‘Scarborough Country’
January 6, 2004
JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: Tonight: Is President Bush going soft on illegal immigration?
You’re about to enter SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY. No passport required, no border jumping allowed.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This administration is firmly against blanket amnesty.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: Tomorrow, President Bush announces his plan for limited amnesty for illegal immigrants. But will it be limited enough? That heated debate coming up.
And another royal shakeup. Before she died, Princess Diana wrote that she thought someone was planning to kill her. It turns out that someone was Prince Charles.
And unholy matrimony. Britney Spears calls it quits after 55 hours.
We’re going to ask Dr. Ruth about the effect on the pop star’s young fans.
And 14 years after he was banned from baseball, Pete Rose decides it’s time to step up to the plate and admit that he did bet on the national pastime. But should that earn him a spot in the Hall of Fames?
Well, tomorrow, the president of the United States is going to officially surrender to illegal immigrants. It’s time for tonight’s “Real Deal.”
President Bush is about to rewrite the rules on illegal immigration by essentially ignoring those rules. Reports out of Washington tonight are that the White House is going to announce a new policy that would allow American jobs to be assigned to illegal immigrants. The Bush plan allows American employers to hire Mexican citizens to fill American jobs. Now, these jobs are supposedly too demeaning for Americans to occupy, but that concept is utter nonsense. The only reason Americans aren’t taking these jobs in question is because businesses are able to fill their employment rolls with illegal immigrants.
These illegal immigrants will work for next to nothing. So, if the United States government actually protected our bordered and enforced the employment laws that you pay for them to enforce, these jobs in question would pay good enough wages for Americans to fill. But, then again, living by the law of the land might actually affect some businesses’ bottom line. Besides, as we all know, playing to illegal aliens is all the rage in Washington these days, where politicians of both parties cynically believe that the only way to win votes is by embracing a group of criminals who come to our country, break our laws, and take our jobs.
Tomorrow, the chief law enforcement officer of the United States is going to tell the world that America has given up its battle to protect its borders. And what that means for our nation’s security is anybody’s guess. It’s a disturbing turn of events in Washington. And it’s tonight’s “Real Deal.”
Now, the president is giving a big speech tomorrow on his immigration policy. And his press secretary, Scott McClellan, gave us a preview of what to expect.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: If employers are offering jobs to Americans that Americans are not willing to fill, then we ought to welcome to our country those who will fill that job.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: And with us tonight is Jared Taylor. He’s the publisher of “The American Renaissance.” And we also have Dan Griswold. Dan is an immigration expert from the Cato Institute.
Jared Taylor, you heard the president’s spokesman. What should we make of George Bush’s plan to offer American jobs to illegal immigrants?
 |
JARED TAYLOR, “THE AMERICAN RENAISSANCE”: Well, I think you said it extremely well.
They’re going to try to dress this thing up and pretend that it’s not an amnesty, but that’s clearly what it is. Anything short of deportation for illegals is an amnesty. We had one once before in 1986. It was supposed to be the never-again, one-time-only amnesty. And to be talking about it again I think is extremely irresponsible and makes the country look untrustworthy.
SCARBOROUGH: Dan Griswold, the president’s statement tomorrow may be perceived by some as the White House’s attempt to cynically win over Hispanic voters. Isn’t that what’s going on here?
DAN GRISWOLD, CATO INSTITUTE: No, Joe, I think you have got it wrong and I think the president has it right.
He’s trying to get U.S.—our dysfunctional immigration laws in conformity with the reality of American life. Look, the U.S. economy is going to continue to create millions of low-skill jobs at a time when U.S. workers are increasingly unwilling to take those jobs. We’re getting older. We’re getting better educated. Where was the line of people, Americans, waiting to stay up all night waiting to scrub toilets at Wal-Mart? It’s just not there.
(CROSSTALK)
GRISWOLD: And, at the same time, there’s no . . .
SCARBOROUGH: But, Dan, you’re saying we have dysfunctional immigration laws. But what’s dysfunctional, the laws themselves or our refusal to enforce those laws?
GRISWOLD: The laws are unenforceable, because we have this gap, this gap between the jobs we’re creating and the unwillingness of Americans to take these jobs.
These workers come here because there is demand for their services. They’re serving important functions in industries like construction, agriculture, hotel and motel industry, light manufacturing. We have manufacturing industries that would go offshore.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Jared Taylor, what do you say to that? Are there certain jobs in America that are just too demeaning and too low-paying for Americans to fill?
TAYLOR: I think you put it very well, Joe, when you opened this segment here.
We now have an estimated nine to 12 million immigrants. We have nine million unemployed Americans. You hit it on the head when you said, if those illegal immigrants were not here, we might pay a little bit more for those jobs. What it means, Americans would have those jobs and not these lawbreakers and queue-jumpers, who have pushed in here, breaking our laws as it is.
SCARBOROUGH: Now, here’s what President Bush is reportedly going to propose as a guest worker program tomorrow, that U.S. companies will post jobs on the Internet that they can’t fill here. Immigrants will then apply, have a background check. And if they pass, they stay for three years and can renew for three more. Eventually, they could even apply for a green card.
Now, Jared Taylor, what do you say about this plan that, again—let’s not brush over the fact that these people are breaking our laws and now they’re actually going to be allowed through this process to get a green card.
TAYLOR: First of all, first of all, there was never a guest worker program that ended up—that didn’t end up being a squatter worker program.
Guests are here at our pleasure and go home when we say go home. Ask the Germans about their guest workers, the Turks, who are now an assimilable minority that cause terrible problems. The idea of a guest worker problem will work only if there’s some sort of immaculate insertion of these people into the economy and they have no interaction with the rest of the country and then they disappear. That’s impossible.
