Racist tweet by Trump re future immigration to the US

Cont....
From 1972-74 I worked for the U.S. Public Health Service based in SF. I compiled a file full of first-person anecdotes which I recorded from my conversations with illegal immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador and Nicaragua who did get through and arrived thanks to the "coyotes", a thriving business by then.

In 1973, the United Farm Workers set up a "wet line" along the United States-Mexico border to prevent Mexican immigrants from entering the United States illegally and potentially undermining the UFW's unionization efforts.[22] During one such event, in which Chavez was not involved, some UFW members, under the guidance of Chavez's cousin Manuel, physically attacked the strikebreakers after peaceful attempts to persuade them not to cross the border failed.[23][24][25].

.....Chavez had long preferred grassroots action to legislative work, but in 1974, propelled by the recent election of the pro-union Jerry Brown as governor of California, as well as a costly battle with the Teamsters union over the organizing of farmworkers, Chavez decided to try to work toward legal victories.[27] Once in office Brown's support for the UFW cooled.[27] The UFW decided to organize a 110-mile (180 km) march by a small group of UFW leaders from San Francisco to the E & J Gallo Winery in Modesto. Just a few hundred marchers left San Francisco on February 22, 1975. By the time they reached Modesto on March 1, however, more than 15,000 people had joined the march en route.[27] The success of the Modesto march garnered significant media attention, and helped convince Brown and others that the UFW still had significant popular support.[27]


Chavez placing Jerry Brown's name for nomination during the roll call vote at the 1976 Democratic National Convention. On June 4, 1975, Governor Brown signed into law the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA), which established collective bargaining for farm workers. The act set up the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) to oversee the process.

In mid-1976, the ALRB ran out of its budgeted money for the year, as a result of a massive amount of work in setting up farmworker elections. The California legislature refused to allocate more money, so the ALRB closed shop for the year.[28] In response, Chavez gathered signatures in order to place Proposition 14 on the ballot, which would guarantee the right of union organizers to visit and recruit farmworkers, even if it meant trespassing on private property controlled by farm owners. The proposition went before California voters in November 1976, but was defeated by a 2–1 margin.[28]

Setbacks and a change of direction, 1976–1988
As a result of the failure of Proposition 14, Chavez decided that the UFW suffered from disloyalty, poor motivation and lack of communication.[28] He felt that the union needed to turn into a "movement".[29] He took inspiration from the Synanon community of California (which he had visited previously), which had begun as a drug rehabilitation center before turning into a New Age religious organization.[30] Synanon had pioneered what they referred to as "the Game", in which each member would be singled out in turn to receive harsh, profanity-laced criticism from the rest of the community.[30] Chavez instituted "the Game" at UFW, having volunteers, including senior members of the organization, receive verbal abuse from their peers.[30] He also fired many members, whom he accused of disloyalty; in some cases he accused volunteers of being spies for either the Republican Party or the Communists.[29]


The trouble with Paradise there is always a snake, or 2, or 3 in the grass.
 
His view on unvetted Muslim immigration to the US was, in my opinion, both correct and a major reason he won the election. Likewise immigration from Haiti and African nations needs to be tempered. I don't know the exact parameters of the proposed legislation admitting residents/citizens of those "shithole" nations to which he referred, but I believe a lottery system (I understand this to be a feature of the legislation) might not be appropriate given existing realities.

r.

You do know that no "unvetted" Muslims (or any other religion) were ever allowed in the US for immigration or visiting purposes correct? Getting vetted for immigration purposes takes at least a year and non-regular (i.e., refugee) visas often take several years. Even visitor visas go through an extensive background check. His ban was totally a red herring thrown out to those who are scared of anyone who looks "different" (i.e., not white).
 
Also, there is a defacto elimination system already in place inre immigration. Only the wealthy or talented need apply ;) The application itself is close to 1K just to file the paperwork. Then in order to be approved, the sponsor or co-sponsor of the intending CR-1 immigrant need to make a certain amount of verifiable income. A low income person simply wouldn't meet the criteria to be a sponsor for another immigrant. Also, if you are trying to bring someone in for work purposes, you need to show there is no one in the US capable of doing that work and/or the intending immigrant is in possession of extraordinary skills.

