Connect with us

News

IDIOTS: Cato Calls for Expanding Mass Migration as the Wuhan Flu Spreads Across the U.S.

Published

on

David Bier, immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, is calling for protecting legal migration during the Wuhan Flu outbreak.

He claims that “President Trump initially kept reasonable travel restrictions to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, but with the virus spreading inside the United States, he is already shifting from minimizing its threat — his first instinct — to use it to justify restrictive immigration policies that he wanted anyway.”

The Cato analyst added that “A broader move to general nativism at this time would be disastrous, as so many immigrants are leading the U.S. response to the virus.”

Trending: HMM: Michelle Obama was Desperate Not to be Photographed in a Bikini as First Lady

According to Bier, “eight of the major companies developing treatments and vaccines for the virus are heavily reliant on foreign workers.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

He added that from “2010 to 2019, we found that the Department of Labor approved the companies developing treatments or vaccines for coronavirus to hire more than 11,000 immigrants and H-1B high skilled foreign workers.”

Bier is of the opinion that “Without these workers, America’s hope of treating and saving thousands of lives at risk from the coronavirus would greatly diminish.”

He ultimately calls for “completely exempting all pharmaceutical researchers and scientists as well as doctors and physicians from the H-1B and green card limits and expediting their processing. It should specifically enact legislation to permit in more foreign doctors to underserved areas—particularly in rural areas.”

Whatever legal migrants we have should not be the subject of our ire. They’re here and we should be thankful for their efforts in combatting this pandemic alongside native-born American professionals. We should salute them for their help and encourage their assimilation efforts. But any type of suggestion that Trump’s policies to restrict immigration are xenophobic or nativist is asinine at best. It’s what any rational national entity has done throughout history. Migration generally comes in waves and is then paused to promote assimilation, social cohesion, and economic rebalancing.

Not to mention, the H-1B visa program is known for its notorious levels of economic displacement.

John Binder of Breitbart News noted the following:

There are about 650,000 H-1B visa foreign workers in the U.S. at any given moment. Americans are often laid off in the process and forced to train their foreign replacements, as highlighted by Breitbart News.

The desire to bring in migrants to help out with our healthcare is all good and well, but we have to ask ourselves what are the actual costs of these policies?

Let’s face it, America’s mass migration charade has gone on for too long. Many of the neoliberal, globalists think that importing thousands if not millions of people to fix some of the problems we have in America will be a viable solution. This ignores that radical mass migration policies come with second and third order effects that many policymakers don’t perceive when crafting the policy. For libertarian mass migration boosters, they fail to recognize that many of the migrants once they and/or their kids end up receiving citizenship inevitably vote for the big government policies they frequently deride. It’s an exercise in suicidal collapse, but for organizations obsessed with cheap labor, this doesn’t enter equation.

For a libertarian organization like Cato, they have to get their priorities straight and understand there are multiple ways to skin a cat. They should be asking themselves the following:  Why not roll back the insane maze of medical regulations that prevent countless American doctors from entering the medical field? While we’re at it, they should also be directing their focus on the absurd levels of regulation the FDA has enacted which has stifled the entrance of life-saving drugs. It would behoove Cato to spend more of their time scaling back the regulatory state — which is what they purportedly claim to do — rather than clamoring for more immigration.

None of these reforms require having to import more migrants. The U.S. is clearly reaching a breaking point on this front.

Cato policy analysts should think about other alternatives to these policy issues instead of putting out pieces shilling for more mass migration in such sensitive times.

 

Big League National Security

Will Josh Hawley be the Next Champion for an America First Foreign Policy?

America First May Have its Next Leader to End Wars Abroad

Published

on

Does America First have a new non-interventionist champion?

Missouri Senator Josh Hawley has been viewed by many as one of the figures who could potentially lead a Trumpist movement after Trump, should Joe Biden end up being installed as president on January 2021.

Hawley has made a name for himself as a champion of Middle America and questioning the neoliberal orthodoxy on immigration and trade. Lately, Hawley has made a pivot towards  questioning the interventionist conventional wisdom on foreign policy. 

In early October of this year, the Missouri Senator called for the American government to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. Hawley tweeted, “Almost 20 years now in Afghanistan. Long past time to draw this war to an end.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Hawley’s foreign policy has been a work progress over the past two years. During a 2019 speech Hawley gave at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), he questioned the nation-building policy prescriptions of previous administrations, demonstrating some degree of skepticism towards non-stop interventionism abroad on the part of the Senator.

That said, it remains to be seen if Hawley’s legislative record will fully match his rhetoric.

Hawley is a staunch China hawk, who fears the rise of China and is a strong voice against China’s expansionist efforts. Hawley’s track record shows that his foreign policy views are rough around the edges. Daniel Larison of The American Conservative is not as optimistic about Hawley judging by his votes on the Yemeni Civil War. Larison cited several of Hawley’s votes that may be cause for concern:

Sen. Hawley voted against the Senate’s resolution of disapproval that opposed the president’s effort to circumvent Congress with a bogus “emergency” to expedite arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE. More important, he voted with the president and most Senate Republicans against the antiwar Yemen resolution that would have cut off all U.S. support to the Saudi coalition.”

Nevertheless, Hawley’s comments on Afghanistan are a good sign that Hawley is catching on to the fact that Americans are tired of foreign wars. Politicians can change their views and behaviors. Hawley is likely recognizing that the America First movement is exhausted by the endless wars and wants candidates and elected officials who offer withdrawal plans. 

After looking at the list of people who have been tapped to join the Biden administration, Hawley tweeted, “What a group of corporatists and war enthusiasts – and #BigTech sellouts.”

Journalist Glenn Greenwald, a fierce interventionist skeptic, maintained cautious optimism about Hawley. In a tweet, he commented, “All kinds of reasons to be skeptical of the authenticity here, but — purely as a matter of rhetoric — just imagine any national Republican speaking this way about a Dem administration even 10 years ago. The framework of politics is radically shifting.”

The jury is still out on Hawley. Regardless of flaws in his voting record, America First advocates should continue to push him and other America First leaning Republicans in the right direction. We should never forget that politicians are still receptive to political pressure and the grassroots holds the keys to political change. 

Young senators like Hawley are the future of American politics and it makes sense for foreign policy restrainers to lobby them and push them in a direction that favors non-interventionism.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending