Workers without borders

There is a very interesting op-ed in this morning's New York Times by Jennifer Gordon proposing a change in how we handle immigrant workers.

Despite stepped-up enforcement at the borders, hundreds of thousands of immigrants still come illegally to the United States every year. Raids terrorize immigrants but do not make them go home. Instead, rigid quotas, harsh immigration laws and heavy-handed enforcement lock people in. As the recession deepens, undocumented immigrants will hunker down more. They may work less, for worse pay, but they will be terrified to go home out of fear they can never return.

Read the entire article for her solution.

One million new immigrant voters

The Huffington Post blog reports that immigrants are applying for citizenship in record numbers:

A record one million immigrants sought US citizenship last year so they could vote in the 2008 presidential election, overwhelming the processing offices, Hispanic groups said on Monday.

read more

In the past Hispanics have voted in approximately equal numbers for Republicans and Democrats. However, with most of the Republican candidates for president competing with each other over who can sound the most anti-immigrant no one expects very many of these new immigrant citizens to be voting Republican in 2008.

What the Mad Hatter said

“Take some more tea,” the March Hare said to Alice, very earnestly.
“I’ve had nothing yet,” Alice replied in an offended tone: “so I can’t take more.”
“You mean you can’t take less,” said the Hatter: “it’s very easy to take more than nothing.”
from Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carrol

The above exchange came to mind when I was thinking about the likely effects of the new immigration law in Arizona, slated to take effect in January. See a description of the law here.
See how the Arizona business community is reacting to the law here. Read today's New York Times editorial about it here.

Insofar as the law is enforced (laws that negatively impact business often are not) I have no doubt that it will reduce illegal immigration and cause illegal immigrants already in Arizona to leave. But will the lives of the people of Arizona be better as a result?

Since Arizona’s current unemployment rate is at a rock bottom rate of 3% (the level at which every employable person who wants work is already employed, other than people temporarily between jobs) the law is hardly likely to reduce the unemployment rate.

Since no terrorist that we know of has entered the country by crossing the US border with Mexico illegally that number is unlikely to be reduced either. As the Mad Hatter said, you cannot have less than zero.

Since people who come to this country as adults (legally and illegally) commit about one fourth as many crimes as people of the same ethnicity and social-economic level who were born here reducing the number of illegal immigrants is unlikely to have a positive effect on the crime rate either.

There are hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants currently in Arizona's labor force. If this law is vigorously enforced it will create a labor shortage that will take years of increased legal immigration to alleviate. The short term effects on Arizona's economy are going to be devastating.

If the law is not broadly enforced, if it is only selectively enforced against only certain industries and as occasional publicity stunts for political purposes, then the likely effect is an increase in corruption and a continuing decrease in respect for the law.

In six months or so it will be interesting to ask Arizonians how that law is working out for them.

The economic consequences of xenophobia

From an article in today's New York Times:

RIVERSIDE, N.J., Sept. 25 — A little more than a year ago, the Township Committee in this faded factory town became the first municipality in New Jersey to enact legislation penalizing anyone who employed or rented to an illegal immigrant.

Within months, hundreds, if not thousands, of recent immigrants from Brazil and other Latin American countries had fled. ....

With the departure of so many people, the local economy suffered. Hair salons, restaurants and corner shops that catered to the immigrants saw business plummet; several closed. Once-boarded-up storefronts downtown were boarded up again.

Meanwhile, the town was hit with two lawsuits challenging the law. Legal bills began to pile up, straining the town’s already tight budget. Suddenly, many people — including some who originally favored the law — started having second thoughts.

So last week, the town rescinded the ordinance, joining a small but growing list of municipalities nationwide that have begun rethinking such laws as their legal and economic consequences have become clearer.

Read entire article

Boarded up businesses in a previously thriving downtown are among the consequences of measures that make immigrants feel unwelcome and drive them away on the local level. Farmers moving their operations to Mexico or having to contract with the government for convict labor in order to harvest their crops are among the consequences we are starting to see on the national level as a result of making it more difficult for illegal immigrants to enter the country.

What would be the economic consequences if we could, as some people claim to want to do, deport all the illegal immigrants form the United States? People who understand how important illegal immigrants have been to the nation's economic growth of the last 20 years or so talk about economic stagnation and recession -- the national equivalent to Riverside's boarded up downtown. The impact on the Social Security system would be huge -- the illegal immigrants have been paying in while getting nothing back.

As the baby boom generation starts to retire who would serve them in restaurants or make their beds in hotels and nursing homes?

Actions taken based on negative emotions such as fear and xenophobia often turn out to have been mistakes.

