Category: Guest Authors

Pre-Paid Debit Cards For Illegals In LA

Pre-Paid Debit Cards For Illegals In LA

By Joe Guzzardi

The handful of journalists who have spent decades on the immigration beat have a saying: “Never say never.” Translated, the maxim means that no matter how outrageous or illegal federal, state or local lawmakers’ outreach is to unlawfully present aliens, a more shocking development will soon supersede it.

Pre-Paid Debit Cards For Illegals In LA

As an example of the inherent wisdom of never say never, turn to Eric Garcetti, the legacy mayor of Los Angeles. With Garcetti’s wholehearted endorsement, Los Angeles city officials are accepting applications for pre-paid debit cards, including from illegal aliens. The cards, funded privately, will have values of $700, $1,100 and $1,500, depending on the applicants’ household income, assuming that annual earnings fall below the federal poverty line and that the household’s head has a 50 percent income reduction directly related to COVID-19. As of this writing, 450,000 people have submitted applications for what Garcetti calls Angeleno cards.

No one argues that being down and out in Los Angeles, and with limited prospects for significant lifestyle improvements, is awful. But neither can anyone disagree that Garcetti’s action, and the actions that precipitated the cards’ issuance, involves multiple federal immigration offenses. Employers are guilty of hiring illegal immigrants, the aliens are guilty of falsifying employment documents that may involve identity theft and of working without legal authorization, and Garcetti is guilty of harboring aliens. Specifically, Title 8, U.S. Code 1324 prohibits proving direct cash assistance to illegal aliens that enable them to remain in the United States. Nevertheless, Garcetti said, “Applicants will not be asked anything about their immigration status. We are all Angelenos.”

For more than 20 years, California’s Republican and Democratic governors Gray Davis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom have disregarded immigration laws. During that period, the governors, along with mayors like Garcetti, San Francisco’s Willie Brown and Ed Lee, and Oakland’s Libby Schaaf, have willfully turned their backs on U.S. workers.

The Migration Policy Institute estimates that Los Angeles County has more than 1 million unauthorized residents; 80 percent fall into the prime working-age demographic, 16 to 54. Furthermore, MPI found that 66 percent of Los Angeles’ civilian, over-16 population is employed – a total that includes unlawfully present immigrants. Contrary to the old, discredited saw that illegal immigrants do jobs that Americans won’t do, Los Angeles’ alien population is nearly exclusively employed in manufacturing, food services, construction, professional services and retail. In an increasingly tight employment market, most Americans would eagerly take jobs in those employment sectors.

A University of Southern California Dornsife Center for Economic and Social Research study found that more than half of Los Angeles’ residents are unemployed. Within the next three months, the USC study estimates about 33 percent of those unemployed residents will run out of money, and will be unable to meet their financial obligations. Chaos will likely follow.

As Los Angeles slowly reopens its economy – an event that, given Garcetti’s hardline “we will shut you down” stance, may be weeks away – U.S. citizens and lawfully present immigrants are entitled to have the first opportunity to fill jobs as they become available. Since there is literally zero likelihood that California’s state or municipal officials will prioritize American workers, mandatory E-Verify is the best and perhaps only chance U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents will have to get back on the road to economic stability.

President Trump has consistently punted on E-Verify. During the employment crisis, now is the time for the president to step up and put his office’s full weight behind the companion House and Senate bills, the Accountability Through Electronic Verification Act, which Senate Finance Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) introduced. The legislation would permanently reauthorize E-Verify. Within a year, all employers would be required to use the program, and existing employees would have to be E-Verify-checked. Employers that refuse to adopt E-Verify would be subject to fines up to $2,500, and risk further penalties.

Congress should do everything in its power to protect the jobs and wages of hard-working Americans. The Accountability through Electronic Verification Act would be one part of that elusive goal.


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

Pre-Paid Debit Cards For Illegals In LA

The Day The Town Stood Still

The Day The Town Stood Still

Dr. John W. Gilmore

The streets are almost empty where I live.  They call it being sheltered.  I walk the streets just for exercise.  In the air of  uneasy quietness I pass neighbors walking their dogs every so often .  We wear masks and spread out just a little farther to keep our distance, unlike the walks in the parks I have gone on where bicyclists come rushing down narrow paths and people without masks stroll rapidly toward you never giving way.  

The Day The Town Stood Still
Wyndmoore, Pa. in the time of Covid

Like everything else, spring seems to be frozen waiting for the corona virus to pass.   But the animals are active, as usual on the cool, sunny day.   Even they seem to be wondering what is going on as I walk past and they look at me strangely.  They move more boldly than usual, probably wondering why things are so quiet and where the humans are.  I suppose if I were an animal I would be delighted, and I think they are.

