Immigration deal earns right's scorn, left's support

[pampango]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

"The bipartisan "grand bargain" on immigration announced Thursday -- promising the most sweeping changes to U.S. immigration law in more than two decades -- met a swift onslaught from the no-amnesty right and a warm, if qualified, embrace from leading pro-immigrant groups on the left.

No wonder. The pact offers quick legalization of the estimated 12 million people living illegally in the United States as of Jan. 1. Within eight years, it also would provide permanent residence -- the coveted green card -- to 4 million new immigrants, mostly family members of those already here, who have been waiting a decade or longer to enter the United States from Mexico, the Philippines and other countries."

"A point system would be created to lure the best and brightest workers from around the world in an effort to shape immigration to meet the national economic interests. The creation of a point system that weighs education and job skills, similar to those used in Canada, Great Britain and Australia, would change the way the United States decides who can enter the country."

"The pact could shatter at any moment. Immigration is among the most complex and emotional issues that Congress confronts. Senate debate, scheduled to start Monday, will determine if the bipartisan coalition can fend off Republicans opposing legalization and Democrats wary of a massive new temporary worker program that would start at 400,000 low-skill workers a year and could rise as high as 600,000."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/18/IMMIGRATION.TMP

---

Wow. We get legalization of those here illegally and others, mostly family members, waiting to come. They get a guest worker program and points-based immigration system. I guess we both get "enhanced border security", "interior enforcement" and new employment verification system.

This will be a very interesting political battle on both sides of the aisle.

[global1]

1. Why Am I Suspect That This Is A Rovian Trick To Win The WH For The Repugs In '08......

Support from the left. Blame 'amnesty' on the Dems. Make it a big emotional campaign issue that sways many people to vote against the Dems. Disinfranchise or scrutinize voter fraud in the run-up to '08.

Get our Dem candidates on the record for this so-called compromise.

I know you are saying that * supports this - but * won't be running in '08. Gives the Repug prez candidates a chance to distant themselves from *.

I just don't trust this whole thing. Am I too suspicious?

[skids]

2. An echo of a Rovian trick gone awry

Rove wanted immigration front and center last cycle. I'm not so sure he likes the issue right at the moment. His plan was to talk tough in November and then totally betray the right and roll over for amnesty after the Republican majority was sealed.

Even though there is plenty of Dem opposition to this in the rank and file it is the Republicans who are more comfortable coming out against it yelling and screaming on TV. They could use it as an excuse to pile on in any attempt to remove *. Surely it is a self-preservation tactic for the 08 congress.

As for whether it could have impacts on the presidential race, well it certainly will thin the herd in the Republican primary -- several of those candidates are so corporate and have been so supportive of wage suppression through this issue and the H1-Bs that they'll stand no chance. I guess the critical issue is what the Mittler and Giusolini have to say for themselves about it, the latter being a * booster will probably commit political suicide over it. What Romney has done I do not know. Seriously, I live in MA and I still don't know what if anything of note he has ever done. He even still hypes up his role on the Olympic comittee in his ads -- you'd think he'd have better material after a full term. But that's another issue.

I wouldn't expect third-party to be an outlet for opposition to this as the talk about Schumer/Tancredo is going to serve to drown out any other independent candidacies, and that ticket is fiercely pro-corporate.

So the little guy looks thoroughly screwed.

[pampango]

3. I don't know how much is Rovian and how much is Democratic

congressional leaders shooting our presidential chances in the foot, but it will be pretty easy for the Repubs to spin this as Democratic legislation. Bush will sign it, but, as you say, he is not running again so the other Repubs can easily run away from him.

I think this deal is pretty good from a pro-immigration perspective, but there is a lot of "anti-amnesty" popular sentiment and anger at the perceived effects of illegal immigrants on blue collar jobs and wages. It will be informative if any of our presidential candidates distance themselves from this proposed agreement to appeal to "popular sentiment".

[bushisdirt]

7. I believe you are right. As I said on another board, even if the

plan were perfect, which it isn't by a long shot, it shouldn't be done now. Not only does it make the Dems look bad for compromising, it gives Bush a victory where none is entitled. Pure Rove.

[Justyce]

12. I was going to post the same thing... the timing and

attention this is getting makes me think this is Rove's version of '04's "gay marriage" issue.

