Terrorist Intimidation: Witnesses, Jurors Protection Overlooked in NYC Terrorist Trial
November 20, 2009
November 20, 2009
Views expressed in guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media.
Visit the complete Guest Column archives.
Borderline Realities
Guest Column | By Larry Scholer | May 9, 2005
. . . the most pervasive myth on immigration is that “There’s nothing we can do about it.”
Immigration has become one of the most contentious issues in politics today, with disagreements transcending party lines. Disagreement is particularly strong on the right: libertarians favor a broad policy that welcomes immigrants and traditional conservatives want a more restrictive policy that secures the borders tightly and decreases the influx of immigrants.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, spoke to an Accuracy in Media luncheon on May 6 and addressed "myths" surrounding the immigration debate. The CIS "is animated by a pro-immigrant, low-immigration vision which seeks fewer immigrants but a warmer welcome for those admitted," according to its website.
Krikorian said that the most pervasive myth on immigration is that "There's nothing we can do about it." Immigration "is an artifact of government policy" that occurs when a government pursues a course of action that encourages movement across the borders. Krikorian cited the example of Mexican immigrants, the majority of whom come from west-central Mexico. In the early 1930s, people in this region opposed the government in Mexico City, and the government, in order to quell dissent, encouraged emigration into the United States.
Government polices created immigration, Krikorian explained, and government policies can interrupt immigration. "We created it," he said. "We can stop it."
Supporters of a broad immigration policy often justify their position by contending that immigrants do jobs that Americans won't do—a myth, Krikorian said.
"No work would not get done in the absence of immigrants," he said.
In the absence of a large population of immigrant workers, American employers would raise wages and attract American workers. Employers would also develop technologies that would replace the unskilled labor pool, according to Krikorian.
Krikorian also challenged two of President Bush's immigration proposals: temporary worker provisions and amnesty provisions. Temporary worker programs, or "circular migration," would allow immigrant workers into the country for a determined period of time, after which the worker would return to his native country.
"Never in human history has a temporary worker program worked….There's nothing as permanent as a temporary worker," Krikorian said.
The United States had a temporary worker program, the Bracero program, that began in 1942 and ended in the Sixties.
An amnesty program is often touted as a means of increasing security—another myth, Krikorian said. While such an assumption is logical, it "assumes we have the bureaucratic capacity to screen 10 million people."
Krikorian also expressed support for the Real ID Act, a bill that would enforce federal standards on state drivers' licenses. He also expressed support for the Minuteman Project, a controversial citizen border watch, the members of which the President called vigilantes.
"We're lucky we have them," he said.
Larry Scholer is a staff writer at Accuracy in Academia.
Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.
0 Comments | Post a Comment