Most of the streets on the main drag here, on Willow Grove Avenue in Wyndmoor are closed.  Only a sandwich shop, a gas station and pizza shop and Rita’s Ice Cream are open for pick up, but not going in or sitting down, just grab and go.  There’s a small grocery store open where people are standing in the street; only a certain number at a time are allowed in. I ordered a hoagie today.  I drove a little way up the street and went to a window with the top slid down to pick it up, which was new.  It was like being in a high crime area where you pay for your food through a slot in a thick plexiglass window.  I had on my mask and a masked man from inside asked what I would like.  It all seemed a bit silly as I paid for my order and waited.  A stranger masked like I was approached and waited, making sure to fulfill the six foot mandatory distance.  I sat in my car and waited relieving myself of my green, homemade mask while listening to my Nothing Like the Sun Sting CD for just a few moments.   

Upon receiving the signal I paid for my sandwich and tossed it in the front seat.  I took a quick look again at the Twilight Zone like environment and began to drive home.   I passed the neighborhood coffee shop, closed, and looked at several very small stores that looked closed, even if they weren’t.  The 711, which is open all the time, looked lonely with very few cars sitting in the parking lot.  The whole place is on lockdown.  It is strange to live in a place where humans have been removed from the equation.

Even so, the animals seemed just a bit happier.  The air seemed just a bit purer and the place quieter.  I thought I could get used to it.  A teenager popping a wheelie on a bike came shooting by right down the middle of the street in all of his teenage arrogance shattering the magic of the moment.  Had I pulled out one second earlier he would have been dead.  Thanks to him I could definitely understand why the animals were so happy and  could actually see a positive side to being without humans. 

Residency Policy Punishes Good US Doctors — And The Rest Of Us

Residency Policy Punishes Good US Doctors — And The Rest Of Us

By Dr. Doug Medina

For years, the Association of American Medical Colleges has predicted the United States will face a large physician shortage, and the coronavirus pandemic may further exacerbate this shortage.

However, there are thousands of qualified U.S. doctors who are unable to practice. Every year, about 1,000 U.S. citizens graduate medical schools in the U.S., but don’t move onto residency at a teaching hospital because they don’t “match” via the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP), the organization that controls this process. Without matching into residency, doctors cannot practice medicine.

Residency Policy Punishes Good US Doctors -- And The Rest Of Us

I’m one of those doctors ready to help during this current pandemic but can’t. Even though I graduated Georgetown University School of Medicine (GUSOM) in good standing, earning Honors in five clinical rotations, I have not matched into residency.

My path to a top-tier medical school in our nation’s capital started at the University of Colorado where I earned a degree in biochemistry. After college, I received a grant to work at the Ferroelectric Liquid Crystal Materials Research Center in Colorado. My hard work and study ethic helped me score in the 90th percentile on the Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT). I was accepted to GUSOM, which receives about 10,000 applications per year and only selects about 200 candidates.

Since graduating Georgetown in 2011, I passed the United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE), Steps 1, 2 and 3. To become a licensed physician, a doctor must pass the USMLE. While I am a nationally licensed physician in the U.S., I cannot practice because I do not have a license number since I don’t have a residency position.

This is happening every year to too many U.S. doctors.

Since 2011, I worked with Floating Doctors, an international nonprofit organization in Central America. In 2014, I published research from the Research Institute on Addictions. After 2014, I received grants to work as an extern under supervising psychiatrists at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, the first federally operated mental health hospital, and the Veteran’s Administration Mental Health Clinic in Washington, D.C. I’ve worked jobs in electronic medical records and as an intake clinician admitting patients at a mental health hospital. I’ve had nine supervisors give me high marks and provide letters of recommendation.

To obtain my medical degree, I incurred debt of $50,000+ per year in federal student loans to pay tuition at Georgetown. With an interest rate of 6.7 percent, my student loans accrue interest of more than $25,000 annually and have ballooned to more than $460,000. Even with my job as an intake clinician earning $30 an hour, and paying my student loans via an Income Driven Repayment (IDR) plan, I’m not even able to afford to pay the accruing monthly interest on my student loans.

Last month, more than 1,200 U.S. medical seniors did not match into residency through the NRMP. In addition, an untold number of prior medical graduates didn’t match. In fact, each year, upwards of 2,000 current-year grads and prior-year graduates don’t match.

Yet just this year, through the NRMP, 4,222 non-U.S. citizen international medical graduates (non-U.S. IMGs) from medical schools outside the U.S. were provided medical residencies, which are largely funded by U.S. taxpayers (via Medicare funding). In fact, each year since 2011, the year I graduated, the number of non-U.S. IMGs receiving U.S. residencies has increased – from 2,721 in 2011 to more than 4,200 in 2020, a total of more than 36,000 foreign doctors in a ten-year period.

To ensure fairness to American citizens, a simple solution is to prioritize U.S. graduates. This may mean a lower number of foreign doctors receiving residency positions, but in this current pandemic, doctors are needed in their home countries. For instance, currently, India has a shortage of 600,000 doctors.

Institutions that should do more to help American doctors achieve their goals work against them. That includes the powerful, influential American Medical Association, which has been lobbying to issue more employment-based visas like the H-1B and the J-1.

