'Let prisoners pick the fruits': House members condemn immigration bil

CNN/AP: 'Let the prisoners pick the fruits'
House members condemn immigration bill
Thursday, March 30, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- House conservatives criticized President Bush, accused the Senate of fouling the air, said prisoners rather than illegal farm workers should pick America's crops and denounced the use of Mexican flags by protesters Thursday in a vehement attack on legislation to liberalize U.S. immigration laws.

"I say let the prisoners pick the fruits," said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California, one of more than a dozen Republicans who took turns condemning a Senate bill that offers an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants an opportunity for citizenship.

"Anybody that votes for an amnesty bill deserves to be branded with a scarlet letter A," said Rep. Steve King of Iowa, referring to a guest worker provision in the Senate measure.

Their news conference took place across the Capitol from the Senate, where supporters and critics of the legislation seemed determined to heed admonitions from both Bush and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to conduct a dignified, civilized debate.

The House has passed legislation to tighten border security, while the Senate approach also includes provisions to regulate the flow of temporary workers into the country and control the legal fate of millions of illegal immigrants already here. Bush has broadly endorsed the Senate approach, saying he wants a comprehensive bill....

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/30/immigration.house.ap.ap/index.html

Have I mentioned today how much I hate those pig bastard republicans in Congress?

Why do we have to pay anyone?

is just arrest more people and put them into prison.

Wasn't forced prison labor something they used to do in the Soviet Union?

and classes and books.

See what happens.

:eyes:

but, JIC, prison industries are a thriving industrial concern. federal prisoners are serfed to companies making cable, mfg y rehabbing office furniture, and numerous other concerns. last i heard (& it was quite some time ago, so the figures are prbly differant today), prisoners were paid 11 cents an hour for labor & cd spend the funds in the "company store" commissary for cigarettes, etc.

this wdnt bother me if the US didn't have the highest per capita inmate population in the world and if there wasn't a gross disparity on who gets what sentence for what violation. a HUGE proportion of our prison populations aren't violent criminals, most cons are doing time on piddly drug busts, like Tommy Chong's conviction for selling "paraphenalia" (glass pipes).

the War on Drugs (tm) is supplying very cheap labor to approved contractors, who make enormous profit thereby.

As far as i know these prisoners volunteer to do these jobs. We have several facility's in this county, 1 Federal, 2 State and 2 private. The State prisons have an all volunteer work force called the Wilderness Camp, that leaves the prison every morning. They do various jobs around the county. I've even had them at my warehouse (Part of the air park, city owned). They tore out a bunch of old offices and used the cinder block they removed to build 2 sets of Bathrooms for the KId's Zone at the park. The prisoners, from the discussions i've had with them, love the job. They say they'd rather be out working than staying at the prison all day.Plus they eat better. Most if not all the company's at the air park, or the City or County go out and have a caterer come out and feed these men. This saves the City's and County 100's of thousands a year.

and i'm sure any con wd like a breath of "outside", but there is widespread abuse of the penal system to provide cheap labor, and many of these people do not belong in prison.

Seen that when i went to pick up a Prisoner at the federal facility in Lom Poc California. They bid against civilian contractors for contracts involving, Sign manufacturing, wiring harness's for fighter jets, and various other equipment that the Feds use. And i didn't meet one guard who didn't make at least a 100,000+ a year.

(many of these people do not belong in prison.)

I agree. It's my opinion that you must have a victim, to have a crime. Many crimes don't fall into that category. And this coming from a man who spent 22 yrs as a peace officer in TX.

:toast:

loved it and hated it for 20+ years. miss it sometimes, too, but i'm better off now tending to my cats!

The prisoners are generally ethnically "dark". These persons are
shipped to generally "white" areas where the prisons are located, along
with the prison jobs. Then those persons inflate the population statistics
for democratic representation in that area, increase the apparent demographic
mix, all the while without any voting rights.

It is forced redistricting, political slave prisons very too much in
keeping with the soviet model.

http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/corrections/index.html

I can vouch for that feels the same way as what you posted. That would be my son's god-father.

people in prison! Woohoo!

