« migrant deaths | Main | a slave by any other name... »

August 11, 2006

it is a question of race

In this excellent article by Ruben Navarrette, we see how the Hutchison-Pence proposal reveals the true motives of the immigration hardliners.

SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) -- Immigration restrictionists can be so dishonest.

They've said all along that all they care about is that border security be the first priority of any immigration reform plan and that illegal immigrants not be given amnesty. They insisted that they aren't motivated by racism and that they have no problem with immigrants, if they are here legally.

Now we learn otherwise in light of the opposition to a middle-ground immigration reform plan proposed by two anti-amnesty, pro-border security Republicans: Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas.

(snip)

Pence and Hutchison are pragmatists. They came up with this: As the first priority, secure the U.S.-Mexico border. For the first two years after the bill becomes law, the emphasis would be on beefing up the border patrol. Once that happens, it would be up to the president to certify to Congress that the border is secure.

Then we'd move on to goal No. 2: establishment of a guest-worker program that would require millions of illegal immigrants in the United States to return to their home country for a couple of weeks to register at privately run "Ellis Island"-type placement centers, where they would receive temporary work visas that could be renewed every two years for a maximum of 12 years.

At that point, workers convert to a new type of visa. And then, in five years -- or 17 years after enrolling in the program -- we'd move on to goal No. 3 in which workers could apply for U.S. citizenship.

You would think that GOP hard-liners could live with this. You'd be wrong. The Pence-Hutchison plan is under fire. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, criticized it for favoring low-skilled workers and not offering preference to immigrants who speak English.

And, during an interview last week with The San Diego Union-Tribune editorial board, House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, flirted with nativism when he said that his concern is that the plan would provide "unlimited immigration from Mexico and Central America."

Now we're getting to the heart of the matter.

The Hutchison-Pence plan forces the anti-amnesty crowd to level finally with the rest of us about what really bothers them. If it is that people are here illegally, or that the border isn't secure, then the plan has that covered. But if it's the fear that Anglo-Saxon culture and the English language are being eroded by Spanish-speaking foreigners, and that the country is going down the tubes because of it -- then this plan doesn't offer much relief.

After all, under it, the immigrants get to be legal, but they also get to stay. For some people, that's the real problem. As far as those people are concerned, the Hutchison-Pence plan doesn't offer much comfort.

What it does offer is something this debate could use more of: clarity. link

When this proposal was first mentioned a few weeks ago, I asked several undocumented individuals, "Would you do it?" (Leave temporarily to be reprocessed through an Ellis Island center.) Without exception, their response has been "No."

I'm not a big fan of this proposal. I think it leaves too much room for sabotage by the restrictionists. Here are a few problems I see:

1. Unless the trigger is an either/or situation (i.e., either the border is certified as secure by the president, OR two years -- whichever comes first), we're looking at an indefinite time line. It would be like an endless road trip with a constant peppering of "Are we there yet?"

2. It isn't acceptable to allow our immigrant communities, families and churches to be torn apart for an indeterminate period of time -- ICE will not slow their raids while waiting for border security. Is it okay to continue oppressing a people group until we deem it time to acknowledge their needs and humanity?

3. As efforts to strengthen the borders increase, so will the quantity of illegal crossings. The borders will be flooded by immigrants attempting to cross in order to participate in the guest worker provisions of this bill.

4. Nearly 500 immigrants have died in attempted border crossings each of the past 6 years. How many more mothers, fathers, children will die before legalization measures take effect? How many more needless deaths can you live with?

5. The immigrant community will be very hesitant to trust the process of self-deportation and the "Ellis-Island" centers. This will be compounded as some applying for re-entry will most certainly be denied.

As a complete aside, the quote by Sen. Jeff Sessions in Navarrette's article made me wonder if the suspected terrorists arrested in the U.K. plot speak English -- maybe they're even highly-skilled. Just a thought.

Posted by almamia at August 11, 2006 9:49 AM

Comments

"2. It isn't acceptable to allow our immigrant communities, families and churches to be torn apart for an indeterminate period of time -- ICE will not slow their raids while waiting for border security. Is it okay to continue oppressing a people group until we deem it time to acknowledge their needs and humanity?"

