Help STOP this Bad Bill and Mass Immigration
Illegal immigrants and their offspring add over 2 million a year to the U.S. population.
And Mass legal immigration also adds over 2 million immigrants & offspring to the U.S. population each year.
Just think of the increased job loss, wage depression, strain on infrastructure and burden on budgets, hospitals and schools such an Influx causes -- and at a time when hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost and are losing their jobs! And when the net (after subtracting taxes immigrants pay) costs of Immigration to American Taxpayers are in the $multiBillions.
Not forgetting the environmental burden of a growing population, for every person added to the U.S. Population, one acre of wild or farm land is lost to residential, infrastructure, or industrial uses. Not only this, but the demand for energy increases with the number of users; per capita use of energy in the USA has declined since 1980, but total energy use in the United States is driven by population growth.
Despite these downsides of mass immigration, and more, Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) wants to add 10,500 guest worker visas annually for Irish Nationals with his Bill, S. 2005.
What a terrible precedent passage of this bill would set. Every ethnic group in the USA could demand its own quota increase.
History is our guide to what can result from seemingly minor changes to immigration legislation. Ironically, the Irish were Massachusetts former-Senator Ted Kennedy’s reason for supporting the disastrous 1965 revision of immigration law, further increases via refugee legislation, and the amazing lottery that allows in 50,000 applicants annually – for virtually no reason.
BALANCE has many Irish-American members and supporters, and this is your opportunity to object to using the Irish as a stalking horse in campaigns to increase mass immigration.
Tell your representatives in Congress that this Bill S. 2005 and any others like it should be defeated, because it would take Americans jobs, depress their wages and create further budget and environmental burdens.
And tell the Obama Administration that they should abolish the position of Public Advocate for Illegal Aliens within the DHS which they just created and funded with taxpayer money.
Finally, tell them you want them to push a Bill which would help solve the crises caused by Mass Immigration, a Bill establishing a zero-net Immigration MORATORIUM.
Three decades of Mass Immigration Reform and Management efforts prove that merely defensively opposing Mass Illegal Alien Amnesties, or merely working for Incremental Reductions in certain immigration categories is a flawed strategy.
Pushing merely for incremental category reductions fails to call into question the whole Enterprise of Mass Immigration. Thus, predictably, mass legal and illegal immigration continue and increase.
Clearly, how we Reductionists go on the offense is critically important
1. Pushing merely for incremental or category reductions cannot succeed because the opposition always mobilizes arguments regarding any particular category (can't keep out families, or relatives, or discriminate against, or for, this or that group, can we?)
2. Moreover, by seeking to reduce ONLY certain categories (e.g. extended family), Mass Immigration Management groups implicitly legitimize a continuation of mass legal immigration via all the other categories. As well, they send the weak-kneed message that Reductionists will be satisfied if only a few category-reduction crumbs are tossed their way.
3. A further requirement for success is that we must focus on both illegal and legal immigration simultaneously. However well-intentioned it may be, pushing ONLY to stop illegal immigration is a deeply flawed losing strategy:
A central Pro-Amnesty argument on Capitol Hill has long been that The Solution to the Illegal Alien Problem is to Legalize Them All. Clearly, if we Reductionists do not simultaneously push for stopping mass legal immigration, then that argument to legalize all the illegals can sound quite persuasive.
Only by questioning the legitimacy of mass immigration in toto, both legal and illegal, can Reductionists force the opposition to try to justify allowing any significant immigration at all.
In sum, Immigration Reform/Management groups focusing mainly on stopping amnesties and merely pushing incremental reductions in a few categories mortally wound the Reduction Movement.
The Good News is that there is One Strategy which incorporates all the aforementioned requirements for success: PUSHING for a zero-net immigration MORATORIUM on legal immigration.
PUSHING a MORATORIUM calls into question the whole Enterprise of Mass Immigration and in so doing puts the opposition on the defensive. It changes the terms of public debate from merely defending against illegal immigration, and pathetically (and thus far futilely) seeking incremental reduction of some categories of legal immigration, to asking why should we have any substantial immigration at all?
Indeed, why should we?
That transformation of the public debate would provide the ideal booster for pushing a Moratorium, and thus actually getting reductions.
Only by demanding a zero-net-immigration MORATORIUM can we provide the full rationale for reducing immigration - - that it is inhumane to American workers who have their wages depressed and lose their jobs, that it costs American taxpayers billions even after subtracting taxes immigrants pay. That it overtaxes our schools and health care facilities, environment and resources, and culture, and society and polity.
Mass Immigration Management/Reform Groups say it is unrealistic that we can get a Moratorium any time soon. Perhaps so.
But that assertion reveals the power of pushing for a moratorium. Pushing for a moratorium creates continuous relentless pressure to reduce the numbers and the manifold costs of both legal and illegal immigration.
Politically unrealistic they claim? Hardly.
One merely has to think back to the Congressional Session of 1994-1996 -- over 80 members of the House of Representatives led by the courageous Representative Bob Stump (R-AZ) (R.I.P.) were pushing what was explicitly a moratorium bill. In response, the liberal Clinton Administration advocated a reduction to about 600,000 a year from the then nearly million-a-year legal flows. The pressure generated by that moratorium push achieved very substantial reductions in Federal benefits for illegal aliens in the Welfare Bill of 1996.
So when encouraging your representatives to defeat Senator Brown's Bill, also tell them that you want them to sponsor a Moratorium Bill. Then and only then do we create sufficient political pressure to obtain substantial reductions.
Only BALANCE and its ASAP! Coalition Allies seriously push a Moratorium, simultaneously with pushing other good Bills and opposing bad ones.
Please visit Population-Environment Balance to support our work.