Just how comprehensive would “comprehensive immigration reform” be, anyway? Apparently, organized labor isn’t all that happy about the new proposals for immigration reform. They have proposals of their own:
The so-called Gang of 8 bipartisan negotiators were meeting late Thursday afternoon for the second time of the day, and were expected to work well into the evening. Sen. Charles Schumer, one of the leaders of the talks, indicated he hopes to have work on the bill largely wrapped up by Friday.
According to multiple sources, several parts of the worker visa plan laid out by labor, which is led by the AFL-CIO, are proving to be particularly contentious.
Among the problematic union proposals: a 10,000 annual cap on low wage work visas; barring work visas for any trade covered by Davis Bacon, a federal wage law that would encompass most of the construction industry; and creating an unemployment based trigger for work visas that would come into effect only when employment drops below a specific level, which sources said has been proposed at several levels including eight and five percent.
I guess it all depends on whose ox gets gored.
Ten thousand is an absurdly low number of low wage work visas. That’s what’s causing our illegal immigration problem in the first place. Fifty years ago we were issuing a half million work visas a year, almost entirely for low wage workers. What problems would a new immigration law along the lines proposed by the AFL-CIO solve? Wouldn’t it amount to an “amnesty only” bill?