Illegal immigration concerns could split both parties
http://www.stltoday.com
Illegal immigration concerns could split both parties
By Ron Harris
POST-DISPATCH WASHINGTON BUREAU
12/20/2005
WASHINGTON
In 1990, hardly a Spanish-speaking person could be found in California, Mo., population 4,106.
That's not the case anymore. Today, Mexican immigrants are almost two of every 10 residents. They account for nearly 40 percent of the workers at the area's largest employers, three meat-processing plants.
With them have come changes - special English classes in public schools, an increased demand for social services, occasional language barriers. And with those changes have come concerns that have echoed all the way back to Washington.
With the House of Representatives' approval of a Republican-sponsored bill to tighten U.S. borders and increase penalties on illegal immigrants, Congress last week took the first steps into the murky waters of immigration.
Early next year, the Senate will take up the issue, a complex subject that threatens to split both parties as lawmakers try to walk a tightrope between good policy and good politics. President George W. Bush has made immigration a top item on his domestic agenda, but his proposals - including a guest-worker program - have gone nowhere.
Americans, polls show, are upset about the government's inability to control illegal immigration, which now accounts for about 11 million illegal residents inside the U.S. borders. They are particularly unhappy with Bush's handling of the issue. One poll showed that only 24 percent of those polled approved of his approach.
Social conservatives see the massive influx of immigrants, nearly 8 million over the past five years, as a threat to American culture.
Some despair of "Press 1 for English" telephone prompts, storefronts in Korean, Spanish, Chinese and Arabic or workers conversing in languages they don't understand.
Job threat?
Meanwhile, blue-collar workers feel threatened economically. They sense that immigrants, particularly illegal immigrants, are taking jobs that once went to them, or at the least, they are depressing local wages by providing cheap labor for unscrupulous employers. The American Chamber of Commerce estimates that 25 percent of dishwashers and drywall installers are illegal immigrants.
That was one of Rep. Jo Ann Emerson's concerns when she voted for the immigration bill last week.
"In my district, we've got a lot of illegal aliens in the construction industry, and I don't think that's right," said Emerson, R-Cape Girardeau. "I think it's important that we assure workers don't lose their jobs to illegal immigrants."
Democrats Jerry Costello of Belleville and Ike Skelton of Lexington, Mo., joined Republicans from Missouri and Southern Illinois in voting for the bill. Other Democrats from Missouri voted against it.
The split among lawmakers reflects that of the public on immigration, pollsters say.
Half of those polled want a hard-line approach that would stiffen the borders, limit immigration and boot out the current illegal immigrants. They are adamantly opposed to a guest-worker program, and particularly any form of amnesty.
The other half also want much tighter border security, but they also are amenable to a guest-worker program and a method to allow current residents to possibly earn citizenship.
"There's no party divide on the issue, which is really interesting at a time when almost every issue is so partisan, "said Michael Dimock, associate director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. "The balance of opinion is split in each party."
"For instance, on the question of guest workers, business-oriented Republicans like guest workers, but socially conservative Republicans or more blue-collar Republicans don't like it. They see immigrants as a burden on the country.
"But working-class Democrats are just as concerned about the impact of immigrants on our culture," he said. "The fact is that there are people on both sides in both parties."
House crackdown
The House-passed bill called for increased border agents and vast fences along the Mexican border. The bill also would force employers to verify workers' legal status by checking their Social Security numbers through a national database or face fines of as much as $25,000 per violation.
It brushed aside Bush's request for a guest worker program.
Instead, it increased penalties for "coyotes," bandits who smuggle immigrants across the border for pay, often leaving them to die in the desert. It also made being an illegal immigrant a crime instead of a civil matter, and introduced legislation that would make anyone who helps or houses an illegal immigrant - including family members - a criminal as well.
Under the legislation, the nation would spend more than $2.2 billion to build five border fences in California and Arizona, a length of 698 miles at a cost of $3.2 million per mile.
An unusual coalition of religious, labor, business and ethnic groups, such as the American Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Council of La Raza and the Service Employees International Union, have come out against the legislation, and many predict a similar bill will never pass the Senate.
Critics say border enforcement and tighter penalties alone simply won't work and could even drive the current illegal residents deeper underground. They also argue that enforcement-only legislation refuses to recognize that American industry depends on immigrants to function.
"One step at a time"
Each year, the country absorbs about 500,000 illegal immigrant workers, many of them from Mexico, while the federal government grants only 5,000 permanent visas for low-skilled workers annually.
Consequently, some, such as Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, argue for increasing the number of legal immigrants allowed.
"The problem is that we have the number of legal immigrants set too low by law," Norquist said. "When you set the number below a reasonable number, all of the people above it are illegal."
Immigrants are not replacing American workers, industry officials say. Instead, they are filling a labor void.
"They're not stealing jobs from Americans, at least certainly not around here," said John Roberts, general manager for Cargill Meat Solutions Corp. in California, Mo., west of Jefferson City. "There seem to be plenty of jobs available, and our unemployment is rather low in the area."
Some senators are beginning to voice support for an immigration bill sponsored by Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and John McCain, R-Ariz. The bill calls for tighter border security but also includes a guest-worker program and a process for legalizing, even if only temporarily, the millions of illegal immigrants already working in America.
Many House Republicans say they will never support such a program, which could make any significant immigration reform extremely difficult, if not impossible.
"This is the first step in a process," said Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill. "We're the House. We always have to lead from the conservative side of the issue. The Senate is more liberal. The president is still part of this debate, and I think people know where he is on the subject. It's one step at a time."
Re: Illegal immigration concerns could split both parties
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian503a
Critics say border enforcement and tighter penalties alone simply won't work and could even drive the current illegal residents deeper underground. They also argue that enforcement-only legislation refuses to recognize that American industry depends on immigrants to function.
'Without slaves, who will pick the cotton?"
That is basically the argument businesses are making.
As for the critics that say enforcement won't work, why not try it for a change and see? Amnesy has been tried several times, and now we have more illegal aliens than ever.
