5 ms·
Immigration reform for skilled workers will almost certainly not happen as long as Democrats continue to lump in amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants in t
by petea 11y ago
Immigration reform for skilled workers will almost certainly not happen as long as Democrats continue to lump in amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants in the same immigration reform bill.
This might not be a popular opinion to spout, but I can't see it any other way. These illegals will almost certainly vote for Democrats. How do you expect Republicans to cooperate to welcome educated workers when you are expecting Republicans to commit political suicide?
US as a whole will hugely benefit from making the immigration process easier for educated workers like many other countries have done (Canada, UK, Germany, Australia etc), but this doesn't seem possible under current political climate.
- bruceb 11y agoThis is an "elite" vs common person fight. Bush 2 and Jeb Bush are for amnesty. That being said from a purely political decision supporting amnesty is generally a loser for Republicans. Their business donors want it but vote wise it seems dumb.
- maxerickson 11y agoIs there much evidence that non citizens are participating in US elections? I'm sure there are a few people doing it illegally, I mean evidence of 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000 or millions or whatever it might be.
- gyardley 11y agoNo, but he's referring to the eventual consequences of an amnesty for illegal immigrants, which would convert them to legal green card holders. After five years of permanent residency, you can naturalize and vote. He probably should've written 'these former illegals' to be clearer.
- maxerickson 11y agoGiven the partisan drum thumping around the issue, I wouldn't want to guess what someone meant. (example: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/12/obama-amnesty-creates-loophole-for-illegal-immigra/?page=1 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/12/obama-amnest... )
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- shas3 11y agoI think by far, the worst affected group is the Indians (and a close second, Chinese, Mexicans, and Filipinos). For a politician, from a macroeconomic perspective, it doesn't make sense to put these arbitrary bureaucratic roadblocks. There was an excellent write-up in this week's Economist on one section of the skilled immigration: Indian immigrants. http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21651331-india-should-make-more-valuable-asset-abroad-worldwide-web http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21651331-india-... Quoth: Indians in America are the most promising. They are increasingly prominent in tech companies, on Wall Street and in government, especially in the state department. Around 1% of America’s population, over 3.3m people, are “Asian Indians”. Perhaps 150,000 more arrive each year, and 90% of them stay permanently. Devesh Kapur, who has studied them, talks of a “flood”. He says over half of all Indian-born people in America arrived there after 2000. From a macroeconomic value addition perspective, this is an enormous tax base which also skews social indicators upwards.
- djb_hackernews 11y agoI wouldn't give too much credit to the Republicans here. They aren't interested in immigration reform so much as they are interested in expanding the H1-B program limits as part of their corporate welfare agenda. I agree with your last statement but I don't think there is any political group who is advocating for making the immigration process easier for educated workers.
- rglullis 11y agoExcept for the fact that illegals don't vote, you are right. The problem is that is more politically profitable to keep "immigration as an issue" than to actually work in "The People's" best interests. Democrats don't want to lose the image of being the welcoming mother, Republicans don't want to lose the image of being the strict but principled father. An immigration law that was based on qualification and possible economic boost by immigrant doesn't help any of them. Basically this was why I left the US after almost 5 years.