/sarcasm

Response to the wrong message, sorry.

a pretty good line. All the proposals suck since amnesty is a smack in the face to those patiently sloggling through the process to legal citizenship and 'guest worker' is code for legalized cheap labor.

But, this gets to the heart of it:

Republicans aired their differences on an issue that directly affects the fastest growing segment of the electorate. Under Bush's leadership, the Republicans have made dramatic inroads among Hispanic voters...


And, this part is correct:

So this ruling class, this new ruling class of America, is expanding a servant class in America at the expense of the middle class of America, the blue collar of America that used to be able to punch a time clock, buy a modest house and raise their families. ... Those young people are cut out of this process."

That's just a repuke trick to get people to oppose a bill which isn't sufficiently xenophobic for their taste. Amnesty, at least as it was carried out in 1986, was literally just that: the only requirement for changing status from illegal to legal was simply being physically present in the US. That was an amnesty. What is being proposed in McCain/Kennedy is that if you have obtained a basis for legalizing your status, such as marrying a US citizen, getting a permanent job, whatever, you will be allowed to take your place in the visa queue - behind those who have already filed their petitions - and your unlawful presence will not be held against you. You still have to meet the same criteria every other legal immigrant has to meet in terms of establishing your eligibility.

I don't think there are too many of those in this economy.

for those applying to enter the country legally is beyond our borders. "you have to meet the same criteria" except you can stay in the country and be treated like a citizen until you become one.
Sure sounds a LOT like amnesty.

but I still see it as a form of amnesty. I don't care why or how some politicians speak to the problem of cheap labor exploitation, I'm against it. And, if I broke a law 5-10 years ago I'd be penalized no matter what sort of good citizen I'd become in the intervening years or why I broke that law. Ah, the fine - the $2000 fine. Right. Our country has a hard time collecting motor vehicle fines.

Instead of looking for xenophobia why isn't anyone calling the president and guest worker advocates anti-American for saying "...doing jobs Americans won't do" without completing the sentence with "...for slave wages"?

True compassion would be to harshly penalize employers who break the law, raise the minimum wage, increase the immigration quotas while forcing all here to go back and get in line behind those who are waiting for their applications to churn through.

Anything less than full citizenship is just a way of 'compassionately' allowing people to work for less than they're worth. Why isn't anyone worried about the dignity of the illegal immigrants or their right to a decent day's pay for a day's work?? Why is it okay for them to have to leave their families in order to feed them? You dishonor and patronize them when you think it's a kindness to 'allow' them to have to travel and live as they do to take care of their families. The permanent job joke will be easy to manipulate and nothing will really change.

Edit for spelling and clarity

... but that's certainly appropriate for such a complex discussion topic. Let me try to address at least part of your argument.

Cheap labor exploitation. Bottom line: it's not that cut and dry. Yes, there are undoubtedly sweatshops in the country where illegal aliens work for slave wages and, in so doing, produce goods or services that could otherwise be produced by US workers. But that's not the whole picture. There are also a great many legitimate businesses and corporations which actually pay wages well over what places like Mal-Wart pay (where US citizens will readily work), yet are still unable to attract sufficient supplies of US citizen labor. If wages were the only factor in attracting labor, no one would work for Mal-Wart for $6/hr, they'd all be out in the fields working for $10/hr, yet they're not. Part of that is a reflection of the fact that the work is bloody hard, toiling away under a hot sun, and I do think it's a legitimate observation that such work is not very attractive, no matter how much you pay for it. Another contributor is that much of that kind of work is seasonal, and so doesn't supply the steady source of income that most American workers need to get by. It's unreliable: one month you're working 80 hour works weeks, then for the next six months you've got nothing. Often the need for labor is in remote rural locations out in the middle of nowhere, far from the cities where most Americans choose to live. In sum, there's an element of transience to a lot of the work being done by migrant workers which is fundamentally at odds with settling down, buying a house, raising a family, etc., which are things that native workers tend to value. Migrants are, by definition, mobile, so moving from one remote location to another every few months to follow the supply of work isn't as much of a problem for them. So I don't think you can just say that this is about corporations seeking cheap labor, because I think that the sectors of the economy which tend to rely upon migrant labor do in fact face legitimate difficulties in attracting native labor.