The only time those situations are suspended is in response to humanitarian crises. Even then, the intending immigrant must go through the vetting process.

To give you an idea, my husband/I had to submit over 100 pages of documentation including his criminal background records, his military service records, financial records, etc, etc. It took approximately a year. And that was the "easy" route as the spouse of a US citizen.
 
You do know that no "unvetted" Muslims (or any other religion) were ever allowed in the US for immigration or visiting purposes correct? Getting vetted for immigration purposes takes at least a year and non-regular (i.e., refugee) visas often take several years. Even visitor visas go through an extensive background check. His ban was totally a red herring thrown out to those who are scared of anyone who looks "different" (i.e., not white).
No, I didn't know that no "unvetted" Muslims or others were "ever" allowed into the US for immigration or visiting purposes, but it does surprise me. Do you really mean to say "ever?" Ellis Island, included? If so, how do you define vetting?
If you say it takes a year to get "vetted for immigration purposes" (i.e., permanent residence) for visitors from European countries, Canada, So Am, etc. I am, indeed, surprised. Ditto for the even longer vetting duration period for refugees. Does that vetting process occur while such persons are in the US on a temporary visa?
Be that as it may, given today's geopolitical realities I approve a policy of vetting all visitors to the US and especially those from the 6 Muslim majority countries identified BEFORE Trump took office. You may disagree, but I trust you agree that Islam (Muslim) is not a race. See, for example, the multitudinous blond, blue-eyed Muslims from the Islamic Republic of Iran, the black Muslims from Africa, the "Asian" types from Indonesia or Malaysia, the "Caucasian" Chechnyans, the Semitic/Arab of Saudi Arabia, the Chinese Uyghurs. Talk of a red herring - not sure you are using the term correctly- but what, in fact, is a red herring is arguing that it is racist to vet those who are more likely to be fanatic jihadis.
It is my opinion that given the geopolitical realities, especially the advent of jihadi terrorism, accurate vetting from the 6 countries in question makes perfect sense. Moreover, it is, in my opinion, one of the principle reasons, if not, the principle reason the jerk got elected. Yes, it may mean that some innocent deserving people have difficulty getting into the US, but it is the price to be paid for excluding those who are committed to fighting the Big Satan.
p.s. No to quoque arguments please.
p.p.s. This is not to say that the jerk is not a racist ahole. I think he is, but what we are discussing is immigration policy.
 
Last edited:
Also, there is a defacto elimination system already in place inre immigration. Only the wealthy or talented need apply ;) The application itself is close to 1K just to file the paperwork. Then in order to be approved, the sponsor or co-sponsor of the intending CR-1 immigrant need to make a certain amount of verifiable income. A low income person simply wouldn't meet the criteria to be a sponsor for another immigrant. Also, if you are trying to bring someone in for work purposes, you need to show there is no one in the US capable of doing that work and/or the intending immigrant is in possession of extraordinary skills.

The only time those situations are suspended is in response to humanitarian crises. Even then, the intending immigrant must go through the vetting process.

To give you an idea, my husband/I had to submit over 100 pages of documentation including his criminal background records, his military service records, financial records, etc, etc. It took approximately a year. And that was the "easy" route as the spouse of a US citizen.
Were these policies about which you complain enacted during Trump's administration or prior ones? Are you referring to immigrants from a particular country? If so, which?
 
Julian63 - I'm not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that a Bracero-like guest worker program ought to be incorporated into any new immigrant related legislation?

Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting. One tailored individually to each US state that may have a need for guest workers.

I'm pretty sure that would not be geographically feasible for Haitians or people from African nations.

Why would such a program not be feasible for Haitians or people from African nations?
You really don't see a geographical difference between a guest worker program for citizens of Mexico vs citizens of Haiti or African nations? Are you willing to pay the passage?
 
