Thread: Border fight forgets migrants' humanity

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... e1023.html

Border fight forgets migrants' humanity

De Uriarte
THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC
Oct. 23, 2005 12:00 AM

At its core, this is not a fight over immigration reform, much less competing pieces of federal legislation. No, it's something more basic, more primitive.

We don't see them as us.

Jeffrey Passell, a demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center, keynote speaker at Wednesday's Arizona Immigration Forum, offered a mountain of statistics describing the historic patterns of immigrants moving across our border with Mexico. advertisement

But he crystallized the debate in two sentences.

"This is a very different country than the one we grew up in," he said. "The world has changed in one generation."

We proudly call ourselves a nation of immigrants. E pluribus unum. Out of many, one.

Yet for most Americans born in the middle decades of the 20th century, ours was once a pretty homogenous place. We are all Americans. For most of our lives, the size of the foreign-born population has been at historic lows. The last big immigrant wave, largely from Southern Europe, ended by 1920. By 1970, fewer than 5 percent of us were foreign-born.

Americans, a forward-looking people, don't remember a time when there were so many "strangers" among us. It scares some of us. And it divides even more.

"There is way too much emotion and not enough reason in this debate," observed Barry Aarons, a lobbyist and former aide to Gov. Fife Symington. Aarons was one of an estimated 450 people who attended the immigration forum at the Marriott Phoenix Airport hotel. "And the more we debate it, the more polarized we seem to get."

The extremes gaze at each other with undisguised contempt.

"What part of 'illegal' don't you understand?" protests one side.

"We're here. We're staying. Get used to it," retorts the other.

Most Americans, however, are in the middle, torn, of two minds.

State Rep. Gary Pierce, R-Mesa, displays this ambivalence in his conversation. "We should enforce our laws," he says in one breath. But then he adds: "Can we do all this and not cripple our economy? And can we afford all the massive costs" of implementing an effective border strategy?

Pierce voices what most of us feel, even if we can't articulate it. As consumers and employers, we hold up a "Help wanted" sign in one hand. But our laws say, "Keep out"

The more you study the issue, the more complex it becomes.

"This is even more complicated than I had envisioned," lamented Phoenix community leader Jack Pfister, a sentiment echoed throughout the forum.

Every strategy, policy initiative, reform plan, carries a downside.

Increased border enforcement

"What is interesting to me was that stricter border enforcement actually contributed to more undocumented workers because it restricted travel back to the country of origin," commented state Rep. Debbie McCune Davis, a Phoenix Democrat.

Conservative Kevin McCarthy, who heads the Arizona Tax Research Association, was even more blunt.

"I don't know if the border can be sealed or not, but it is obvious that the current substantial taxpayer investment in that effort is a complete waste of money."

Guest-worker program

The plan is embraced by moderates, those who study U.S. labor statistics and conclude we face a serious labor shortage in the coming decades, most certainly in low-skill, low-paying jobs that the economy still generates.

The lure for Mexican immigrants is jobs. And economists agree that current levels of legal immigration are not adequate to meet the labor demand for certain industries: farmworkers, landscapers, restaurant employees and custodians.

Now, a guest-worker program promises genuine benefits of a legal labor pool. We'd know who and where these workers are. We could screen out criminals and those who would do us harm. It would bring them into the legal economy, extract insurance, health and income taxes from them. It might reduce the massive smuggling operations. But there's little to suggest it would eliminate the flow of undocumented workers.

First of all, any system promises a mountain of paperwork and process time that American businesses will find burdensome and impractical. When construction crews, restaurants and farms need workers, they want them right away, not after advertising a month for U.S. workers.

Any successful guest worker-program must be accompanied by strict workplace enforcement, a tamper-proof ID card, a massive bureaucracy to implement it. Will U.S. taxpayers pay for all that? Elected leaders say they want strict enforcement, but U.S. businesses are adamantly opposed. "U.S. employers have (historically) been effective in scuttling enforcement beyond the border areas," explained Gordon Hanson, an economist at the University of California-San Diego.

Legalizing the undocumented

This is the knottiest political problem of all because it goes to the core of how we see ourselves as a nation.

The self-described "realists" among us conclude we can't deport the estimated 11 million people now living here illegally. Such a biblical exodus is a practical impossibility. Many unauthorized workers have worked here for years. They have families. Many have U.S.-born children. We have to find some accommodation.