U.S. medical students go through a highly rigorous process to get one of the coveted first-year slots. We have a reasonable expectation that when we graduate medical school, we’ll practice our chosen profession. To be shut out while foreign nationals are hired violates America’s social contract with its citizens.

There are reasonable solutions to address this serious problem that is ruining thousands of American lives per year. The governing medical organizations, universities and our elected officials must right this wrong.

Dr. Doug Medina is a graduate of Georgetown University School of Medicine and advocate for ensuring U.S. doctors in good standing receive residency status in order to practice medicine. Contact Medina at info@doctorswithoutjobs.org.

Residency Policy Punishes Good US Doctors — And The Rest Of Us

US Doctors Bypassed For Foreign Ones?

US Doctors Bypassed For Foreign Ones?

By Joe Guzzardi 

Congress, immigration advocacy groups and immigration lawyers are urging the Trump administration to increase the number of foreign-born doctors to alleviate the alleged medical responders’ shortage during the coronavirus pandemic. Minnesota Democratic Senators Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith, along with colleagues in the House and Senate, wrote to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services requesting that the agency resume premium processing for international medical school graduates (non-U.S. citizen international medical graduates) who are seeking employment-based H-1B and J-1 visas. On March 20, USCIS announced that because of COVID-19, it would suspend premium processing.

US Doctors Bypassed For Foreign Ones?


According to the letter, more foreign-born doctors would increase health care availability, especially in rural areas, through the Conrad 30 Waiver Program, which allows U.S.-trained foreign medical school graduates to stay in the country as long as they practice in underserved areas. The “30” refers to the number of doctors per state that can participate in the program.

Traditionally, foreign national doctors who trained in the U.S. must return home for two years after their provisional period has ended before they can reapply for a new visa or permanent residency. Last year, Senators Klobuchar, Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) introduced legislation to extend the Conrad 30 program through 2021. The Conrad State 30 and Physician Access Reauthorization Act, S. 948, has 15 cosponsors, eight Republicans, six Democrats and one Independent.

Americans are united in their desire to do all possible to end the spread of coronavirus. But a reality dose is in order. There are U.S. doctors ready to work who Klobuchar, Collins, Rosen et al appear to be ignoring. National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data shows that each year since 2011 up to 2,000 current year medical school graduates and prior year graduates did not place into a medical residency at a teaching hospital. Without that residency, they cannot practice medicine.

But in that same ten-year period, more than 36,000 non-U.S. citizen international medical graduates (IMGs) received residency positions – spots that are largely funded by U.S. taxpayers through Medicare dollars. In fact, the number of non-U.S. citizen IMGs has increased each of the years since 2011, from 2,721 to more than 4,222 in 2020.

A sensible solution to the imbalance between overseas and U.S. doctors would be to reduce the number of residencies available to non-U.S. doctors which should increase residency slots for U.S. doctors.

American medical school graduates have worked hard, often taking on tremendous debt loads to earn their undergraduate and M.D. degrees. An unmatched Georgetown University School of Medicine graduate who I’ll call Dr. X, and who I interviewed for this column, told me that to obtain his medical degree he took on $50,000+/year in federal student loans to pay for his education. The cost of a medical degree at GUSOM is even higher today.

With an interest rate of 6.7 percent, Dr. X’s student loans accrue interest at more than $25,000/year and have ballooned to an aggregate that exceeds $460,000, a sum he’s unlikely to retire if he’s unable to work as a physician. Dr. X passed his U.S. medical licensing exams and has extensive medical volunteer experience, as well as other health services experience. Still, without residency, Dr. X can’t practice.

Yet, just since 2011, 36,000 foreign-born doctors are practicing throughout the U.S. even though the federal government has no regulatory authority to oversee the quality of medical education in India, Pakistan, China and Iran, the home countries of the majority of these incoming doctors.

Not only is the existing system and the proposed congressional effort to increase the total number of foreign medical practitioners unfair to American doctors, it’s unjust to the sending countries. In this current pandemic, doctors are needed in their home countries. For instance, India reported a shortage of 600,000 doctors which means that there is one government doctor for every 10,189 persons versus the World Health Organization’s recommended ratio of 1:1,000.

American doctors have the reasonable expectation that upon earning their medical school degrees, and passing their licensing exams, they’ll be able to practice their chosen profession. To shut U.S. doctors out while hiring foreign nationals violates America’s social contract with its citizens, and is a gross injustice.


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

US Doctors Bypassed For Foreign Ones?

