Here is a segment of the report that focused on the legal side of immigration by which policies and priorities were set forth:
Legal Immigration: Setting Priorities
Here is the paragraph that focused on the admission of foreign workers and the way that American workers should be given the best opportunity to make certain that they do not suffer from unfair foreign competition:
Immigration can support the national interest by bringing to the U.S. individuals whose skills would benefit our society. It also can help U.S. businesses compete in the global economy. This national interest in the competitiveness of business must be balanced by an equally compelling national interest in developing a U.S. workforce that has the skills necessary to compete in the global economy. Immigration policy can contribute to this national interest by:
- Focusing on the admission of highly-skilled individuals;
- Giving employers access to a global labor market when they cannot identify U.S. workers with knowledge and expertise required for a specific job or when they demonstrate a labor shortage that cannot be filled through short-term training programs;
- Helping companies conducting business, both in the United States and internationally, to reassign personnel as needed to maintain their competitiveness;
- Encouraging entrepreneurial activities and other investment in the United States aimed at creation of jobs;
- Providing a means of ensuring that U.S. workers are not displaced or otherwise adversely affected by the entry of foreign workers; and
- Providing incentives or penalties to help ensure that employers in the U.S. engage in serious recruitment of American workers (for example, national rather than local recruitment where appropriate) and contribute significantly to the training of the comestic U.S. workforce.
The Commission recommends that the preferences for the admission of skill-based immigrants be reorganized to establish two categories: those subject to a lobor market test, which we would expect to be the norm; and those who, for significant and specific policy reasons, should be exempt from such a labor market test. Labor market testing requires a demonstration that a business has a bona fide need for the skills of a foreign worker and cannot find a qualified U.S. worker or one who could be readily trained for the intended job.
The recommendations of the Jordan Commission are just words on a piece of paper unless resources are provided, with full support of the administration, to conduct investigations to make certain that indeed, foreign workers do not displace American workers. This is a component of the interior enforcement of the Immigration and Nationality Act that is almost never noted by anyone in government or among the “journalists” who are quick to provide their perspectives on immigration.
When politicians state that they are willing to provide unknown millions of illegal aliens, who snuck into the United States to evade the inspections process that is supposed to prevent aliens who pose a threat to the safety and well being of America and Americans, they are ignoring the obvious, that without secure borders and an immigration system that has integrity, our country cannot defend itself against terrorists, spies and transnational criminal organizations.
They are also making it abundantly clear that they are willing to flood the labor pool at a time when their is a record number of American workers who have given up looking for work and who, therefore, have abandoned their hopes of participating in the “American Dream!”
Having mentioned the “American Dream,” today, the “DREAMERS” who are illegal aliens who have until age 31 to file an application claiming that they were brought to the United States by their parents when they were teenagers, are being granted temporary lawful status and are being given official identity documents without so much as an in person interview. There are no resources, either, for ICE to conduct field investigations to seek to uncover fraud.
This flies in the face of commonsense and the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
Here is a link to a video of a segment of my testimony before that hearing provides crystal clarity about my grave concerns about the nexus between any such amnesty program and national security.
I articulated my concerns about the previous attempt to enact Comprehensive Immigration Refom in my Op-Ed that the Washington Times published on June 22, 2007 and that Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama quoted from, on three separate dates, from the floor of the U.S. during the contentious floor debates. In my piece I recommended that Comprehensive Immigration Reform be given a more honest and descriptive title, I suggested that it be renamed the “Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act!”
My article was entitled:
Immigration bill a ‘No Go’