Category: Joe Guzzardi

Both Sides Agree That Border Bill Would Keep Invasion Going

By Joe Guzzardi

An Associated Press story that three of its leading reporters contributed to is a grand example of journalists not seeing the forest for the trees. Colleen Long, Zeke Miller, and Seung Min Kim, whose titles respectively are White House law enforcement and legal affairs correspondent, chief White House correspondent, and White House reporter, teamed up to write “Biden Determined to Use Stunning Trump-backed Collapse of Border Deal as a Weapon in 2024 Campaign.”

The story’s gist about the collapsed Senate border deal does not address the most crucial point: would the bill fulfill its stated purpose of securing the border? While President Joe Biden moved forward on his never-ending quest to seek additional funding for Ukraine, he gambled that as part of the same package he could satisfy Americans’ demand that he secures the U.S.-Mexico border. In his press release, Biden wrote that the bill “includes the toughest and fairest set of border reforms in decades. I strongly support it. It will make our country safer, make our border more secure….”

Naturally, Biden’s take away would be positive. The deal was negotiated by two Democrats, Arizona’s faux Independent Kyrsten Sinema who caucuses with Democrats, deep blue Connecticut’s Chris Murphy, and one Republican sacrificial lamb, Oklahoma’s James Lankford, whose home state is safely six hundred miles away from Eagle Pass, the landing point for thousands of arriving illegal aliens. A more appropriate choice to join the negotiating team would have been Texas’ Ted Cruz or Florida’s Marco Rubio whose constituents are under siege. The bill had input from impeached Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), two Biden confidants. In his 35 years in Congress, Schumer has unfailingly voted against border and interior enforcement as well as in favor of more liberal asylum standards and increased annual refugee ceilings.

Critics, including former President Donald Trump, insisted that the bill was hurtful for the homeland, and did nothing to secure the border, but instead assured that illegal crossings would persist, and that many illegal aliens would continue to get affirmative benefits. At a rally in Nevada, after solidifying his position as the far and away GOP front-runner, Trump made his feelings known. “As the leader of our party, there is zero chance I will support this horrible open border betrayal of America. I’ll fight it all the way.” Then he added, “A lot of the senators are trying to say, respectfully, they’re blaming it on me. I say, that’s OK. Please blame it on me. Please.” Trump’s statement provided Biden with the fodder he intends to use during the intense summer campaigning months. Again, Trump’s position, like Biden’s, is predictable. He knows that immigration is voters’ top concern, and his statement plays to his base.

The bill cannot be both “the toughest and fairest set of border reforms in decades,” and “an open borders betrayal of America.” AP should have focused on Biden and Trump’s disparate views on the immigration bill, S. Amdt.1388 to H.R. 815, and delved into whether the bill is bad, as the former president claimed, or whether the incumbent is on solid footing when he insisted that the bill provided the solution to the border crisis. Digging into the bill’s weeds would be challenging for AP since the senators’ proposed four hundred-pages long legislation was written with typical congressional obfuscation. Immigration law is tough for laymen to grasp, especially four hundred pages of it.

AP missed an opportunity to reach out to legal experts to help answer the straightforward question: is the Senate bill good or bad for the nation? Nolan Rappaport, a Democrat who opines in “The Hill” has excellent credentials. For three years, Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an Executive Branch Immigration Law Expert and subsequently served a four-year period as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims. Before working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years. Rappaport’s summary of the amendment was concise: “the Border Act would not secure the border. Among other weaknesses, it fails to provide a solution to the most serious problem, which is that Biden has released so many asylum seekers into the country that our asylum system has broken.”

Another professional legal opinion came from the Center for Immigration Studies’ Andrew Arthur whose 20 year-plus career includes a period as Counsel on the House Judiciary Committee where he performed oversight of immigration issues. After five years at the House Judiciary, he was appointed to the immigration bench, serving for eight years as an Immigration Judge. Arthur reached the same conclusion as Rappaport: “the bill fails to close the vast majority of loopholes smugglers have been exploiting for a decade to move illegal migrants (and migrant families and children, in particular) into the United States. Worse, it codifies some of them.” Among the loopholes Arthur referred to were “the low “credible fear” standard for border migrants seeking asylum.” 

In short, the amendment would legalize border chaos by allowing up to 5,000 illegal entries per day, potentially 1.85 million illegal aliens annually, before border closure is required. The border closure guidelines are time-limited, however, and the untrustworthy Biden and Mayorkas have the discretion to determine how and when to use the authority provided. Biden does not need legislative action to close the border, and the administration’s support of the bill, which the Senate rejected, is an open admission of its failures. The proposed cap of 5,000 illegal entries per day proves that Biden could close the border to illegal aliens in an instant if he had the will to do it. The border solution that Americans want is to enforce existing immigration laws; no new legislation required.