It is not a matter of immigrant communities, but illegal immigration. We do not condone theft rings, mafioso style organizations, or any other type of "community" based upon illegal activity. There is no reason to condone illegal immigration when there is a perfectly legal way to immigrate to the United States of America. We are not oppressing a people. We are demanding responsibility and accountability by prospective immigrants. It is not a question of their humanity. Their humanity does not require them to illegally enter the United States. If that were the case, then you would be denying the humanity of those individuals who do not illegally enter the United States.

"3. As efforts to strengthen the borders increase, so will the quantity of illegal crossings. The borders will be flooded by immigrants attempting to cross in order to participate in the guest worker provisions of this bill."

This statement does not fit logically with the requirements you have quoted. If they must return home in order to participate in the guest worker provision, what good would them illegally entering the United States do? Making it a requirement for them to apply from their own country and not from the United States there would be no reward for crossing the border.

"4. Nearly 500 immigrants have died in attempted border crossings each of the past 6 years. How many more mothers, fathers, children will die before legalization measures take effect? How many more needless deaths can you live with?"

The number of immigrants who have died while attempting to cross the border is a moot point. How many have died from misuse of a motor vehicle, cleaning products, weapons, plastic bags, etc? If they were not trying to cross the border illegally they would not have died. That is responsibility and accountability. The United States is not condoing their behavior, therefore the United States is not responsible for the risks they take with their lives. Now, having said that, how many others have died as a result of illegal immigrants? As a result of the crimes committed by their children? Somehow those deaths are of less value though, right?

"5. The immigrant community will be very hesitant to trust the process of self-deportation and the "Ellis-Island" centers. This will be compounded as some applying for re-entry will most certainly be denied."

But we should trust them when they have no respect for our laws, for our communities, for our cultures? Why are illegal immigrants of more value than legal immigrants and natives? Yes, some will be denied. That is part of the process of controlling immigration, which after all is the whole point of immigration laws.

Posted by: Shane at August 11, 2006 1:34 PM

Shane:

1. Actually, you yourself have denied the humanity of these immigrants in the simple use of the term "illegal immigrant" Only behavior can be illegal -- not people. Others have called our immigrant communities a "scourge", "invasion" etc. Anytime a people group is described in a way that disconnects them from their own humanity, it becomes easier to treat them inhumanely.

We are talking about immigrant communities. Throughout the United States' young history, we have expended immigrants on our own pleasures. The labor for the first railroad lines, the Hoover Dam, the Empire State building was largely immigrant labor. This continues to this day with immigrants building our roads, homes, businesses, cleaning our hotel rooms, grooming our lawns etc. In speaking of illegal immigration, let us bear in mind that we are referring to a misdemeanor offense. We are not speaking of crime at the level to which you refer: theft rings, mafioso organizations, etc.

The group that I wouldn't mind seeing severely punished is that which profits by human smuggling. I would place this group at the level you describe and think they should answer for the many deaths in the dessert.

2. In setting up Ellis Island processing centers, I assume the immigrants will have to prove that they have been living in the U.S. already. You and I probably can agree that it isn't logical to cross into the U.S. first, but there will be thousands who do in the hopes that they will be able to participate in the guest worker program. This could be fueled by the human smugglers who may spread rumors and misinformation in order to take advantage of a people in crisis. Perhaps my prediction will be wrong (and hopefully so), but historically, this is what has happened.

3. This sentiment, in particular, is chilling. Again you deny the humanity of the immigrant. The number of deaths is most certainly NOT a moot point. All life is precious. While the immigrant most certainly takes grave risks in crossing the border, the United States must also be accountable and take responsibility for the vaccuum we've created to lure immigrants here without putting in place a system of immigration to meet that demand. As for crime, it is often actually lower in immigrant communities

4. This isn't about who is better than whom (nor have I expressed any such sentiment). This is about humanity. I have lived and worked cross-culturally in immigrant communities for more than 10 years and I have never felt that my culture and values are not respected. We may not share the same expression of culture and values and that often is threatening, but our differences truly make this a country like none other.

Perhaps the Ellis Island centers will be wonderful gateways into the American Dream. My comment merely expressed the reality of distrust in government that many immigrants feel.

Posted by: Alma Mia at August 14, 2006 6:42 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?