Your Ad Here
2006 May 21 Sunday
Senator Sessions Reveals US Senate Deceives on Immigration

US Senator Jeff Sessions (R Alabama) has made a very important speech about the nightmare immigration legislation now pending before the US Senate. That legislation, the Hagel-Martinez Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (CIRA, S.2611), would, even in its current amended form, increase the rate of legal immigration by a factor of 4 or 5! Go read the full speech:

Then perhaps the most significant amendment that was adopted was a Bingaman amendment. It would reduce the incredible escalating number under the new H-2C visa foreign worker program. Under the original bill, the numbers were unbelievable. The amendment reduced the total number of immigrants that would have come into the United States if that bill became law from 78 to 217 million to a lower 73 million to 93 million. That was a strong vote for that provision and we make progress in reducing the numbers.

However, this bill, S. 2611, still enacts a four- to fivefold increase over the current levels of legal immigration into America over 20 years. Current law would bring in 18.9 million over 20 years. Did you get that? This bill, if passed today, even after the Bingaman amendment passed by a substantial majority, would still bring into our country three, four, five times–at least four times, I suggest–the number of people who can come into our country legally today.

That is a huge number and will lead us at the end of 20 years to have the highest percentage of foreign-born Americans this Nation has ever had in its history, including the great migration period between 1880 and 1925. It is a colossal bill still in terms of those numbers.

The American middle class is just not good enough for our elites. We do not satisfy them. They prefer a much larger and dumber lower class over which they can rule. More maids. More gardeners. More nannies. More roofers to enhance their mansions. They want servants, not citizens.

Sessions is only sane by US Senate standards. He still likes large scale immigration.

But Sessions reveals the CIRA legislation contains a very automated way for so-called temporary workers to rapidly convert themselves into permanent residents and citizens. The idea that the illegals are getting to sent "to the back of the line" is a huge lie by Jorge W. Bush and company.

The section we were trying to change was the section that is as bogus as any part of the bill. It is the section that is captioned in big print: temporary guest worker. That is what the President has been saying he favors. He told me that personally a couple of days ago. He told me, when he flew to Alabama, that he believed in temporary workers. But it is not so that this bill creates a temporary worker program. I challenge any one last night to tell me that what I am saying is not true.

Under this bill, under that rubric of big print language, “Nonimmigrant Visa Reform, Subsection A, Temporary Guest Workers'’–what it really says is if you come into this country under this work visa you get to convert your status to a green card holder–a legal permanent resident that can then become a citizen. Somebody said last night: Why are people afraid to discuss this issue? I say to the supporters of the bill: Why are you afraid to tell the truth about your bill? Why do you title the section one thing and then write it to actually do another?

Why are you putting in here “temporary guest workers'’ when there is nothing “temporary'’ or “guest'’ about them. Why? Are they afraid the American people will find out what is really in that provision which would have brought in, had it not been amended by Senator Bingaman, perhaps 130 million new people into the country permanently? What kind of temporary program is that?

How does it work? This is the way it works: You come in, get a job; you come in under this guest worker proposal, and within the first day you arrive, your employer can seek a green card for you. If you qualify–and most will–then that green card will be issued, and you are then a legal permanent resident. You are a legal permanent resident within weeks or months of entry into the country, and within 5 years of being a legal permanent resident and having a green card, you can apply for citizenship. If you know a little English and don’t get arrested and convicted of a felony, you will be made a citizen by right under that provision. So it is not a temporary guest worker program. We need one in the bill. It is not there. That is what the President says he supports.

The American people don’t think we ought to huddle up, have some groups come in and meet with a few Senators and have them foist on the American people an immigration bill that ignores their concerns about legality and their legitimate concerns over the depressing of the wages of American citizens. That is not a myth. The law of supply and demand has not been abrogated with regard to wages and labor.

