It’s no secret that the Social Security program faces a very real threat of running out of money. Thanks to impressive advancements in the medical world, the ratio of workers to retirees is now decreasing too quickly, and the future availability of retirement funds for millions of Americans is in serious doubt. Internal agency assessments predict that the program’s trust fund reserves will be completely depleted by 2034 unless significant reforms are enacted before then.
Of course, many open-border advocates use this as an opportunity to call for more mass-immigration, including amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, to immediately boost the number of workers in the United States.
Only in the stagnant swamps of Washington, DC, could a public policy with the word “temporary” in its title gain a sense of permanence, but that is exactly what has happened to Temporary Protected Status (TPS).
TPS was a benevolent policy enacted in 1990 to provide temporary safe haven to those who were visiting or temporarily living in the United States – such as tourists or students – when civil strife or a natural disaster suddenly struck back home, making their immediate return either very difficult or dangerous.
The idea of a merit-based immigration policy originated on the political left. It was first proposed by a blue ribbon panel, chaired by a civil rights movement icon, Barbara Jordan, in the 1990s. The commission’s recommendations for an immigration overhaul were immediately endorsed by President Bill Clinton and other leading Democrats and Republicans of the day and then, just as quickly, mothballed due to objections from ethnic interest advocacy groups and powerful cheap labor business interests.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently reported that the nationwide unemployment rate stood at 7.9 percent – double what it was in February before the COVID-19 crisis hit our shores. Stay-at-home orders, government-mandated shutdowns, and delayed reopening of state and local economies continues to derail the ability of our country to recover from the economic and human impact of COVID-19. Worse still, millions of Americans remain unemployed, particularly in the service sector of our economy.
In last Thursday’s debate, former Vice-President Joe Biden promised that, if elected, he will create “a pathway to citizenship for over 11 million undocumented people.” While most of the pundits focused on how such a massive amnesty would impact America, there is also much disagreement surrounding the question of how many illegal aliens actually reside in the country. So where did Biden get his “11 million [illegal aliens]” figure? And is it accurate?
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created in response to the attacks of 9/11. Among its critical responsibilities is to secure the nation’s borders, enforce its immigration laws and protect the interests of Americans and migrants. But none of those priorities is likely to be achieved under the leadership of Alejandro Mayorkas, the man President-elect Joe Biden has nominated to serve as the next DHS secretary.
Late last week, in the middle of high-stakes COVID-19 relief negotiations, the Senate quietly attempted to bypass the normal legislative process and ram through a dangerous immigration giveaway. You heard that right—yet another immigration bill without the best interests of the American people in mind.
The bill, known as the Hong Kong People’s Freedom and Choice Act and already approved by the House, is a well-intentioned effort aimed at responding to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) increasingly repressive efforts to snuff out any remaining freedoms enjoyed by Hong Kong residents. Fortunately, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) took a bold stand and blocked the bill, stopping it in its tracks for now. Unfortunately, the legislation will likely return in the 117th Congress.
The times they will be changing, come January 20. Joe Biden will bring a change in style, a change in tone and a change in temperament when he assumes office next month. And like any new president, he will bring a change in policies. Perhaps none will be more notable than his handling of immigration policy.
For the past four years, Donald Trump has approached immigration policy from the standpoint that, like any other public policy, its primary purpose was to serve the greater good of the American people. In pursuit of that objective, his administration made good faith efforts to secure our borders, cut down on asylum and other sorts of fraud, end abuses in guest worker programs that undermine the interests of U.S. workers (especially after the pandemic struck) and to ensure that people who immigrate legally have the wherewithal to be self-sufficient.
Vice President Kamala Harris traveled to El Paso, Texas, ostensibly to get a firsthand look of the border and humanitarian crisis her administration created. Despite President Biden tapping Harris to oversee and address the “root causes” of illegal migration, the trip can only be described as a flop. The location, the timing, and the nature of her visit demonstrate that she and her administration have no desire to end the crisis any time soon and that this crisis is a deliberate policy.
Check out what RJ wrote in the Washington Examiner:
The bill is slated to be advanced through the little-known budget reconciliation process, which allows the party in power to pass legislation related to the budget with only a simple majority, bypassing the traditional 60-vote threshold. However, the budget reconciliation process has complex requirements, and it is not certain that the inclusion of immigration would pass muster with the Senate parliamentarian.