Another consideration here is cost. Okay, sure, you could raise the wages paid to farmworkers by a factor great enough to induce enough US citizens to put up with the inconveniences of the lifestyle to meet the needs for labor entirely with US workers. But suppose you did. Great, now you have a 100% US citizen workforce. Only problem is, labor is the number one cost in agriculture, so having tripled or quadrupled the rate of pay for agricultural labor, the cost of agricultural goods is going to triple or quadruple in turn. Now, when you go into your local grocery store, locally-grown tomatoes cost $10/lb. Are you going to buy them or are you going to buy the $3/lb tomatoes imported from Chile or Argentina or wherever? Perhaps you personally will be patriotic enough to pay extra to support US businesses, but how realistic is it to expect that everyone else will be? So what will happen is the demand for domestic produce will plummet and demand for cheaper imported goods will skyrocket. How many jobs will US agriculture sustain if no one is willing to buy their products at the higher price? US agriculture is already heavily subsidized to keep its prices competitive, how much more are you willing to provide in direct subsidies to support the increased labor costs? What happens to the trade balance if we cease to export agricultural goods and have to import all of our food? To close that loophole, we'd have to jack up tarriffs on imported produce. Our international trading partners would certainly resent such a move and respond in kind by raising tarriffs against our exports, so suddenly we aren't able to sell our products overseas anymore, so the businesses which produced goods for export lose markets and therefore jobs.

The point I'm trying to make is that no one on either side of this debate is "pro illegal immigration." The problem is, you can't just say get rid of illegal immigration and it will solve all of our problems, it's a whole lot more complicated than that.

As for breaking laws, well, extenuating circumstances play a major role in determining culpability in pretty much every court I've ever seen. Your intent and the reasons behind your violation do matter a very great deal. Yes, illegal immigrants break the law when they enter the US illegally. But given that they're officially being told to not come, while at the same time, US companies are offering them jobs paying 20 times what they make on their side of the border and, in some instances, are even offering them help in getting across the border, I think it's only fair to admit that we're sending pretty mixed signals here: don't come, but here's your boarding pass and a wad of cash, be at work by 8. Wouldn't you find that a little confusing? I think it's entirely appropriate for that to be taken into account as a factor mitigating the crime.

I am aware that many of the illegal workers on job sites aren't slaving for a mere few bucks an hour. Most are experienced and many are even artisans. I even realize there are employers who have a hard time filling seasonal work but this problem has an easy remedy, witness the tourist meccas who legally hire foreign workers who go home after labor day. The problem with seasonal farm work is that the crops (which have a slim profit margin to begin with) have to compete in market against imports which is a problem no matter who picks 'em. Point is, both types of employer have the same problem: the quotas aren't large enough.

Contractors are busier than ever, thanks to readily available mortgage money but I've seen houses being built almost entirely by foreign hands, with a supervisor, head plumber and head electrician signing off on the work. At the same time I see that boom in renovation and building I see very few ads in the paper for construction workers. MAYBE they're being hired through the unions...maybe not. If there is a legitimate shortage of workers, again, legally hire temporary workers on a per job basis AFTER first trying to fill those jobs with domestic workers and when the job is done, back they go.

Many small businesses can ONLY compete these days by using illegal labor. Once the first landscaper or bathroom remodeler does it and cuts his price that's it for that area market. Those who hire and pay workers above minimum wage still are not paying a middle class AMERICAN wage. Some would argue that our workforce was slightly overpaid, particularly those in union represented jobs, and in some cases even those workers would've agreed. Now, however, our cost of living keeps rising while wages are stagnant or falling thanks to the dilution of the labor market. When there are more workers than jobs the employer has the advantage, obviously.

