There has been a lot of talk about "amnesty" in regards to the President's immigration proposal. Unfortunately, most of it is misdirected. The 12 million immigrants aren't really getting anything close to the definition of amnesty. Amnesty is about getting off "scott-free" for an alleged "greater good."
These 12 million or so illegal immigrants will be required to pay fines, go back and forth to their "native country" and do a host of other things just to be eligible for any kind of citizenship. Then, if deemed worthy, will go to the back of the line for that priveledge.
That doesn't sound like gettin off "scott-free" especially when we are really talking about a misdemeanor. And a misdemeanor that the statute of limitations probably ran out a long time ago in many cases. I wonder when the last time someone had to go thru that gauntlet to clear up a parking or traffic ticket. Sure, maybe there 's the exception or 2 out there, but most of us pay our fine and it's over. Or sometimes we don't pay the fine, and it is never brought up again in any meaningful way.
And of course, this "war and peace" length bill of legal jargon should be easily understood by a group that a significant portion of either doesn't speak any or has a hard time with english, even in it's most rudimentary form.
The real amnesty is the amnesty that we are giving the corporations that feed off this cheap, easily abused labor force. The companies that have been abusing the migrant, undereducated and desperate workers in some cases, before the 1986 bill that was supposed to crack down on them. They are actually the biggest beneficiaries of the new bill, as they are the ones who are really getting off "scott-free."
And we know that not all those jobs are there for the immigrants because Americans won't do them. On this blog, and in other media outlets, we hear countless stories of employers who effectively "shut-out" Americans who will work for the wage, but might expect a few labor laws to be at least attempted to be adhered to. And the criminals, in this case, felons, who perpetuate this nonsense are the ones that our federal government is all too eager to let off the hook. And for the ones who can only get immigrants supposedly, maybe they ought to consider paying a few duckets more a week. And if that is so unfeasible, then maybe a new line of work is in order. Maybe that business needs some people running it who can figure out a way to balance a fair wage and a good profit. Maybe someone who can only get that by abusing their employees in one way or another isn't something in line with actual American values. Where has been anyone standing up for the American worker in all this, except maybe Senator Dorgan who has commented on such things on the Senate floor.
The fact is, that if we, the people demanded it, that those 1986 laws could be enforced today. Those employers could be fined or jailed and a clear message sent that those jobs are no longer here for those folks who come over looking for them. And that, my friends, would do more to solve our immigration dilemma than any z-Visa and hundreds of pages of continued employer amnesty could hope to.
Perhaps where the labor vs. management battle in the last century has focused on the unions vs the companies. Perhaps today, a climate that doesn't exactly resemble the "pre-union" era where employee abuse was not only commonplace, but expected and readily accepted, the battle between labor and management should be redirected. Perhaps the idea of fighting for employee rights is indeed dying, and the immigration front is more of a proper place for labor, and those who care about the working class, to continue that struggle.
Of course, the jobs that are getting shipped overseas these days, for pennies on the dollar, will not be really relevant when it comes to this issue anyway. Those jobs are gone. And increasingly, those jobs aren't manual or unskilled jobs. Those jobs left a decade or more ago. Today's outsourcing is all about the white collar.
The working class blue collar jobs that remain and that are being filled with immigrants might be a more proper battleground for today's labor. They aren't goin to mexico for 30 cents an hour. If they were, the immigrants would just stay home, and that job probably would have moved a long time ago. The fact that it is here, is testament to it staying here.
While organized labor has seemingly hit it's "march of dimes" dilemma. A problem that is often illustrated using the charity as an example. It shows how a cause can start out good and noble. Then the cause is "cured." But the organization keeps on truckin, taking on less significant causes as time moves forward. Others might know it as the law of diminishing returns. Time will tell, but organized labor might have hit that wall. Most places these days, are pretty good places to work, on the whole. Yes, not every non union shop or business is perfect, but many have learned that a happy workforce is a productive workforce. And do things, like say...take their staff to see "Spiderman 3" and other things to show their appreciation. Most places don't resemble a 1906 scenario at the workplace. Yes, some do, and some businesses might still be served well by a "watchdog" working full time to ensure safety and compliance issues. I think many a miner and steelworker is thankful their union is there for them. The employers don't like it, and never will, but such is life. I don't think a baseball player really needs a professional union lookin out for their millions quite as much tho.
And for others, perhaps the labor battle should be moved to the immigration front. That is where American workers might have their best shot at securing their future in a way that doesn't require being represented by some mob of thugs with muscle.
And maybe then, the criminal employers that hire illegal workers instead of Americans might not get the amnesty they are counting on.