Bill Would Allow Reopening Some Pa Businesses With Conditions

Bill Would Allow Reopening Some Pa Businesses With Conditions

By Sen. Doug Mastriano

I introduced legislation this week to get Pennsylvania working again.  Calling it “Pennsylvania Healthy Citizens and Healthy Businesses back to work initiative,” it applies strict health and safety measures on businesses to allow them to resume operations.  The governor should not have the sole and arbitrary power to judge which businesses should survive.  His only answer to this was creating a star-chamber like secret waiver process, which at last count has 25,000 requests pouring in.  The entire process is a well-guarded secret with zero accountability or transparency.  We have no idea if those approved/disapproved are getting political payback, or how decisions are being made.  Is it constitutional that he is wielding so much power, unprecedented in Pennsylvania’s history?  It is not up to Governor Wolf to pick winners and losers and he is indeed doing that.  This was made evident in a recent expose by the Philadelphia Inquirer, which discovered the Wolf Family legacy company to remains open, despite his order to the contrary.

Pennsylvania is indeed confronted by a contagious virus, which has necessitated certain emergency measures to curtail its spread.  This encompasses distancing, sanitary health practices, health conscience behavior, a sanitary workplace, among many other considerations as listed by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  These are designed to ameliorate the spread of COVID-19.  Chief among the considerations is the need to avoid the spike in infected people that sadly occurred in other nations, such as in Italy.  This spike overwhelmed their health care facilities and left scores not receiving the help that they required.

The key concern of Governor Tom Wolf in this environment was to reduce the spread of the virus across the state by severely restricting/limiting what he called “non-essential” and later,  “non-life-supporting” business activity.  His order to avoid a spike in cases was triggered by the governor’s 19 March order that initially called for the closure of all businesses across the state deemed non-essential that evening.  Wolf’s unilateral closure order impacted tens of thousands of businesses; millions of jobs and put at stake the very lives and economic well being of our citizens.  His draconian order took no account of CDC or Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines on allowing low contagion risk jobs to remain operational, but at the stroke of a pen, unilaterally issued a proclamation that will be calamitous for our state.  Hardest hit among these are; single-parent families, young couples, the independently employed (who still are not eligible for unemployment, despite my engagement with the governor to reverse his position on this), non-profits and small businesses.  There is a real and present danger that Wolf’s cure may be worse than the virus.

And then there is Wolf’s much-vaunted waiver office.  The governor’s waiver process lacks accountability, has no oversight and grants him unilateral power of who can and cannot be open for business.  This is too much power in the hands of one man and as we saw with the Philadelphia Inquirer exposé, it is already being used for political payoff.

My “Pennsylvania Healthy Citizens and Healthy Businesses back to work” legislation will allow businesses to reopen if they agree to abide by CDC mitigation measures to contain the spread of the virus. We need a safe, fair and balanced approach to reopening businesses.  Not the secret and random Wolf waiver process, but rather an approach that takes the incompetence and corruption of Harrisburg bureaucrats out of it.  A process that uses the expert advice of CDC and OSHA to provide direction on how certain businesses can reopen, which will at the same time, protect the health and welfare of our people and our state.

The preponderance of the “non-life sustaining businesses” closed by Governor Wolf are categorized by the Federal Government as low to medium risk at spreading the diseases and that’s without them already implementing the CDC’s health conscience best practices.  Imagine how safe they will be with the implementation of CDC’s guidance.  The way ahead for Pennsylvania is to offer businesses deemed by Gov Wolf as “non-life supporting” to resume operations but under certain conditions.   To reopen, mangers, owners, and staff agree to comply with CDC and OSHA COVID-19 mitigation measures until the state of emergency has ended.  These businesses do not require a waiver, but agree to enforce CDC and OSHA policies during the COVID-19 health crisis and will be responsible for meeting these standards if inspected by the PA Department of Health or local law enforcement.  Timely and full compliance is required to continue operating the business during the crisis.  An appeals process will be established at the Department of Labor to handle any concerns of disagreement with an inspector’s findings and monthly reports will be filed with the relevant committees in the House and Senate (Health, Labor, etc) to provide oversight and transparency.  The House and Senate Labor Committees will adjudicate any appeals or complaints that are challenged by the businesses in disagreement with a Department of Labor’s decisions.

Businesses that resume operations during this health crisis agree to abide by the following healthy practices delineated by both the CDC and OSHA:

Businesses that resume operations during this health crisis agree to abide by the following healthy practices delineated by both the CDC and OSHA:

  • Implement a generous sick leave policy, without retribution, for anyone who has COVID-19 symptoms (i.e., fever, cough, or shortness of breath)
  • Employees who develop COVID-19 symptoms (i.e., fever, cough, or shortness of breath) will immediately be sent home and not return until cleared by a healthcare professional
  • Sick employees must remain at home until their symptoms have passed and/or they receive a clean bill of health from their healthcare provider or state/local health officials
  • Employees with sick family members, or family members at higher risk (elderly, those with a weakened immune system, heart conditions, respiratory disease, chronic medical condition, diabetes, etc), should not work in a public area and all efforts should be made for them to work from home
  • Employers allow as many employees as possible to work from home (telework)
  • Employers must ensure that there is a minimum of six feet between workers, as well as six feet maintained between the employee and the public.
  • Employees at higher risk of suffering severe consequences or death by COVID-19 (elderly, weakened immune system, heart conditions, respiratory disease, chronic medical condition, diabetes, etc), will not be permitted to work in a non-life supporting business until the crisis has passed.
  • Employees with a sick family member will not return to work until that family member is cleared by a professional healthcare worker.

