Archive for the ‘Immigration Reform’ Category

WATCH: President Trump introduces immigration reform RAISE Act – AOL

Christina Gregg, AOL.com

Aug 2nd 2017 11:54AM

Update: This event has ended.

Republican Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue are set to join President Trump on Wednesday in introducing a bill meant to overhaul the U.S. immigration system.

The Reforming American Immigration for a Strong Economy Act -- or RAISE Act -- is described by the White House as "aimed at creating a skills-based immigration system that will make America more competitive, raise wages for American workers, and create jobs. Americans deserve a raise."

RELATED: Faces of Trump's immigration crackdown

14 PHOTOS

Faces of Trump's immigration crackdown

See Gallery

Mexican national Adalberto Magana-Gonzalez, 44, waits to be processed after being taken into custody by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Fugitive Operations team in Santa Ana, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES. TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY.

Mexican national Adalberto Magana-Gonzalez, 44, has his fingerprints taken after being taken into custody by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Fugitive Operations team in Santa Ana, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

The badge of a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Fugitive Operations team is seen in Santa Ana, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Field Office Director Jorge Field (R), 53, arrests Mexican national Adalberto Magana-Gonzalez, 44, in San Clemente, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

Mexican national Adalberto Magana-Gonzalez, 44, waits to be processed after being taken into custody by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Fugitive Operations team in Santa Ana, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Field Office Director Jorge Field (R), 53, arrests Mexican national Adalberto Magana-Gonzalez, 44, in San Clemente, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Fugitive Operations team takes immigration fugitives into custody in Santa Ana, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

Handcuffs lie in a box at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Fugitive Operations office in Santa Ana, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Field Office Director Jorge Field (L), 53, arrests an Iranian immigrant in San Clemente, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Field Office Director Jorge Field (R), 53, and Field Office Director David Marin arrest an Iranian immigrant in San Clemente, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Field Office Director Jorge Field, 53, arrests an Iranian immigrant in San Clemente, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Fugitive Operations team member arrests an Iranian immigrant in Santa Ana, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Fugitive Operations team search for an immigration fugitive in Santa Ana, California, U.S., May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson SEARCH "NICHOLSON ARREST" FOR THIS STORY. SEARCH "WIDER IMAGE" FOR ALL STORIES.

HIDE CAPTION

SHOW CAPTION

More from AOL.com: WATCH: President Trump addresses law enforcement officials about MS-13 Twitter lawsuit against Trump for blocking followers just got a boost Former officials say something 'insidious' is brewing between the White House and DOJ

Continue reading here:
WATCH: President Trump introduces immigration reform RAISE Act - AOL

The President’s Proposals for Legal Immigration Reform are Bad Economic Policy – Mountain View Voice (blog)

Local Blogs

By Steve Levy

E-mail Steve Levy

View all posts from Steve Levy

These proposals (primarily the first one) would reduce annual immigration levels from roughly 1,000,000 to just over 500,000

The President alleges these proposals will help American workers and particularly those injured by legal low wage immigrants.

These proposals will hurt, not improve American economic prospects and are ineffective approaches to helping American workers more fully participate in the job market.

I believe, as do most economists and business owners, that the nation needs more, not fewer, legal immigrants.

I am sympathetic to designing a system that is more based on labor market needs and am open to reexamining the family based admissions. That is a position widely shared by economist who study labor markets as I do. But these are separable issues from reducing overall legal immigration levels.

If the President were serious about moving to a more labor demand based legal immigration system, he would have proposed a substantial increase in labor based admissions rather than keeping the current 140,000 annual target.

If the President were serious about making a more labor demand based legal immigration system, he would have recognized that employers are seeking workers at ALL skill levels, not just college graduates.

A high skill approach is NOT the same as a labor market demand approach because the shortages we have that will grow are in many occupations that are not high wage or require a college degree.

We are already into a period of tightening labor markets with low unemployment levels and the beginning of a surge in baby boomer retirements. In addition to providing for job growth, the nation will need to replace retiring public safety workers , plumbers and truck drivers, pilots, nurses, teachers and millions of other occupations.

At the same time birth rates have plummeted and we have the challenge of preparing high school and college graduates for tomorrows workforce.

Lindsay Graham today in response to the Presidents proposal noted that many low wage employers in his state were supportive of legal immigration policies to help fill their existing openings. Readers can judge for themselves as businesses owners and leaders weigh in on the Presidents proposal.

While the country has divided opinions about unauthorized immigrants who are already here, we have a history of bipartisan support and appreciation for legal immigrants who contribute to our economy and society.

