In the USofA, barriers against employing highly-skilled foreign professional workers in roles as doctors and lawyers are many. While simultaneously, semi-skilled less-educated US employees are purposely targeted for wage concessions and/or job eliminations — either by the re-location of US manufacturing facilities overseas, exploiting cheap foreign labor; or alternatively by the lax enforcement of existing US employment policy applied to competitive blue collar immigrants; or more indirectly, by diluting US wage-earner production, with the importation of less expensive yet comparable foreign products.
Here is an example of protectionism serving existing US medical professionals, by steering foreign medical staff toward less desirable practice in low income neighborhoods: “When doctors emigrate” (Dec 10, 2006)
…”Under U.S. immigration rules, a foreign doctor — even if he completes his medical schooling in the U.S., or does an internship or residency at an American hospital — is obliged to return to his homeland for a period of at least two years before he can seek employment in the U.S. There is, however, an exception built into the law. The U.S. Federal Government has designated 2100 areas, mostly impoverished districts at the nadir of the economic recession, as “medically under-served”. If a foreign doctor agrees to work in one of these areas, the standard requirement, of two years outside the U.S. before working here, is lifted. The much sought-after “green card”, entitling the doctor to permanent residence in the U.S., is just a few prescriptions away.”
Another citation from H. Ronald Klasko, exposes the legal complexity and legislative constraint imposed on potential emigrant doctors. “Foreign Physicians Face Tough Immigration Hurdles”
…”Most physicians enter the United States on either J-1 or H-1B visas. The H-1B is often considered more beneficial to the physician, whereas the J-1 may be the only option offered by certain hospitals and medical schools because of fewer employer responsibilities and liabilities.
The J-1, or exchange visitor visa, is sponsored by the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG). This is a quasi-governmental organization that has been set up to facilitate and execute policies established by Congress and the administrative agencies that implement the immigration laws. ECFMG places strict limits on length of visa, change in programs, and moonlighting.”…
…”The H-1B visa must be sponsored by the employer. It does require various levels of employer recordkeeping, posting notices to employees, payment of prevailing wage and substantial fees paid to the government. In addition, the doctor must meet any relevant state licensing requirements.”…
…”Finally, all other physicians who wish to seek permanent residence status must go through the labor certification application procedure. This procedure requires an employer-sponsor to undertake various recruitment efforts in order to prove to the U. S. Department of Labor that the foreign physician is not taking a position away from a qualified and interested U.S. citizen or permanent resident physician.
The representation of foreign physicians and the hospitals and medical practices that employ them is a complex subspecialty within the immigration law field of practice. The advisor must be aware that rules that apply to other professions do not necessarily apply in the representation of physicians.”…
Foreign doctors should not be allowed entrance into the US without stringent performance review. Yet current US immigration policy toward medical professionals appears focused less on job proficiency and more on visa quotas, irrespective of applicant skill. Additionally, the status quo for current visa holders reward those who would remain in the US to practice medicine, but only when they choose placement in designated impoverished areas, not in direct competition with most American medical personnel.
This is not “free trade”. This is arbitrary strategy purposefully designed to price-support current doctor’s earnings in this country, while an inverse policy by US government oversight agencies implements competitive pressure on American blue collar workers — eroding wages on multiple fronts. It’s all a matter of who has access to power. Free trade truly impacts only those workers without the clout to lobby for protective practices.
Tags: free trade, protectionism
Mike Reynolds in the current issue of The Nation magazine (16 June 2007), pens an investigative piece exposing the ineffective pork-barrel industry, sprouting from conservative Christian policy as advocated by Bush and Co., concerning abortion, abstinence-only contraception and HIV disease prevention — among other sexual health-oriented, government-funded programs and agendas.
Appropriately titled: The Abstinence Gluttons, Mr. Reynolds follows the money and the players, while documenting the usual rush to profit, that often underlines SOP behind Republican party platform to privatize government agencies, like our national Health and Human Services Administration.
Under the guise of family values, decency, etc., the religious right reaps financial gain with the expressed invitation of this administration, to promote faith-based strategy for health and welfare management of public agencies — all at taxpayer expense with minimal regulation or accountability.
Excerpts:
“One of the chief cooks is a media-shy 63-year-old Catholic multimillionaire, welfare privatizer and Republican donor named Raymond Ruddy. With close ties to the White House, federal health officials and Republican power brokers that date back to W.’s days as Texas governor, Ruddy has leveraged his generous wallet and insider muscle to push an ultraconservative social agenda, enrich a preferred network of abstinence-only and antiabortion groups, boost profits for his company and line the pockets of his cronies–all with taxpayer dollars.”
Fortunately, Democrats now control some of the purse strings and can expose these cash-rich, ineffective schemes.
“At press time, Democrats are poised to cut off one $50 million abstinence-only funding stream, through Title V, which requires renewal by June 30. Henry Waxman, the California Democrat who chairs the House government reform committee, is considering hearings on Bush’s abstinence programs–hearings that could expose the conservative pork barrel they’ve become.”
We must promote Congressional hearing to examine health care policy that allows spending large sums of taxpayer money without oversight and accountability, while concurrently advocating for effective results-based performance.
Tags: abortion, abortion rights, faith-based, family values
Greg Palast makes some remarkable claims, corroborated by Monica Goodlings recent testimony before the House Judicial Committee about the Federal Attorney firings. He backs up these assertions by producing emails (some of the missing Carl Rove emails), obtained from emails missent by Tim Griffin while Griffin worked for the re-election of George W. Bush in 2004. Griffin is the current interim US Attorney for the eastern district of Arkansas, groomed by Rove to replace Bud Cummings during the attorney purge — the current Justice Department scandal embroiling AG A. Gonzales.