Okay, trade subsidies and exporting - some of that has more to do with international relations (and greed) than necessity. I'm horrible with dates but during the first term of the current administration the cost of beef began to rise because of mad cow and lower imports. At the same time domestic meat exporters were bitching about Japan cutting off our exports. Uhhh...why didn't those same beef suppliers turn around do something radical and cut their losses (and our prices) by, gee, supplying OUR country? Subsidies are currently being abused the most by factory farms and 'farmers' (some politicians) who have no intention on farming anyway and they're as in need of reform as social welfare was. If we didn't import certain crops American farmers would just be competing against themselves. There is so much wrong with the way we do trade that I cannot accept it as a valid argument for encouraging cheap labor. Our trading 'partners', in fact, impose tariffs on our exports to protect their industries while frowning on us for even entertaining the notion! Our 'partners' often have the advantage of a national health care system, manipulated currency, etc., etc. The free market is not free, it has been corrupted and as long as it remains so the little guy will continue to be exploited, only now we're supposed to accept it so we can 'compete'.

So, whatsa matta - you don't trust a truly free market (with the aid of universal health care) and innovation to eventually level out the cost of goods and services in an economy that didn't cheat or allow its trading partners to manipulate currency, steal intellectual property or use cheap labor?

Did I miss anything? This type is too small and I ran out of coffee in the middle!




Edit for the sentence before last...I'm leavin' it as is...:(

Wow, I'm impressed, that's really one of the most thoughtful posts I've seen around here on this issue, thank you very much. I agree with you 100% that greed has an enormous amount to do with these problems, be it on the part of construction contractors who'd just as soon save a few buck on labor, CEOs who can't afford to pay decent wages without cutting into their $50 million/year compensation package, and, I think also, we ourselves need to assume some responsibility since we mostly give our business not to the companies who treat their employees best, but to those companies who offer the cheapest prices. I'm going to have to give a great deal more thought to the other points you made, which are all excellent ones. I dunno, I so wish I could see a ready answer to these problems, but it always seems to come down to the self-serving greed that is so fundamental to our sacrosanct capitalism, and I just don't know how to get past those stumbling blocks. Thank you again, I do want to continue this discussion, but it'll have to wait as my wife keeps looking at me expectantly to do something about dinner. So, until later.

Contractors are busier than ever, thanks to readily available mortgage money but I've seen houses being built almost entirely by foreign hands, with a supervisor, head plumber and head electrician signing off on the work. At the same time I see that boom in renovation and building I see very few ads in the paper for construction workers. MAYBE they're being hired through the unions...maybe not. If there is a legitimate shortage of workers, again, legally hire temporary workers on a per job basis AFTER first trying to fill those jobs with domestic workers and when the job is done, back they go.

This is an issue I would love to understand better and I have wracked my brains over it but am at a complete loss. As you say, thanks to abundant mortgage monies, housing starts are up, lots of people are re-financing and rennovating, all of which adds up to an unprecedented demand for contractors and construction workers. My rudimentary knowledge of economics leads me to predict that, where demand exceeds supply, prices go up in response. And, in my own experience as the owner of an old home in DC, if one can find a skilled contractor for less than a $100/hr, you feel like you've won the lottery. You go out and tell all of your friends that you've miraculously managed to not only find a contractor who doesn't have a six month waiting list, but is even available for the bargain price of $50/hr! So if there is so great a demand and people are willing to pay such high wages for these services (unlike agricultural commodities), why isn't this a veritable gold rush for US workers? I wonder if there aren't a variety of factors feeding this. I know that the local community colleges have wait lists of up to three years to get into some of their vocational certification programs. Perhaps part of the problem is that our educational system doesn't provide enough opportunities for Americans to obtain vocational skills? I also wonder what role the decline in the health of unions might play in this. With fewer unions available to protect workers and ensure that they're not only being paid a decent hourly wage, but are also qualifying for retirement benefits, health insurance, professional development, etc., are trade vocations as viable and attractive careers for young Americans as they might have been when unions were more robust? I don't really know, maybe it's just a topical thing right now related to the abnormally high demand.

