Immigration Issues: Shades of Grey or Black-and-White?
Monday April 3, 2006
Immigration has moved to center stage not only in Congress, but also on newspaper editorial and front pages. Some rhetoric remains fevered (defined as ignoring historical or contextual data) but some is both thoughtful and reflective of the shades of grey lost in the "just build a wall" mentality.
The reason that we're having a screaming match because of an estimated 12 million undocumented (no green card, hence "illegal") foreigners is because laws on the books for 20 years have been routinely ignored by employers large and small -- and by the federal agencies charged with enforcement. However, we cannot simply say "arrest 'em and toss 'em out ... and build a big wall to keep 'em out while you're at it."
It's a simple argument -- and it appeals to the racist in the heart of many human animals. But it's wrong and unworkable to boot.
Putting A Face on The Problem
Consider the case of Zenaida Lopez: volunteer at her kids elementary school (two, both US citizens), Head Start and Camp Fire USA. Smuggled into the country with her husband, 10 years ago. A domestic violence victim who later left her husband and is making do with money from her brother (a US citizen) and friends (who help with groceries and clothing) -- all of whom would be made criminals under the House immigration bill pending in Congress. (Aiding and abetting, donja know. Even though it's been illegal for business to hire illegals since Reagan's era - and it's the exception for one to be charged.)
What do we do with Denise (9) and Orlando (8) if we deport their mother? Do they stay in the US with their uncle? Do they become foster children? According to the Pew Hispanic Center, about 2 million undocumented aliens in the US have family members who are citizens.
That's one backdrop for Saturday's march in Brooklyn (more than 10,000) and other cities across the country. Another is the image of the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps - volunteers who watch the 2,000 mile long border between the US and Mexico. Yet another is debate in state capitals such as Atlanta, where lawmakers are attempting to step in where the Feds have failed, such as requiring better business documentation of employees.
Guest Worker Program: Recipe for Disaster?
Still another is the specter of a guest-worker program -- supported by business -- that allows foreigners into the country to work but offers them no pathway to citizenship. That seems to be the shortest road to true inequality.
And this one reflects an explanation that US Liberals Guide Deborah White penned last year: the federal government cannot turn off the tap because it is a "highly profitable proposition for both employers and the US government, and it also benefits Mexico."
Lumped together with the debate on illegal immigration -- but put on the back burner by many politicians -- is the discussion of green cards : how many should the US issue in any year?
There are no easy answers here -- don't let simple political rhetoric mislead.
Historical Context Missing
What is also missing from the reporting and the dialog is the history of the border. Mexico obtained independence from Spain in 1821. At that time, the lands along the current Mexican-US border were part of Mexico, and many had been settled by Spaniards in the 1700s. Thus, these border counties could well have cultures with historical roots set not in Northern Europe, but in Southern Europe.
The discussion in the US Politics Forum centers around real and perceived hardships suffered by US citizens in border counties.
In general, these discussions seem ignorant of historical arguments against immigration: "that immigrants are dirty, lazy, or insular; that they steal jobs from "real" Americans; that they sponge off the welfare state and crowd the schools; that their allegiance is to the old country, not the new; that they refuse to learn English... every last one has been heard before, most likely applied to the grandparents of the same politicians and rabble-rousers uttering them today."
Take a close look at the carrots and sticks in the competing bills before Congress. How well do these bills -- and the political leaders who champion them -- acknowledge the need for policy that sets realistic targets for annual immigration, establishes a process for those here without documentation to obtain legal status, sanctions employers who hire undocumented workers, and properly funds border protection. Just as a chair which has lost a leg -- or which has an ueven leg -- will wobble, sometimes precariously, so will any immigration policy that ignores one of these four key issues.
More reading:
The reason that we're having a screaming match because of an estimated 12 million undocumented (no green card, hence "illegal") foreigners is because laws on the books for 20 years have been routinely ignored by employers large and small -- and by the federal agencies charged with enforcement. However, we cannot simply say "arrest 'em and toss 'em out ... and build a big wall to keep 'em out while you're at it."
It's a simple argument -- and it appeals to the racist in the heart of many human animals. But it's wrong and unworkable to boot.
Putting A Face on The Problem
Consider the case of Zenaida Lopez: volunteer at her kids elementary school (two, both US citizens), Head Start and Camp Fire USA. Smuggled into the country with her husband, 10 years ago. A domestic violence victim who later left her husband and is making do with money from her brother (a US citizen) and friends (who help with groceries and clothing) -- all of whom would be made criminals under the House immigration bill pending in Congress. (Aiding and abetting, donja know. Even though it's been illegal for business to hire illegals since Reagan's era - and it's the exception for one to be charged.)
What do we do with Denise (9) and Orlando (8) if we deport their mother? Do they stay in the US with their uncle? Do they become foster children? According to the Pew Hispanic Center, about 2 million undocumented aliens in the US have family members who are citizens.
That's one backdrop for Saturday's march in Brooklyn (more than 10,000) and other cities across the country. Another is the image of the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps - volunteers who watch the 2,000 mile long border between the US and Mexico. Yet another is debate in state capitals such as Atlanta, where lawmakers are attempting to step in where the Feds have failed, such as requiring better business documentation of employees.
Guest Worker Program: Recipe for Disaster?
Still another is the specter of a guest-worker program -- supported by business -- that allows foreigners into the country to work but offers them no pathway to citizenship. That seems to be the shortest road to true inequality.
And this one reflects an explanation that US Liberals Guide Deborah White penned last year: the federal government cannot turn off the tap because it is a "highly profitable proposition for both employers and the US government, and it also benefits Mexico."
Lumped together with the debate on illegal immigration -- but put on the back burner by many politicians -- is the discussion of green cards : how many should the US issue in any year?
There are no easy answers here -- don't let simple political rhetoric mislead.
Historical Context Missing
What is also missing from the reporting and the dialog is the history of the border. Mexico obtained independence from Spain in 1821. At that time, the lands along the current Mexican-US border were part of Mexico, and many had been settled by Spaniards in the 1700s. Thus, these border counties could well have cultures with historical roots set not in Northern Europe, but in Southern Europe.
The discussion in the US Politics Forum centers around real and perceived hardships suffered by US citizens in border counties.
In general, these discussions seem ignorant of historical arguments against immigration: "that immigrants are dirty, lazy, or insular; that they steal jobs from "real" Americans; that they sponge off the welfare state and crowd the schools; that their allegiance is to the old country, not the new; that they refuse to learn English... every last one has been heard before, most likely applied to the grandparents of the same politicians and rabble-rousers uttering them today."
Take a close look at the carrots and sticks in the competing bills before Congress. How well do these bills -- and the political leaders who champion them -- acknowledge the need for policy that sets realistic targets for annual immigration, establishes a process for those here without documentation to obtain legal status, sanctions employers who hire undocumented workers, and properly funds border protection. Just as a chair which has lost a leg -- or which has an ueven leg -- will wobble, sometimes precariously, so will any immigration policy that ignores one of these four key issues.
More reading:
- Anti-Immigration Rhetoric At Odds With Data
- Bush view on ‘illegals’ cast early, cuts deep
- Economics of Immigration
- The Eternal Conflict Over Immigration - California
- In Georgia, Immigration Is No Peach - Georgia
- Taking heart when people take to the streets - Texas
Technorati Profile
Technorati tags:
Immigration,
Politics
gada.be tags:
Immigration,
Politics