Baptist Church in Georgia Welcomes Immigrants

There was a wonderful article in this morning's New York Times about a Baptist Church in Georgia that decided their Christianity obligated them to be welcoming to all the refugees and immigrants that were showing up in their community.

“Jesus said heaven is a place for people of all nations. So if you don’t like Clarkston, you won’t like heaven.” - Rev. Phil Kitchin of the Clarkston International Bible Church, Clarkston, Georgia.

read the article

What part of illegal doesn’t Rudy Giuliani understand?

According to an Associated Press story Rudy Giuliani has thrown cold water on the widely believed idea that the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States are criminals and that when cities instruct their employees to not inquire about immigration status they are turning a blind eye to criminal behavior.

"[Illegal immigration is] not a crime," Giuliani said Friday. "I know that's very hard for people to understand, but it's not a federal crime."

How can that be Rudy? What does the illegal in illegal immigrant mean?

"I was U.S. attorney in the Southern district of New York," he said. "So believe me, I know this. In fact, when you throw an immigrant out of the country, it's not a criminal proceeding. It's a civil proceeding."

Oh.

Number one in google

Among the tools that bloggers have are ones telling us the links that people followed to get to our blogs, including the phrases they typed into search engines if they got to our blogs by selecting our site from among the sites listed by a search engine in response to a search. That is how I know that about 5 times in the last couple of days someone has visited my blog after typing ‘Why must I dial 1 if I speak english’ and clicking ‘Search’ in Google.
Click here to see what Google returns for ‘Why must I dial 1 if I speak english’
I do not know if they considered what I wrote a satisfactory answer to their question, but I would like to think they did. After all Google seems to think this blog is the best match on the web to that question.

Lawrence Welk, the poorly assimilated

According to every biography of Lawrence Welk I cam find he was born in Strasburg, North Dakota in 1903 to German-speaking immigrant parents. He always said that he did not learn English until age 21 and always spoke with a heavy German accent. This is very late and poor assimilation compared to today’s standards.

Today all schools in America teach English to non-English speaking students as their top priority and I have never met or heard of anyone born in Amercia (or who came to this country before the age of 10 or so) who does not speak English fluently without an accent.

So what do these facts do the often heard contention that immigrants today are not assimilating as quickly as previous generations?

Although poorly assimilated by today’s standards Lawrence Welk was no threat to the American way of life, of course. He enriched, strengthened and broadened our culture and, like most immigrants, made America a better place.

Elites not interested in immigrants assimilating?

Last Sunday on Book TV I heard an author they were interviewing say the most extraordinary thing. He said that unlike in the past the American elites of today were not interested in having immigrants assimilate. What could he possibly be talking about?

Could it have something to do with education? Our public schools have always been the primary means of assimilation for immigrants. Immigrants who come to this country as adults, especially those that come not speaking English, usually do not become very well assimilated. But their children, if they come to this country before the age of 10 or are born here, always have and continue to learn to speak English without an accent and become perfect little Americans primarily through the efforts of our public schools. If you know anything about what is going on in our public schools you know that when they are confronted with a student who does not speak English, teaching that child English is their top priority and that is just as true today as it ever was.

So how could anyone think that our public schools are not as interested as they once were in assimilating immigrants? Could it have something to do with the schools talking about the need to communicate with parents who do not speak English? Could the school’s desire to be able to communicate with parents who do not speak English be seen as a lack of interest in the parents assimilating? That would be totally absurd. Does anyone really believe that adult immigrants would be more likely to learn English if they could not communicate with anyone at their children’s school? If they cannot communicate with anyone at the school the more likely effect is that they are less interested in their children’s education – the primary means through which immigrants are assimilated.

Could the fact that the government now has paperwork and forms available in other languages be seen as a lack of interest by the government in immigrants assimilating? Again, that would be absurd. Does anyone think that people are going to be motivated to learn English or not based on whether or not government brochures and forms are available in their native language? How often does an immigrant fill out a government form or read a brochure?

The reality is that immigrants who do not speak English are at a tremendous disadvantage in the job market. The only jobs available to those who do not speak English are very low paying, menial jobs. Every immigrant who does not speak English is confronted daily by the economic penalties for not knowing English. That is a tremendous motivation, far greater than any motivation that might be created by being unable to communicate with government officials or school personnel.

So what on earth are people talking about when they say immigrants are not motivated to assimilate or that the elites are not interested in having them assimilate? It just seems to me to be a belief independent of reality.

How much Spanish do you know?

Just by living in America you have probably picked up more Spanish than you realize. How many of the following 20 Spanish words or phrases can you match with their English equivalents?