Joe Guzzardi is an Institute for Sound Public Policy analyst. Contact him at jguzzardi@ifspp.org

Both Sides Agree That Border Bill Would Keep Invasion Going

Five Pinocchios for Gavin Newsom

By Joe Guzzardi

Add California Governor Gavin Newsom’s name to the list of prominent elected officials who blatantly lied about their personal histories. Senator Elizabeth Warren lied for years about her alleged American Indian heritage. Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal falsely claimed to have been a Vietnam war combatant. Instead of slinking silently away under the cover of darkness, Warren and Blumenthal shrugged their lies off and successfully campaigned for re-election. Warren first identified as an American Indian in the 1980s and listed under race on her State Bar of Texas registration form as American Indian. In her 2019 presidential bid, voters disregarded Warren’s brazen misrepresentation; 49 percent polled said they considered decades of lying about her heritage didn’t matter. In her telephone call to the Cherokee Nation’s principal leader Bill John Baker, Warren apologized, then went about her Senate career unscarred.

Blumenthal claimed to have served in Vietnam, a falsehood that the New York Times exposed. Truth be told, Blumenthal never went to Vietnam. Instead, he obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war. Blumenthal claimed that he “misspoke” about Vietnam, but he nevertheless has been elected to the U.S. Senate in 2010, 2016, and 2022.

Although not as outrageous as Warren’s and Blumenthal’s lies, Newsom’s whopper is notable, and an effort to enhance his shadow presidential campaign. As Newsom tells the story, he was headed to a community college until Santa Clara University’s baseball coaches phoned with a partial scholarship offer which, he said, “changed my life, my trajectory”. But former coaches and teammates countered that Newsom’s baseball biography, repeated again and again through interviews and glossy magazine profiles and coverage of his 2021 baseball-themed children’s book on overcoming dyslexia, inflated his baseball credentials, and gave the impression that he was a more accomplished player than he was.

A junior varsity recruit who played only during the fall tryouts in his freshman and sophomore years, Newsom left the baseball program before the regular season began without ever playing an official game for the Broncos, an NCAA Division-1 school. Newsom does not appear on the Broncos’ all-time roster or in media guides published by the athletic department.

Rumors persist that the Democratic National Party is plotting to dump Biden and his miserable poll ratings. Newsom waits anxiously in the wings. But from a national voters’ perspective Newsom’s curriculum vitae makes him increasingly unelectable. Should Newsom ever reach the campaign trail, he’d be on the defensive from the get-go. California has amassed an enormous $73 billion deficit, in large part because the dysfunctional state has driven taxpayers away. The non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) in its February update added $15 billion to its original $58 billion budget current deficit projection. The massive, mounting debt coincides with the large numbers of fleeing taxpayers, one of California’s primary sources of revenue. Census data shows that California’s population dropped by about 75,400 between July 2022 and July 2023. Many of the people leaving California are taking significant resources with them. California experienced a net loss of more than 27,000 tax filers with an adjusted gross income of over $200,000 between 2020 and 2021, according to the Tax Foundation. The state’s budget deficit is more stunning when compared to 2022’s $97.5 billion surplus which quickly morphed into a $31 billion-plus deficit.

Newsom will push more Californians out of the-once Golden State if the legislature approves his energy bill plan. California lawmakers propose to change the way electricity is billed to households, part of Newsom’s tax the rich scheme. Instead of paying for the electricity consumption a household uses, the home will also be billed based on its income. A draft of the new law requires that people earning $28,000-$69,000 be charged an extra $20 to $34 per month. Those earning $69,000-$180,000 would pay $51 to $73 per month, and people earning more than $180,000 would pay a $85-to-$128 monthly surcharge. California has one of the nation’s highest costs of living and ranks third in highest residential energy costs. Residents making $28,000 annually are struggling financially, especially if they’re supporting large families, and cannot afford an energy surtax. They too may soon be heading for the highway. The California Public Utilities Commission has until July 1 to implement the new rule into the billing process.

A stumping Newsom would meet strong headwinds on his immigration agenda, national voters’ biggest concerns. Newsom’s welcoming immigration laws will make it impossible for him to pose as an enforcement advocate. His latest affront: effective January 1, 2024, all illegal aliens, regardless of age, will qualify for Medi-Cal, California’s version of the federal Medicaid program for low-income individuals. Newsom estimates conservatively that 764,000 illegal aliens will enroll, exacerbating the already strained Medi-Cal system that provides for 14.6 million Californians, about a third of the state’s population. An LAO estimate calculated that providing Medi-Cal to California’s illegal alien population would cost the state over $6.5 billion annually, a tough pill for taxpayers to swallow when the budget is $73 billion in the red. For the DNC, pushing Biden aside to make room for the potentially less electable Newsom would be a roll of the dice. The party is better off with the devil it knows, Biden, than to gamble on the duplicitous Newsom.

