NOW IS YOUR CHANCE TO SPEAK DIRECTLY TO A UNITED STATES CONGRESSMAN!
Chris Cannon (R-UT):
"If you have questions or concerns about my work on immigration issues, just give me a call on my cell phone, (801)362-8300. I would enjoy discussing this or any other issue that is on your mind."
"If you have questions or concerns about my work on immigration issues, just give me a call on my cell phone, (801)362-8300. I would enjoy discussing this or any other issue that is on your mind."
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
5 comments
I called Cannon's cell phone #(801-362-8300)that he encouraged his constituents to call and I got him on the phone Monday at about 5:31 pm .
I pasted him pretty good, and he was pretty much flustered and stuttering and defensive most of the conversation .
He was told very firmly to co-sign HR-946, drop sponsorship of his bill, cease currying favor with illegal aliens, or we would work around the clock to deliver a new vocation to him.
Challenger wants chance to focus on immigration issues
By Tad Walch
Deseret Morning News
PROVO — Don't hold your breath waiting for a debate among the three Republican candidates for Utah's 3rd District congressional seat.
Challenger Matt Throckmorton called Friday for a series of debates focused on immigration issues, including one on the eve of the Republican convention. He also encouraged Rep. Chris Cannon to accept a standing invitation from talk show host Lou Dobbs to debate immigration policy with Throckmorton on CNN.
Neither will happen, nor will Cannon agree to any debates, a spokesman said.
"It's a matter of priorities," said Joe Hunter, Cannon's chief of staff. "We've got very limited time in which to communicate with the thousand or so delegates in the 3rd District that we need to meet with. Essentially, Chris has next week, and that's it, then Chris is back in Congress."
Congress reconvenes April 20. The convention is scheduled for May 8.
Throckmorton accused Cannon of backing out of several planned debates, including at least one that Cannon allegedly proposed. That debate was to take place on a Utah radio station, Throckmorton said, but a Cannon staffer called the morning it was scheduled to say the congressman couldn't make it.
Additionally, Throckmorton said he and his wife recently ran into Cannon and his daughter at a Springville market. He said Cannon agreed then to a debate on immigration policy.
Both Throckmorton and Greg Hawkins hope to garner enough votes from delegates at the convention to force Cannon into a party primary. Throckmorton said Friday he has reserved locations on May 7 in both Salt Lake and Utah counties.
"Whatever makes him comfortable," Throckmorton said, "but he needs to be there."
Cannon wants to focus on meeting with delegates instead, and Hunter denied the charge that Cannon has ducked any debates.
"We didn't have a clue what he was talking about in so far as setting up dates," Hunter said. "If running into someone on the street constitutes a commitment, we're never going to say it didn't happen, but there have been no debates scheduled that we'd agreed to or that we didn't show up for. I'm pretty confident about that."
Cannon has discussed immigration on several national TV shows, including Dobbs'.
"We don't feel the need to go on with Matt and do so again," Hunter said.
Cannon is sponsoring a bill in Congress that would create a guest workers' program for illegal immigrants working in agricultural jobs. For that, Cannon has been attacked via local billboard and radio ads.
Throckmorton said he is not attached to the groups buying the ads, but he is shaping his campaign largely around Cannon's positions on immigration. He said Cannon favors amnesty for illegal immigrants, a characterization that drew a sharp response from Hunter.
"It's not amnesty," Hunter said. "They're claiming we're supporting amnesty. We're not proposing amnesty. It's a very, very strict requirement and provides significant hurdles for an illegal employed in agricultural to come out of the shadows and claim temporary status. I don't think any reasonable person would consider that amnesty."
Cannon's bill has more than 100 co-sponsors in the House and 56 in the Senate, Hunter said.
Cannon's Web site doesn't list his position on illegal immigrants, but Hunter said a statement will be added to the site by Monday.
Throckmorton wants more.
"I told Rep. Cannon, 'If you do a debate with me and you make me look ridiculous, you win,' " Throckmorton said. "And if a majority of Utahns want to do what Chris supports, then he should win."