Additionally, the business will agree to:

  • Implement sanitary policies and a regular cleaning schedule to reduce exposure to COVID-19
  • To disinfect workspaces and areas with access to the public in addition to the workspaces and especially the restrooms.
  • Have adequate cleaning supplies available, as well as disposable paper towels, etc. The business will also ensure that tissues, hand sanitizers, gloves, medical masks, and other necessary sanitary products are available on site should an employee need them.
  • Online meetings will be encouraged rather than in-person
  • Employees will not share tools, equipment, phones, desks, computers or electronics.
  • Employers will agree to allow employees to remain home to care for sick relatives if necessary
  • Employers will develop flexible emergency leave policies during this health crisis and have non-punitive measures in place for those that need time off due to health concerns
  • Employers will not require their employees to have a COVID-19 positive test result to take sick leave
  • Employers will suspend non-essential operations and go to “minimal manning” to reduce the chances of spreading COVID-19
  • Employers Adopt “flexible worksites” that allows telework, etc. to reduce the likelihood of exposure
  • Break rooms and cafeterias should be closed
  • Postpone all non-essential meetings.
  • Limit public interaction and use curbside pickup, and online meetings.
  • Seek ways to increase building/office ventilation and circulation,

In closing, I’m reminded of a local florist that is operated by a husband and wife.  They can do all transactions online and deliver the arrangements to the customer.  They will not exchange money, see or meet any people and are at zero risk of spreading the virus.  There is another local business in my area that is operated by a husband, wife and their daughter.  Again, the transactions can be done online and the goods can be left out for pick up or delivery.  They will have no interaction with the public and are at zero risk of spreading the virus.  Having such low-risk businesses shut down at the whim of the governor lacks reason or justification.  He’s doing nothing to limit the health crisis while causing unnecessary pain to the community.   What’s the point of shutting down any activity that has zero to little risk of spreading the virus?  This is simply an example of the heavy hand of big government, needlessly crushing hard-working families and small business owners.

By implementing the above best practices, the spread of the virus will be contained/migrated, while at the same time allowing Pennsylvania to reopen for business.   Many of the businesses shut down by the governor’s unilateral order are considered by CDC and OSHA criteria as low risk of spreading the virus.  Mandating the implementation of these commonsense and life-saving measures, as described by CDC and OSHA, will ensure the safety of our citizens and the survival of our businesses.  Without compromising the health and welfare of our people, this balanced/commonsense approach is in the best interest of Pennsylvania.  Governor Wolf, it’s time to think about the people of Pennsylvania and get “safe businesses” back to work.

Doug Mastriano represents Pennsylvania Senate District 33

Bill Would Allow Reopening Some Pa Businesses With Conditions
Bill Would Allow Reopening Some Pa Businesses With Conditions

California Homeless Coronavirus Concern

California Homeless Coronavirus Concern


By Kevin Lynn

The novel coronavirus that first appeared in China late last year has been finding its way around the world since. Its journey highlights why a nation’s borders serve not only to protect a nation’s security, but the health and welfare of the citizens of a country. Ineffective U.S. border control for decades, as well as only cursory attention paid to internal controls that regulate entries and exits of noncitizens, has left our country vulnerable to a new pandemic.

California Homeless Coronavirus Concern

The agencies and technologies exist to effectively regulate entry, but we choose not to utilize them. Quixotically, cities, counties and even entire states opt to declare themselves sanctuaries for illegal immigrants. The poster child for local governments providing sanctuary is Los Angeles, a city least prepared to deal with a disease outbreak.

Last year, Los Angeles had an outbreak of typhus, a disease characterized by fever, headaches, a purple rash and often delirium that typically spreads by infected mites, lice and fleas. The outbreak would have probably gone largely unreported had it not been for the disease jumping from the city’s homeless population to staff working in City Hall, blocks from Skid Row.

Conservative estimates place the number of Los Angeles County’s homeless population at 59,000. Imagine if coronavirus hits that population. Unlike typhus, which is a bacterial infection, the coronavirus can spread much more easily. The virus, which results in the disease COVID-19 in humans, can spread between people who come as close as six feet, via respiratory droplets and by exposure to infected surfaces. The Center for Disease Control states, “The virus that causes COVID-19 seems to be spreading easily and sustainably in communities.”

It is hard to walk back decades of neglect and disinterest in what should be a commonsense approach to regulating who may enter the country. But the special interests that want an inexpensive as well as pliable labor force and politicians looking to feather their nests have undermined our ability to respond effectively to the coronavirus.