The argument that restricting legal immigration will help American workers is particularly off base. If industries have to downsize because they cannot find enough workers, that affects opportunities for everyone at those firms. Moreover, most workers who have been hit by transitions in the job market like the loss of manufacturing jobs and declines in coal mining are unlikely to be helped by restricting legal immigrants and particularly the low wage legal immigrants the President seems to be focused on.

And they are certainly not looking for protection so they can get low wage jobs. Of course if the President were worried about the fate of low wage workers, he could support a higher minimum wage or expanded earned income tax credit.

There are ways to help workers who may need help or young people at risk. For people preparing for the next labor market, policies from free pre-school to high school programs partnering with companies to community colleges and workforce programs working hand in hand with employers could both help existing workers but, more important, contribute to breaking a cycle of poverty for some families.

Helping people get better skills is a positive approach. Let's do bipartisan reform of the legal immigration system.

Comments

See the original post:
The President's Proposals for Legal Immigration Reform are Bad Economic Policy - Mountain View Voice (blog)

As US immigration reform stalls, will employers be pressed to move to Canada? – HR Dive

Americans love to joke theyll move to Canada for any number of reasons (Tim Hortons, poutine, healthcare). But some U.S. employers may be taking a serious look at their options thanks to recent, opposing moves by the Trump administration and the nation's northern neighbor.

While one country contemplates closing borders and pausing international visa programs in favor of domestic job development, the other has expedited visa programs, encouraging highly skilled, English-speaking talent from abroad to apply.

In other words, the U.S./Canadian border may be one front in the battle between prevailing worldviews over talent and globalization.

Talent shortages, particularly in tech or STEM positions, plague American employers of all types. Some companies, like InfoSys, have opted to reignite their U.S. hiring programs in response to the Trump administrations call to Hire American. Others have brought their concerns straight to the White House.

But more than anything else, employers in every country hate uncertainty. While solid immigration policy may still be years in the making in the U.S., companies are looking for solutions now.

And some are betting on Canada.

In the short-term, U.S. companies with international ties may weather the brewing storm over immigration and visa policies. But in the long term, employers already struggling to find talent may find some American wells have dried up and moved north.

Examining the American take on immigration requires a full-360 view of the other domestic concerns currently absorbing the White Houses attention. Immigration reform was one of Trumps main campaign platforms, but Republican Congressional leaders have focused mainly on the Affordable Care Act and pushing through tax reform and infrastructure planning.

Immigration has been lower on the priority list and that may not be a surprise to politicos.

Immigration reform has always been the bull in the china shop, Jorge Lopez, chair of the Global Mobility and Immigration Practice Group at Littler Mendelson, told HR Dive. Hes worked in immigration law for more than 30 years. Its there but no one wants to talk about it.

Its more common for immigration leaders to talk about enforcement first, then shift to visas and benefits, he noted, which is what we are seeing now. A new I-9 form was recently released and Trump has spoken favorably of E-Verify in the past. However, Trumps Hire American executive order did have a clause focused specifically on H-1B visas, changing the lottery award system to focus on skills so that American workers arent undercut by lower-cost foreign workers.

Proponents of the Trump stance on immigration tough on undocumented immigrants and calling for a reform of the guest visa program argue that visa limitations can actually help streamline the high-skilled immigration system and make it fairer. Various reports claim that large conglomerates unfairly hijack the visa lottery system, making it nearly impossible for other companies obtain any.

There is no consensus on the best way to handle immigration reform and its Rubiks cube of complexities.The conservative Heritage Foundation favors a visa auction system. Even liberal-leaning organizations like The Economic Policy Institute have advocated for an H-1B program that requires American companies to try and hire U.S. workers first and a lottery that favors employers who will pay visa holders more than the prevailing wage.

Immigration reform has seen bipartisan support in the past, but it often gets stalled in favor of other domestic issues or mired in debate over single elements of reform, such as deportations, Lopez said. Questions over staffing are rarely answered in the debate, leaving employers in the lurch.

Canada introduced its new immigration initiative, the Global Skills Strategy,in June. Evan Green, senior partner at Green and Spiegel and specialist in Canadian immigration law, broke it down for HR Dive.

The current plan splits employers into two categories: A and B.

Category A employers are those that are specifically increasing their employment levels in Canada and need foreign individuals to scale up their company overall. To qualify employers must:

Once approved, category A employers can then bring in specialized employees with an advanced degree or advanced experience (five or more years, usually, Green said) that will make upwards of $80,000 per year.

