President Obama proposed executive action on immigration, is measured, thoughtful and even Economically-based. So much so that he's hardly getting a "ringing endorsement" from the beneficiaries of those "pathway to citizenship" priority-realignment actions ...
Activists React Cautiously to Obama Immigration Plans
Executive action, strongly opposed by the GOP, would help as many as 5 million undocumented immigrants
by Rachel Roubein, nationaljournal.com -- November 13, 2014
[...]
A crucial component of Obama's executive action plan, as reported in The Times, centers around parents of children who are U.S. citizens or legal residents. It would allow parents to apply for work authorization and allay the fear of deportation.
This would affect at least 3.3 million people who had been in the country for as many as five years, or more than 2.5 million if the plan is contingent on at least 10 years of residency, according to a Migration Policy Institute report.
About 1 million more undocumented immigrants could receive temporary stays of removal if the plan extends protections to more children who came to the country illegally when they were young, as well as to their parents, according to The Times.
[...]
Advocates of immigration reform say "it falls short of the benchmark —
8 million" that the advocates
wanted to see, be given the opportunity to escape the "economic shadows" -- to be able pursue the American Dream.
President Obama recently called his plan "a pathway" to earn citizenship -- a chance to get in line -- and get their citizenship "legally." There was no talk of Amnesty as there was with so many of his predecessors ...
Transcript: President Obama’s Nov. 5 news conference on midterm election results
-- washingtonpost.com -- November 5, 2014
[... President Obama: ]
And then the executive actions that I take go away. They’re superseded by the law that is passed. And I will engage any member of Congress who’s interested in this in how we can shape legislation that will be a significant improvement over the existing system. But what we can’t do is just keep on waiting. There is a cost to waiting. There’s a cost to our economy. It means that resources are misallocated.
When the issue of unaccompanied children cropped up during this summer, there was a lot of folks who perceived this as a major crisis in our immigration system. Now, the fact is that those numbers have now come down and they’re approximately where they were a year ago or two years ago or a year before that.
But it did identify a real problem in a certain portion of the border where we’ve got to get more resources. But those resources may be misallocated separating families right now that most of us, most Americans would say probably we’d rather have them just pay their back taxes, pay a fine, learn English, get to the back of the line, but we’ll give you a pathway where you can be legal in this country.
So, where I’ve got executive authorities to do that, we should get started on that. But I want to emphasize once again, if in fact Republican leadership wants to see an immigration bill passed, they now have the capacity to pass it and hopefully engaging with me and Democrats in both the House and the Senate, it’s a bill that I can sign because it addresses the real concerns that are out there. And the sooner they do it, from my perspective, the better.
[...]
The president is once again only filling the vacuum of leadership, the dearth of any real policies, from the GOP fractured branches of Government. The president is once again only the addressing the very real human and economic tragedies, that the one-dimensional Republican rhetoric had left us with, as per usual.
And about some of those Economic Costs of inaction -- of treating hard-working, underpaid, essential migrant workers -- as if they were "dispensable" pawns on a political gameboard? Well we only have to check with the Farmers of Georgia, who abruptly loss their "labor" services:
Georgia’s New Immigration Law Leading To Crops Rotting In Farmers’ Fields
by Doug Mataconis, outsidethebeltway.com -- June 22, 2011
During the last legislative session, Georgia adopted a harsh new immigration law modeled on the law passed last year by Arizona. Now, it seems they’re getting a little lesson in the law of unintended consequences:
[...]
Thanks to the resulting labor shortage, Georgia farmers have been forced to leave millions of dollars’ worth of blueberries, onions, melons and other crops unharvested and rotting in the fields. It has also put state officials into something of a panic at the damage they’ve done to Georgia’s largest industry.
[...]
Or check with the Farmers of Alabama, who also loss the benefits of "under the radar" taken for granted labor-force too ...
Alabama Immigration Law Causing Produce To Rot In The Fields
by Doug Mataconis, outsidethebeltway.com -- October 6, 2011
Alabama’s tomato farmers are experiencing some of the same problems that Georgia farmers did earlier this year thanks to Alabama’s tough new immigration law, but the author of the law says he’s not willing to change it:
A sponsor of Alabama’s tough new immigration law told desperate tomato farmers Monday that he won’t change the law, even though they told him that their crops are rotting in the field and they are at risk of losing their farms.
Republican state Sen. Scott Beason of Gardendale met with about 50 growers, workers, brokers and business people Monday at a tomato packing shed on Chandler Mountain in northeast Alabama. They complained that the new law, which went into effect Thursday, scared off many of their migrant workers at harvest time.
“The tomatoes are rotting on the vine, and there is very little we can do,” said Chad Smith, who farms tomatoes with his uncle, father and brother.
[...]
When crops rot in the fields for lack of "Americans willing to do the back-breaking, sub-minimum wage jobs" --
how is THAT good for the overall Economy?
What's more is that, bringing these hard-working, often exploited-labor forces -- out of the shadows, and into the well-regulated American "free-market" light -- will also "good for the Economy" in another vital way. It'll be good for America's bottom-line: Revenue ...
The Economic Benefits of Providing a Path to Earned Citizenship
by Cecilia Muñoz and Gene Sperling, whitehouse.gov -- August 13, 2013
Today, the White House released a report detailing the economic benefits of providing a path to earned citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S. shadow economy. As highlighted in the report, a range of economic research has shown that immigrants living and working in the United States without authorization are earning far less than their potential, paying much less in taxes, and contributing significantly less to the U.S. economy than they would if they were given the opportunity to gain legal status and earn U.S. citizenship. According to outside estimates, providing earned citizenship for these workers would increase their wages and, over 10 years, boost U.S. GDP by $1.4 trillion, increase total income for all Americans by $791 billion, generate $184 billion in additional state and federal tax revenue from currently undocumented immigrants, and add about 2 million jobs to the U.S. economy.
A strong majority of Americans from diverse states and political backgrounds support a path to earned citizenship. However, some in Congress have suggested that immigration reform should provide only legal status, without any opportunity for those who are getting on the right side of the law to earn their way to citizenship. This “legalization-only” approach violates a basic principle of our country: that anyone, no matter where they came from, can become an American citizen if they’re willing to work for it and take on the responsibilities of citizenship. We cannot afford a system that creates a group which can never become fully American, denying equal rights to people who pay the same taxes and play by the same rules even after they've paid a penalty and gotten on the right side of the law.
[...]
We
cannot afford perpetuating a system that relies on exploiting an "in the shadows," cheap labor force -- composed of desperate immigrant workers who's willing (
and necessary) -- to do the "unpleasant work," that ordinary Americans are simply unwilling to do.
When crops rot in fields -- all to make some sort a political point -- it's not good for Anyone -- and most of all it's NOT GOOD for the American Economy.
We cannot afford "cancelling" such a system, either. Unless we want to see the price of our Groceries -- rise uncontrollably like the price of our Gas ...
Once again it is the compassionate Democrats being faced with "Damned if you do -- and damned if you don't" dilemma ...
What Dems need to start asking is: "Why is it always the Republicans doing this non-sequitur damning?" ... When is it, do they get to "share in," the confounded blame?