Letters

NRCA Executive Vice President Bill Good's column, "Legislating by compromise," July issue, page 58, would have been a lot more straightforward if it had said what is obviously true:

• The legislation proposed does not represent the will of the American people.
• These are illegal aliens we are talking about and not "undocumented workers."
• Did Good forget that "all the interest groups" includes NRCA? Perhaps he really meant to say "all those folks who oppose NRCA."
• The statement "ours is a nation of immigrants" is irrelevant to the discussion.
• The statement "denying entry into our country is inconsistent with our best impulses" is wrong and dangerous. Protecting our borders from illegal entry is the issue. The law does not act on "best impulses" though the anointed elite act on nothing else.

Comprehensive immigration reform is a bogus issue. We do not need new legislation to protect our borders. The government's poor enforcement of existing laws gives Americans no confidence the government will enforce any new laws, either. As for the 12 million illegal aliens, if we quit paying for their education, welfare, health care, etc., they will find their way home soon enough. The real issues are:

• Firms looking for cheap labor
• Political party interest in votes (particularly the Democratic Party)
• Labor unions looking for the power gained from increased membership and dues

Let's lock down the borders and build the fence. Then and only then can we talk about real reform.

By the way, you might want to consider keeping your journal focused on the technical aspects of roofing—not politics.

Michael Adams
Received via e-mail
mikeadamscvs@earthlink.net

Following is Good's response to the letter:

Ultimately, of course, the attempt to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation failed as Adams must surely know.

And here's what we have as a result:

• There were no additional border security or employer verification requirements, as Adams would have liked, contained in the bill.
• State and local governments will continue to pass bills and ordinances that will increase penalties on employers because federal pre-emption requirements contained in the bill are not in effect.
• An estimated 500,000 illegal immigrants will enter the U.S. this year—and next year and every year until we can reform a broken system.
• The 12 million undocumented people will continue to live under the radar screen. And yes, many of them will go to school and use our social services. More of them will pay taxes and support a Social Security system they will never be able to use.
• Our industry will face an accelerating labor shortage with no relief in sight. And that's despite the fact that the average unskilled entry-level roofing worker makes $12 an hour in wages and $4 an hour in benefits—hardly the "cheap labor" Adams would like people to believe.

Suggesting, as Adams does, that the answer to all of this is to build a fence is like suggesting the way to prevent car accidents is to ban the use of automobiles.

Meanwhile, Professional Roofing will continue to address issues, like national immigration policy, that are important to the roofing industry.

I read Good's article "Legislating by compromise." When I read these types of articles, I am deeply saddened by the issues they reveal about people in the U.S.

I have been aware for a long time of the lack of correct history that is taught in the schools at all levels in the U.S. One of the items not understood by a lot of people, including Congress, is who determines how Congressional office holders should vote on issues.

The Declaration of Independence states: "We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies … ."

The Constitution then starts out with these words: "We the people … ."

These words should lay a foundation for how our government should work. When Good writes of legislation by compromise, he advocates undermining the Constitution. A lack of knowledge of the Constitution (or should it be the desire for power and money?) is shown by the remarks of the people who were upset because the immigration bill was defeated. It is sad when a certain element of our society cries out against the variety of ways (talk radio is one) the people have to learn the truth regarding the goings-on in Washington, D.C. The fact the bill was voted down indicates a large number of Congress members heard from the people who voted them into office.

You state that "denying entry into our country is inconsistent with our best impulses." The question arises—whose impulses? As evidenced by the voice of the people, these "impulses" Good speaks of belong to a select few and not a majority.

If low-paid, unskilled workers are needed, there are legal ways for these people to come into the U.S. Because these people smuggled themselves one way or another into this country makes them criminals. Why is it that the companies that hire these people will not hire people who have committed crimes, paid their dues to society and/or looked for a honest day's work?

Because I have been associated with construction companies all my working life, I get to hear the tales of destruction, shoddy work and, in some cases, theft when illegal immigrants are on job sites. This kind of behavior would not be accepted if the person who committed it was a legal citizen.

The constant pushing for this bill and the name calling reveals a lot about businesses.

In a letter to Horatio G. Spafford dated March 17, 1814, Thomas Jefferson wrote: "Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains."

This was true before and is true now. Companies that hire these people do so because the people will accept low wages and no benefits and the companies save on Social Security taxes and other expenses, increasing the company's profits.

I have always considered Professional Roofing an extremely good technical magazine with timely articles regarding technical roofing information. Also included are important administrative articles and legal regulations affecting employers. The interjection of politics severely degrades the quality and professionalism of this great magazine.

Art Byrd
A & K Associates
Greenfield, Tenn.

Following is Good's response to the letter:

I'm afraid Byrd, as he intimates, has been listening to too much talk radio.

The whole point of the immigration reform movement is that there are not ways for workers to enter the U.S. legally to work in industries like ours. If there were, perhaps we could have a more reasonable discussion. Byrd, like so many other immigration reform critics, likes to stigmatize the issue by suggesting immigrant labor is underpaid and not provided benefits. In fact, most roofing contractors would be thrilled to hire workers at wages at least 50 percent higher than the new federal minimum wage and offer benefits but can't because those workers don't exist.

It is important to point out, I think, that many of the framers of our Constitution, whom Byrd, like me, admires so much, would not have been able to enter the U.S. legally if our current visa system were in place during the 18th century. Those same framers, most notably James Madison, made sure we have a system of government that allows for enough deliberation to prevent legislation from being enacted according to the results of the most recent polls.

Finally, shouldn't Professional Roofing discuss matters of public policy that affect the roofing industry? It seems to me that's part of our job.