Immigration Lawyers Like All The Presidential Candidates
Print Friendly and PDF

The Immigration Lawyers Website just published their opinion of which one of the presidential candidates is most likely to deliver "immigration benefits". ILW didn't define what they mean by "immigration benefits", but it's safe to assume they are talking about amnesty, large increases in guest worker visas, F-4 and OPT for foreign students, H-1B, green cards, and anything else that increases the volume of business and wealth of immigration lawyers.

It's a tough choice for ILW because all three candidates agree to the agenda of comprehensive immigration reform, which includes H-1B visas.

The ILW winners are:

  • #1 McCain
  • #2 Obama
  • #3 Clinton

Fortunately for the ILW, and unfortunately for us, they get to choose the best of the three instead of the least of three evils. Keep in mind that the ILW choices have nothing to do with policy or ideology because all three of these presidential candidates are globalists who want to destroy our country by opening our borders to unlimited immigration (in WTO terms they want unimpeded flows of "natural persons"). The ILW choice boils down to who is most likely to get the dirty job done, not who has the most desire to do it.

In their opinion, McCain is the best option. That's an excellent choice based on McCain's record. Two examples of McCain's open borders voting record was his co-sponsorship of H-1B in 1990, and the McCain/Kennedy amnesty bill. To read more about McCain's voting record on foreign worker importation go here.
Out of the two Democratic candidates, ILW thinks Obama is most likely to deliver the goods. Their reason for picking Obama is that Clinton is so polarizing the Republicans, and possibly some Democrats, will try to thwart anything she does on immigration, or probably anything else — even if it means filibusters. Obama on the other hand might not have as many problems with partisan politics, which means he may be able to push amnesty and open immigration bills through Congress more rapidly than Clinton.

Obama Clinton McCain,, March 26, 2008

The three major contenders for President this November are Senators Obama, Clinton and McCain. Here is a quick preview of how immigration benefits might fare under these three possible presidencies (bear in mind that immigration legislation is controversial and generally difficult to muster votes for).

The analysis begins with the likely shape of Congress next year. Here, the ground appears to favor Democrats. In the House of Representatives, the Democratic majority will likely increase by the low single digits or decrease by the high single digits. Either way, it appears that the Demcrats will keep their majority in the House. In the Senate, Democrats appear poised to increase their majority by 3 to 6 seats. Either way, the Democrats will likely fall short of a filibuster proof majority, thus guaranteeing that on some issues, the Republicans will be able to block bills. Thus the three possible presidencies should be viewed within the context of Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate in the next Congress.

If Sen. Clinton were President, Senate passage of immigration benefits could be problematic since a Republican filibuster against an initiative from a President Clinton may be easier to sustain than against another Democrat. The fundamental issue if either Democrat were to be elected President - Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama - is that immigration will likely not be high on the list of Presidential priorities in the next Congress. The Iraq war, health care, energy, the economy - all these might prevent any Democratic presidential push on immigration. If Sen. McCain were President, however, the list of Presidential priorities would be quite different: war against Al-Qaeda, tax cuts, and spending cuts. A President McCain may well want to work on immigration early on to show that he is a centrist President and does not govern from one end of the political spectrum. To sum up, from a purely immigration benefits perspective, an Obama presidency would be better than a Clinton presidency, and a McCain presidency would likely be the best option.

We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to [email protected].

Print Friendly and PDF