But, for whatever reason, there appears to be a legitimate labor shortage in this area, which is not related to low wages, as the wages are really quite good for that sector of the economy, like, indeed, more than I make as a white collar worker, now that I come to think of it. You commented that, if there truly is a shortage of labor in a particular sector, then we should legally hire workers temporarily and send them home when they're done. Okay, I can see that reasoning. But wouldn't it follow that we would need to create adequate opportunities for those workers to come here legally? I mean, I work in immigration law and policy and have had opportunity to speak with any number of illegal aliens over the years and none of them wanted to be here illegally, every one of them wanted to be here in lawful status. But there were no visa numbers available for them to be here legally, as Congress had only authorized a tiny number of visa numbers in their preference category.

Another question. What do you say to those migrant workers who point out that they've been busting their butts building your houses, growing your food, landscaping your yards, raising your children, cleaning your homes - haven't they earned a little gratitude? I don't mean to suggest that illegal aliens are altruistic saints or anything, obviously they had their own motivations for coming and working here, but then, very few of us are altruistic saints either and this population of illegal workers have made significant contributions to this country. Whether or not we ought to have, we nevertheless have taken advantage of, and benefitted from, the labors these people were willing to provide. I have a hard time not sympathizing with some of the bewilderment many of them feel having really worked hard here and done as much or more than most Americans to make a contribution, yet being repaid with resentment and deportation orders. I don't know, call me a bleeding heart softie, but I feel for them.

Anyway, thank again for the chat and have a great weekend!

My first instinct is, of course, to blame the weakening of the unions but when I do that I also have to be fair and point out how expensive unions made everything. I'm pretty sure Big Business would say they were forced to increase productivity via an alternative workforce because union wages and benefits left them unable to compete. It looks good on paper but...all that mortgage money in American hands and still we have this jobless recovery. IBD attributed it to unusually high productivity which always comes down to, "how can I produce the most for the least?" and the answer these days has been through cheap labor (illegal immigrants, outsourcing, awful trade agreements). There is no job Americans will not do provided the wages are adequate.

In the past labor has moaned and groaned about innovation, about illegal workers, about jobs being shipped off-shore but they survived, adjusted. This time we're being hit by technology, outsourcing, fewer regulations, weak unions, (unfair) trade agreements AND an influx of illegal labor. Our workforce, now undervalued, has had no time to recover from one ripple much less several and certainly not enough time. Time is relevant because without the option of cheaper labor the sharp cuts made in the earlier 2000's might have given way to a return to hiring and capitalization. The landscape has changed for white and blue collar workers. Haven't you noticed how often you've heard what the workforce is like now? We're a service and value-added economy with jobs at the penthouse level and jobs at the burger-flipper level with very few in between. Isn't it odd none of these experts included the trades, which are traditionally well paying? Even if manufacturing is sent overseas, people still need tile set and the above ground pool installed, right? When did they become 'jobs Americans won't do'? When you find out the answer to this and to what happens to our vocational school graduates, please PM me.

The illegals I've worked with are all great. Hell, they're like us so what's the surprise, right? Immigrants have a huge advantage over the average comfortable American because those who come to stay arrive motivated and willing to humble themselves. We, OTOH, are an entitled people and make for rather sassy employees. Talk to a high muckety muck manager who's outsourced and he'll rave about the enthusiasm of the workforce. We took our good fortune for granted, it's true, but I believe it is our right. Besides, in about a decade those grateful employees will be as jaded as we once were. In fact, the Japanese have already noticed a difference between this new generation and the last.

And, oh man, you had to ask, right? What would I say? I'd say their mistake in settling so comfortably was in forgetting that tenuous feeling they had when they first got here. I'd say those who allowed them to live and work here illegally were the selfish ones, not me. And, then I'd cry buckets for being such a bitch. I don't think they'd understand when I tried to explain what a disservice they do to all labor. They'd think me stupid for telling them they were being taken advantage of and that they deserved even better. I don't even think they'd care that I was raised by an immigrant who is adamant about allegiance and the law. And, what about Martin Luther King, who said something to the affect (badly quoting from a sieve-mind), "...as you love the law, lovingly disobey it..." IOW, when we break the law to change it we must accept some initial penalty on our journey.

You're a challenge, Kevin, and I have much to think about. :hi:

I agree wholeheartedly and that's why I don't blame the immigrants but their employers and politicians. I've said this before here - they wouldn't be risking life and limb if there were no jobs. Even we consumers are sending mixed signals. Maybe half my neighbors had landscapers 10 years ago, now I'd say about 3/4's do because cheap illegal immigrant labor made it affordable for more.