_______

Joe Guzzardi is an Institute for Sound Public Policy analyst. Contact him at jguzzardi@ifspp.org

Five Pinocchios for Gavin Newsom Five Pinocchios for Gavin Newsom

‘Charlie Hustle’ Delves into Pete Rose, the Player and the Man

By Joe Guzzardi

Pete Rose, aka “Charlie Hustle,” owns baseball’s all-time hits record, 4,256. Rose holds 14 other Major League records, and five other National League records. Some are less widely known than his hits record but are still nearly impossible to comprehend in this era when players routinely sit out games because of “tenderness” or “discomfort.”: Baseball’s only major league player to play 500 games at five positions, 1B (969), 2B (634), 3B (634), LF (671), RF (595), Rose won Gold Gloves at all the positions except 3B. No active player is anywhere close to breaking Rose’s hits record or exceeding most of his on-the-field achievements. Cincinnati native and journalist Keith O’Brien’s biography “Charlie Hustle: the Rise and Fall of Pete Rose and the Last Glory Days of Baseball” tells the good, the bad and the ugly about Rose, whose gambling addiction ended in a lifetime Hall of Fame ban. Over the years since Rose retired as a player and a manager, his name has become synonymous with gambling, and his contributions to the Big Red Machine’s world championships with teammates Joe Morgan, Johnny Bench, Tony Perez, and manager Sparky Anderson have faded in comparison to his flaws.

After reading O’Brien’s well-researched, meticulously written biography, the reader will likely conclude that Rose might not be his first choice for a dinner companion. Fans can, however, through Rose’s website, pay to dine with Charlie Hustle at an upscale Las Vegas restaurant. In his past, Rose, now 83, hung out with unsavory types, frequented Cincinnati’s Gold’s Gym where hoods congregated, and participated in multiple extramarital affairs. One of Rose’s many mistresses said that he loved only two things, baseball and himself. Despite or perhaps because of his flaws, the scrappy, undersized, blue-collar, Cincinnati-born Rose was a fan favorite.

The question fans pose is whether Rose is being treated fairly considering MLBs active promotion of baseball gambling through its partnership with the bookmaking website FanDuel which, it states, “provides customers the ability to watch and wager on MLB games via [the] Sportsbook app.”  MLB is also inexplicably tolerant of players who took Performance Enhancing Drugs, a federal felony. Without a valid medical prescription, the possession of, distribution of or use of PEDs violates the Controlled Substances Act, and is punishable by prison and/or significant fines. Rose’s crime was, at worst, a misdemeanor. Yet multiple MLB commissioners have denied Rose HOF ballot eligibility status, and rejected his appeals, hypocrisy at its apex since its FanDuel partnership encourages gambling. In 2018, the Supreme Court opened the door for states to legalize sports betting; since then, 38 states have legalized sports betting and five others are in active legislation to legally sanction betting. By 2023, U.S. gamblers wagered more than $500 billion. Gambling addictions can lead to severe emotional problems, lost jobs, and destroy marriages.  Bettor’s Eye, presented by BetMGM, is MLBs first daily betting-focused program which, it deceptively claims, provides a fun look at the latest baseball betting trends and information. One thing can be predicted with certainty: put cash down on those “fun looks,” and kiss your money goodbye.

MLB has consistently denied Rose a place on the HOF ballot, but PED abusers Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Alex Rodriguez, Sammy Sosa and Mark McGuire have appeared on ballots or until their eligibility periods expired. Bonds, Clemens and others could eventually reach the Hall via the newly created and absurd “Today’s Committee” which will consider players that fell short on the traditional ballot. Only Rose, a better all-around player than any of them, remains on the outside looking in. The Baseball Writers Association of America elected Mike Piazza, an admitted PED user, and, on the first ballot, David Ortiz, another user. Bonds, who holds the career home run record, Clemens’ seven Cy Young awards and others career and season achievements are still in the record books, despite having been reached illegally. Baseball’s PED users are unindicted felons, unworthy of a Cooperstown plaque. MLB is investigating the Los Angeles Dodgers’ Shohei Ohtani for his possible involvement in a gambling scandal. Whatever the investigators may find, rest assured that a whitewash will exonerate baseball’s $700 million poster boy. Any other conclusion would be a black eye for Commissioner Rob Manfred, the Dodgers, and the baseball industry.