S. 1645 and H.R. 3142, the so-called AgJOBS legislation introduced by Senators Larry Craig (R-ID) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and Representatives CHRIS CANNON (R-UT) and Howard Berman (D-CA), represents a Faustian bargain between those seeking a sweeping amnesty for millions of illegal aliens and those seeking unlimited and unrestricted access to cheap foreign labor. The advocates for illegal immigration would get a sweeping amnesty for hundreds of thousands--and perhaps millions--of current illegal aliens and their families, while the U.S. agricultural industry and its advocates would get access to a virtually unlimited supply of cheap foreign workers. Meanwhile, wages and working conditions are undermined.
In addition to being an amnesty that rewards illegal aliens for breaking the law and the employers who hired them unlawfully, S. 1645 fails as a prescription for curtailing future illegal immigration. The bill contains no provisions that would effectively discourage more people from entering the U.S. illegally or deter employers from hiring them.
Amnesty
Notwithstanding disclaimers by the bill’s sponsors and supporters, S. 1645 is an amnesty. The only difference between this bill and other proposals to legalize potentially millions of illegal aliens is that it places them in an interim “guestworker” status along the road to legal permanent residency.
As a matter of principle, most Americans believe that rewarding people who have broken the law by granting them legal status in the U.S. is wrong. This bill would also renege on a promise made by Congress in 1986 that amnesty would never be repeated.
In addition to objections in principle, S. 1645 is a deeply flawed bill that would create countless new problems:
Potential for massive fraud. The Special Agricultural Worker (SAW) component of the 1986 amnesty legalized 1.3 million illegal aliens – some three to four times the number of illegal aliens who were estimated to be working in agriculture at the time. As many as two-thirds of those amnestied under SAW got their green cards based on fraud. This massive fraud was encouraged because the SAW contained sweeping provisions making all information furnished by an amnesty applicant “confidential.” The confidentiality measures that encouraged fraud in the SAW amnesty program are even more sweeping in the current proposal.
Weak requirements for documentation to support amnesty claims. S. 1645 would rely on the most flimsy of documentary evidence to establish that an applicant qualifies for amnesty under the bill. An amnesty applicant would be able to support a claim by using uncorroborated third party affidavits attesting that he or she has met the agricultural work requirements. Documents containing false identities used by an alien while he or she was illegally present in the United States would also be accepted as proof of eligibility. The evidence of U.S. residence required in the 1986 amnesty has been dropped. Passage of S. 1645 would create a boom for document counterfeiters.
Expanded confidentiality provisions would protect criminals and terrorists. Illegal aliens with criminal records or even associations with terrorist organizations would be eligible for legal residency under S. 1645. The normal criteria for excluding applicants for legal admission to the U.S., such as a conviction for an aggravated felony or ties to known terrorist organizations, would be waived under this bill. Moreover, other information that might make an alien excludable, such as evidence of tax or welfare fraud, would not be shared among the relevant government agencies and the Department of Homeland Security.
Claimants may apply outside the United States. People seeking amnesty based on having worked illegally for a U.S. agribusiness would be able to apply at the border and be admitted under “preliminary” status while their claims were being processed. Such applicants could immediately be granted a border-crossing card without a background check or verification of the data in the application.
Family members go to the head of the immigration queue. Amnesty, under S. 1645, also would be extended to the spouse and minor children of the principle alien. Like the principle applicant, family members could not be excluded for the usual factors that would deny other applicants admission to the U.S. These beneficiaries would not need to be in the U.S. to qualify. The family relationship that qualifies dependent aliens for legal residence along with the primary amnesty recipient would not even need to exist at the time the amnesty application was filed, while children who reach the age of majority after the application was filed would continue to remain eligible for legal residency.
Eligibility for taxpayer-funded legal assistance. Illegal alien applicants for amnesty would be eligible for taxpayer-funded attorneys and legal services through the Legal Services Corporation to file their amnesty claims and contest denials. This provision would create an economic bonanza for immigration attorneys.
Broadest possible definition of “agricultural” worker. Virtually anyone who had touched an agricultural product (including non-food agri-cultural products or the land and facilities where it was produced) any time before a commodity left the premises of the agribusiness site where it was harvested or first processed would be classified as an agricultural worker under S. 1645. Occupations such as forestry workers, landscapers, processing plant workers, mechanics, and irrigation tech-nicians would all be considered agricultural-related and, therefore, illegal aliens working in these occupations would also be made eligible for amnesty under this bill.
