Tag: immigrationreform

2022 Election, Antitrust & Trade Regulation, Domestic Policy, Immigration, Politics

2022 American Nationalist Voting Index – The Square Deal

Bob Claude |

Theodore Roosevelt famously promised a “square deal” for the average American to reduce the stark inequality of his times. His approach was both pragmatic and straight-forward, best described by this quotation from his New Nationalism speech

But when I say am for the square deal, I mean not merely that I stand for fair play under the present rules of the game, but that I stand for having those rules changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service.

Today, his crusade against monopolies remains keenly relevant.  Meanwhile, while wage earners have more power to demand better wages and benefits in today’s economy, employers are still agitating for increased immigration to blunt their power.

Antitrust Law

Corporate market power drew criticism in Congress from both political parties, whether it was Big Tech’s influence on political discourse or high gas prices. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D. Minnesota) took an admirable lead on the issue by introducing two trailblazing bills. The Consolidation Prevention and Competition Promotion Act (Senate Bill 3267) would have strengthened the Clayton Act by prohibiting mergers that create an appreciable risk of materially lessening competition or may create monopsonies (monopolies of buyers, not just sellers). Her Platform Competition and Opportunity Act (Senate Bill 3197) would have cracked down on social media’s market power. Unfortunately, neither was reported out of committee, but they still represented a step in the right direction.

However, a seemingly innocuous but important antitrust measure entitled the Merger Fee Modernization Act (House Bill 3843) passed the House but died in the Senate. In addition to raising the fees companies must pay for the required pre-merger review, it requires the disclosure of foreign government subsidies of acquirers and gives state attorney generals the right to enforce antitrust laws in their own state courts. A good summary of the bill can be found at this link. If you are interested in how your congressmember voted, it can be found here:

https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2022460

Immigration

Once again, the President and Congress dodged their responsibility to pass a comprehensive fix for our broken immigration system and secure not only our borders, but also the economic security of American workers. As I have argued previously, our current de facto system of unrestricted immigration is a new slavery that benefits primarily high-tech and low wage employers. Sadly, the only substantive bills on the subject would worsen the situation.

I believe immigrants who have been in the country since 2012 (the so-called Dreamers) should be brought out of the shadows and legalized. However, I also have argued the Obama Administration’s original Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals rule (DACA) was unlawfully issued and the courts have finally so ruled (see this post). This prompted the Biden Administration to attempt to legalize it pursuant to a formal rulemaking under the federal Administrative Procedure Act, though whether this is outside of their authority under the immigration statutes remains to be seen.  Meanwhile, the House passed an even more radical legalization program called the American Dream and Promise Act that would extend the program to those who entered the country illegally before 2021.  The roll call vote on the bill can be found here (a “No” vote is a nationalist vote):

https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/202191

Sadly, Sen Klobuchar tarnished her nationalist credentials by sponsoring and passing legislation (Senate Bill 3167) mandating the government encourage the employment of high-skilled immigrants, thus feeding Big Tech’s greed for cheap technical workers at the expense of Americans with the same skills. The record vote on that bill can be found here (again, a “no” vote is a nationalist vote):

https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2022439

It passed the Senate by a regrettably unanimous voice vote.

Conclusion

Elites regularly lament the effects of the Great Resignation on American workers’ new-found bargaining power and opportunity to improve themselves. American nationalists should celebrate this power, but also be aware of how fleeting it is, especially as we face the prospect of a potential recession. More changes in the rules of the game are necessary to ensure these gains endure.  

Domestic Policy, Government, Immigration, Uncategorized

A Blow for Immigration and Governmental Reform

Bob Claude |

This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live in unless we make it reasonably good place for all of us to live in.

Theodore Roosevelt

A federal district court in Houston has struck down the Obama Administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and its companion for parents of those children. Specifically, it held that the program was an administrative rule making required to follow the notice and comment process of the federal Administrative Procedures Act (APA).  The failure of the Obama Administration to follow this process rendered the program illegal. CNN helpfully included a copy of the Order and Opinion of the court here. The decision is not only a step towards effective immigration reform, but also strikes a blow against the power of the administrative state. 

The court essentially took up the issues ignored in the US Supreme Court’s Regents of the University of California opinion that I previously discussed here.  This decision struck down the attempted rescission of the DACA program by the Trump Administration as itself violating the APA while glossing over the illegalities in the original rulemaking. This new federal court opinion turns the tables and focuses on those infirmities, noting that the Supreme Court itself held that DACA was not simply a passive non-enforcement policy. Instead, it conferred affirmative immigration relief such as the right to receive a work permit and the right to travel abroad without permission.  It did so despite admitting in the original memorandum that only the Congress could confer affirmative immigration relief. The district court’s opinion built on Justice Clarence Thomas’s dissent in the Regents opinion by highlighting the real reason for the program – the inability of successive Presidents to unite the Congress and country around an immigration bill that included effective limits and enforcement as well as the necessary relief for longtime residents. 

The district court was mindful of the hardships an immediate cessation of the program would cause to current participants and simply prohibited further expansion of the program for the time being. The Biden Administration has announced that it will appeal the order and urged Congress to pass a bill fixing the problem. The administration’s latter position is correct. Both political parties need to look beyond the twin corruptions of identity politics and corporate contributions to pass a comprehensive immigration reform legalizing the status of the “Dreamers” and creating real enforceable limits on future immigration as I advocated in this post. A truly comprehensive answer to the immigration crisis would be a new beginning for insuring the American Dream for both lifetime citizens and immigrants alike.