“Charlie Hustle,” a derogative nickname given to Rose by Mickey Mantle and Whitey Ford, is a compelling must-read for fans who remember seeing the 1970s star as well as those who never watched baseball’s all-time great. Rose may not be a likeable guy, but his accomplishments as a player should give him an opportunity for Cooperstown induction.

Buy “Charlie Hustle” here.

Joe Guzzardi is a Society for American Baseball Research member. Contact him at guzzjoe@yahoo.com

‘Charlie Hustle’ Delves into Pete Rose, the Player and the Man

Wall Street Giddy Over Mass Migration, Deceptively Tout GDP Growth

By Joe Guzzardi

A direct relationship exists between high immigration levels and pro-expansionists’ phony research which insists that immigrants are making a significant fiscal contribution to the economy. Economists tout the “more immigration is better” argument even though their logic is sophomoric and cannot stand up to the obvious flaws in their reasoning. The three-year long border surge that has given the green light to releasing eight million or more illegal immigrants into the U.S. interior is economic good news, shills insist. Instead of worrying about unvetted illegal aliens settling into established communities nationwide, Americans should rejoice in their contribution to higher gross domestic product—or so the story goes.

Last month, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that legal and illegal immigration will generate a $7 trillion boost to gross domestic product over the next decade, a conclusion that the agency arrived at after including the recent immigration surge. Wall Street is euphoric about millions of unvetted, unskilled, under-educated, non-English speaking border surgers. If only the general population could see the labor and societal advantages to an open border instead of wringing its hands about, as President Biden refers to them, the “newcomers,” then all would be hunky-dory.

If Goldman Sachs Group Inc., which revised up its near-term economic growth forecasts,  JPMorgan Chase & Co. and BNP Paribas SA were among banks that acknowledged the so-called economic benefits from surging immigration, then skeptical working-class Americans should get onboard. More “newcomers” means a higher GDP, the be-all and end-all in the opinions of globalist economists. In her letter to its forty-two million clients, Janet Henry, HSBC Holdings global chief economist, wrote that no advanced economy has benefited from immigration as much as the United States. Henry wrote: “the impact of migration has been an important part of the U. S. growth story over the past two years.” HSBC Holdings reported a 2023 $30.3 billion pre-tax profit.

Before analyzing the “impact of migration” that Henry touts, the obvious must be addressed. Per capita growth, not GDP, is the true measure of a society’s prosperity. While it is accurate that a larger population invariably results in a greater aggregate economy— more workers, more consumers, and more government spending— all expand the GDP. But a nation’s standard of living is determined by per capita, i.e., per person, GDP, not the overall size of the economy. Studies like “The Effect of Population Growth on Economic Growth” have shown that population growth negatively affects economic growth. Another study, “Is Low Fertility Really a Problem? Population, Aging and Consumption,” found that low fertility rates which the media bemoans, increase per capita economic growth and raises standards of living. The authors conclude that “low fertility is not a serious economic challenge,” and instead, they find that “The effect of low fertility on the number of workers and taxpayers has been offset by greater human capital investment, enhancing the productivity of workers.” They added that “Targeted immigration policy might be helpful, although we are somewhat skeptical on this point.” By targeted immigration, the authors mean thoughtful—an immigration policy that works on behalf of, not against Americans. Biden’s immigration agenda does the opposite; his open northern and southern borders harm all.

Immigration’s “impact” depends on who and where the illegal aliens have settled. The assumption is that the illegal immigrants benefit from coming to the U.S. But not all are better off—some are working for slave wages in meat processing plants, others are sex trafficking victims, and still others are sleeping on the streets, hustling for food, or stealing. Illegal aliens have perpetrated numerous violent crimes against innocent citizens.  Chicago, Denver, Boston, and New York residents have watched helplessly as illegal aliens have transformed their communities. Displaced citizens have no voice in the elitist federal, state, and municipal governments’ destruction of their communities.

More on Henry’s immigration “impact” that she overlooked, perhaps because it doesn’t fit the designated media narrative. Millions more people mean more stress on vital services essential to a properly functioning society—schools, hospitals, roads and housing. After three years of Biden’s open border, all those services have undergone negative, undesirable “impacts.” Immigration expansionists never mention the multiplier “impact.” The millions that have arrived will soon petition their family members left behind, grow their existing families, or start new ones. Today’s eight, ten or twelve million illegal aliens—don’t forget to include 1.5 million gotaways— will be because of family reunification and anchor baby births, within a couple of decades, 20 or 25 million. Recent history proves that immigration is the main population driver that brings with it substantial challenges. More people invariably mean more problems. From the Center for Immigration Studies: “immigration from 1982 to 2017 added 52.7 million people to the U.S population — 35.78 million immigrants and 16.93 million descendants—16.03 million U.S.-born children and 890,527 grandchildren…immigration accounted for 56.3 percent of U.S. population growth from 1982 to 2017.”

