« February 2006 | Main | April 2006 »

Immigratiationation

I don't know about you, but I hate immigrants. Coming over here, taking our jobs and our women and our Starbucks coupons. Who do they think they are, anyway? They all smell of weird ethnic foods, they live ten to a room, and they're always on street corners looking for work or picking cotton or something. Oh, and they're lazy too. They just come over here to get free healthcare and breed like rabbits. If it was up to me, I'd build a big wall. That'll show em. Speaking as an American, I-- wait, what? I'm not American? I'm an immigrant? Oh. Well then. Immigrants? They're awesome. They should totally all get citizenship. Oh, and their choice of happy meal.

You'd be forgiven a bit of uncertainty on the question of whether immigrants are a welcome addition or a bunch of filthy dirty parasites who should go back where they came from and leave America to the Americans. (Not the Native Americans. They don't count. Besides, they get to bankrupt us at casinos). Going by the yelling between House and Senate this week, you are not alone in your ambivalence, though the bulk of the fighting was (as seems increasingly common) between Republicans, where the giants of WeAreToughOnNationalSecurity and WeLikeLowPaidWorkersJustFine grappled for ascendency.

The House Bill, passed in December, was quite hard-line by any measure. Not only did it put requirements on Employers to more thoroughly vet their employees, it increased funding for enforcement; would make being illegal a felony; criminalizes any aid to illegal immigrants (including aid provided by charities or church groups, from food to shelter to medical care). It was also happily dancing in the land of the sugarplum fairy as it envisioned detaining all illegal immigrants in federal custody pending trials or deportation (as opposed to the current procedure where such people are simply given a court date on a piece of paper, and asked nicely to show up to be deported - somehow, not many of them show up). The President's plan for a guest-worker program was rejected out of hand, which is quite the thing for a Republican-led Congress to do - but then this is an election year, and Georgie won't be around too much longer.

The Senate bill passed last night was by comparison to the House bill far more conciliatory. It offers provisions not only for guest workers to gain a path to full citizenship, but also a way for those already in the country to get into the queue (albeit the BACK of the queue, with extra fines and back taxes and background checks to pass). The bill passed the Senate committee with the votes of all 8 Democratic members, and 4 of the 10 Republicans, enough to put it over the top - and further displaying where the division lines are drawn. The real fun starts now, as both bills have to be reconciled with each other before going before the President. It should be fun to watch. And boy, I'm glad I have a green card already.

What surprised me the most in this whole debate this year has been the mass protests we've seen in California and elsewhere. Aren't mass protests what those crazy Europeans do? Well, five hundred thousand might not count as a general strike, but it's still pretty impressive. In years past, those most affected by the debate - the illegal workers themselves - tend to shy away from publicity, rocking the boat, or anything that would bring attention, really. It has the potential to kickstart the debate into a new level.

Business groups are also standing in support of immigrant's rights groups. Surprise you? It shouldn't; they have traditionally tended to be in favor of anything that meant they got more cheap labor with no real need to check documents too closely. As illegals are more easily exploited than any other sector of the workforce, they're great to hire! You don't have to pay a living wage, or benefits, and you can just fire them at will. Even better though, because you can do that, it makes it easier to offer lower wages to actual Americans, too! After all, if Jose will do your job for $8.00 an hour, that means you'd better do it for that - or less! Competition and capitalism at its finest. It is interesting to see Republicans actually opposing immigration on the grounds it depresses wages for lower-income American workers (a notion debunked by a recent paper from the American Immigration Law Foundation); I guess the notion of having companies pay a living wage in the first place is nicely antiquated.

The entire immigration issue does leave a bitter taste in my mouth. Mainly because it seems so easy for companies to relocate out of State - or even nation - to find the best location. The most tax free, with easiest environmental regulation, loose labor protection laws and highest profit potential. Try and do that as an individual though, and you'll find it's not so easy. Apparently free trade doesn't trickle down to the trade of your skills for a decent wage, if that means crossing a border.

For the most part, those in this country illegally are actually working, making money to either support families here, or their country of origin. It makes a hell of a lot more sense to have them legal and paying more taxes and be subject to the same protections and responsibilities, than it does to pretend erecting more fences is going to stop people wanting to come here to seek a better life for themselves and their families. Ultimately, if you're anti-immigration, you're rejecting everything that built this country over the years.