To mitigating circumstances - don't most criminals claim them? What if a shoplifter tells the judge he had to do steal to feed his family? Would those charges be dropped? And, if they were, what sort of precedent would that set? What sort of chain reaction? ("Hey man, I told the judge my baby was hungry and he dropped the charges!") Think about it, if I hung outside the 7-11 without buying anything a police officer would eventually come over and urge me to move along. And, if I trespassed or drove a car without a valid license I'd have to show up in court because there'd be a better chance of catching ME than someone with fake papers or whose primary residence is in another country. I resent the double standard that is a result of the wink and nod from the powers that be.

I've mentioned it before but, one thing a lot of people aren't mentioning is how disproportionately we favor South American and Mexican immigrants over those from other countries.

Truly fun to read. Thanks. You won't find this kind of intelligent discussion in Freeperland.

What is a form of slavery
Organized
Under a swarm of devils
Straight up
Word em up on the level...

-Chuck D

Not very smart. Hey morans, some illegal farm workers have extended families that do legally live in America and they VOTE. Better yet, keep it up! Morans.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Pastures Of Plenty

It's a mighty hard row that my poor hands have hoed
My poor feet have traveled a hot dusty road
Out of your Dust Bowl and Westward we rolled
And your deserts were hot and your mountains were cold

I worked in your orchards of peaches and prunes
I slept on the ground in the light of the moon
On the edge of the city you'll see us and then
We come with the dust and we go with the wind

California, Arizona, I harvest your crops
Well its North up to Oregon to gather your hops
Dig the beets from your ground, cut the grapes from your vine
To set on your table your light sparkling wine

Green pastures of plenty from dry desert ground
From the Grand Coulee Dam where the waters run down
Every state in the Union us migrants have been
We'll work in this fight and we'll fight till we win

It's always we rambled, that river and I
All along your green valley, I will work till I die
My land I'll defend with my life if it be
Cause my pastures of plenty must always be free

Words and Music by Woody Guthrie
© 1960 (renewed) and 1963 (renewed) by TRO-Ludlow Music, Inc.

Great version!

I can't recall the specific acts but back during the depression strict prohibitions were put on prison labor because of the depression and that it was so darn profitable.

For the most part, I seem to recall that the acts dealt with the private market place and that the labor and products made could only go toward the running of the institution and things like making furniture for government.

Too lazy right now to look it up..

of Blacks for minor, petty crimes and excessive prison time so they could keep their prison population high and make big bucks. Remember the chain gangs? It was mostly Black prisoners who suffered this fate.

Prison industries encourage excessive prison time and imprisonment for minor crimes. Hey we could be on an equal footing with Communist China.

prisoners pick the fruits'

and when will your pal Tancredo scrub toilets?

America the toilet bowl of the world and the butt of all jokes these days, 'eh?

but, how about letting American citizens pick the fruit and paying them a decent wage for their labor?

...how about letting American citizens pick the fruit and paying them a decent wage for their labor?

I'm confident that there are eleven million Americans out there who'd be willing to pick fruit, clean toilets or put up drywall if it paid enough to live on!

Tighter borders, a greater threat of deportation and harsher penalities for those who hire illegal aliens are the answers, not amnesty and guest worker programs. But I think the Repubs know that--in fact, I think this whole thing is a weapon of mass distraction from Bush's Iraq problems. It also allows them to whine, "We TRIED to reform immigration, but the Dems stopped us" while their campaign-contributing buddies cry all the way to bank.

:headbang:
rocknation

I mean, you'll get no argument from me that wages in this country are too low, but there are US citizens, indeed quite a lot of them, working in Mal-Warts and other minimum-wage type jobs who actually earn considerably less than the going rate for the agricultural or construction day labor which tends to attract undocumented aliens. So if $7/hr is enough to attract US citizens to work at Mal-Wart, why isn't $10 or $15/hr enough to attract US citizens to work in the fields, if wages are the only consideration?

disdainful of the workers who pick the fruit and veggies, and no doubt has no love for the folks who toil in meat packing plants. And I'd be willing to bet he doesn't much care for those who do the grunt work in bakeries, either. Yet, I've seen pictures of him and he doesn't look like he misses too many meals.