When Wall Street economists with their advanced Ivy League degrees opine about immigration, they project an air of credibility which a large segment of the public buys into. That’s too bad because, when the subject is immigration, most economists are selling a self-serving bill of goods without even a passing mention of the negative consequences.

Joe Guzzardi is an Institute for Sound Public Policy analyst who has written about immigration for more than 30 years. Contact him at jguzzardi@ifspp.org

Wall Street Giddy Over Mass Migration, Deceptively Tout GDP Growth

Maryland Could be Key to Senate Control

By Joe Guzzardi

Maryland’s Prince George County Executive Angela Alsobrooks is a leading candidate in the Democratic U.S. Senate primary. Republicans hoping to pick up the open seat in deep blue Maryland have the best chance in four decades with former Gov. Larry Hogan. Incumbent Democrat Ben Cardin announced last year that he would not seek another term. Cardin served in Congress for 36 years, at first in the US. House of Representatives from 1987-2006 and then, since 2007 in the Senate. Alsobrooks is one of ten announced Democrats in the May 14 primary race, but her most probable rival is U.S. Rep. David Trone.

Now that May is quickly approaching, Trone is hoping that his extreme far-left platform will overcome lost ground which some attribute to a perceived racial slur. During a recent House Budget Committee meeting, Trone used the word “jigaboo” in reference to a tax issue. In his apology, Trone said that he meant to say “bugaboo.” Alsobrooks immediately picked up several endorsements from House Congressional Black Caucus members. Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat who was an impeachment manager against President Donald Trump, also endorsed Alsobrooks after pledging that he would stay out of the primary race.

Under the national radar when compared to California, Pennsylvania and Ohio, over $29 million has already been spent in the Maryland race which, according to AdImpact Politics, makes it the third most expensive primary in the country, with Trone, a wealthy businessman, accounting for 97% of that spending. Trone is among Congress’ wealthiest legislators with a net worth estimated at $33 million created through the ownership of 265 stores across 28 states that specialize in wine, beer, and spirits, Total Wine & More.

Trone’s platform includes radical immigration overhauls that go farther than either open borders President Joe Biden or Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas would dare propose. Speaking at a candidate forum, Trone urged citizenship and voting rights for “all 12 million folks” currently residing in the U.S. that would include deferred action for childhood arrivals and temporary protected status recipients. Since the total DACA and TPS population is only about three million; the assumption therefore is that Trone would give voting rights to already present illegal aliens and the constantly arriving foreign nationals, possibly 1.5 to 2 million more by November.

Further demonstrating how out of touch with his constituents he is on voters’ major concern—immigration—Trone voted against the bipartisan Laken Riley Act, a bill named to honor the nursing student that Venezuelan  illegal alien Jose Antonio Ibarra murdered on the University of Georgia campus. The bill that Trone voted against would require U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest illegal immigrants who commit theft, burglary, larceny or shoplifting offenses and mandate that, in the name of public safety, such criminals be detained until they are removed. Ibarra had been arrested in New York last year for child endangerment, and in Georgia for misdemeanor shoplifting. Ibarra’s New York and Georgia crimes would have mandated his deportation, and saved Riley’s life.

Alsobrooks immigration views are similar to Trone’s. If elected to the Senate, Alsobrooks promises to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants, DACAs, and TPS recipients. As Prince George’s County’s 2013 State’s Attorney, Alsobrooks advocated for legislation allowing illegal aliens to obtain driver’s licenses.

Whether Alsobrooks or Trone secures the nomination, they’ll have to beat popular twice-elected, former governor Larry Hogan who opposes Maryland’s sanctuary state status and  whose immigration views are in line with the nation’s  enforcement sentiment than with Biden’s open border policies. In Maryland, residents are  struggling to cope with violent MS-13 gang crime. During his 2014 campaign, Hogan said he favored returning illegal aliens to their home countries. And in 2021, he vetoed a bill in the General Assembly that would require counties that have contracts with ICE to end those contracts by October 1, 2022. However, during a special session, the General Assembly overrode his veto.

In the latest polling, Hogan leads Alsobrooks by +14, and Trone, +12. When Hogan left office, he had a favorability rating in the mid-70s, which placed him as the nation’s third most popular governor. Still, Hogan has his work cut out for him. Biden carried Maryland in 2020 by more than 30 points, and, in 1980, Charles Mathias was the last Republican U.S. Senator Maryland elected. Maryland is up for grabs, and Hogan has greater stature among voters than either of his likely Democratic challengers.

