The following article was written by Sally Rodriguez, who is active in organizations opposed to illegal immigration, and appeared in the Santa Maria Times.

The public is not made aware of funding sources for some large organizations that take stands on issues unpopular with the American people. Most of the mainline media seldom touch on such issues, because if the truth is made public, big businesses that profit from cheap illegal immigrant labor could experience losses. Polls show illegal immigration is a very unpopular issue with both Democrat and Republican voters, therefore it is an American issue, not a party issue.

Who is paying for such things as expensive marching banners, picketing signs, flags, voter registration coordinators, ads on Spanish television, and large staffs who put together all kinds of propaganda for public consumption in favor of their cause, and to promote their goal, which is amnesty for all illegal immigrants now here, often referred to as comprehensive immigration reform?

In fact, the word “amnesty” has now been replaced with the word “legalization,” because it sounds better.

Their other goals are prevention of the completion of a more-effective border wall, and in general a halt to all deportations, job-site raids, the E-Verify program and the H-2A ag workers program. However, farmers do have a legitimate claim that some of the H-2A provisions are bad. For example, one worker shouldn’t be locked into one employer, because when that employer no longer needs their labor, they should be able to change employers during the period of their work visas. In addition, farmers should not be forced to provide transportation from the border, or their housing once here.

These laborers have always been able to handle these things on their own. However, farmers should be required to abide by health standards, give work breaks, basic medical insurance, worker’s comp, adequate tools, safety items, etc.

Currently, if workers abide by the terms of their temporary work visa, they can come back again for as long as they are physically able to do the work. Under this system, they can earn money to support their families back home, while American farmers can obtain much-needed harvest labor, which Americans refuse to do because of the low pay.

Aside from the few defects cited in one particular item of the H-2A program, the critics have nothing else to cite as negative in the control of illegal immigration. Yet the narrow minority interests, besides being against all of the issues listed here, are trying to get the public to lump all Hispanics and people with Hispanic surnames as being in favor of their goals, which is untrue.

Most people who have Hispanic surnames are Americans first, and are just as opposed to illegal immigration as everyone else. They want the issue resolved, but not with another unworkable amnesty, like the first attempt in 1986, which, due to lack of enforcement, was a disaster and just made the problem worse.

We need to consider the 1.2 million legal immigrants admitted each year, 125,000 from Mexico alone. Who thinks that they like illegal immigration? For radical organizations to lump everyone with a Hispanic surname as being in favor of amnesty, in my opinion, borders on a criminal act.

Hispanics are interested in jobs, education, raising their families and a whole host of other issues as being much more important than giving lawbreakers amnesty, followed by millions more who will get the message to come quickly with their false documents that the government won’t have the resources nor manpower to properly verify. That is what happened in 1986, as the vast majority were just passed on through, with nothing verified. Think about it. Now there are far more waiting for another easy way to get amnesty.