"I am struck by how entrenched the immigrant population is in the workforce and in society in Arizona," offered state Rep. John McComish, R-Ahwatukee. Undocumented immigrants make up an estimated 9.7 percent of the state's workforce. "They are more engrained here than was my impression. The problem of dealing with all this is made more difficult."

But legalizing them seems to reward illegal behavior and invites more.

Leaders such as U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl, a Republican, feel it undermines the rule of law. You can argue about extra-legal property arrangements on the American frontier, or prohibition, or even the 55-mph speed limit, but we see ourselves as a law-abiding people. We obey red lights. We pay taxes.

Legalizing border crossers is a tough sell.

And among the politically engaged conservatives, the base of Republican elected officials, "earned amnesty" or whatever you call it, is a non-starter, a virtual deal-buster. Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies cites the experience of the 1986 federal immigration act. "Amnesties don't work. The last amnesty made things worse."

U.S. Rep. J.D. Hayworth, an Arizona Republican, is adamant. "Amnesty is the wrong thing to do." State Rep. Russell Pearce calls the plan, "putting citizenship up for sale."

As a political issue, the subject of immigration is at once complicated, emotional and polarizing. Neither party has mastered the debate. State Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, a central Phoenix Democrat, feels liberals must reassess their arguments. "Our message has not resonated. We say: 'One, this is a federal issue. And two, you people are racists.'

We have to look for common ground."

It might be that if every American underwent a five-hour tutorial, the country could appreciate the nuances, even find some common ground. Right now, we hold contradictory opinions. We want to stop illegal immigration and pay $1.39 for a head of lettuce. As consumers, we reap the benefits of low prices, but complain about the costs.

The process was initiated by economic and demographic forces. An aging, affluent and better-educated America is seeking workers. But what we get is people. We want willing laborers during the day and wish they'd disappear at night. And meanwhile, those workers, those people, have changed the face, the culture of post-war America. And it may take us awhile to adjust to the new look.

We proudly call ourselves a nation of immigrants.

Who does that? Not me! I was born here and I'm never leaving. I'm just another White Male Pain in the Ass, leftie!!!

"Can we do all this and not cripple our economy? And can we afford all the massive costs" of implementing an effective border strategy?

"We want to stop illegal immigration and pay $1.39 for a head of lettuce. As consumers, we reap the benefits of low prices, but complain about the costs. "

It's not about humanity. If it was we'd have starving Africans streaming into the country.

Dude,,, there are some things in life you just have to take a stand on.

It boils down to priciples : Either you're a conservative, a liberal or you don't care.

It's about how you see the future of the USA.
Uing the "massive costs of securing our Borders... & crippling our economy... and... $1.39 lettuce" is a cop out.
The $$ we spend incarcerating, housing, food stamps, educating, medical care and more,,, for ILLEGALS is wayyyyy more than the $$ to stop them at the Border.
Yeah, AMERICANS dont want to spend time in the hot sun picking crops,,, cleaning motel rooms etc --- for $5-6/hour. Nor should they. $8-10/hour will bring plenty of AMERICANS to all these jobs. Thats a fairly decent living wage.
So what if a Value Meal goes to $6-7?? Shouldnt be eating that garbage very ofetn anyhow. Produce would go up a $.25 or so. A motel room might cost you $5.00 a day more.
Labor is NOT a huge part of prices.
Insurances, taxes and property taxes and Workmen's Comp, rent, utilities, equipment, supplies & materials,, and the rest of the Bureaucratic mess comprises 70-85% of business costs. NOT labor.
Business will move fatser to replace labor with Technology.
That will create much much higher paying jobs for those positions. Companies profits will soar. They'll pay a Lot more taxes (which means our next Agenda will be to police the big Cororations !)
You'll see a lot of Single Wage Earners in FAMLIES again, w/ a parent staying home to actually raise our children,,,, which will fix a lottttt of our social ills.
It'll allow us to return to the direction America was on before all this started,,,, A culture that sees the world thru the same vision, families raising our own kids, a solid middle class,,and entrepeneaurs.

Guest workers? Sure why not. FULLY regulated tracked and enforced.
AFTER they seal OUR Borders and send the ILLEGALS back.

Yeah, and their kids don't get to be citizens if born here.