Huge negatives crop up with senate amnesty bill 744
~~By Frosty Wooldridge~~
Over the past ten years, I have tried my best to inform the American people concerning the negatives of endless legal immigration as well as the horrors of nonstop illegal immigration.
Thankfully, when Bush tried to jam an amnesty down our throats in 2007, enough Americans called and wrote their senators to stop the amnesty. But today, the exact same bogus amnesty faces us once again. As noted earlier, our U.S. Senate added another 500,000 legal immigrants to the bill to make it 1.5 million immigrants granted citizenship annually. You must wonder who they represent because it’s sure not American citizens.
First, they won’t enforce the laws on the books, but now they rewrite the laws to make illegality and criminality—legal. It boggles my mind.
Author, publisher and my long time friend, John F. Rohe, a U.S. Peace Corps Volunteer from 1972 to 1974 and now serves as vice president for Philanthropy at the Colcom Foundation, in Pittsburgh, spoke to me about what our country faces if Senate Bill 744 passes.
“Some foundation leaders have spoken in support of the pending bill to overhaul immigration,” said Rohe. “Every policy decision, however, creates winners and losers. In fairness, both deserve consideration.
“Needy immigrants, whether legal or illegal, merit human sympathy. As foreign job seekers, they strive to improve opportunities for themselves and their families. Immigrants have often benefited themselves while benefiting America.
“Not everyone, however, necessarily benefits. It falls squarely within the province of philanthropy to contemplate the losers— particularly since they are often the most desperate in the United States and abroad.
“Several inexorable facts underlie the difficult, and often tragic, circumstances in today’s immigration policies. For example, the Population Reference Bureau reminds us the planet adds 231,000 people (births minus deaths) every day. That’s essentially another major American city on a daily basis. The vast majority of newcomers were born into underprivileged, and often impoverished, circumstances in developing nations. The line of desperate immigrants with a legitimate claim on the world’s conscience is long. The depth of this line cannot be ignored.
“By a wide margin, the United States accepts more immigrants than any other nation. Even this unprecedented level represents an almost invisible fraction of global hardship. For every immigrant, thousands upon thousands in need are left behind.
“The past decade has added more immigrants than any other decade in U.S. history. Meanwhile, domestic job prospects have plummeted. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, “Census Bureau data collected in March of  show that 13.1 million immigrants (legal and illegal) arrived in the previous 10 years, even though there was a net decline of a million jobs during the decade. In contrast, during the 1990s there was a net growth of 21 million jobs and 12.1 million new immigrants arrived.”
“An immigration overhaul might operate more benevolently if the U.S. was experiencing a worker shortage. The proposed overhaul would, going forward, more than double the already record high level of legal immigration.
“The numbers give pause. During the first 10 years of this overhaul, immigration would add the number of people now residing in the 20 largest U.S. cities. (33 million people) Why would the nation flood a labor pool already teeming with displaced, jobless, and underemployed Americans?
“A path to legalize the 11 million immigrants in the United States illegally today would steepen (make more difficult) the path to a livable wage for the American worker. Congress will not soon repeal the law of supply and demand.
“Immigration policy predominantly affects America’s underprivileged. The unemployment rate among some minority groups exceeds 50 percent.
“George Borjas, a Harvard scholar who is an immigrant from Cuba, has been described by Business Week and The Wall Street Journal as America’s leading immigration economist. A report he issued last month finds immigration is primarily a “redistributive policy.”
“In other words, since most immigrants arrive with low educational skills, they compete for jobs with America’s underprivileged. The American worker is either displaced or suffers wage dilution. Mr. Borjas concludes that mass immigration essentially “redistributes” the wages of needy Americans to the immigrants.
“For the American work force, a job means hope, a sense of self-worth, the opportunity to demonstrate responsible behavior to family members, and stability for a single- or two-parent household.
“A job enables an honorably discharged member of the military to continue feeling like a team player when re-entering civilian life. To undermine an American job is to destabilize fundamental philanthropic priorities.
“Philanthropic sympathy toward foreigners should embrace not only those willing to flee the hardship of home but also, more important, the multitudes left behind.