In terms of lawfulness, decency, morality, and the national interest, the American people are head and shoulders above the Members of Congress who are asserting and pushing this flawed legislation. A huge majority of the American people have been right on this issue for decades. It is the executive branch and the Congress that have been derelict in their most solemn duties. If the American people had been listened to and not been stiff-armed by an arrogant elitist bureaucracy and political class, we wouldn’t have 11 million to 20 million people in our country illegally today.

Again, read the whole thing.

Patrick Cleburne asks: Time for President Sessions (R- AL)? I'd almost think so but for one passage in his speech about increasing legal immigration. Vice President Jeff Bingaman (R NM) would probably make a good match to a President Sessions. Though President Tom Tancredo (R CO) would much more closely represent the views of the majority of the American public. We need far less immigration, both legal and illegal.

Steve Sailer thinks the US Senators were either too dumb or intellectually lazy to know what a nightmare their staffers had concocted.

My guess would be that a small inner circle of lobbyists and staffers constructed this nightmare bill knowing reasonably well what it entailed. Everybody else went along with it without asking what it would do because, as everybody who is anybody knows, only shallow people think deeply about immigration. An insouciant attitude about radical demographic change shows that you are so high up the social ladder that you don't have to worry about how things like lower wages, increased crime, and crummier public schools will affect you and your family.

The big benefit of what the US Senate has done comes from the scale of what they propose. That such a huge rapid demographic transformation of America could be produced by this legislation is shocking a lot of people out of their complacency over immigration. Over on View From the Right One of Larry Auster's readers comments that the American middle class finally is starting to feel its world is threatened by the Open Borders crowd.

Things are changing. I recently have had conversations with two middle-of–the-road white women who would previously never have dared have a non-PC thought enter their heads suddenly discussing this “immense problem of America’s being swamped by S. American immigrants.”

Do you remember that once I told you that the dominant American thought was that “there would always be enough”? I meant that most middle class, muddle-class Americans thought they could always keep giving it away, but that their world would never change. They are in the beginning of the wake up stage.

Larry responds to his reader and argues that modern liberals have been preaching from a position where they incorrectly believed in the invulnerability of their society and world view.

Yes, they had to feel it before they could see it. (Who would have thought that the single most accurate and concise explanation of American attitudes toward mass non-Western immigration in the 21st century would come from George Washington?)

What you say is true. Modern liberalism is based on the assumption that “we” are invulnerable, that nothing that we do for the Other can ever cause any existential threat to ourselves. Therefore we can just keep giving and accommodating and celebrating and diversifying and nonjudgmentalizing and tolerating and including and surrendering forever.

The liberal (and libertarian) noblesse oblige toward the lower IQ brown people that underlies their Open Borders position is based on a big error. They think they can always maintain power, maintain their neighborhoods, maintain their control over the heights of academia, the media, and government. But a huge Hispanic influx will ultimately lead to the displacement of white liberals from many of their positions of power.

Update: If you want to contact your US Senators to express your displeasure at their plan to deluge the United States with tens of millions of immigrants in the next 20 years then you can find the web sites of each US Senator in this list. Similarly, you can find contact information for your US House Representative here.

Update II: Getting back to the Jeff Sessions speech: most of the huge surge of immigration that this bill creates will be dummies.

At the same time, we have done the research on it, and I will not go into the details, but the programs that allow most of the people to come into our country favor low-skilled workers. We think from 70 to 90, maybe 92 percent of the workers who will come in under the provisions of the bill in the Senate today will come in as low-skilled workers. That is very significant because it is quite clear from every professional, independent, pro-immigration economist who has analyzed it that low-skilled workers do not tend to pay as much in taxes as they take out.

Are the Senators morons? I mean, do they want to bring in large numbers of people who will make little and pay little in taxes while taking lots of taxpayer-funded services? Why are our elites so determined to ruin America?

