From: EvMick@aol.com
Date: Thu Mar 20 2003 - 19:55:26 MST
I recently came across the following article. Makes a lot of $en$e to me.
EvMick
JOHN FUND'S POLITICAL DIARY
Hit the Road, Jacques
Forget "freedom fries." Punish the French with green cards.
Thursday, March 20, 2003 12:01 a.m. EST
Congress is none too pleased with France's diplomatic betrayal over Iraq.
House restaurants have renamed french fries "freedom fries." Rep. Ginny
Brown-Waite (R., Fla.) has introduced a bill that would fund the repatriation
of remains of U.S. servicemen who died in World Wars I or II and were buried
in France. Others are boycotts of French (and German) products, or even
economic sanctions.
There's a better way to punish France. It's time to use immigration laws as
an instrument of foreign policy, and Rep. David Dreier (R., Calif.), a
respected internationalist who chairs the House Rules Committee, may
introduce legislation to that effect.
Traditional responses to countries with which we are unhappy but not at war,
such as raising tariff barriers to their goods, hurt U.S. consumers and
violate our own goal of freeing world trade. Sweet reason and visits from a
parade of U.S. diplomats clearly haven't produced results. France's desire to
humiliate America, along with its longstanding business interests in
Iraq--and perhaps fear of what a successful invasion will uncover about
French companies and officials in that country's archives--loom larger in
Paris's decision making. So perhaps it's time to consider using the
immigration lever. The U.S. could creatively use its dynamic culture and
economy to get the French and others to consider the costs of their actions.
By slightly loosening immigration rules, we could punish France by allowing
more of its talented citizens into America. Immigration policy also could be
used to open up trade in computers and medical technology and even help
toughen patent and trademark protections.
Each year more than 900,000 foreigners move legally to America. The number is
limited by law, and the State Department allocates a certain number of
immigration slots per country. No more than 25,620 may enter from any one
land in a given year, and a 1965 law bars economic immigrants from entering
the country if there are any Americans available and qualified to perform the
job the newcomer is seeking. By slightly amending this law, varying the
country allocations and the distribution of work permits to specific
countries, and indeed particular individuals and professions in those
nations, we can use the brain drain as a pinpoint method of sending a message
to recalcitrant allies.
Several thousand Frenchmen are on a waiting list to immgrate to the U.S.
Still others are discouraged from applying by the long list, which can take
years to clear. The U.S. Embassy could quietly let out word that we are
passing out green cards or work permits to a certain number of French
computer experts or civil engineers--or really hit below the belt by
targeting French fashion designers and wine makers. Our high-tech and
engineering professions could absorb 500 French computer specialists and
1,000 civil engineers without seriously affecting U.S. pay scales, but France
could ill afford to lose them.
What could a Jacques Chirac do to retaliate? Invite Americans to France? And
would he really denounce the U.S. for allowing greater numbers of French
citizens to trade Boulogne for Baltimore? After all, Mr. Chirac himself likes
to talk about the days when he lived in the U.S. in the 1950s and worked both
as a chauffeur for a wealthy Texas widow and as a short-order cook at a
Howard Johnson's coffee shop.
This strategy would allow Washington tremendous flexibility. One hundred work
permits or green cards could be given out each week, until, say, the Greek
government agrees to further crack down on its anti-American terrorist cells.
Or until other countries quit tolerating drug exporters. Obviously there need
be no official acknowledgment that the increased issuance of green cards is
tied to any specific response by any country. But they will know what is
happening--and how to stop it. As David Frum of National Review says, "If
that doesn't bring them to their knees, do it again!"A supply-side
immigration strategy will also give Washington the opportunity to champion
human rights and economic freedom in countries that are not officially allied
with the U.S. What if strongman President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela doesn't
allow a referendum on his continued rule as he promised later this year?
Green cards to a certain number of Venezuelans. Does Brazil still refuse to
reduce barriers to U.S. goods? Fine--let's invite interested Brazilian
executives and professionals. Insufficient democratization in Saudi Arabia?
OK, more green cards--for educated men and women.
Rep. Dreier calls this approach "a positive-sum game for the U.S." It would
also send a clear signal to our errant allies by denying them the skills,
services and much of the income of their most prosperous and talented
citizens. It reminds the world that America remains the world's most pleasant
and prosperous place to live. And it would bring talented, resourceful and
hardworking people to live among us and become Americans.
The U.S. already has used its fairly open immigration policy to the detriment
of communist nations. It attracted most of the talent out of Castro's Cuba.
Soviet Jews and dissidents have enriched America, as have countless
immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean. Now is the time to exert such
subtle pressure on our unruly allies. Against Iraq the U.S. is about to use
smart bombs and tanks. Against Osama bin Laden we are deploying a world-wide
network of intelligence operatives. But in encouraging better behavior in the
Western camp, our most effective instrument of foreign policy just might be
the green card.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 20 2003 - 20:03:01 MST