Illegal Immigration Conflicts Heat Up
By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in General PoliticsAcross the country today people marched in protest against a proposed legislation that would crackdown on illegal immigration. A number of members of Congress want to make it a felony to be in the U.S. illegally. They also want to enact new penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants and build a fence covering one third of the border with Mexico.
This is one of those issues that is difficult to discuss because it is incredibly complex and yet many insist on taking simplistic and misleading positions. This is not just about basic rights (although rights are involved). This is not just about cultural clashes (although assimilation is an issue). And this is not just about American jobs (although the economy is greatly affected). This, I think, is about an entirely new phase of a very American experience.
Other than those whose ancestors migrated across the Bering Straight or whose ancestors were forcibly brought here, we’re ALL the descendants of immigrants. Our national culture has been and will always be and amalgam of diverse peoples, traditions and ideas. Indeed, I have no hesitation in saying that it is this very fusion of peoples that makes America great.
But this process of integration has never been without conflict. In that way, the current Hispanic immigration is part of a historical pattern. What makes it different is our inability to control it. During previous periods of mass immigration, immigrants had to come by ship, which means we could account for them at the ports and turn them away when we wanted to cut off the spigot. We cannot account for the millions of Mexicans and Central and South Americans streaming over our borders. And we certainly can’t cut off the spigot.
And that is what this is about. Control. There are a lot of negatives that can be caused by immigration. Wages may be driven down. Crime may rise. Schools and public health systems may be overwhelmed. Cultural conflicts may occur. But we have a hard time keeping these negatives in check because we have no control over the situation.
Some, like the representatives supporting the previously mentioned legislation, want to gain control through laws and walls. Others, like our President, want to gain control through a guest worker program that would help us document and track those who come into this country.
Given that those two positions are diametrically opposed, this is an issue that is going to see a lot more conflict before anything is solved.
This entry was posted on Friday, March 24th, 2006 and is filed under General Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 25th, 2006 at 8:54 am
This is actually a much more simple issue than most people want to make it. Here’s how simple it is: they are here illegally and they are keeping people who want to come here legally out. What is right about this? Why should we give favoritism to people who come here illegally over those who are trying to do so legally.
Justin, I don’t know if you saw my reply on a post about this topic at TMV. My wife and her family were legal immigrants in 1990 who, throughout the 80s, were victims of these illegal immigrants. Because of illegal immigrants, it took them years longer than it should have to get their legal refugee status and come to the United States. In the meantime, they had to live with next to nothing in a refugee camp in Thailand.
I have one simple question for anyone who believes we should allow this “guest worker” program or any of these other programs that are essentially amnesty programs for illegal immigrants. Why should we give favoritism to these people who are violating our laws at the cost of punishing the people who are trying to follow our laws?
March 25th, 2006 at 11:50 am
Sorry, no disrespect ment toward Alan or Justin. I must have had a brain freeze when I was typing that comment. I knew Justin didn’t write this, why on earth did I address him there?
March 25th, 2006 at 12:26 pm
I have NO problem with those who came here through proper channels. They work to learn the language and become an American. I do, however, resent and dislike those who sneak across the borders and then use our services without regard for law nor legality. Many drive without licenses or insurance, killing those who are real US citizens (and not saying that some US citizens don’t do the same)They leech off our health care and take jobs that YES some of us real citizens woiuld and CAN do. I live near a large southern city and see plenty of the illegals doing jobs and getting paid decently for positions I would love to have……
IS this fair….???!!
Don’t think so!
March 25th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
Ryan, no offense taken.
As for my calling this complex, my point was that there are a lot of issues tied up in this one issue. You have one of what I think are many valid points. But clearly there are other reasons to be against a amnesty/guest worker program. And there are valid reason to be in favor of it.
But crafting a workable solution will be the most complex aspect. Neither the guest worker program nor stepped-up enforcement will give us much more control over the problem.
March 25th, 2006 at 8:30 pm
Alan, I agree that solving the issue is very complex. However, the question of offering an amnesty-like program to me is a no brainer. Rewarding the law breakers while punishing those who follow the law? That’s not a good idea any way you cut it.
Of course, beyond not rewarding people for breaking the law while punishing others for following the law, I’m not even going to pretend I know the answer. I do think it has to be a combination of enforcement against those who employ illegal immigrants as well as against the illegal immigrants themselves and working with other countries to improve the conditions that these people are trying to get away from.
March 26th, 2006 at 11:43 am
The immigration issue is not a simple one to solve. there is much to be said for the comments from Ryan because is based in family experience. The caveat I would offer is this: IF I lived in a country that was lacking in the opportunity to advance my family with proximity to a country like the U.S. I would risk everything get on the playing field. It would not matter much about the “legal” or “illegal” aspect of short circuiting the so called proper process (which we all know is corrupt and purposefully snail paced) to be LEGAL. In those same circumstances I think Ryan and his In-Laws would have to consider the risks.