________

Joe Guzzardi is a Project for Immigration Reform analyst who has written about immigration for more than 30 years. Contact him at jguzzardi@ifspp.org

DNC Will Find Overrun Chicago Inhospitable

By Joe Guzzardi

When Chicago hosts the Democratic National Convention in August, the Windy City will be less hospitable than the DNC and President Joe Biden hope for. In his statement, Biden said that Chicago is “a great choice” to host the convention where Democrats can “showcase our historic progress including building an economy from the middle out and bottom up, not from the top down.”

Before getting too giddy about Chicago as an ideal city to tout his party’s “historic progress” on “building an economy,” Biden would gain insight from listening to what black Democrats think about the illegal alien invasion that has devastated working-class citizens’ lives.

Here’s a sampling of excerpted comments from residents directed to Mayor Brandon Johnson who presided over the March 20 City Council meeting.

The first commentor, a legal immigrant woman who lives in the Gage Park area, a working-class, Hispanic neighborhood now converted into illegal alien camps, said that her family is a “prisoner” in their own home. Packages have been stolen from her porch. Illegal aliens have urinated in her front yard and sell food without licenses. Police come but do nothing. “They [illegal aliens] need to leave now, we demand it. Taxpayers have been put in harm’s way; we want our park back.” The media “censors our voices.”

Second, a black man, said that the illegal aliens “keep on coming,” and Chicago houses them “in nice hotels,” while veterans are sleeping on the streets as Chicago spends “millions and billions on migrants.”  [Exclusive of costs incurred by other agencies that include Chicago Public Schools, the Department of Streets and Sanitation and Cook Country Health, in the past year-and-a-half, Chicago has spent nearly $300 million.] “Fake news” covers up the truth.

Third, a black woman, criticized Chicago’s sanctuary city policy that allows Johnson “to stick people in our neighborhoods.” She exposed WOTC, Illinois’ Work Opportunity Tax Credit, intended as an incentive for employers to hire veterans and welfare recipients but is being used instead to hire fraudulent asylum seekers. We “promise to vote you out.”

Fourth, a black man, “Blacks get nothing…who are these people? Are you a criminal? A pedophile? Why are you pushing out black people? Sell out…evil… corrupt…most corrupt city in America…not wading across the Rio Grande to help blacks…[they’re] selfish.”

Fifth, an immigrant woman and Gage Park resident, “We are the taxpayers. I dare you to walk by at night…I promise you will not like it, we want our safety back…our neighborhood is trash. My children cannot go into the yard, overwhelmed by marijuana smoke. The system is failing us. We are the ones who put you there [in office] and we are the ones who can take you back.”

Sixth, a black woman, “You [Johnson] have appointed a Deputy Mayor for Immigrant Affairs [Beatriz Ponce de León, Deputy Mayor of Immigrant, Migrant and Refugee Rights]. Where, the woman asked, is the Deputy Mayor for black affairs? Chicago has added 5,000 students to its public-school enrollments but, she emphasized, hasn’t built a single new school. In a remark directed to blacks, “we’re being led to slaughter.”

Each speaker was allotted three minutes; at the end of their time, Johnson had the same insincere response: “Thank you very much for your comments.” Many more blistering anti-Johnson, anti-Biden online comments, 6,700 as of March 25, were posted near-unanimously in support of the Chicago residents. Most noted, correctly, that Johnson had no interest in the citizens’ fate.

Sure enough, just days after the City Council meeting, Johnson took a bow for Chicago’s accommodating approach to the illegal aliens’ influx that has devastated Gage Park and other overwhelmed locales. In his press conference, Johnson boasted about Chicago’s “open and quite accommodating” approach to resettling illegal immigrants when compared to other blue cities like New York, Denver, and Washington D.C.

In the four-plus months that remain until the Democrat’s convention, Chicago’s betrayed citizens’ temperatures will grow higher. The sweltering summer months will bring more brazen crime, more public weed smoking, and less likelihood that the Chicago people will support the craven politicians that have so assiduously worked to displace them.

Joe Guzzardi is an Institute for Sound Public Policy analyst who has written about immigration for more than 30 years. Contact him at jguzzardi@ifspp.org.