The countries of Singapore and Mongolia have been shining examples of how to deal with the coronavirus pandemic. The number of new cases in both countries is falling off dramatically. In the case of Mongolia, cases have plateaued. Singapore responded immediately to the crisis. Its top-notch healthcare system allowed it to do localized testing which helped not only in early identification, but also effective tracing of potential carriers. Moreover, it was able to take the restrictive measures necessary with a citizenry that was prepared to sacrifice for the common good.

Contrast this to what is now a very balkanized California. Even with its large vulnerable populations (150,000 homeless) and recent examples of disease outbreaks, California has no localized disease testing. California’s politicians are almost giddy with delight when flouting the nation’s immigration laws, but tepid when it comes to measures that actually improve the safety, health and security of its citizens.

Likely California will handle COVID-19 in much the way it responds to everything else that requires an effective response. It will launch into delusional thinking that will have its political leaders assigning blame to everyone but themselves. The question is: How long will the citizenry put up with this?


Kevin Lynn is the Executive Director of Progressives for Immigration Reform. Contact him at klynn@pfirdc.org.

California Homeless Coronavirus Concern

Enrollment Plummets At Pennsylvania State Universities

Enrollment Plummets At Pennsylvania State Universities

By Lowman S. Henry 

Governor Tom Wolf’s address to a joint session of the General Assembly in early February marked the official beginning of the annual state budget process. Higher education, specifically the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE), became a dominant issue.

Enrollment Plummets At Pennsylvania State Universities

Unfettered by economic reality, the costs of higher education have skyrocketed. The result is massive student debt and never-ending calls for more taxpayer dollars to subsidize our education institutions. This despite declining enrollment and an economy more in need of individuals trained for technical jobs or skilled in the trades.

Adding fuel to the fire, the governor proposed diverting more than $200 million from subsidies to the state’s horse racing industry to pay for scholarships or to help reduce the debt burden for students attending state-run colleges. Most of the money to pay for the scholarship program would be diverted from the Horse Racing Development Fund.

Revenue to supply that fund is generated by taxes from the slot machines that now dot the commonwealth’s landscape. That is ironic because casino gambling in the state began as a plan to place slots at race tracks in an effort to save the then floundering horse racing industry. What gaming has become is a subject for another day, but taking away that revenue stream resulted in predictable howls of protest from those in the equine community.

Governor Wolf’s solution to every problem is to spend more taxpayer money. He is especially fond of throwing more dollars at education, without ever demanding those dollars be spent prudently and with no means of measuring quality. Likewise, as predictable as Punxsutawney Phil emerging from his burrow, the reigning chancellor of PASSHE every February petitions the legislature for more money.

In so doing they have turned a blind eye to market forces. This is because most in the higher education community don’t view education as a product. While there is merit to valuing education for the sake of adding to the societal pool of knowledge or even for personal edification, the main reason for obtaining a higher education is to equip oneself to earn money – presumably at a higher level than one would have earned without a degree.

To that end, state system schools have become the retail equivalent of shopping malls – overbuilt behemoths with a rapidly declining customer base. According to the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy in Pittsburgh, enrollment at the 14-university system peaked in 2010 at 119,513 students. By the fall of 2019 enrollment had dropped by 20 percent to 95,494 students. Mansfield University saw an enrollment decline of 51 percent, while Cheney’s enrollment fell by 61 percent.

With a declining customer base, the schools have not only failed to contain costs but have actually increased both annual spending and debt. The schools’ combined financial liability has increased from $2.07 billion in 2010 to $5.46 billion in 2019. Pension liabilities are up 53 percent.

The decline in enrollment can be attributed to several factors. First, Pennsylvania’s high schools are graduating fewer students, thus the “customer base” is shrinking. Second, state-related universities such as Penn State and the nation’s private universities are doing a better job of attracting students.

And while all of the above have made adaptations to accommodate non-traditional students, adult continuing education, and on-line learning, they have failed to adequately respond to the fact the nation’s workforce has less and less need for classically educated individuals and a greater need for those with a technical education or ability to work in the building trades.

Yes, there will always be a need for those equipped with four-year college degrees and higher. But, the failure of the higher education community to contain costs and adapt to market forces has made such an education unaffordable for many potential students. This is especially true when high paying, family-sustaining jobs in manufacturing and the trades are readily available, and for significantly less cost for training.

In the age of Amazon, Governor Wolf and the higher education establishment are stuck in a brick and mortar world. They are over-built, inefficient, and fail to deliver a needed product. Cost containment, consolidation, and a realistic assessment of workforce needs are necessary steps. Simply giving them more taxpayer dollars will only make the problem worse.

Lowman Henry is chairman and CEO of the Lincoln Institute and host of the weekly Lincoln Radio Journal.

