Amnesty for Illegal Aliens — Repealing the Rule of Law

   In 1986, Congress granted "amnesty" to three million illegal aliens, thus allowing them the legal right to remain in the United States and eventually apply for citizenship. Supporters of the amnesty promised that it would be a one-time "humanitarian" gesture. The promise wasn't kept. Since 1986, lawmakers have granted a succession of de facto amnesties to illegal aliens under one pretext or another. Pressure for more amnesties shows no sign of decreasing.    In Amnesty for Illegal Aliens — Repealing the Rule of Law, John Vinson traces the history of amnesty and examines how it is a flawed concept in relation to illegal immigration. He maintains that amnesty undermines America, as a nation under law, by rewarding law breaking. This report documents the failure of amnesty to stem illegal immigration and why the proposal to give "guest worker" status to illegal aliens is likely to terminate in amnesty.

Immigration Balkanizing America

4-page report from AIC Foundation 1996
3 copies for $1.00
 
   Many Americans fear that current immigration policies run the risk of splitting up the United States and turning it into another Lebanon or Bosnia. Academic studies now confirm trends which indicate this possibility.
   A leading researcher in this field is Dr. William Frey, a demographer at the University of Michigan. With statistical analysis, Frey shows that native-born Americans in very large numbers are moving away from parts of the country heavily impacted by immigration. If this process continues, Frey believes that our country will become “balkanized,” i.e., split up along racial, ethnic, cultural, and regional lines.
   Dr. Frey’s studies need to be widely publicized, but a problem is that they are lengthy and sometimes difficult for a layman to follow. To deal with this problem, AIC Foundation has produced a special report on Dr. Frey’s findings which presents their key points in a brief, easy-to-understand way.

---

The Refugee Racket

by Don Barnett
4-page report from AIC Foundation 1997
3 copies for $1.00
 
   Since 1980 the United States has almost doubled its admission of refugees, from about 50,000 to nearly 100,000 a year—even though political repression around the world has declined significantly during that time.
   Yet any questioning of our refugee policy brings protests that refugees are people who are “fleeing for their very lives.” In point of fact, however, most are simply people who wish to improve their economic circumstances in America, in many cases by latching on to our welfare system. This is the disturbing message of Don Barnett’s The Refugee Racket. A former resident of the Soviet Union who saw the operation of the system first-hand, Barnett has described its corruption in national publications, including National Review, the Christian Science Monitor, and Newsday.
   In The Refugee Racket, Barnett updates his charges, with ample documentation. Of particular interest is his description of how U.S. religious agencies are profiteering, at taxpayers’ expense, from the importing of “refugees.”

---

U.S. Immigration: Viewed By an Immigrant

by Yeh Ling Ling
6 pages, published 1999 by AIC Foundation
2 copies for $1.00; 5 copies for $2.00; 10 or more copies, 25 cents each
 
   A common smear employed by immigration promoters is that restrictionists “hate immigrants.” The truth is that restrictionists oppose excesive levels of immigration, not individual immigrants.
   Actually, quite a number of immigrants are restrictionists themselves. The reason is not difficult to understand. They don’t want their adopted country to lose the unique character and appeal which attracted them in the first place.
   One such immigrant is Yeh Ling-Ling, a native of Vietnam of Chinese descent. For many years, since coming to America, she has worked tirelessly for immigration control.
   In her pamplet, U.S. Immigration, Viewed by an Immigrant, Ling-Ling makes a powerful, well-reasoned case for less immigration, citing the harmful effects on too many newcomers on U.S. culture, the economy, and the environment. For the sake of foreign countries, she concludes, “the most compassionate way to help the world’s poor in the long run is to seriously restrict immigration, which would force developing countries to work to improve the livelihood of their own citizens.”

---