[pampango]

14. Damn that Rove! He has even got so far as to sign up Kennedy,

Feinstein and Reid to help him with his nefarious plans. The one guy he seems to have forgotten to get on board is Rush who seems to hate this deal so much he is turning blue in the face. It is good that Rove is losing his touch. Someone should tell him that the 2008 election is still 18 months away. He would have been smarter to get Kennedy to float this out there in May 2008 rather than now.

[fasttense]

4. Just another bomb in the War on the Middle Class

This legislation is exactly what the corporations were hoping for. No one has mentioned anything about holding huge conglomerates accountable for their illegal hiring practices. It simply focuses on the illegal. Until corporations stop luring illegals over the border to do their dirty work for them, no amount of unenforceable, convoluted, immigration law is going to make a difference.

"Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., promised amendments, saying she feared a guest worker program would "lead to more illegal immigration and downward pressure on wages.""

Maybe Sen. Boxer will hold all Americans (including the fat, rich CEOs), not just the illegals, accountable.

[Vinca]

5. I don't think you can say the "left," as a whole, supports this.

Lots of the "left" are closer to the "right" on this issue. In fact, this issue might be the one that keeps us from winning everything in 2008.

[pampango]

6. You are right. Some groups on the left and some on the right

will work to kill this deal, while Congressional leaders from both parties will work to get it passed. It could have a big impact in 2008, since it is about the only issue the Repubs have any hope of campaigning on.

[sweetjake]

8. I agree

I haven't posted here in a long time, but this bill has prompted me to do so.
There are a lot of issues carried with this bill to think about. I was thinking the other day about if a person with a Z-Visa will be allowed to pay into Social Security or not. And if so, then they leave and go back to their home country, will they and their entire family draw benefits at retirement or death? How would that work? SO many complexities in this bill make a lot of different groups unsupportive of it, left and right.
Saying that the Left supports it as a blanket statement gives people an "out" to say "See! The Dems wanted this...now look what happened". It just bothers me.

[Saturday]

19. My thoughts EXACTLY Vinca. n/t

[hogwyld]

9. One positive to take away from this

Immigrants traditionally vote Democrat by overwhelming numbers, so we can add another 12 - 20 million to our ranks, and kiss the GOP goodbye as they sprint to the dustbin of history.

[pampango]

10. You are certainly right about that, but I think that some on the

left fear that is precisely the reason for some Democratic leaders to support this - politics and power; not the merits of the issue. And, of course, the RW knows how immigrants traditionally vote, so you wonder why they think the deal is good for them in the long run. (Maybe they are just thinking about short term profits? ;) )

[BonnieJW]

11. My idiot brother-in-law

in an immigrant and votes repub.

[pingzing58]

13. Mexican culture is predominantly conservative and to the right.

Those that are to the left are fighting in Mexico for the
rights of the poor and the indigenous populations of which
there are 35 dominant native indian groups with their own
language, etc.  Those that would immigrate to the U.S. legally
and illegally are fiscal conservatives for the most part -
some are criminals.  Those that I know vote Republican and
believe in the Republican ideology.  The  U.S. native Mexicans
and Mexican Americans who experienced discrimination from 1930
to 1960 vote Democrat because we remember the "No
Mexicans Allowed" signs at restraunts, hotels, etc.  You
and I cannot allow our great nation to return to those days. 

[NorthernSpy]

15. they have no goddamn right to say that "the left" supports this...

Sure, the ivory tower left may well like this shit. Why not? They are just as much a part of America's elite class as their rightwing brethren in the corporate world.

But as for the American left that is still loyal to the interests of the American worker, we don't want it.


This is not really a left versus right issue. This is an elites versus the rest of us issue.

[sadiesworld]

16. Approximately 80% of the country opposes this crap...

surely that includes a dem or two. :eyes:

[piedmont]

17. What do mean by "we?"

I'm sure as hell not happy about amnesty and unlimited family-based immigration.

[pampango]

18. I meant that in the article the Democratic senators considered

amnesty and family-based immigration as considerable achievements. Hence the perhaps misplaced "we". (I think that the Democratic big shots look at the 10+ million illegal immigrants as eventual Democratic voters, hence a form of job security for them, if not for us.)