What an elitist SOB.

And this is purely an aside, but he's another graduate of Palos Verdes HS, George Allen's alma mater...finishing school for future racist repuke politicians.

I thought the whole point was there were all these Americans who WANT these jobs. And their suggestion is to give the opportunity to the private prison corporations? So THEY can make more profit?

This issue of illegal immigration bugs me because I can't get comfortable with either position, either for or against. I know Americans won't be picking lettuce in any large numbers, but is it really true that we won't do construction? Since when? Since they stopped increasing construction wages to keep up with inflation?

I read a report which said, persuasively in my view, that the net economic effect on the economy as a whole of illegal immigration is either neutral or slightly positive. But it has a huge REDISTRIBUTIVE effect WITHIN the economy. It takes money out of wages for poor people and puts it in the pockets of those who already have money and whose jobs aren't threatened by illegals. Makes it easy to see why the Wall Street Journal editorial staff has flat-out called for open borders- no restrictions whatsoever. The Wall Street types will be isolated in their gated communities in the Hamptons- what do they care if wages are falling across the country, emergency rooms are flooded in the southwest, etc?

On the other hand, the increasing political power of Hispanics is a nightmare for Republicans and should help make it harder than another GW Bush will come along.

Like I said- frustrating issue that I can't get completely comfortable with.

Having prisoners do the work won't do anything at all for the American worker.

They're concerned with cheap food, goods and services. They'd rather have prisoners doing the work than union workers.

Liberty on the march.

Imagine the cost of security for millions of slave laborers. These people are too stupid to breathe without help.

fought forest fires, planted trees and cut trails for a pittance. He and every other prisoner in the work camp volunteered for the camp, and the work, to get outside the walls and enjoy the limited freedom of working "in the woods". The camp was no where near a size to take all the volunteers and it was an earned reward.
So I'm ambivalent about this suggestion. If the farmers are willing to pay a fair amount into a prisoners fund for his commissary privileges and a portion saved for their release it could be a good thing. I don't think we are considering the situation depicted in "Cool Hand Luke" or the "Shawshank Redemption".

bet the same companies who own the prisons, own the places they go work at.

Didn't nazi germany send their prisoners out to be laborers. Auschwitz.

made Abu Garaib look like a Day Care Center until very recently. I think they've been shut down. They may have had prison farms in other states. Since we're already busy locking up as many young black men as possible on minor drug charges, I wouldn't want to be headed down this path any time soon.

Start by having prisoners grow their own food. I also think that after a "get back on your feet" grace period, rather than give money and the like to individuals, states and cities should require some sort of work and set up a system for matching prospective employers and employees. I see a win-win: get people into the work force and incent employers to hire American citizens. I've done my stint of minimum-wage unskilled labor: it's not fun, it's often messy, but I needed the paycheck.

I don't believe in amnesty for people who are in the US illegally. I think the US and Mexico (and any other countries that want to participate - I'm looking at you, Ireland) should have a reciprocal program whereby Mexican citizens can live, work and pay taxes in the US and US citizens can do the same in Mexico. While current immigration laws may be stupid - and I think they are - rewarding people for breaking the law is counterproductive.

Have you noticed that in all the discussion of what to do about illegal immigration there's very little talk of holding employers responsible? It actually is illegal to hire someone who does not have the legal right to work here: where are the prosecutions for that?

The employee shows a valid social security number and gets hired. Everyone pretends not to notice that the employee speaks no English and is living with twelve other guys in temporary quarters and is cashing his check every week at a check cashing service because he can't get a bank account. This is in cases in which the employer actually makes a pretense of obeying the labor laws as opposed to hiring by the day off the street and paying cash at the end of the day.

There was a terrible accident on a local farm in which the propane tank blew up when the workers got up to fix breakfast. Fourteen guys went to the hospital, all with proper papers, every single one with forged papers. The worst part is that one man died, and no one has been able to find out his real name, not even the Mexican Consulate. His family may never know that he received a proper burial in Oswego, New York.