Minimal requirement that applicants continue to work in agriculture. Amnesty recipients under S. 1645 would need only to work 360 hours of agricultural work (the equivalent of 45 eight hour days) within seven years to receive a green card. Since S. 1645 would ensure that farm wages will remain below poverty levels, most amnesty recipients would move to towns and cities and take low-skilled jobs from Americans and legal immigrants– exactly what happened in 1986.
Guaranteed Cheap Labor for Employers
Because it is highly likely that workers who received amnesty under S. 1645 would opt for employment in other sectors of the labor market with better wages and working conditions, the bill would allow for a steady (and unlimited) flow of guestworkers, who might also eventually qualify for legal residency in the U.S.
Access to cheap illegal alien labor has kept millions of farm workers in America in poverty and impeded the sort of mechanization and industry reforms needed for the long-term viability of American agriculture. S. 1645 would virtually assure that these conditions would be perpetuated.
In addition to the impoverishment of entire classes of workers in the United States, S. 1645 contains many specific provisions that are highly objectionable:
“Need” for guestworkers to be determined solely by employers. Current guestworker programs require employers to document to the government that a need exists for such workers and that a good-faith effort has been made to recruit American workers to fill those positions. S. 1645 would rely on the self-serving attestation of agricultural employers to determine the need for guestworkers. Recruitment would be slashed to one notice in a local paper and one posting at a local job office, effectively excluding most American migrant workers, who travel during the harvest but reside in towns because of the scarcity of affordable farm housing. Longstanding enforcement powers would also be thrown out.
Usual grounds for exclusion are waived. As is the case with aliens seeking amnesty under this bill, applicants seeking to enter the U.S. as guest-workers would not be excludable for many of the reasons that keep other aliens out of the country. Criminals and people with ties to terrorist organizations would not be excluded from becoming guestworkers in the United States. The emphasis of the bill is solely on admitting guestworkers expeditiously, with no concern for public safety or national security.
Perpetuates shameful wage and working standards. The Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR), currently in effect to ensure that agricultural guestworkers do not degrade wages in this sector of the economy, would be frozen at the current rate for three years after enactment of the bill. The current AEWR is approximately $8.42 an hour. Based on the actual number of hours the average agricultural worker is employed, that translates into an annual salary of just $8,000 for such workers. The maximum earnings for a worker employed full time under the current AEWR is $14,474. S. 1645 would freeze the earnings of workers at these disgraceful levels. The official 2002 poverty level for a family of three is $15,260 a year.
Employers absolved of most other labor costs. S. 1645 would cut back the employers’ longstanding responsibility to provide housing and travel expenses for migrant alien workers. The burden of providing housing for workers (who surely would not be able to provide their own at the current AEWR) will fall to HUD and other state and local government agencies. In addition, employers will not be responsible for providing transportation for workers who live as far as 60 miles from their place of employment. Employers would not even be required to provide workers with tools or meals.
Employers’ liability limited, and immunity granted from many labor requirements. S. 1645 would strip out the assurances employers must provide that they will respect many federal, state, and local employment laws, and it would give employers increased immunity from violations of existing health and safety standards. The “private right of action” contained in the legislation, that ostensibly would allow guestworkers to sue employers or contractors, is mere window dressing. The language of the bill contains so many loopholes that favor the employers that it would be virtually impossible to find employers in violation of labor laws.
Health care for guestworkers would be the taxpayers’ responsibility. Employers would not be required to ensure the health of their guestworkers. The costs would be borne by federal, state, and local taxpayers.
Mass Illegal Immigration Likely to Continue Unabated
The most immediate effect of passage of S. 1645 would likely be a surge of new illegal immigration as countless people attempt to enter the country to take advantage of an amnesty program that would be highly vulnerable to fraudulent claims. Proponents of S. 1645 openly predict it would be just the first step in a series of wider amnesty programs covering non-agricultural jobs and illegal aliens who will enter the U.S. in the future.
In spite of proposing a new guestworker program, there is nothing in this legislation that would prevent employers from continuing to hire illegal aliens if they so choose. The bill contains no enhanced enforcement provision or penalties against employers who hire illegal aliens. Employers could continue to use abusive farm labor contractors and bar immigration officers from verifying the status of their workers. There is no reason to expect that employers would not replace newly amnestied illegal aliens with new illegal aliens.