1. Casa	A. Miss
2. Hasta La Vista	B. Hat
3. Adios	C. Good Day
4. Gracias	D. Information
5. Uno	E. House
6. Hombre	F. Thank you
7. Dos	G. Mister
8. Senorita	H. Five
9. Senor	I. Good evening
10. Tres	J. See ya later
11. Siesta	K. Man
12. Cuatro	L. Afternoon nap
13. Sombrero	M. The child
14. Cinco	N. Water
15. El Nino	O. Good-bye
16 Maήana	P. Two
17. Buenos dias	Q. Four
18. Buenas noches	R. Tomorrow
19. Agua	S. One
20. Informacion	T. Three

Correct Answers
1E, 2J, 3O, 4F, 5S, 6K, 7P, 8A, 9G, 10T, 11L, 12Q, 13B, 14H, 15M, 16R, 17C, 18I, 19N, 20D

Leave a comment with your score and how you would have described your knowledge of Spanish before taking this test.

Teaching English as a Second Language

It is somewhat amazing when you think about it that in the United States of America we provide free public education to all the children in our community, no questions asked. Although providing that education consumes a sizeable percentage of all the tax money collected on the local level I have never heard anyone suggest that we stop doing it. No one talks about how much lower their taxes would be if free public education were eliminated.

We don’t think of the money we spend on education as charity. We are sold on the concept that it benefits us all to provide education to all. We do not even balk at spending more for educating “special needs” children. On what basis could we object to the costs required for any particular child once we have accepted the general concept of educating all the children? If someone were to claim that so much was being spent on Special Education that it was impacting the quality of education provided to the other students we would probably say, “well, we just need to come up with more money, then.”

But something about illegal immigrants upsets some people so much that they resent the money spent to educate “those” children, Here are some of the comments posted online to a Moline Dispatch/Rock Island Argus article about East Moline schools hiring bilingual staff to better meet the needs of students for whom English is not spoken at home:

This is an English speaking nation and I resent my tax dollar being spent on instructing anyone who don`t bother trying to learn the language of my country. Press one for English--press two for instruction on leaving the country until you do.

I have to say that I strongly resent the expansion of the ESL program, not because I hate children or can't stand immigrants, but because in an increasingly competitive world, our children are being left in a cloud of dust by an uncontrolled stampede of illegal immigration.

I don't believe my taxes should be paid just to educate my child, I do, however, believe that when it comes time for my child to receive their education I should be able to expect a sound, solid base. This cannot happen with limited resources (tax dollars) being stretched beyond capacity.

The bright children are left without challenge. More and more "gifted" programs are cut, while we spend our tax dollars on teaching basics like speaking English, and often to those who are here illegally or not paying taxes.
It is simply a matter of equity and sound governance, not a matter of racism. As we shift our resources from teaching science, math, arts, and music to programs teaching simple communication, we lower the level of education for all.

Of course, illegal immigrants do pay taxes. When it comes to the property and sales taxes that pay for education they pay just as much as anyone else. But that is beside the point. Our commitment to educating all the children is not based on how much the student’s parents have paid in taxes.

Why do these people resent the cost of educating these “special needs” children while not objecting to other “special needs” students? I think the people making these comments see illegal immigrants as “the other”, not like us, not part of our community. It is not inevitable that this would be so. Almost all the illegal immigrants came here for the kinds of reasons Americans normally approve of and identify with. They came here looking for work so that they could provide for their families. They heard there were jobs here and they came looking for work, not a handout. They do not qualify for food stamps, Medicaid or Section 8 housing.

Judging from the comments it seems the main reason they are seen as “the other” is because they do not speak English. It is not obvious why that should put them beyond the pale. My paternal grandmother’s parents and grandparents came as immigrants to this country from Schleswig-Holstein, in what is now Germany. My great-great-grandparents came to this country as adults and although they picked up some English they always spoke German at home. My great-grandparents learned English as a second language in school. I suspect that many of those posting those intolerant comments also have immigrant ancestors who learned English in school as a second language.

Bill O'Reilly: immigration is changing the complexion of America

I read this transcript from the May 29 edition of Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly on the Media Matters website: Bill O’Reilly is speaking:

On the other side, you have people who hate America, and they hate it because it's run primarily by white, Christian men. Let me repeat that. America is run primarily by white, Christian men, and there is a segment of our population who hates that, despises that power structure. So they, under the guise of being compassionate, want to flood the country with foreign nationals, unlimited, unlimited, to change the complexion -- pardon the pun -- of America. Now, that's hatred, too.

It is clear from that quote that, in Bill O’Reilly’s mind, the most important thing to know about immigrants are whether or not they are white. One would almost be tempted to suspect that Bill O’Reilly fears that whatever success he has achieved was only possible because he is a white Christian man in a majority white Christian nation. He seems to be projecting his own fears onto others so that in his mind people advocating immigration reform are primarily motivated by a desire to take power away from Bill O’Reilly.