Enrollment Plummets At Pennsylvania State Universities Enrollment Plummets

Mulvaney Wants More Immigration

Mulvaney Wants More Immigration

By Joe Guzzardi  

One Capitol Hill lead pipe certainty: every year Congress will try to pass legislation to import more overseas workers, and an equally strong push to grant an amnesty for the millions of unlawfully present aliens that will include lifetime valid work permits. Annual congressional attempts to pass immigration legislation that will expand the workforce, and greatly increase the nation’s population, are as certain as rain. The strategy, so far unsuccessful, is for a prominent Republican to endorse the proposed bill. With Republicans on board, the media can then label the legislation bipartisan, a helpful tool in selling the bill to unsuspecting, under-informed readers.

Mulvaney Wants More Immigration


See the roll call of prominent Republicans who have been all-in on the worst of bad immigration bills over the last 15 years: the 2005 McCain-Kennedy bill; the 2013 Gang of Eight bill that included Marco Rubio, Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham and John McCain; the former Senate Judiciary Chair Orrin Hatch-championed I-Squared Act that would have increased by 110,000 the H-1B visa cap, and the 2019 Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Actthat would eliminate the per-country numerical cap for employment-based immigrants which Utah’s Mike Lee heartily backs. The Senate is indifferent to the cruel reality that endless numbers of H-1B visa holders have displaced, and continue to displace, U.S. tech workers since the enactment of the Immigration Act of 1990.

Invariably, the Republicans joined with the most pro-immigration Democrats to support the expansive immigration bills. The Democrats were in 2005, Ted Kennedy; in 2013, Richard Durbin, Chuck Schumer, Robert Menendez and Michael Bennet, and in 2019, Kamala Harris.

This year, the most prominent and loudest cheerleader for more immigration is former South Carolina U.S. representative and current Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. Before a private UK audience, Mulvaney said: “We are desperate – desperate – for more people. We are running out of people to fuel the economic growth that we’ve had in our nation over the last four years. We need more immigrants.”

Today’s specific amnesty agenda calls for the Senate, in a push that current Senate Judiciary Chair Graham is spearheading, to adopt an upper chamber version of Zoe Lofgren’s (D-Calif.) agriculture amnesty, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, a cheap labor, indentured servitude bill that would allow an estimated 1.5 million aliens access to Green Cards in exchange for their labor for a fixed period, between four to ten years.

The federal government has not given the slightest indication that it can properly manage any immigration bills, let alone a farm worker amnesty. In 1986, President Ronald Reagan’s Immigration Reform and Control Act included the Special Agricultural Workers (SAW) provision. SAW was a disaster, so bad that The New York Times wrote that it was “one of the most extensive immigration frauds ever perpetrated against the United States government.”

Mulvaney’s comment that the country is in dire need of more people is a complete lie. Ask commuters driving to work if the nation needs more people. More to the point on employment, despite the rosy reporting on jobs, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that millions of prime working-age people including minorities continue to be unemployed or under-employed. Nevertheless, every year more than 1 million legal immigrants get work permits, and about 750,000 guest workers receive employment-based visas. Then, there are the tens of thousands of workers who come unlawfully.

The unasked and therefore unanswered question in the Mulvaney mystery is whether President Trump encouraged his chief of staff to promote immigration. President Trump has made several references to his expansive immigration vision including his State of the Union bombshell that he wants the “highest [immigration] numbers ever.” For months, the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner has been touting an immigration bill that would, among its other anti-American worker features, increase high-skilled labor or so-called “merit-based” immigration – a terrible outcome for U.S. tech workers that would flood the market with cheap labor.

If President Trump wins re-election, in his second term he’d be unencumbered by his campaign pledge to “hire American” that helped put him in the White House. Depending on whether President Trump decides to defend American workers or cave to demands from big business for low-cost labor, the next four years could signal an immigration apocalypse.


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

Mulvaney Wants More Immigration Mulvaney Wants More Immigration

Wyndmoor Going Upscale

Wyndmoor Going Upscale

By Dr. John W. Gilmore

My little town of Wyndmoor, Pa. nuzzled against Mount Airy and Chestnut Hill is changing at Traymore and Willowgrove avenues.   New shops and buildings are popping up while others, old stores, small business, and gas stations that served the neighborhood well, are disappearing under the shovel and hammer of progress.  The most recent change is a large condo unit replacing our gas station, our small but convenient hardware store, and a few houses and small businesses. Some of the condos cost as much as $400,000.  Rumor has it they have already been sold.

Wyndmoor Going Upscale
You can tell a town by its coffee shop.A view of Wyndmoor from Locals Coffee & Eatery

On the bottom floor there are new businesses. Captain Andy’s Market where a Tanning Salon used to be; Enza wine and Pizza where a house once stood; Toni’s Pizza (the only neighborhood shop left standing) surrounded by and having to compete with it’s new Pizza selling neighbor; Lash Lounge; Pure Barre (an upscale clothing store); and across the street Skin Smart Dermatology are just a few new shops, and at the very corner of the building Locals Coffee shop.

Locals is a coffee shop with a large open space and polished concrete floors.  The ceiling is painted black with a large fan and silver ducts and pipes running along it giving it a polished, industrial look. Blond wood tables–some large and long with a raw rustic look, but well polished and varnished, others small and square with padded benches provide comfortable seating.  There are four leather chairs seated in front of a small fireplace embedded in the wall below a large screen TV.  The music is pleasing.    