Opening Day 1969 When ‘The Kid’ Returned

By Joe Guzzardi

During the 1969 spring, spirits were high in the nation’s capital. The cherry trees along the Potomac River were in bloom. Cautious optimism prevailed that newly inaugurated President Richard Nixon would fulfill his campaign promise to end the Southeast Asian war. But more than anything for DC’s sports’ fans, legendary Green Bay Packers coach Vince Lombardi had agreed to assume the Washington Redskins general manager and head coach positions. And Hall of Fame great Ted Williams, “The Kid,” accepted owner Bob Short’s offer to manage the moribund Washington Senators. Baseball fans were shocked that Williams, nine years after he homered on his last at bat, agreed. Earlier, Williams had rejected Red Sox owner Tom Yawkey’s offer to manage Boston, spurned the Detroit Tigers’ offer, and once said that he considered managers the lowest form of human life.

Short, a trucking and hotel mogul, had previously owned basketball’s Minneapolis Lakers and moved the team to Los Angeles before selling the Lakers for $5.2 million, a $3 million profit. Among Short’s goals were to entice more Senators fans, turn a profit. To achieve those objectives, he wanted a big name to take the Senators’ helm.

The new owner’s first moves were to fire general manager George Selkirk, the New York Yankee outfielder who took Babe Ruth’s place in right field, and to boot pilot Jim Lemon, a one-time Senators’ slugger. Under consideration to replace Lemon were Jackie Robinson, Elston Howard, Maury Wills, Monte Irvin, and Williams who rejected Short’s first offer. Short had reveled in Teddy Ball Game’s 1938 Minneapolis Millers, AAA American Association career. Williams won the Triple Crown with a.366 batting average, 43 home runs, 142 runs batted in, thirty doubles, nine triples, and 114 walks. But then the persistent new owner solicited American League president Joe Cronin to persuade Williams to reconsider. Cronin and Williams spent several seasons together as Red Sox teammates.

Williams was certain that he could help the punchless Senators. When Short offered a five-year, $65,000 annual salary with perks that included a $15,000-a-year hotel suite, an unlimited expense account, a title as vice president and an option to buy 10 percent of the team for $900,000, Williams became the new Senators manager, and set out to prove that he had leadership skills.

The woebegone Senators that Williams inherited were mocked throughout baseball including in their home city. The 1968 Senators finished in 10^th place, dead last, with baseball’s worst record, 65-96. The team also drew the fewest fans, 565,000, a 206,000 decrease from 1967.

The 1968 club had a .623 on-base-plus-slugging percentage, fourteen points below the league average. In 1969, Senators batters had a .708 OPS, eighteen points above the league’s .690. The Senators drew 630 walks in 1969, compared to 454 the previous season. Even with the rule changes that lowered the pitcher’s mound and tightened the strike zone, the Senators showed an astounding improvement of 176 free passes. Williams understood the age-old axiom that a walk is as good as a hit.

Pitchers also improved under rookie manager Williams. The hurlers listened to Williams’ daily spring-training sermons on hitting and how to exploit American League opponents. In 1968, the Senators ERA of 3.64 was sixty-six points above the league average, 2.98. The next season, Washington’s pitchers reduced their ERA to 3.49, 14 points below the rest of the AL, 3.63. Williams’ 1969 Senators won eighty-six games, a 21-game improvement over 1968 and the team’s best record since 1945.

Fans flocked to Robert F. Kennedy Stadium to watch the Senators; the team drew 900,000 paid admissions, and Williams won the Manager-of-Year Award. Unfortunately, the 1969 Senators proved to be a one-year wonder, returning in 1970 to their habitual doormat as “first in war, first in peace, and last in the American League.” A 70-92 record landed the Senators in sixth and last place in the American League East

Despite high-profile trades, which brought Curt Flood and a washed-up Denny McLain to the Senators in 1971, the team declined to 63-96. The Cleveland Indians spared them last place in the American League East.

Short had raised ticket prices, and fans refused to pay more to watch a lousy team play in an unsafe neighborhood. Senators’ frustrated fans—14,500, about twice the daily 1971 attendance– saved their worst behavior for September 30, the final American League game played in Washington. When the fans destroyed the field, umpire James Honochick forfeited a Senators’ 7-5 lead to the visiting Yankees. The fall out: a long-anticipated September 1971 announcement that Short was moving the Senators to the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, to the ingloriously named Turnpike Stadium. The Senators were renamed the Texas Rangers.

Williams befuddled the baseball world when he agreed to accompany the limping Senators to Texas. One disastrous year in Texas was enough for “The Kid.” The Rangers lost one hundred games, had a .217 team batting average, a 15-game losing streak, and finished 20-1/2 games behind the next to last California Angels. Williams retired, and headed home to Islamorada to pursue bonefish, a skill that gained him a place in the International Game Fishing Hall of Fame.

