were able to
travel freely, and did not bring their family with them. They had to take care
of their own health insurance. During this period of time there were less than
100,000 illegal immigrants a year in our country. And while they worked they
could also apply for citizenship.This program had some problems. The
biggest is that the comply employing them held their visa. This lead to some
serious problems of abusing workers, which lead to communist Caesar Chavez and
Senator Ted Kennedy killing the Bracero and giving us the multi-level junk we
have now.Clearly, a functional Guest Worker Visa modeled after the
Bracero is a significant step in fixing this problem. The bigger problem:
Democrats want millions of new voters tied to government entitlements;
Republicans want cheap labor. Between the two, neither party wants legitimate
reform.Once we have serious people at the table we can fix this.
Intriguing???? This is the stupidest idea of all time. It fits the DN amnesty
agenda however so let's talk about how "intriguing" it is. Are you guys for
real? While we are issuing a pass to illegal alien lawbreakers let's go several
steps further and include all lawbreakers. How about an ATM card for bank
robbers so they don't have to steal from the bank? They could get it legally.
Let's give drunken drivers a special pass to drive drunk once a month so they
will limit their drunk drinking to one day instead of every day. Why
don't you call the current unemployed in Utah and see if they think we need to
accommodate illegals who send most of their money back to Mexico and don't have
to pay taxes on it? The DN is so far out of whack with the people of this state
on this issue I am surprised you have any subscribers left.
How would you propose enforcing it so they stay here in Utah? That would have to
be done to stay even close to compliant? Hire hundreds of Utah immigration
officers?With 10% unemployment, and no unemployment benefit
extension, you want to create a bigger problem?