I don’t think that most Euro/ Asian immigrants are a fair comparison to Mexicans/ South Americans in regard to proximity. If Tailand was directly to our south, these same folks would be climbing the fences.
The Immigration issue is absolutely complex, involvinga number of indices that need to be addressed:
Political – disingenuous administration of existing laws by the U.S and Mexican governments
Economic – Disingenuous use of operating costs/ labor base availability by Farming Industry
Socio-economic issues of class creation and maintenance
Personal growth of those who do make it here, keep their heads down, and sacrifice themselves to the next generation(the Irish, Italian, jewish, Nordic, etc.) did it … Why not the Mexicans?
These are all real world items that can’t be easily resolved with the application of any purist solution.
I don’t know the correct or acceptable solutions …. but I still say ….Hooray for the melting pot.
March 27th, 2006 at 12:36 pm
GN, I definitely agree that this is a very difficult situation and no “simple” solution will solve it. To tell the truth, I don’t know if there are any “correct” solutions to this issue. I also agree with your “Horray for the melting pot” comment. I stated elsewhere that one of the greatest things about this country is that it is a melting pot, a place where we can blend cultures from all around the world and people from all corners of the world can celebrate all kinds of cultures that they wouldn’t ever be exposed where they or their ancestors originally came from.
You bring up a good point. If I were in dire straits and I could see that crossing the border could improve my life and the life of my family, it would be hard not to be tempted to do so. However, is this really an argument for favoring those who break the law over those who follow the law? It would also be also tempting to steal a new car if I knew I would likely get away with it to improve my life instead of buying a new car but should we create programs that allows car thieves to legally own their stolen cars because they are using the cars to get to their jobs they couldn’t get to without those cars? No, we should create programs that help those who are trying to save up the money to buy the cars legally and offer other ways for people to get to work in the meantime while punishing those who stole the cars.
I know that may be a bad analogy but the same underlying principles stand. We don’t reward those who broke the law. We try to make it easier for those who are trying to do things legally and try to improve the conditions of the people who are still in the process while punishing those who acted illegally. It is simply not right to reward people for breaking the law while telling those who are acting within the law to just keep waiting in line.
To me, the issue that people are protesting about is an issue of right and wrong. It is wrong to reward people for breaking the law while simultaneously punishing people for following the law, which is what the protesters are demanding.
March 27th, 2006 at 2:15 pm
I don’t have a personal stake in how this gets resolved, but I will respond to your concerns:
(If I were in dire straits and I could see that crossing the border could improve my life and the life of my family, it would be hard not to be tempted to do so. )
I don’t believe that “dire straits” gives one a temptation to steal from people. However, when you live close to a country that is filled with opportunity that is denied you in your own country the desire to improve is not akin to accumulating goods (legally or illegally) for short term gratification. It is about survival and forward momentum for those who follow you in the family tree.
(However, is this really an argument for favoring those who break the law over those who follow the law?)
It is difficult, at best, to believe that the majority of the pojos who risk everything (what little) they own, potential for death, or rape and sodomy of their female family members to just break a law. These folks live as citizens in their own country in much the same (and sometimes worse) conditions as your in-laws did in relocation camps.
(We don’t reward those who broke the law.)
In fact, Ryan, we do reward those who break the law. We do this often in the form of communtation of sentences, accelerated rehabilitation programs, etc.
(We try to make it easier for those who are trying to do things legally and try to improve the conditions of the people who are still in the process)
There are people in Mexico who have been attempting to legally enter the U.S. for generations. generations, Ryan, like people die waiting to get on the list. The programs are written so that it is extremely difficult to make it to the U.S. (by our gov and theirs)
People eho escape from Cuba and makeit to U.S. soil are accepted, and given legal status. Think about that for a moment and do a little research on how many folks escape from how many countries annd make it here.
This is a problem of volume immigration, fostered by corporate agri-culture to increase profit. It is much more complex than ” he came here illegally. Got to go to a meeting …. more later …. glad you are concerned. ;o)
March 27th, 2006 at 6:47 pm
The agri-business in the U.S has created a sub-culture by using IA’s for the bulk of their manual labor. They have created this labor force over the last (20) years (which is the time that we gave our last amnesty program for IA’s. This allows them to cry that they can’t get Americans to do that work (which is true now that they have deflated the labor rates). They have not been taken to task for this by our Government.
The pollos basically have no fear of enforcement now because we haven’t perfomed anything but cursory enforcement in the last twenty years. When we instituted the last amnesty program it was tied to a clause that said we would begin strict enforcement at that time. Once the amnesty participants were registered we STOPPED enforcement.
For anyone who has a true interest in this topic, I highly recommend that they read “Lines and Shadows”, Joseph Wambaugh, 1984 (available at Amazon.com). This is a true story of an enforcement experiment by San Diego Police in the 70’s. Reading this book and understanding what has gone on for the last (20) years will give you an idea of the magnitude of this problem, but will not point to a solution. What it will do is help you realize all of the complexities that surround the IA issue.