There are various items placed artfully around the room that attract the eye:  old wooden  baskets of fruit, potato chips, various types of food.  A dark metal case with sodas, orange juices, water, and various drinks for those who may want something other than coffee sits close to the counter.  Pastries, sandwiches, and many variations of the  main ingredient–coffee and even tea are sold.

I always thought that one could tell the quality of the town by its coffee shop or lack thereof.  Now we have one we can compare. I sit in a large leather chair next to the fire place.  Is it real fire?  It looks as though it is a fire sealed behind glass and plastic, yet I don’t feel the heat.  The atmosphere is relaxed.  Soft jazz is playing.  It can be crowded sometimes, but due to the openness of the space the voices seem muffled and absorbed. It is good to have a coffee shop so close to my home that I can walk. 

Wyndmoor is changing.  It is the closest town to Chestnut Hill and Mount Airy.  Upscale houses, mansions and estates line the streets directly behind it.  Real estate prices are high in Mt. Airy and Chestnut Hill.  Perhaps this is the next hot spot for gentrification and housing prices will rise.  I really don’t know if that is a good thing.  What has the world come to when even middle class neighborhoods are unsafe from the shovel and hammer? 

Wyndmoor Going Upscale

Feds Finally Tackle Birth Tourism Criminals

Feds Finally Tackle Birth Tourism Criminals

By Joe Guzzardi

As the old saying goes, half a loaf is better than none. Today’s subject isn’t bread baking but rather the recent and long overdue Homeland Security Investigations’ action against 19 California-based Chinese nationals for birth tourism operations. HSI’s action followed up on its 2015 sweep that uncovered several illicit goings-on that included criminal offenses at maternity hotels that centered on women who paid as much as $80,000 for the privilege of giving birth to a U.S. citizen child.

Feds Finally Tackle Birth Tourism Criminals


 By violating immigration laws and committing other crimes involving conspiracy, visa fraud, income tax fraud and money laundering, the unscrupulous birth tourism proprietors raked in tens of millions of dollars over the years. One of the operators, Dongyuan Li, faced the seizure of her $2.1 million Irving, Calif., home, six luxury vehicles and more than $1 million from bank accounts, as well as many gold bars and coins. According to the ICE press release, Li “received $3 million in international wire transfers from China in just two years.”
 
According to the indictments, birth hotel owners advised their clients to lie on their visa applications, a crime, and to hide their pregnancies from airport Customs and Border Protection officials. The end game for the foreign-born mothers is to secure U.S. citizenship for their children through the current misinterpretation of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
 
Although no court has ruled on the 14th Amendment as it applies to U.S.-born children whose mothers are not American citizens, those children born on U.S. soil are granted automatic citizenship, a practice known as jus soli.Constitutionalists argue that since the foreign-born mother isn’t “under the jurisdiction thereof…” (the U.S. government), citizenship should be conferred only on children whose parents are citizens, known as jus sanguinis.
 
Birth tourism hurts Americans in multiple ways. Later in their lives, the newly minted citizens will have unfettered access to jobs, Social Security and other affirmative benefits. The birth tourism industry is big business. Estimates for the annual births related to the tourist scam range between 40,000 and 60,000 annually. Birth tourism spawns population-busting chain migration since the anchor babies, once they turn 21, can sponsor their parents for permanent residency. Then, in turn, the parents will eventually sponsor their non-nuclear family members. In 2016, the U.S. admitted more than 300,000 people through chain migration.
 
As welcome as the HSI action is, the best hope is that it will send a warning shot over the operators’ heads, and possibly deter other global foreign nationals from signing up for birth tourism packages. It would be more effective, however, if the State Department announced that it will no longer issue travel visas to obviously pregnant women. Then, pregnant women who ignore the State Department’s warning should be turned away at their port of entry.
 
Since this is the first federal intervention into the sleazy, criminal birth tourism businesses that’s been thriving for more than a decade, the question is what took so long. The query is especially significant because the preferred destination for many wealthy pregnant Russians is Florida Trump properties. Although the Trump Organization doesn’t profit from the subleased condominiums that the Russians rent at up to $85,000, it’s inconceivable that President Trump, who railed against chain migration, is unaware of birth tourism on his Florida property.
 
Joseph Macias, Special Agent in Charge of HSI Los Angeles, said that “America’s way of life is not for sale,” and promised to aggressively target “those who would make a mockery of our laws and our values to benefit and enrich themselves.” HSI has a long row to hoe. Dozens of birth tourism scams are still thriving, although perhaps less brazenly.
 
 
Joe Guzzardi is a Progressives for Immigration Reform analyst who has written about immigration for more than 30 years. Contact him at jguzzardi@pfirdc.org.

Feds Finally Tackle Birth Tourism Criminals