According to Palast, Griffin goofed and sent email to “georgebush.org” instead of “georgebush.com” and some of this email from August ’04, refers to “caging” of votes. This is a process — for those unfamiliar — of writing letters (do not forward) to select voters. Any letters returned to sender are ear-marked for “caging” — a challenge to the veracity of a voter’s registration based on false home address. This is the twisted logic, working an ugly method, which fuels the Republican party rail against “voter fraud”.
So who are these miscreants defrauding the American public with their vote? How about the homeless, vacationing students and soldiers of color stationed in Iraq. That is, folks less likely than most to vote Republican. Voter fraud in these terms, is Orwellian speak for voter disenfranchisement. One point of importance, if voter rolls were parsed demographically before mail was sent to confirm current voter address, a more egregious case of discrimination could be made. Yet even without a pre-screened mailing list, the exclusion of homeless folks and students could be taken as a statistical gain for the Republican party. Without knowing the racial makeup of overseas soldiers or any allowance for voter registration, the bias of military exclusions might yield less benefits. Recent history has favored the Republican party among military personnel.
Read more about Palast’s evidence and view samples of the mentioned emails HERE . This is remarkable stuff, and Greg Palast – reporting for the BBC – is either a lying scoundrel or the world’s foremost investigative reporter. Reading his year-old book, which offers much damning evidence behind the invasion and continuing occupation of Iraq, Armed Madhouse , one is inclined to believe the latter. I did a search on Palast, attempting to debunk his journalism. Nothing jumped out at me. Here’s a positive review, with some explanation why the American press has found Palast too incendiary and mostly will not report his stuff: Greg Palast: The Last Muckraker? .
If there is credible evidence that Greg Palast is just blowing smoke — much like Matt Drudge on the right — then please let me know.
As always, use your own judgement.
Tags: conservative anxiety, liberty, voter disenfranchisement
— Updated below —
While 90% of Americans wish the Federal Government to negotiate group discount rates for prescription medication, a minority of Senators blocked this legislation (S. 3, The Medicare Fair Prescription Drug Price Act of 2007) from coming to a vote on the Senate floor. Here in Arizona, our senior Senator, John McCain did not vote, and our junior Senator John Kyl voted to block the bill.
Speaking to John Kyl’s vote against introducing such legislation, the question is why. How would this effort to rein in pharmaceutical prices, not be in the public good? And since John Kyl is our Senatorial representative, why would he vote against this issue? Let’s look at the man’s record on similar matters.
Kyl also has consistently sided with pharmaceutical companies on issues regarding Medicare and senior citizens.
In a 379-8 House vote in 1987 in support of the Older Americans Act — which included Meals on Wheels — Kyl was one of the eight.
He voted to roll back laws protecting Medicare patients against overcharging by physicians.
In the late 1990s, he proposed legislation allowing doctors to refuse to treat Medicare patients. In 2005, Kyl cast the deciding vote against an amendment that would have allowed the federal government to negotiate for lower drug prices under Medicare.
…and so it seems, he is at it again. Siding with big Pharma vs. the average man. Where is the representation in such a vote?
John Kyl, a principled man, is still a corporate shill. Government run as a big business; beholden only to money and power, will consistently be drawn to special interests — those with the capital. The public good gets factored out of such an equation — which is why the people of Arizona find themselves served with such a “principled” vote.
— Updated (4-22-07) —
In true double-speak fashion, Senator Kyl touts the blockage of this legislation as a wonderful thing for senior citizens.
Austin American-Statesman (4-19-07) out of Austin, Texas this:
Senate Republican Conference Chairman Jon Kyl of Arizona called the blocking of debate a “victory for seniors,” saying, “the Senate today chose access over restrictions, choice over government mandates and competition over price controls.”
And that’s the rub folks — Senator Kyl has never embraced collective bargaining of any kind. So what we have is you and me “competing” individually against pharmaceutical corporations, instead of negotiating as a class of citizenry with the power of governmental oversight.
The only victorious seniors will be those holding shares of big pharma in their retirement portfolio, and these gains will undoubtedly evaporate with the soaring cost of medication.
Again, where is the representation?
Tags: corporate sponsorship, fear mongering, health care reform, insurance industry, lobbyist influence, social welfare
As good an explanation as any about the “Decider’s” unwillingness to halt the Iraq war follows below. Which is why Congress MUST halt this man’s agenda. He is hooked on violence and will not give up the fix willingly. This callous affliction first manifest itself while “W” was governor of Texas and the state saw a spike in the number of capital sentences executed. Once a public drunk, always a public drunk. Just a change of intoxicants. (Emphasis in the following quote is mine.)
“Tyranny starts as a habit; it has the tendency to, and generally finally does develop into a disease. I believe that habit may coarsen and stultify the very best of men, reducing them to the level of brutes. Blood and power make a man drunk: callous coarseness and depravity develop in him; the most abnormal phenomena become accessible, and in the end pleasurable to the mind and the senses. The human being and the citizen perish forever in the tyrant, and a return to human dignity, to repentance, to regeneration becomes practically impossible for him,”
– Fëdor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky, “Memoirs from the House of the Dead.”
Tags: military-industrial complex, tyranny, war