There are some experts (I will look for citation) who believe that it is a physical impossibility to round up all IA’s and return them, or that it is worth the effort. Here is the logic:
Twenty years of increased immigration can only be turned around by a focused enforcement program, an improved and closely administered Guest Worker Program that allows for citizenship pursuit after the appropriate time period. Over the next twenty years this approach would start to reverse the trend of IA population growth in the U.S.
I don’t know how I feel about this solution …. need to do more research … but this I do know …. most of the IA’s deserve a shot at U.S. citizenship …. and American Industry that uses foriegn labor needs to be brought in line. There are some who believe that the mexican worker is saving the Agri-Biz … but take a little time and research the lifstyle and standard of living that these “poor farmers” are enjoying.
Add to that the following: The U.S. has more arable land than any country in the world. When we get over our addiction for oil ….. and when we again become the Super Power in the world (and we will in the future) it will be because we have the ability to feed the world (the new OPEC will be called FOODPEC) the money guys will have a built in low paid labor force.
March 27th, 2006 at 6:57 pm
Alan – Thanks for this post …. it is not an easy topic, but it is one that has bothered me for years.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:57 am
I understand all these things you’re saying and I agree they are problems. However, I keep coming back to one thing when I think about this topic. Others are suffering great hardships while waiting years, even decades and generations, to do this legally. In the meantime, we’re saying that those who went around the law get a free pass to stay legally. I have yet to see an explanation of how this even resembles any kind of fairness.
I know, life isn’t fair. Well, shouldn’t we at least try to do something that resembles fairness? Giving favoritism to those who break our laws does not set a very good example of what this country stands for. People are in life or death situations all around the world but they take the time and effort to come here legally. Why should they not be able to come here while those who just decided to break our laws are allowed to stay here?
To me, it all comes back to the one point. Do we stand behind our laws? These amnesty-like programs tell the world that we don’t care about our own laws. Go ahead and break our laws, we’ll then give you favoritism over those who abide by the law.
One thing I can tell you for sure. On the topic of illegal immigrants being cheap labor, why should we believe that legal immigrants who could come here in bigger numbers if illegal immigrants were not taking their places would not be willing to do the same labor for the same wages? When they first came over, both of my wife’s parents were working long hours at around minimum wage doing jobs that most Americans would have demanded at least double what they were getting for. They did it because it was all they had and it was still better than what they had for the 15+ years that they waited in a refugee camp to come here legally. Her father is still working at a very difficult job for very little money, the kind of job most Americans wouldn’t touch for anything near the wages he is making. This is a low wage, hard working, LEGAL immigrant.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:41 am
Ryan, you are correct … life is not fair .. and we should not give special dispensation to law breakers … including the companies that mis-use illegals and legals (your Father-in-law) but we seem to be focused on the immigrants only. That is NOT fair by any standard. There are some companies that encourage IA’s to steal identities so their documentation matches. Then when they are injured on the job they just “let them go” and say they were unaware. AND, these companies receive federal tax dollars for the employment of workers on prevailing wage construction jobs and pay them substandard wages so I ask you “Where do YOU think that money goes”?
March 29th, 2006 at 11:38 am
Hmmm… I thought that Bush was always planning on creating a new Hispanic base in the Republican party.
With 500,000 people in the streets in LA alone (dwarfing even the largest anti-war protests in the U.S), it doesn’t look like this is the way to go about it. I guess people don’t like their hardworking friends and family being tagged as felons. Sure, the program lets immigrants provide someone with cheap labor for five years after waiving their rights under the Constitution, but then they get booted out of the country anyway.
Bush really knows how to charm them.
April 2nd, 2006 at 3:03 pm
Chambers of Commerce across the United States are pushing Congress to accept illegal immigrants for cheap labor. And cheap labor is killing our middle class who cannot find jobs that are going to Illegal immigrants.
What I can’t understand is Why we as Legal Citizens are sitting on our duffs waiting on Congress to decide. Why aren’t we out marching for our rights? My home is plastered with the American Flag! If we as Legal Citizens do not stand up for our Rights~ you better believe NO one else will!
April 12th, 2006 at 2:14 am
Does that neat saying etched on the Statue of Liberty by the Frenchman who created it, the Frenchman who was not happy with his own country so made it up to fantasize us into being Santa Claus instead of just a land of liberty and fairness..
Does that saying mean that we are duty-bound forever to accept an unlimited tide of the poor that countries such as Mexico give them maps in order to be rid of….
Does that saying mean that we are “bad” if we do not accept an endless tide of the products of failed governments worldwide and that we must give them all $100,000 medical procedures upon request, even though to pay for that billions-of-dollars per day national dept increase to pay for such even now is signing over larger and larger chunks of our sovereignty to greedy leveragers of smoke and mirrors worldwide?
Is mindless, unlimited debt slavery of ourselves and destruction of liberty to our children the “duty” of decent folds?
May 14th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
I love the mexicans!! let them all in