In fact, if you read the bill, you will discover there has been a studied and carefully carried out plan to conceal how many people will come in under the temporary guest worker programs when, in fact, what they mislabel as a temporary program is in fact a permanent worker program that leads on a direct path to citizenship in fairly short order. I am talking about the future immigration programs in the bill here. I am not talking about the other 11 to 20 million illegal aliens who may claim amnesty under this bill.

Liars and destructive. That's America's elite in the early 21st century.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2006 May 21 11:29 AM  Immigration Politics


Comments
Kurt said at May 21, 2006 12:36 PM:

Having done political activism (The Launch Service Purchase Act of 1990), I think Steve Sailer's explanation is accurate. Congressmen, especially Senators, rarely read all of the stuff they vote on. This is mainly because there is so much of it. They have staff aids who read this stuff for them, then recommend a vote. We found this out when working our space bill in 1989-1990. The only way to stop these immigration bills is to deluge your senators with letters urging them to not sign them. The staffer actually will listen if they get a huge number of letters.

Furious Frank said at May 21, 2006 3:57 PM:

As I watch this self-destructive immigration bill making the rounds in the Senate, I grow more and more alienated. How can I look in the mirror and call myself an American anymore if, as you say Randall, the Senate is determined to turn us into a nation of servants? I'm so fed up I'm almost ready to emigrate.

There's one thing holding me back from such a step, and that's the very real probability that this bill will be defeated. But we can't sit idle.

I call on everyone reading this, to call your representatives in Congress, send them letters and even (if you're thus inclined) to protest in front of the Capitol, and demand that this bill be defeated. Appeal to both the better instincts of our members of Congress (preservation of the Republic) and to their fears, specifically, their fears of being defeated in an election. In your phone calls and letters to Congress, let our Senators and our Representatives in the House know, in no uncertain terms, that if they vote in favor of this disgusting immigration bill or support it in any way, that they will be defeated when they run for election, and in the most humiliating manner. If they're Republicans, let them know that you're a Republican, but that you'll leave the party if they vote for the bill, and that you'll actively work to defeat them in the next elections. Ditto if they're Democrats. Nothing works as well as tremendous political pressure, so hit them hard. If the immigration bill fails, no big deal-- at least then, maybe the next bill, providing for something as basic as increasing the number of Border Patrol agents and little more, would succeed. Just about anything would be preferable to what the traitors in the Senate have put forth here. This bill must be defeated, period. We have to do our part to ensure this.

Tim said at May 21, 2006 4:27 PM:

Randall, you're right that at some point sheer weight of numbers will allow Latin Americans to displace affluent whites from their
positions of power and prestige. It's currently happening in Texas and already has happened in Miami, which is now completely run by Latin Americans. Affirmative action, electoral power, and big numbers are in combination going to lead to Latin Americans dominating large parts of the country at both the lower and higher end of the economic ladder. By then we can look forward to the U.S. scaling
tbe cultural heights of Brazil and Colombia.

noone said at May 21, 2006 4:52 PM:

I'm actually surprised,this bill is nothing more than an up-and-down vote to abolish the the American Nation.I never would have expected our elites to undertake such a crude and blunt act.
Our elites prefered method has been midnight votes in late December to slip things past us rubes.

This is historic,we called them,they saw us and raised the pot.
The big question is,are they bluffing or are we?
When push comes to shove,will we tar and feather them,run them out of town on a rail?
Or will we just grumble?

Randall Parker said at May 21, 2006 5:05 PM:

Guys,

We have to act. It occurs to me we have to start yelling at our elected representatives.

Now is the time to complain loudly. You can find the web sites of each US Senator in this list to get contact info. Similarly, you can find contact information for your US House Representative here.

Have you complained yet? I'm doing to at this moment....

dennisw said at May 21, 2006 5:05 PM:

Randall, you're right that at some point sheer weight of numbers will allow Latin Americans to displace affluent whites from their
positions of power and prestige.

I don't have a high regard for the Latino culture. It's best confined to Latino nations south of us. I prefer the "Anglo" ways of America and being Jewish I'm a neutral observer. And this is how it was for most of America's years. Latino-Hispanic ways have made an ungodly mess of most nations south of us. So Latinos bail out, come here illegally, then proceed to lecture us via large demonstrations that they have a right to be here

Uncle Vet said at May 21, 2006 9:37 PM:

As an old Vietnam vet geezer in his 60's, I never thought I'd see before me, what's unfolding now in the US Congress-- the deliberate destruction of the US. Though this process is well under way anywya. I hope at the very least, this finally wakes people up and makes it clear that the legal immigration policies are a greater threat to national integrity than even the illegal numbers-- with the numbers currently being floated, this nation's founding White population will be a minority within about 20 years. And through the secretive amnesties, creeping quota increases and other quiet ways that still more millions of cheap-laborites are imported, US Whites are on our way to a minority in any case.

I can't believe it's come to this. I ask myself today, what were I and all of my buddies actually fighting for back then in the Southeast Asian jungles? What were we bleeding and dying for? A nation with a corrupt government, with a virtually unshakeable hold on power, that insists on turning us into a minority? I've befriended many immigrants and African-Americans before, but sheer numbers-- absolute and relative-- do matter, and they matter an awful lot. The truth is that there are an awful lot of social pathologies in those populations that persist across generations, at a rate far higher than those in the White population, yet we can't honestly point this out without facing ostracism.

There was a young black woman at my old office who was caught stealing items from the place on many occasions. I really, truly felt for her like a bleeding-heart liberal-- she's experienced childhood traumas, and suffered things that most of us could hardly conceptualize. But the fact is, her various pathologies were expensive and a drain on everybody-- on our company and on the commonwealth as a whole-- to care for her. We can't afford too much of this. With our immigration policies, we're multiplying this problem manifold.

I have 5 grandkids, and I honestly am wondering like some of you here, if I want them to be raised in the USA anymore. The toxicity of this place is stifling. I realize that much of Europe like the hapless French of course, as well as Canada and the Aussies have the same sorts of problems, but there are other options. Me, I've always had a fondness for those small European countries that more or less skipped out on the age of overseas imperialism that wound up ensnaring Britain and France-- the Austrias and Luxembourgs and Liechtensteins of Europe, for example. Seems like they have decent schools and a modern society w/o the immigration insanity of the US and much of the rest of the West. Some of my grandkids have signed up for German in school, and now I'm starting to wonder if this decision might wind up being far more useful than any of us would have imagined initially.

crush41 said at May 21, 2006 9:39 PM:

JD Hayworth is currently the most eloquent restrictionist in Congress, and he's on the "front lines" so-to-speak. Shoot him a quick email (use ZIP 85280) encouraging him to throw his hat into the '08 primaries. He's certainly voluble enough to at least force open-border aspirants like Sam Brownback out of the smoke-and-mirrors routine.

If you want your Congressional representatives to hear you, arm yourself with information on each one's immigration voting record at numbersusa prior to letting them have it.

John S Bolton said at May 22, 2006 12:27 AM:

What we have is a small group with self-conscious malice, who will try anything they can get away with to destroy civilization and gain power. Immigration, like affirmative action, is chosen because they then get to say that all opposed are simply expressing racism. This way, no argument is needed; you just say all opposition is diagnosable as xenophobic. This has been the pattern for over 40 years now; people should see it coming by now.
Others go along with this because that's how they operate: go along to get along.
What matters is the motivation of the high-powered people who actually know what they're doing.
Racial conflict is the way to get war and war powers internally.
America is resistant to despotism; there are people with more money than they can use, but nowhere near as much power as they want. Others don't care about money, only power.
What they have in common is that they will try anything that works, accepting any degree of damage to civilization this entails, in order to get the increments of power which are otherwise unavailable.

