The latest CIS email below

1.
Immigration and Usurpation: Elites, Power, and the People’s Will
by Fredo Arias-King
Center for Immigration Studies Backgrounder, July 2006
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/back706.html

EXCERPT: ‘... If mass immigration from Latin America has debatable benefits for the United States as a whole, if a majority of the American people is against it, and if immigrants cannot vote until they become naturalized (which can take years after their arrival), why would nine-tenths of the legislators we spoke with be so keen on increasing immigration?
...
Also curiously, the Republican enthusiasm for increased immigration also was not so much about voting in the end, even with ‘converted’ Latinos. Instead, these legislators seemingly believed that they could weaken the restraining and frustrating straightjacket devised by the Founding Fathers and abetted by American norms. In that idealized ‘new’ United States, political uncertainty, demanding constituents, difficult elections, and accountability in general would ‘go away’ after tinkering with the People, who have given lawmakers their privileges but who, like a Sword of Damocles, can also ‘unfairly’ take them away. Hispanics would acquiesce and assist in the ‘natural progress’ of these legislators to remain in power and increase the scope of that power. In this sense, Republicans and Democrats were similar. ...’

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

2.
Analysis of the Senate Amnesty Plan: S2611 Repeats Many of the Mistakes of the Past

Statement of Steven A. Camarota before the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims, July 18, 2006
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/sactestimony071806.html

EXCERPT: ‘... It is often said that history repeats itself. If S2611 become law, that will certainly be true. We would again make the mistake of thinking that amnesty for illegals and increased legal immigration will solve the problem. It didn’t in 1986 and 1990 and it almost certainly will not do so now. Legal immigration has almost doubled since the mid-1980s, but illegal immigration has increased right along with it. In fact, rewarding illegal behavior and increasing legal immigration, as is the past, will only spur more illegal immigration. Like the 1986 amnesty, the immigration service will not be able to handle the crush of work, with the result that there will again be massive fraud. Only this time, because the amnesty is so much larger, fraud also will be larger, making it all the more likely that terrorists and criminals will receive amnesty. Moreover, S2611 will not solve the problem of job competition for the less-educated or the fiscal burden on taxpayers caused by illegals being allowed to stay. Finally, because S2611 is so out of step with public opinion, if it were ever implemented, it would only add to the frustration and dissatisfaction of the American people. Of course, history does not have to repeat itself. Congress can pass sensible legislation that enforces the law and responds to concerns of the American people.’

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

3.
Examining the Need for Immigration Reform, Part II.

Statement of Michael W. Cutler before the Senate Judiciary Committee, July 12, 2006
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/cutlertestimony071206.html

EXCERPT: ‘... If we were able to make the borders of the United States utterly impassible to illegal aliens but then do little, if anything, to detect and combat immigration benefit fraud thereby providing immigration benefits to aliens who are not entitled to such benefits, we act as foolishly as the homeowner who, fearful of having his home burglarized, invests considerable effort and money on buying strong doors and locks for his doors and windows and takes other such measures, but then hangs the key to the secure locks on the outside doorknob, making it simple for anyone passing by to gain entry into his home. ...’

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

4.
DHS Intelligence and Border Security: Delivering Operational Intelligence

Statement of Michael W. Cutler before the U.S. House of Representative Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment, June 28, 2006
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/cutlertestimony062806.html

EXCERPT: ‘... The routine enforcement of immigration laws can provide our government with the opportunity to cultivate informants and provide essential insight if our agents are properly briefed and properly debriefed. They need to be encouraged to come forward whenever they make observations that arouse their suspicions or curiosity and need to have an easy way to report on their findings in the field. ...’

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

5.
Immigrant Employment Verification and Small Business

Statement of Mark Krikorian before the House of Representative Small Business Committee, Subcommittee on Workforce, Empowerment and Government Programs, June 27, 2006
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/msktestimony062706.html

EXCERPT: ‘... But it’s not just that a verification system would sit lightly on the back of business; it actually makes good business sense to participate. Many small businesses might well be alarmed by all the talk they’ve been hearing of ‘penalizing employers’ as an immigration-enforcement strategy. While crooked, faithless employers deserve whatever penalties they receive, the point to an employer-verification system is not to penalize employers, but to empower them. By taking the guesswork out of hiring a legal workforce, the system that grows out of the Basic Pilot can help firms build a workforce on concrete rather than sand, a workforce that will have no reason to run away if there’s an immigration raid, a workforce that won’t be arrested when the inevitable—and I believe it is inevitable—crackdown comes.

‘In fact, I would submit that public companies that are not participating in the Basic Pilot are neglecting their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders through imprudent labor practices that will jeopardize the stability of their labor force. Privately held businesses, while not answerable to stockholders, nonetheless have a moral responsibility to their employees and customers and creditors to conduct due diligence in hiring. ...’

Posted by jonjayray on Wednesday, July 19, 2006 at 08:14 AM in
Comments (1) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Next entry: Ninth Circuit Court strikes again!

Previous entry: Where is our own fully-funded anti-defamation organization?