Matthew Udall

I’m sure most of you have heard President Bush’s proposal for a new temporary worker program. There appears to be much debate about the need for such a program, or if needed, how it should be formulated and what goals it should accomplish.

There seems to be two “gripes� or arguments already associated with this debate that I’ve noticed. One is that we need this due to a lack of U.S. workers ready, willing and able to perform this work, and two, many are angered by the idea of “rewarding� those who violated the law.

So what do “you� think? Assuming we are going to get this program, how do you think it should be set up? Should it lead to permanent resident status? What about unintended consequences that will spring up from any such new program (Thanks Folinskyinla for bringing up that particular subject)?

I had a few ideas last night about some features that could be put into the new system. I’m sure some of you might have some ideas too. Let’s hear them.

Paulgani

Knowing this newsgroup, I'll bet this discussion won't even come close to
approaching the size of the "About the Andrew SeFaria and Vampier argument"
thread!

Paulgani

Andy Platt

"Matthew Udall" <member3997@british_expats.com> wrote:

    > So what do "you" think? Assuming we are going to get this program, how
    > do you think it should be set up? Should it lead to permanent resident
    > status? What about unintended consequences that will spring up from
    > any such new program (Thanks Folinskyinla for bringing up that
    > particular subject)?

I think it will have to whatever the proposal currently says. What are you
going to do, let people live here for 3 or more years, get settled in
communities, have (US) children and then say, OK pack your bags, your'e all
going home. You would just get back in the same mess we started from.

Andy.

--
I'm not really here, it's just your warped imagination

Wolfie

Just a short version from me. It seems like we want to have our cake and eat
it too. They want the workers to come here so the large companies and
farmers can hire cheap labor (seems the most benefit will go to big
business/wealthy...my how unusual for out Pres!), then they don't want these
cheap laborers to stay here! I think it is mostly an election cycle ploy and
I don't think it seriously addresses the reform needed for the entire
immigration system.
"Matthew Udall" <member3997@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > I'm sure most of you have heard President Bush's proposal for a new
    > temporary worker program. There appears to be much debate about the need
    > for such a program, or if needed, how it should be formulated and what
    > goals it should accomplish.
    > There seems to be two "gripes" or arguments already associated with this
    > debate that I've noticed. One is that we need this due to a lack of U.S.
    > workers ready, willing and able to perform this work, and two, many are
    > angered by the idea of "rewarding" those who violated the law.
    > So what do "you" think? Assuming we are going to get this program, how
    > do you think it should be set up? Should it lead to permanent resident
    > status? What about unintended consequences that will spring up from
    > any such new program (Thanks Folinskyinla for bringing up that
    > particular subject)?
    > I had a few ideas last night about some features that could be put into
    > the new system. I'm sure some of you might have some ideas too. Let's
    > hear them.
    > --
    > Posted via http://britishexpats.com


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 12/23/2003

Matthew Udall

I’ll start. Lets open the borders and let market forces prevail. We won’t need the program at all, and this will be the start of our new “global community� and new world order. I don’t think this is ever going to happen, but I wanted to put that one in to make Paul happy (as I would be no longer needed :-).

Ok, how about if you want to participate in the program, you cannot get authorization to participate in that program from within the U.S. Instead, you have to depart the U.S. by a certain date and you must check in with a U.S. Consulate abroad and process your case (under the new program) there. All prior illegal presence in the U.S. will be forgiven so you won’t face a ban when leaving, but you have to depart in order to qualify (and the U.S. at the same time will fortify the border during this exodus period to make it harder for illegal traffic to flow in either direction in the future).

The program will lead to LPR status (which is the second greatest gift the U.S. can bestow upon anybody, second only to U.S. citizenship), to provide an incentive in participating in the program, but in order to participate you must depart, than come back in under the new program. Eligibility to get in on this program will be only for a certain window of time (lets say a 6 month period). If one is18 years old (or older… this will keep innocent children from being stung by this) and doesn’t depart and get signed up under the new program by a certain date, than its too late to participate and you will be permanently barred form participating if another “batch� is processed in the future under a similar program. Cancellation of removal will also be no longer available to those who decide not to participate and instead chose to remain illegally in the U.S.

Make it clear that for now, this is a one shot program that may or may not come up again, and that no future similar programs, or “amnesties� will be offered except for another possible round under this program at some future date.

Requiring illegals to depart the U.S. might lessen the sting to those who think we are rewarding illegal conduct, and will allow a new generation of legitimized workers and families in to help the U.S. economy (as well as helping themselves).

-//-

OK, so I'm not a legislator and this is probably a stupid plan. What are your ideas?

Andrew Defaria

Since we have supposedly beefed up our borders with the US-VISTA system
(or whatever it's called) and the fingerprint/scan thing so as to insure
that people entering the US are not terrorists or criminals how about this?

Implement the guest worker program but require that everybody who wants
a guest worker visa go to a POE and make them go through this new
US-VISTA thing so we have their finger prints and pictures and have them
registered to start with.
--
I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.

jeffreyhy

Matt,

I see a practial problem. This program is for immigrants who are working in the US. For high-skill work I can see ways for US employers and foreign workers to connect. For the kinds of low-skill, low-education work that that the undocumented workers perform, I don't see any economically practical ways to do this. Even sending a caravan of busses on a 'recruiting' tour of our nearest neighbor to the south would cost too much.

Even if there was a feasible matching mechanism, would a worker already in the US give up a job he's got to go back home, get in line with everyone else there, and hope to get his job back when the recruiters come through? I expect not.

The present workers already have connections with the employers, so maybe the employers will not mount recruiting drives but will instead wait for the processing to take place and bring their present employees back as legals? Again, I think not. The floors and dishes need to be washed today, the lawns and gardens and office cleaning needs to be to be done today, the crops need to be sown and harvested today. Not next year when the processing is done. The job of any worker who leaves will be immediately filled by someone who stays around or who comes inward accross the border while the naive believers in the program are heading home - to stay.

Regards, JEff

A-Man

I have already said my piece(s) on this issue in another thread. Any who is
interested, I would encourage to read the following from Colorado
Congressman Tom Tancredo who just happens to be against all forms of illegal
immigration. He makes some good points (summarized below):

http://www.house.gov/tancredo/newsro...003_06_18.html

Summary
---------

- It is his opinion that America has an open-door immigration policy (he is
referring specifically to illegal immigration).
- Trying to counter the claim that Americans don't want low-wage jobs, he
cites a restaurant in northern Denver, CO that received 600 applications on
the first day for a $3 / hour waiter job advertised in the newspaper.
- He questions why such a high number of people are being brought into the
country on H-1b and L-1 visas in the IT field when there are millions of US
citizens looking for IT work.
- He wants Americans to know the truth in that the H1-B and L-1 visa
programs are cheap labor programs. He says they are in no way being used
for their intended purposes. He cited one company in which 5,000 people
(half of the companies entire US workforce) held an L-1 visa, and wonders
how 5,000 people could have such specialized skills that they needed to
leave their home country to come to America to perform these skills.
- He thinks that the net effect to US taxpayers to support illegal
immigration is a large burden. His reasoning is that they work for the most
part in low-wage work paying little to nothing in taxes, but the
infrastructure needs to be there to support them (education, health care,
housing).

These are his claims and I am just summarizing them, it is an interesting
read however.


    > I had a few ideas last night about some features that could be put into
    > the new system. I'm sure some of you might have some ideas too. Let's
    > hear them.

What are your ideas?

Mrraveltay

Matthew Udall wrote:

    > Ok, how about if you want to participate in the program, you cannot get
    > authorization to participate in that program from within the U.S.

I like that idea... And if the program will only be instituted if the US
has the money to pay for it.. After all, we are facing a record budget
deficit and really don't have extra money to give HS for this.
AND........ I am not in favor of doing anything that ties up USCIS or
Consulates from assisting the people who have been trying to legally
immigrate. I agree that we might need a worker visa program that can
ensure that pay is fare and Americans are not undrecut for jobs simply
because the pay is better than an immigrant worker could earn in their
home country. I also do not see a reason to continue to offer amnesty.
The first crack at the new immigrant worker program should go to those
that are NOT here illegally.

Mrraveltay

A-MAN wrote:

    > I have already said my piece(s) on this issue in another thread. Any who is
    > interested, I would encourage to read the following from Colorado
    > Congressman Tom Tancredo who just happens to be against all forms of illegal
    > immigration. He makes some good points (summarized below):
    >
    > http://www.house.gov/tancredo/newsro...003_06_18.html
    >
    > Summary
    > ---------
    >
    > - It is his opinion that America has an open-door immigration policy (he is
    > referring specifically to illegal immigration).
    > - Trying to counter the claim that Americans don't want low-wage jobs, he
    > cites a restaurant in northern Denver, CO that received 600 applications on
    > the first day for a $3 / hour waiter job advertised in the newspaper.

Would you say that a $3 per hour waiter job gets the waiter only $3 per
hour? I doubt there are a lot of Americans lined up for low pay jobs in
the Salinas, CA area that would require them to be bent overthe fields
much of the day.

    > - He questions why such a high number of people are being brought into the
    > country on H-1b and L-1 visas in the IT field when there are millions of US
    > citizens looking for IT work.