John S Bolton said at May 22, 2006 2:13 AM:

One way we know that power-seekers are playing hardball is how extreme amd obvious the lying is, that they use, to try to get some expansion of aggression. This is politics; there is only one question: will what is proposed raise the level of aggression in the jurisdiction for which the decision is to be made, or not? If this question is evaded, it will be for the obvious reason.

D Flinchum said at May 22, 2006 7:32 AM:

"Randall, you're right that at some point sheer weight of numbers will allow Latin Americans to displace affluent whites from their positions of power and prestige."

I have told my liberal friends that they have more to fear in the areas of gay rights and women's rights from the massive influx of third-world immigrants than they do from the religious-right in the US. They don't believe me - yet. I can't say that there is no third-world country that respects women's rights and gay's right anywhere near the way that the US does since I don't know about every third-world country in the world, but I can say I don't know of any. Certainly not in Latin America.

The problem, of course, is that by the time they wake up, it will be too late. You can't un-do decades of massive immigration with more and more becoming citizens and PRODUCING citizens via high birth rates and family re-unification the way you can un-do tax laws or even foreign policy.

What I occasionally get is that women and gays have it so much better in western Europe. Alas, that may unravel even sooner than the US.

Michael S. Hartman said at May 22, 2006 1:14 PM:

I have read several good points. It bothers, but does not surprise me that a vote might swing on the bias of an aide. We might as well vote on the Internet.

Part of me is screaming, "Write! Register! Vote!" (which I have, and will) In 1986 we had reform that ended in amnesty, and our present problem. In 2001 we had 9-11 because a handful of people came across the Canadian border, and lived as illegal immigrants. FEMA under Homeland Security showed us how well our government does its job. Not too long ago there were some backroom deals concerning American ports. There were scandals involving lobbying. Millions have invaded this country without consent. Three large drug cartels are trying to get across the border into this country. A half-mile border crossing concrete reinforced tunnel was found where tons of drugs were transported. Smaller tunnels are in such numbers that roads are collapsing. Congress has sat by. There has already been talk that the Congress hopes to put off the immigration vote until after the election. (Doing this might reduce voter leverage, allowing Congress to skirt the issue, and serve their special interest.) Proposals are amended back to square one. Eighty one percent of Americans polled agree that there is a problem. The Blogsphere has exploded on the issue. Despite this Congress hesitates, and stalls. How many outcries do they need? We are told that there are too many immigrants to deport. If 12 million American taxpayers refused to pay their taxes, it wouldn't take long to arrest and jail them. No amnesty. No debate.

We are told we shouldn't deport illegal immigrants because it will hurt businesses that have hired a lot of illegal immigrants. Duh, did I miss something? The more you break the law the more you should be excused? They tell us the illegals that have been here the longest should stay while those here least should go. What? If I break the law longer, I should be excused. If I told my parents either as a kid, I would have been laughed out of the room (or sent to mine), yet we have adults in all seriousness saying it. Has this country lost its common sense? Some have said that we should make them all legal. Reminded me of the seventies argument that making Marijuana legal would solve the problem. What was that mantra they had for people who wanted to keep it illegal?

We need to get this situation under control, and not let those who work for us listen to thoughtless babble and special interest. It is our right to say who comes into our home. Write! Register! Vote! We can't wait another twenty years.

Matra said at May 22, 2006 1:25 PM:

"In 2001 we had 9-11 because a handful of people came across the Canadian border, and lived as illegal immigrants"

Those early reports that the terrorists crossed from Canada turned out to be untrue. The blame lies entirely with the US.

D Flinchum said at May 23, 2006 4:29 AM:

"In 2001 we had 9-11 because a handful of people came across the Canadian border, and lived as illegal immigrants"

Those early reports that the terrorists crossed from Canada turned out to be untrue. The blame lies entirely with the US.


I'm not sure, but I think that all 19 of them came to the US legally but several had overstayed their visas. I read recently that about 40% of illegal immigrants are people who initially came here legally and overstayed visas.


Advertise here. Contact randall dot parker at ymail dot com
Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©