Category B employers include the short supply occupations, such as computer technology, web design, electronic engineering and the like jobs that many employers are struggling to fill worldwide. To qualify, employers must:

Once those qualifications are met, employers can bring in talent to fill their needs. If those employees are highly skilled and meet NOC 0 or NOC A requirements (essentially, Canadas skill classification system), such visas can be turned around in two weeks.

Employees are also scored on a point system, largely based on age, education, work experience and whether they have family in Canada. A PhD graduate who is fluent in English would score pretty well, Green said, and the points required for visas have come down.

Its obviously too early to tell how effective Canadas global skills initiative program will be, but it does represent an interesting conundrum for U.S. employers.

Canadas program emphasizes spending on local initiatives to encourage longer-term investments, which may not be ideal for every employer. But companies are curious, Green noted.

Companies are looking at this and asking, How do we take advantage of this? Green said. He has even heard of some companies considering moving their development centers to Canada thanks to the new plan, especially those in category B.

While U.S. H-1B visa applications reached their limit in only five days this year, the amount of applications actually decreased for the first time in five years. That decrease surprised Lopez, though he questioned whether some employers opted out of the process to avoid the issue entirely.

The Buy American, Hire American executive order could change H-1B visa management from a three-year approval period down to an 18-month approval period, which Lopez said would be horrible for businesses, as they would have to file for extensions more often.

That could make the H-1B visa more trouble than it's worth for many companies but many dont have much of a choice, Lopez said.

Could the U.S. see a brain drain to Canada? Looking at the current comparison, Green said, 100 percent yes.

A year ago, I would have said it was very hard for someone without Canadian work experience to apply to work in Canada, Green said. But now its easier.

For some employers, the skills gap is serious enough to warrant existential worry. Some see Canada as an option for expansion due to its proximity to the U.S., a shared language, similar government systems and their already-intertwined economies.

The issue is not so much immigration, per say, but filling the jobs that need to be filled in the U.S. economy, Lopez said. If those jobs cant be filled here, [employers] are going to look elsewhere.

The travel ban is its own Pandoras box. While direct impact on employers is limited, it did spread unease among immigrant communities, which could lead to long-term effects on American talent availability. Applications to Canadian universities have substantially increased at the same time that international applications to U.S. universities have decreased. Some speculate that this shift may be due to students uncertainty that they will be able to live and work in the U.S. after graduation, Green said, and that could post problems for U.S. employers five or 10 years from now.

Complex policy like immigration will not have fast or easy fixes. Immigration policy set now could have ramifications for years thanks to international student enrollment numbers and company strategy shifts that will be difficult to change on the whim of any administration.

Real discussions on immigration policy are unlikely until issues with the domestic talent pipeline are also addressed. A lack of proper upskilling, the image gap, bias and even opioids have all eaten away at the availability of American talent in a variety of industries.

In essence, immigration policy will likely remain mired in the culture wars a polarizing central tenet of the globalization versus insulation debate. Employers, in the meantime, will likely be following the available talent. Will that talent be in Canada? Time will tell.

View original post here:
As US immigration reform stalls, will employers be pressed to move to Canada? - HR Dive

Two GOP senators plan to propose skills-based immigration bill: report – The Hill

Republican Sens. David Perdue (Ga.) and Tom CottonTom CottonSenate rejects ObamaCare repeal, replacement amendment Live coverage: Senate begins debate on ObamaCare repeal If our innovators have no reward, how will America compete? MORE (Ark.) plan to introduce legislation at the White House Wednesday calling for a new skills-based immigration system, the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.

According to the report, the plan would reduce the overall level of legal immigration into the country.

Our current immigration system is outdated and doesnt meet the diverse needs of our economy, Cotton aide Caroline Rabbitt told The Weekly Standard. Senator Cotton and Senator Perdue will join President Trump to unveil legislation aimed at creating a skills-based immigration system that will make America more competitive, raise wages for American workers, and create jobs.

Both senators have called for immigration reform, often criticizing the current system.

Earlier this year Cotton and Perdue introduced legislation that they said would effectively halve the number of green cards issued each year from 1 million to roughly 500,000.

Over the last 40 years weve seen a huge increase in immigration, Cotton said at the time, arguing that the current amount is out of line with historical levels.

The legislation would have nixed immigration preferences for non-immediate family members, adult children or adult parents of current legal permanent U.S. residents. It ultimately stalled in the Senate.

White House policy director Stephen Miller and Senate Republicans have reportedly been meeting to discuss immigration reform that would ultimately lower the amount of legal immigration.