These people will have children. They will have wives. They will have girlfriends. They will be on the public dole. They will be getting hurt and going to emergency rooms. The idea that this will not affect the rest of the country is, I think, eyewash.
SCARBOROUGH: Dan Griswold, isn’t the president going to be admitting tomorrow that America is incapable of protecting its borders?
GRISWOLD: Not at all.
In fact, I think this is going to help us protect our borders. Secretary Ridge, the homeland security secretary, two or three weeks ago started this conversation by saying it would make his job easier if we knew who was here. We have eight million people living in a kind of legal twilight zone. If they have a path a legalization, they’ll be more inclined to cooperate with law enforcement.
We can begin to drain the swamp of smuggling and document fraud. We can free up resources to go after terrorists. Why is our Homeland Security Department expending its resources trying to bust janitors at Wal-Mart? I’d rather have them going after terrorists.
I think that’s why Secretary Ridge and President Bush, who’s doing everything he can, I think, to protect us from terrorism, I think this is the right thing to do. It’s good for our national security, good for our economy. It’s humane and just approach to immigration.
SCARBOROUGH: Now, Jared, this is the same argument that we heard when California was talking about giving illegal aliens drivers licenses. They said that law enforcement officers actually said, hey, it will make our job easier. We’ll know who is in the country illegally and we’ll be able to track them down. Do you buy that argument?
TAYLOR: We’re just making it easier and more attractive for people who should stay home to come here. It will have no effect, other than encourage yet others to come and break the law to come in.
They will have the idea they, too, will get an amnesty. We are opening up a door that will result in a flood. Already, look, we have one-fifth of the population of Mexico living here. How much of Mexico do we wish to have, especially given that Mexicans are three times as likely as whites to commit violent crimes? There’s not a single school district in the country where Mexicans perform at the level of whites and Asians.
There’s not a single majority Mexican neighborhood that Mr. Griswold would probably want to live in. Why do would we want to increase the proportion of Mexicans already here?
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Dan, respond to that. There were several charges made by Jared. Respond to those, please.
GRISWOLD: Again, President Bush grew up in Texas. He was governor of that great state.
He knows. There is a state where U.S. and Mexican-Americans live side by side, work side by side in a peaceful, productive culture. The president has said family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande. Immigrants are hardworking, peaceful people. We should welcome them if they’re coming here to fill jobs that Americans don’t want.
TAYLOR: I would like Mr. Bush to tell me to name one majority Mexican neighborhood he would like to live in, one majority Mexican school he’d like his children to attend.
It’s all very well . . .
(CROSSTALK)
GRISWOLD: You need to get out and see this country.
TAYLOR: Hey, then you name one yourself. Name one Mexican neighborhood you’d like to live in.
This is typical. These are people who say, OK, this is great. I don’t care if these Mexicans are going to live 20 or 30 in a house, because it’s not my daughter who’s going to look across the back fence and see them urinating in their yard. No, I’m happy to get a guy who can mow the lawn for $2 an hour and that’s all I care about. This is a much bigger question.
(CROSSTALK)
GRISWOLD: Joe, this is not worthy of your show.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: I was just going to say, obviously, there’s some
stereotypes out there that I may not agree with, that you may not agree
with. But the bottom line is
(CROSSTALK)
TAYLOR: This is reality, Joe.
SCARBOROUGH: But the bottom line is this, Dan.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Yes, you can talk about that, but I want you to also respond to this.
Just talking about illegal immigration for a minute. And I know Cato is a libertarian organization, the less laws, the better. But are there any immigration laws that you and Cato would believe we need to enforce?
GRISWOLD: Absolutely.
What we have now is anarchy, Joe. I want a system that is safe, orderly and legal. We need to have laws that are first in conformity with the realities of our life. We’re incorporating this US-VISIT program, which I think is a reasonable response to have—keep track of who enters the country and who leaves.
But we can’t have our laws in fundamental conflict with the reality of the needs of the American economy and American life. And that’s what we have now. And I think the president is trying to bring our immigration laws into conformity with how we’re actually living your lives.
Now, I just want to say about Mexicans, they have a high rate of two-parent families, a high rate of homeownership. They’re religious people. They’re family-oriented people. I just think it’s outrageous what you have allowed your guest to say tonight.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, I certainly haven’t allowed him to say anything. He’s come on. It’s a free country. And even though I disagree with him, he’s free to say what he says, just like you. You’re free to come on and say what you’ve said. We certainly appreciate it.
And certainly, this is not a question about whether Mexicans should be able to immigrate to America or whether Lithuanians should be able to immigrate to America. We are a country of immigrants. Americans are great. We are a great country because we are the melting pot.
But, at the same time, those people that have come here before as immigrants have come here legally. That’s the issue here. It’s not about whether they’re Mexicans or Canadians or whether they’re from England or whether they’re from Russia or whether they’re from China. It’s whether they stand in line with the other illegal immigrants.
I constantly, when I was in Congress and even now, I have people that I run into that are from China or from Pakistan. I have a gentleman from Pakistan who said his wife is over in Pakistan and he wants to get her here with the rest of his family. But he can’t do it, because the INS will not allow her in here.
I think it’s absurd that other people wait in lines and they live by the rules of our land, the immigration rules of our land. But one group of people, just because they live on our southern border, are able to come in here, break our laws, and have American politicians saying, that’s OK. It has nothing to do with whether they’re Mexicans or Pakistanis or Canadians. It’s whether the people that come into this country do it legally.
Anyway, I want to thank both of our guests for joining us.