For more than three decades and through multiple league expansions, Washington unsuccessfully sought a major league team. Finally, in 2005, the Montreal Expos moved to D.C. to become the Washington Nationals, the 2019 World Series champions.

Joe Guzzardi is a Society for American Baseball Research and Internet Baseball Writers Association member. Contact him at guzzjoe@yahoo.com The 2024 season’s opening day is today, March 28.

Weaponized Immigration Wrecking Sovereign America

By Joe Guzzardi

Weaponized immigration has come to America and is bringing low-skilled illegal aliens to the labor market. Since July 2018, the economy has created zero jobs for American-born workers.

Kelly Greenhill, a senior research scholar at MIT Center for International Studies and author of “Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement, Coercion and Foreign Policy,” wrote in her analysis that the U.S. has been a frequent weaponized immigration target dating back as long ago as President Dwight Eisenhower’s administration and through George W. Bush’s eight years in the early 21^st century. Greenhill blamed Western governments—Europe is also a migrant warfare target—that don’t understand how engineering the movement of foreign nationals across international borders exploits political divisions within the targeted countries. Unless policymakers confront the forces that enable weaponized migration “it is unlikely to go away anytime soon,” she concluded.

Since 1951, Greenhill has identified 81 worldwide cases, all of which achieved their weaponized immigration objectives. The targeted countries were disproportionately liberal democracies whose lax attitudes toward the threat determined the degree of success the subversive mission achieved. The Biden administration is a perfect fit for nations that want to implement weaponized migration to undermine the sovereign U.S. Not only has Biden demonstrated enthusiasm for the open border policy that he created and encouraged, but his administration has also promoted, at every turn, globalism at the expense of nationalism.

Nicaragua is a major weaponized immigration enabler. Motivated by his deep hatred of the U.S., President Daniel Ortega loosened visa requirements for Cubans in 2021, and then expanded his list to include Haiti, other Latin American countries and eventually several Asian and African nations that include Indians, Uzbekistanis, and nationals from Mauritania and Senegal. Travelers going through Nicaragua avoided the dangerous trek through the Darien Gap, and Ortega could not only subvert America, but he could also make big money at the same time. Nicaragua hired a private company to organize contracts with charter flight companies across Asia, Europe, and Africa. The flights pay landing fees, and travelers are assessed airport taxes that range from $100 to $200 per person. Transporting migrants from their home countries to Nicaragua is a multimillion-dollar business.

With weaponized migrants arriving at the U.S. border faster than officials could detain them, the Department of Homeland Security decided to process them into the U.S. rather than deport them. The strategy culminated in the May 2023 “The Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Final Rule.” The title summarizes the objective: for illegal immigrants, DHS created, without congressional approval, an entirely new set of administratively sanctioned methods of being processed into the U.S. DHS moved “to expand safe and orderly pathways for migrants to lawfully enter the United States.” Included are “establishing country-specific and other available processes to seek parole for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit; expanding opportunities to enter for seasonal employment; putting in place a mechanism for migrants to schedule a time and place to arrive in a safe, orderly, and lawful manner at ports of entry via use of the CBP-One mobile app; and expanding refugee processing in the Western Hemisphere.” 

An earlier DHS document, the “Los Angeles Declaration of Migration and Protection,” which 21 countries endorsed in June 2022, resulted in the U.S. committing to resettle 20,000 so-called refugees from Central America during fiscal 2023 and 2024. In fiscal 2022, the federal government issued more than 19,000 H-2B visas to Guatemalans, Hondurans and Salvadorans, a 94% increase from the previous fiscal year. Not surprisingly the 21 endorsing countries were overwhelmingly potential migrant sending countries: Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Haiti, Honduras and other economically failing nations.

As part of making their case to impeach DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, the House Committee on Homeland Security’s Republicans identified more than a dozen parole programs which, they argue, Mayorkas illegally created to circumvent congressionally established immigration laws. Texas, Florida, and other states have sued over many of DHS’ programs that have allowed illegal border crossers to remain in the U.S., concurring with the committee’s chairman, U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R-Tenn., who led the impeachment charge. Always a long shot in the Senate, the House has not yet sent impeachment articles to the upper chamber. Even though the Senate outcome is predetermined, enforcement-minded, patriotic Americans will be denied the cold comfort of a Mayorkas impeachment trial. Worse, the consequences of his brazen disregard for enforcement and protecting the homeland will continue to play out until January 2025, or until Mayorkas’ DHS releases about two million more illegal aliens into the interior, bringing the total to well over 10 million during his term as secretary.

Joe Guzzardi is a Project for Immigration Reform analyst who has written about immigration for more than 30 years. Contact him at jguzzardi@ifspp.org

Weaponized Immigration Wrecking Sovereign America