Thread: Immigration Policy Old But Applicable (Opinion)

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opin ... 31606.html

Immigration policy old but applicable

Published on: 03/16/06

In the course of almost every discussion about illegal immigration in the United States, you'll hear it: "We are a nation of immigrants."

Nearly as often, a comparison is drawn between the massive influx of Latino immigrants over the last few decades and the great wave of immigrants from Ireland in the decades following the potato famine of the 1840s. As St. Patrick's Day approaches — a time when 50 million Irish-Americans celebrate the patron saint of their ancestral land — now would be a good time to think about the validity of this comparison and whether it is predictive of what Latino immigrants will face in the decades to come.

Immigration policy old but applicable

There are many similarities in these two massive immigration waves, even if they are 150 years apart. They include the immigrants' poverty, their willingness to work for low wages and their vows to help other family members join them. And certainly the reaction their arrival caused among nativists then, and now, is similar — fear of their impact on jobs and the economy, on the quality of life where they settle (in the tenements of the big cities for the Irish and overcrowded rental houses of the suburbs for Latinos) and concerns about gang crime, violence and lack of assimilation.

But when the largest wave of Irish came, there were no immigration laws on the books. Indeed, their arrival over a period of decades pushed Congress to enact the nation's first immigration rules. From the time of the famine to 1880, 3.5 million Irish immigrants came to America. Set against the backdrop of Irish, German, Slavic and Jewish immigration, starting in 1891, laws were constantly rewritten over 30 years to form the basis for what's in effect today.

Those arcane quotas and rules are being ignored by the latest wave of immigrants. They may be woefully out of date in today's world economy, but they remain on the books. That willingness to flout the law — among the immigrants and their employers alike — weakens the comparison between these two waves of immigration when it comes to public policy discussions.

Moreover, there are other major differences between the Irish immigration then and illegal Latino immigration now that should not be minimized. The Irish arrived at a time when government social and welfare services were virtually nonexistent, so there was no resulting drain on taxpayers.

In the Shanty Towns of large cities, infant mortality among the Irish was more than 50 percent. Those children who did survive often could not get into public schools. They relied on their church for schooling and religious societies for food, clothing, shelter and medicine.

They dug canals, laid the railroad lines and went inside the coal mines for wages so low that their exploitation formed the basis of the labor 'union' movement. When they educated themselves and wanted to elevate beyond their working-class status, American business often greeted them with "No Irish Need Apply," signs on the door of the employment office.

But that was then.

The climate surrounding the current immigration debate is vastly different, as well it should be decades later. Public education is enshrined by law as a right available to all children in this country, regardless of citizenship or legal status. Emergency medical care is similarly protected.

The federal government has established dozens of programs that states and local governments can use to help pay for services needed by new arrivals to the country, including, in some cases, those here illegally.

Rather than chasing away immigrants applying for work, American employers — including the textile, poultry, home construction and housekeeping services industries in Georgia — simply could not function without illegal immigrant labor.

Does that mean that we can expect non-Latinos to be wearing "Kiss Me, I'm Mexican," buttons on Our Lady of Guadalupe Day each December the way everyone now wants to be Irish on March 17?

It could happen — when public policy on immigration catches up with economic reality. But not until our discussion of that policy acknowledges that even an antiquated law should not be so easily ignored.

• Mike King is a member of the editorial board. His column runs Thursdays.

I have been there, I seen these people coming across. They do not seem to be starving or poor with ther $100 sneakers and $50 jeans. Anyone that can save up $2,000 for a guided tour from a smuggler, when the same amout of money will buy so much more in your legal country of origin.

In my opinion they are no better than the thief in the night, and are stealing taxpayer money.