“As a practical matter, migration will be feasible for only a thin veneer of the world’s approximately one billion undernourished, dehydrated, or starving inhabitants. For the world’s economically depressed billions, only a small fraction will realistically be in a position to cut and run.
“To confront the sobering mathematical reality of hardship in foreign lands is to recognize that aid must be deployed where the cause of suffering originates, rather than where the few can escape. Meaningful assistance requires those of us who want to help the needy to endure the rigors of skin diseases and intestinal complications at the source, where the masses reside. The issue is not whether to be compassionate. Rather, it’s whether to actively solve the cause of a problem or react to the consequence.”
The immigration issue brims with disquieting ethical issues
“When the motivated elements of society flee, a nation is deprived of enthusiastic catalysts for change,” said Rohe. “This loss postpones the prospects for reform where reform is urgently needed. The ethics become even more poignant. The International Organization for Migration says there are more Ethiopian doctors practicing in Chicago than in Ethiopia. How can this immigration policy be reconciled with selfless, charitable compassion?
“The judicious allocation of support is never easy. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, 57 percent of all immigrant households with children receive welfare payments. (This figure does not include nonprofit support of immigrants.) Every dollar spent in the United States represents one less dollar available to deal with the cause of hardship. The charitable dollar spreads far more widely at the source of hardship in developing lands than in the U.S. That dollar of support can best serve humanity where it bears the highest value and serves the widest need.
“Immigration stirs ardent emotions on both sides of the debate. Perhaps for this reason, the level of immigration oscillates wildly. It was high around the turn of the 20th century and again near the turn of the 21st. In 1924, responding to an oversupply of labor, the proliferation of ghettos, and dismal job prospects for blacks, Congress slashed immigration to a trickle. It remained low until the last major overhaul of immigration law in 1965, which then increased the flow to the current high mark. A more sustainable approach seems preferable to the episodic policy of the past or the proposed overhaul of the present.
“Although the nation has been slightly below replacement-level fertility for over 40 years, the overhaul would eventually cause the United States to follow China and India as the next billion-person nation.
“Can a domestic population surge be a philanthropic priority today, as the nation confronts water shortages, urban sprawl, farmland losses, congestion, toxic proliferation, resource depletion, landfill overloads, unemployment, energy dependence and national parks that are loved to death?
“Before promoting the overhaul, foundations could support research and education on the consequences. Let’s examine the environmental and economic impact of sharply increasing human pressures here while ignoring pressures at the source. As long-range philanthropists, let’s explore the optimum level of immigration to maintain a respectable balance between people and resources. Let’s strive to fashion a non-discriminatory, racially neutral, sustainable policy to assure the borders will never again be essentially closed.
“In formulating a thoughtful policy on the level of immigration, an ounce of prevention will enable today’s philanthropist to champion a long-term ethical imperative. When advancing long-range public policy, the physician’s maxim to “first do no harm” remains relevant to philanthropy.”
If S744 passes, it will do more harm than anyone yet understands. I urge each of you reading this commentary to take action at my website and other organizations gearing up to defeat this horrific amnesty bill.
If you would like to make a difference, please join these organizations for the most effective collective action you can take: www.CapsWeb.org ; www.NumbersUSA.org ; www.TheSocialContract.com ; www.Fairus.org
Join me, Frosty Wooldridge, with Dave Chaffin, host of the Morning Zone at 650 AM, www.KGAB.com, Cheyenne, Wyoming every Monday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., as we discuss my latest commentaries about issues facing America. You may stream the show on your computer. You may call in at: 1-888-503-6500.
In a five minute astoundingly simple yet brilliant video, “Immigration, Poverty, and Gum Balls”, Roy Beck, director of www.numbersusa.ORG, graphically illustrates the impact of overpopulation. Take five minutes to see for yourself:
“Immigration by the numbers—off the chart” by Roy Beck
This 10 minute demonstration shows Americans the results of unending mass immigration on the quality of life and sustainability for future generations: in a few words, “Mind boggling!” www.NumbersUSA.org