Julian63 - I don't think it is correct to say that the California'' construction industry relies on migrant workers. Wages were high enough to attract a local work force.

In the last 5 years he has been unable to find any additional legal workers. During the months of Jan and Feb he shuts down his business. All 8 of his employees take those months off to return to their towns in Mexico. Some bought land there and are building their homes for when they retire. Others take their family to visit relatives.
I am surprised to learn your husband was unable to find any legal employees. I presume he was offering competitive wages, if not, the promise of union wages. Yes? If so, PM me. I 'm pretty sure I can refer him some legal workers from the SF bay area.
 
Last edited:
Cont....
From 1972-74 I worked for the U.S. Public Health Service based in SF. I compiled a file full of first-person anecdotes which I recorded from my conversations with illegal immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador and Nicaragua who did get through and arrived thanks to the "coyotes", a thriving business by then.

In 1973, the United Farm Workers set up a "wet line" along the United States-Mexico border to prevent Mexican immigrants from entering the United States illegally and potentially undermining the UFW's unionization efforts.[22] During one such event, in which Chavez was not involved, some UFW members, under the guidance of Chavez's cousin Manuel, physically attacked the strikebreakers after peaceful attempts to persuade them not to cross the border failed.[23][24][25].

.....Chavez had long preferred grassroots action to legislative work, but in 1974, propelled by the recent election of the pro-union Jerry Brown as governor of California, as well as a costly battle with the Teamsters union over the organizing of farmworkers, Chavez decided to try to work toward legal victories.[27] Once in office Brown's support for the UFW cooled.[27] The UFW decided to organize a 110-mile (180 km) march by a small group of UFW leaders from San Francisco to the E & J Gallo Winery in Modesto. Just a few hundred marchers left San Francisco on February 22, 1975. By the time they reached Modesto on March 1, however, more than 15,000 people had joined the march en route.[27] The success of the Modesto march garnered significant media attention, and helped convince Brown and others that the UFW still had significant popular support.[27]


Chavez placing Jerry Brown's name for nomination during the roll call vote at the 1976 Democratic National Convention. On June 4, 1975, Governor Brown signed into law the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA), which established collective bargaining for farm workers. The act set up the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) to oversee the process.

In mid-1976, the ALRB ran out of its budgeted money for the year, as a result of a massive amount of work in setting up farmworker elections. The California legislature refused to allocate more money, so the ALRB closed shop for the year.[28] In response, Chavez gathered signatures in order to place Proposition 14 on the ballot, which would guarantee the right of union organizers to visit and recruit farmworkers, even if it meant trespassing on private property controlled by farm owners. The proposition went before California voters in November 1976, but was defeated by a 2–1 margin.[28]

Setbacks and a change of direction, 1976–1988
As a result of the failure of Proposition 14, Chavez decided that the UFW suffered from disloyalty, poor motivation and lack of communication.[28] He felt that the union needed to turn into a "movement".[29] He took inspiration from the Synanon community of California (which he had visited previously), which had begun as a drug rehabilitation center before turning into a New Age religious organization.[30] Synanon had pioneered what they referred to as "the Game", in which each member would be singled out in turn to receive harsh, profanity-laced criticism from the rest of the community.[30] Chavez instituted "the Game" at UFW, having volunteers, including senior members of the organization, receive verbal abuse from their peers.[30] He also fired many members, whom he accused of disloyalty; in some cases he accused volunteers of being spies for either the Republican Party or the Communists.[29]


The trouble with Paradise there is always a snake, or 2, or 3 in the grass.
Can I get an executive summary? What is your point? (re immigration)
 
Julian63 - I'm not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that a Bracero-like guest worker program ought to be incorporated into any new immigrant related legislation?

Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting. One tailored individually to each US state that may have a need for guest workers.
Immigration law is the subject of federal legal jurisdiction. It is not susceptible to state by state tailoring.
 
Back
Top