[SallyIsNice5]

You spent time in Texas, you can't tell me this isn't the case... most of the anti-immigrant folks that I know personally are somewhat or fully anti-hispanic racist. The strength of the political movement is built on the ease of political racism. I was there, and what I saw is that there was considerable suspicion about the benefits of immigration from everyone, not just the white folks. Plenty of hispanics who are bona fide American citizens have a problem with the ones who skirt the system.

Think of it this way, they are the ones who suffer most of the problems of illegal immigration because it happens in their backyard.

You probably don't know US policy in the 19th century very well... the US was very self-involved prior to WWII, and had very little interest in the outside world. Considering I'm a history grad you might want to rethink that assumption.

At the time, they had the most open immigration system in the world. That's the flip side of the percieved isolationism, they would take anyone who was fleeing troubles and wars in their homelands.

Particularly around the time of WWI, there was quite substantial sentiment to just ostrich up and not get involved in the outside world. This sentiment meshes easily with the racist politics and made it possible to pass anti-immigration policies. Except for the fact that it wasn't until after the first world war, that the US began to enact restrictive immigration laws.

Wilson really changed things. The whole policy of intervention in the affairs of the world is Wilson's policy, and to some extent is still being carried out today.

As for your proposal, I like the idea of the employer being able to conduct interviews with those from other countries without running afoul of the current immigration restrictions. Right now, as it stands someone who goes to the US to take an interview would be breaking the law if they came there on a visitor's visa.

Visa allows travel between home country and US, either unlimited or reasonably limited No, not unlimited, perhaps after a year continuous residence in the US. This is an important restriction.

That's not an amnesty plan, it's an economically sound plan for allowing immigration based on need that fills jobs as they appear but restricts it to qualified applicants who are applying for legitimate jobs. I owe you an apology then. You are taking the regulation about those who enter the US seriously. Thanks for the plan, overall I think it has considerable merit.