I don't know about now, but I know about 3 or 4 years ago when I was
interviewing, it was difficult to find qualified people. Simply having a
degree and/or experience doesn't mean you should be working at any high
tech job.


    > - He wants Americans to know the truth in that the H1-B and L-1 visa
    > programs are cheap labor programs.

I would tend to disagree for the most part. I don't deny there are
abuses of visas, but the H1-Bs that I know about are not "cheap labor"


He says they are in no way being used
    > for their intended purposes. He cited one company in which 5,000 people
    > (half of the companies entire US workforce) held an L-1 visa, and wonders
    > how 5,000 people could have such specialized skills that they needed to
    > leave their home country to come to America to perform these skills.

What company was he referring to? Would you rather have 5000 people
come into the US to work AND PAY TAXES, or have them outside of the US
working?

L-1s are transfers from company's with overseas operations.
There is no requirement that they have to search for Americans with the
skills the L-1 employee has.

It is highly likely they would have people with a knowledge of the
things below. In fact, they would have had to work for the overseas
company for at least 1 out of the last 3 years to qualify for a L-1.
The "Specialist Knowledge Staff" would also be permitted to remain for
up to 5 years.

According to the info I have, I suspect they fall under the following)

************************************************** ************************
2.
Specialist Knowledge Staff

This category covers those with knowledge of the company's
products/services, research, systems, proprietary techniques,
management, or procedures. Staff in this category are issued an L1B
visa, initially for three years extendible to a maximum of five years.

************************************************** ************************



    > - He thinks that the net effect to US taxpayers to support illegal
    > immigration is a large burden. His reasoning is that they work for the most
    > part in low-wage work paying little to nothing in taxes, but the
    > infrastructure needs to be there to support them (education, health care,
    > housing).
    >
    > These are his claims and I am just summarizing them, it is an interesting
    > read however.
    >
    >
    >
    >>I had a few ideas last night about some features that could be put into
    >>the new system. I'm sure some of you might have some ideas too. Let's
    >>hear them.
    >
    >
    > What are your ideas?
    >
    >

Rete

My thoughts on the proposal as I have read them

While it is viewed by many as purely an economic decision on the part of the President and as a way of ensuring a higher Hispanic vote in the upcoming Presidental election, I have one strong issue which deals with the criteria of the program.

I do not believe that the opportunity to participate in an unskilled labor pool should be open to any illegal alien presently living and working in the US at the moment.

It appears to me, that although this is not an amnesty as we have seen in the past, that to allow those who have knowingly and willingly broken the existing laws of immigration to participate in this program is saying to those immigrants who have traveled the many twisted and convoluted roads to legal migration that our journey is a meaningless mockery of present existing immigration laws. I don't care if the alien is from Mexico, Canada, the FSU, Britian or Jamacia. If they have broken the laws of immigration, they should not be rewarded for their behavior.

My suggestion would be that those illegal immigrations leave the US and show proof that they have resided outside of the US for a minimum of six months before they are allowed to participate.

As well, since the USCIS is far into the red, that fees paid by those who are seeking legal migration to the US not be increased to supplement the cost of their "petitions". We are already paying the fees for asylum seekers who are given the right to work as soon as they file for asylum. If these illegal aliens can find the money to pay coyotes and snakeheads to get them to the US illegally, they can take that money instead and apply it to the legal pursuit of migration.

Rete

Rete

Is that not what they do to H-1B skilled workers whose employers do not sponsor them for a green card? Should unskilled workers be treated differently because of their lack of education and/or skill?

Rete

Rete

Damn I read your post after I wrote mine. We are not suppose to agree on things.

But I won't take my words back.

Rete

cindyabs

From a practical standpoint as a taxpayer, funding this idea, to be specific, I have a problem with it, based on our current deficit situation. As a member of this NG I have a problem with it, especially after reading the link Mr F provided this morning on the analysis and subsequent shortfalls found in the current "legal" immigrant visa programs.

Andy Platt

"Rete" <member167@british_expats.com> wrote:

    > Is that not what they do to H-1B skilled workers whose employers do not
    > sponsor them for a green card? Should unskilled workers be treated
    > differently because of their lack of education and/or skill?

In my experience H-1Bers who want stay have been able to find sponsors. The
recent economic downturn did quash some of this but it was not the norm. I'm
sure there are a few but it's not many. (I don't want to hear about the
scores who decided not to stay, I'm talking about the ones who wanted to).
Plus we must remember that a lot of H-1Bers (like me) would do very well if
they returned home which may not be true of the unskilled.

Andy.

--
I'm not really here, it's just your warped imagination
    > Rete
    > --
    > Posted via http://britishexpats.com