Posted by union_jack at 10:34 PM | Comments (0)

Arabs, Republicans and Ports, Oh My

I really must apologize for the gap in posts of late to my readers (all three of you). Work has a way of grabbing you by the throat. Hopefully this will ease up in the weeks ahead! Speaking of things grabbing you, all of the Senate and Congress appear to have been grabbed by the collective urge to be seen to be Speaking Out On National Security Matters That Affect This Great Nation. Also known as We Don't Want No Filthy Arabs Controlling Our Ports, depending on which spin you want to believe.

The Dubai Ports World takeover of P&O, a venerable British company, was one of those deals that in other times would have passed unheralded and uncommented on except for some notes in the Wall Street Journal. These are not those times, and it seems natural that foreign investment may be given a little more scrutiny given that a sizeable chunk of the world doesn't seem to like America very much at the moment. Apparently, scrutiny was given to the deal to the point of the company agreeing secretly to provide additional information to US Government agencies. Was this enough to reassure? Clearly it was not.

Is the criticism of the deal legitimate? I personally have not seen so many politicians scramble to be on the right side of an issue since Jack Abramoff's fall from grace. With even a cursory glance at the evidence, very little supports the self-serving rhetoric that swirled the halls of power. US Port operations, like those of many industrialized nations, are run by many international companies. Some of those companies are American. Some are European. Some are Chinese. Personally if I had to worry about a foreign owned entity, it would be one that may be partially controlled by the Chinese military. Not because I don't like the Chinese - their crab rangoon is the best - but that military involvement in supposed commercial entities just worries me, no matter the source.

To hear talk of the deal, people I spoke to seemed to think that at any second, New Jersey was about to be struck by a tsunami of robe-wearing sandal-flopping men riding camels around Newark, spitting cloves in the street and mocking the Great Satan of America. Little wonder that opinion polls put support for the deal at around 17%. When a few facts were brought into the picture - for example that the US Coast Guard controls port security along with other Federal and State agencies - opinion changed from outright rejection to wariness and requests for more details. Which is a much smarter way to approach the issue. Unfortunately a lot of the acceptance or rejection seem to split along party lines at least among the populace, if not politicians.

Right up until the end of last week, I was wondering if Bush would actually have to exercise a veto for the first time in his Presidency. Congress attached a rider derailing the Port purchase to a bill that provided funds for Katrina relief and Iraq; a bill that Bush would have had a very hard time throwing back. Unfortunately this nailbiter came to a very anticlimactic end as the company at the heart of the controversy announced it would transfer its US assets to an as yet unnamed "US entity". The deal has yet to be worked out, and so there may yet be controversy. If the company divests its interests cleanly the matter is likely resolved, for now. Instead, they could attempt to shuffle paperwork to satisfy the letter, if not the spirit of their statement and then we can look forward to it flaring up again.

While the GOP has been split along free-trade vs. security lines (two uneasy bedfellows at the best of times) it has been up to the Democratic party to attempt to make hay with a brazen shamelessness that would make the most red-blooded GOP spinmaster proud. Many of the luminaries of the party, among them presidential hopefuls, have been loudly declaiming their opposition to the deal to talk show hosts, newspapers, television, and soon, bumper stickers. Polls seem to indicate it may have worked. It is fortunate for politicians in this era that the average voter could tell you more about their local baseball franchise than matters of state*.

It's very depressing that the Democratic Party still has no coherent national message after six years in opposition, so I can understand you have to take your shots where you can. Better hope Bush is caught on camera eating a baby between now and November; with that plus Iraq, plus the Medicare disaster, plus the deficit, plus the economy, plus the widening gap between rich and poor, plus the lack of affordable healthcare, plus the failures of No Child Left Behind, plus the lobbying scandal, plus the bribery scandal, plus the Tom Delay scandal, plus this ports deal... you might pick up a couple of seats!

Not that I'm bitter about your ineptitude lately, or anything...

* This upsets me not because people don't share my morbid interest in politics, but just that they like baseball. Watch more rugby, people. Now THAT's a sport.

Posted by union_jack at 07:48 PM | Comments (0)