When I worked nights, I'd see the Immigration officers driving around town at 3AM. I know we have a lot of undocumented workers here (about an hour's drive from Canada) but I never heard of any arrests, so I have no idea what they were doing.

Employer sanctions have been part of US immigration law since the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). The problem, as always, is that the economic sectors which most relied upon undocumented labor put pressure on their representatives, who in turn refused to support IRCA unless it contain exemptions for their key constituents. So IRCA's employer sanctions went into effect - for everyone except the industries where their application would be meaningful.

Another problem in enforcing employer sanctions has been that employers must "knowingly" hire unauthorized workers; they didn't want to prosecute some company who legitimately did their best to hire US workers, but got fooled by a fake ID or whatever into hiring an illegal alien. That was what gave rise to the whole I-9 process which now every employer follows when hiring new employees. But fraudulent documents have been a real problem here. You can't expect every employer to be an expert at detecting fraudulent documents, nor would you want them to be, as without proper training, they'd probably get it wrong a lot of the time and end up discriminating against people who were in fact legitimately authorized to work. Unfortunately, that means a lot of illegals get jobs using bogus documents. Worse, it gives companies who routinely hire illegal workers the perfect fig-leaf to hide behind: "What? That cocktail napkin with crayon scribblings wasn't a REAL Social Security Card?! However was I to know?!" At that point, the burden shifts to the state to prove that the employer knew that the documentation was fake and hired the alien anyway. In practice, it's almost an impossible burden for the state to meet. And, of course, even when you can meet that burden, the big corporations will dodge the bullet and claim that it was the isolated actions of a few bad apples, they're throw the government a couple of low-level managers as sacrificial lambs, and the company goes back to business as usual. That's how Tyson's Chicken got away with hiring smugglers to bring illegal aliens into the US to work in their plants. When they got caught - after government had spent years and millions of dollars building the case - they just claimed it was all the fault of some low-level employee and they got off scott free. It's a real problem.

Anyway, that's one of the reasons people are trying to come up with electronic verification systems: if employers can (and are required to) quickly, easily, cheaply, and reliably consult some database which will definitely inform them whether you're authorized to work or not, they will have no excuse any longer for not knowing who is and who is not work authorized. At that point, if they still employ illegals, you can nail their asses to the wall.

"I say let the prisoners pick the fruits," said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California

"I wish he'd think about the party and of course I also wish he'd think about the country."
Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado (I'd love to hear audio of this to see how much of a delay there was about W, OH YEAH, thinking about the country)

Rep. Steve King of Iowa plays class warfare (and needs to be drug tested)
"The elite class in America is becoming a ruling class and they've made enough money by hiring cheap illegal labor that they think they also have some kind of a right to cheap servants to manicure their nails and their lawn, for example.

"So this ruling class, this new ruling class of America, is expanding a servant class in America at the expense of the middle class of America, the blue collar of America that used to be able to punch a time clock, buy a modest house and raise their families. ... Those young people are cut out of this process."





Finally this


Rohrabacher said Americans should be able to "smell the foul odor that's coming out of the U.S. Senate."

Asked a few moments later whether the same odor was emanating from the president, he said, "I have no comment."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/30/immigration.house.ap.ap/index.html

bring it back. This is a GOOD day!

/sarcasm

"Work Will Make You Free" -- sign on the gates and entrences of various Nazi concentration camps

then who will do the telemarketing?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2004-07-06-call-center_x.htm

I don't know exactly where I stand on it.

... or shut the fuck up about "prisoners picking the fruits".

What a bunch of.

and we keep finding newer and more convenient ways of imprisoning them (see: http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Ohio_passes_drugged_driving_law_0331.html ) then is this not just an attempt to 're-legalize' slavery?

and I re-iterate...I DO like the sound of that.

Please be careful to follow the thread before making accusations.

but it's still a corrupt, inhumane practice

The more, the U.S. becomes a police state, the more money they make.

That seems to be what they are proposing, and didn't the courts declare it illegal to use convicts as part of the free-enterprise system?