The proposal comes as the Trump administration continues to look for solutions and reform on immigration, an issue Trump took a hard-line stance on during his campaign. During that time he pledged to deport more than 10 million undocumented immigrants.

Continue reading here:
Two GOP senators plan to propose skills-based immigration bill: report - The Hill

Surveys Show 60 Percent Opposition to all Immigration – Breitbart News

The polls of white Americans also showed that American college graduates are even more opposed to immigration than the average American, flipping the commonplace claim that people with additional years of education are more welcoming of divide-and-rule diversity than are blue-collar Americans.

The little-known 2010 report also showed that almost three-of-four white liberals hide their preference for zero immigration. According to the survey, which was conducted in 2005:

Political liberals are considerably more likely than moderates or conservatives to conceal support for immigration restrictionism. While 26 percent of liberals claim to support cutting off immigration in response to a direct question, 71 percent of liberals [when asked indirectly] support immigration restrictionism.

The second poll was conducted in 2010 and was published in 2014. It showed similar opposition to any and all immigration plus a greater willingness by employed Americans to reveal their opposition. The second study concluded:

The results suggest that respondents mask their opposition and [that] underlying anti-immigration sentiment is far higher than direct estimates suggest even before the financial crisis We implore future efforts to measure anti-immigration sentiment to be cautious about direct measurement of opposition, as these measures underestimate anti-immigration sentiment both before and after the financial crisis.

The surveys help explain popular opposition to the establishment-boosted cheap-labor-and-amnesty Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill of 2013, and also help explain the hidden public support for candidate Donald Trump in the 2016 election.

Both polls focused on white people because they are cheaper and simpler to survey. Other polls show large but hidden opposition to immigration among African-Americanand Latinopopulations, who also share whites sympathy for striving migrants.

Under pre-Trump policies, the federal government annually imports 1 million legal immigrants into the United States, just as 4 million young Americans turn 18.The federal government also awards roughly 1.5 million temporary work permits to foreigners, grants temporary work visas to roughly 500,000 new contract workers, such as H-1B workers, and also largely ignores the resident population of eight million employed illegal immigrants. These new migrant foreigners serve both as lower-wage workers to drag down labor costs, but also as welfare-aided consumers to push up consumption of company products and services.

This nations cheap-labor immigration policy has a huge impact on the economy and it creates massive financial incentives for investors and employers to inflate public support formass immigration. For example, Facebook founder Marc Zuckerberg funded a skewed poll in 2014 to boost apparent public support for the Gang of Eight comprehensive immigration bill in 2013. In contrast, very few public polls try to find out what people really think about immigration.

The first of the two surveys were conducted by academic Alexander Janus, now teaching at Edinburgh University, and was published in December 2010 by the peer reviewed journal, Social Science Quarterly.It is titled The Influence of Social Desirability Pressures on Expressed Immigration Attitudes.Janus conducted his survey from October 2005 through February 2006 via the existing Time-Sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences survey.

He divided his sample of 700 non-Hispanic whites into two demographically similar groups.

The first group was told: Now I am going to read you three/four things that sometimes people oppose or are against. After I read all three/four, just tell me HOW MANY of them you oppose. I dont want to know which ones, just HOW MANY.The issues were federal government increasing assistance to the poor, professional athletes making millions of dollars per year, and large corporations polluting the environment.

The second group was presented with the same question and the same list of issues plus an unobtrusive fourth issue about Cutting off immigration to the United States.The first group showed the baseline answer and the increased response in the second group showed the hidden answer to the immigration question.

This chart shows the percentage of people who support cutting off immigration to the United States in theunobtrusive estimate column:

The unobtrusive column shows 61 percent of all respondents favor cutting off immigration. So do 71 percent of liberals, 63 percent of Democrats, 71 percent of college graduates but only 41 percent of people with postgraduate degrees.

The paper also shows that roughly one-third of the 61 percent or 19 points hide their real opinion from pollsters. Almost two-thirds of college graduates 42 points of the 71 percent also hide their opinions. According to the survey paper:

This study suggests that almost one out of three (31 percent) Americans who are in favor of cutting off immigration hide their restrictionist sentiments when asked directlly

This studys findings serve as a call to immigration scholars to be more sensitive to self-presentational concerns within the survey interview, a topic that for a long time has captured the interest of the racial attitudes literature but has received scant attention from scholars who study immigration.

The group effect question refers to a section where the pollsters asked people if they have a warm or cool attitude towards immigrants. It revealsonly a small difference between the two groups on cutting off immigration.

The second survey has793 people in the first control group, plus 816 people in the unobtrusive group who were asked the extra question about immigration. It is titled Has Opposition to ImmigrationIncreased in the U.S. after theEconomic Crisis? An ExperimentalApproach, and itconcluded:

Opposition to immigration, although higher thanthat estimated directly, does not increase after the economic crisis. Instead,the post-crisis period is marked by greater tolerance to overtly expressedanti-immigration sentiment, despite little change in the underlying truelevels of opposition.This suggests that the U.S. general population of referencesees appearing tolerant as less favorable/important.

A third careful academic survey on immigration shows that Americans attitudes about H-1B visas are not linked to attitudes about immigration by Indians, many of whom are H-1B workers. Instead, their attitudes about H-1Bs are based on worry about economic threats. The study is called Economic Explanations for Opposition to Immigration: Distinguishing between Prevalence and Conditional Impact.

When asked by Breitbart News about his survey, Janus responded by urging more studies to determine what Americans focus on when they think about immigration:

I would be cautious about drawing too much from the results of this study. Respondents could have had different interpretations of the immigration item. Does immigration refer to legal or undocumented immigration? My sense is that one of the most divisive issues is what to do about the people who are already in this country illegally, but we do not ask about this. Additional studies that use alternative methodologies that control for social desirability or that use alternative immigration questions are clearly needed.

The two studies show far greater opposition to immigration than most polls partly because most polls are designed to manipulate Americans white, Latino and African-American into declaring support for immigrants and immigration. In general, the poll numbers are easy to manipulate because Americans do like many individual immigrants, and they do want to be seen liking immigration.

But opposition to the mass immigration policies is often visible in the business-funded polls. For example, the 2014Zuckerberg poll got high approved for amnesty by asking skewed questions but it also showed that intense Latino concerns. For example, 78 percent of Hispanic respondents supported substantially increasing security among US-Mexican border. and 77 percent favored rules requiring companies to check job applicants documents.

The media is often loath to admit what the numbers show. A July 2016 poll by vox.com showed that Midwesterners were particularly opposed to immigration, foreshadowing Trumps decisive victory in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. But Voxs progressive staffers simply ignored their data and claimed that the numbers show public concerns about physical security crime and terrorism are more important than concerns about jobs and the economy.

Media polls are usually skewed by professional and political alliances. In fact, one D.C.-based pollster for a famous newspaper told his reporter in 2014 that he polled people to find out how they respond to questions, but not to find out what they really believe.

Pollsters and polling companies do not want to irritate business and political clients who favor the mass inflow of workers and consumers. So they have a commercial incentive to not collect, not notice and not publish anti-immigration, pro-American results from the public.

Pro-American advocacy groups have sometimes exposed the publics worry about mass-immigration but their data has been treated as unreliable.But a few pollsters have produced good data on the issue, including Kellyanne Conway, who helped Trump shape his pro-American not anti-immigrant message in 2016.

Very few media people have recognized the deep public opposition to mass immigration. For example, Julia Preston, the former chief immigration reporter at the New York Times, rarely wrote about the publics suppressed attitudes towards cheap-labor immigration. Instead, she served as a megaphone for foreigners concerns when she was employed at the NYT, and in her subsequent work as a reporter for the Marshall Project. For example, Preston wrotethis recent article about migrants worries:

Tens of thousands of families from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, and some from Mexico, came here citing their need forprotection from predatory gangs and criminal violence. Now, they face the prospect of being sent back to countries they fear have not become any less dangerous.

Of nearly100,000parents and children who have come before the courts since2014, most asking for refuge, judges have issued rulings in at least 32,500cases, court records show. The majority 70percent ended with deportation orders in absentia, pronounced by judges to empty courtrooms.

But her views are out of step with public opinion. For example, the comments by the mostly liberal readers of the Washington Postshowed near-universal hostility to Prestons welcome-the-migrants theme. The top-ranked comment, for example, says:

This is stupidity. Just because your home nation is filled with violence and savagery, doesnt make you Americas problem.I feel bad for these people, but they still have no case.

To read more about immigration polls, click here.

The currentannual floodofforeign laborspikes profits and Wall Street valuesbycutting salariesfor manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate prices,widens wealth-gaps, reduceshigh-tech investment, increasesstate and local tax burdens, hurtskids schoolsandcollege education, and sidelinesat least 5 million marginalizedAmericansand their families.

Follow this link:
Surveys Show 60 Percent Opposition to all Immigration - Breitbart News