Does Illegal Immigration Hurt America?

The very low poll numbers Tom Tancredo’s campaign for president is generating shows there is not much support for his idea that the sheer number of non-English speaking immigrants, both legal and illegal, is damaging our society and changing it in undesirable ways. These ideas are apparently more racist and xenophobic than are the vast majority of Americans. This is certainly encouraging news.

There is much broader support, however, for the idea that the large number of illegal immigrants willing to work hard for low wages are depressing the wages for legal Americans, presumably most especially for unskilled and under-educated Americans, mostly minorities, who are only qualified for the most menial and lowest wage jobs. The most extreme version of this idea is the often-heard complaint that illegal immigrants are filling jobs that legal Americans would hold if the illegal immigrants were not here. This, of course, is nonsense. Illegal immigrants are at a great disadvantage in the job market compared to Americans who speak English and have valid documents and Social Security numbers. Almost every job currently held by an illegal immigrant would have been given instead to an English-speaking American with a valid Social Security number if any legal Americans willing and able to do the job had shown up to apply for it.

It is a little harder to refute the variant of this idea which says that if the illegal immigrants were not here the wages offered for the jobs that illegal immigrants now hold would have to be increased until they were high enough that legal Americans would be willing to do those jobs. It is also believed by many that this would create a cascade effect that would also raise the wages for all jobs in America. Of course, in the face of labor shortages, wages can not rise without limit. For every job there is a limit to how high wages can rise before the job disappears. Above that limit either a cheaper alternative exists such as automation or moving the job off-shore or the higher wage would force the price for the produced product above the limit the market would bear and demand for the product would disappear along with the job of producing that product. For the jobs now held by illegal immigrants in America how much higher is this limit than the current wage? How much would wages rise if we created a labor shortage by removing the illegal immigrants? How many of the jobs would just disappear if there was no one willing to fill them at the currently offered wage? Would low wage workers be better or worse off? Would most Americans be better or worse off? There is no way anyone can know that with any degree of certainty.

There is a possibility that removing the illegal immigrants would create a labor shortage that would contract the economy, creating a recession and wages would go down. Is that more or less likely than wages rising? Who knows! At the very least the price of a hotel stay, the price of a meal in a restaurant, the prices of fruits and vegetables picked by migrant workers and other things Americans buy would go up if the wages for the jobs now held by illegal immigrants went up. Even if removing the illegal immigrants caused wages to rise (not a sure thing) would the rise in wages more than offset the higher prices that would result so that most Americans would be better off? Who knows!

What do we do in the face of such uncertainty? The AFL-CIO says that one thing we can know for sure is that all workers should stick together for their mutual benefit. Christianity teaches us that God requires us to offer hospitality to strangers and aid to the less fortunate. American History teaches us that we are an immigrant nation that has benefited and grown with each wave of immigration. During the great wave of Irish Immigration from 1860 – 1890 many thought the large numbers of new Irish immigrants were hurting America. Today no one (that I know of) claims that those Irish immigrants changed America for the worse or made any Americans worse off in any way.

When poor people, willing to work hard and wanting to help their families show up in our communities looking for work will we regret allowing them to stay? Being hospitable and welcoming and showing human kindness can never be the wrong thing to do.

Pretty Boy Floyd never deported anyone

During the Great Depression in the 1930s, when people made powerless by poverty were being thrown out of their homes when banks repossessed them, Woody Guthrie wrote a song about Pretty Boy Floyd, the bank robber, that ended:

As through this world you wander
You'll see plenty of funny men.
Some will rob you with a six-gun
Others with a fountain pen.

But as through this world I've wandered
And through this world I've roamed
I've never seen an outlaw
Drive a family from their home.

Outlaws have never driven people from their homes by repossessing their houses nor have they ever broken up families by conducting workplace raids and deporting fathers and mothers. When undocumented workers are deported as part of a ICE (Immigration and Custom Enforcement) raid children and spouses are left behind, some of them citizens, wondering when and if their families will ever be reunited. There raids are not being conducted by outlaws or terrorists, but by our government, acting in our names.

Recent polls show that the vast majority of Americans (78%) believe that illegal immigrants who are already here and working should be given a chance to become citizens rather than being threatened with deportation. We need comprehensive immigration reform to bring our laws and policies on immigration more into line with how the majority feel the undocumented should be treated.

Tom Tancredo enters presidential race

Tom Tancredo, Republican Congressman from Colorado, recently announced that he is running for president. This could a very good thing for the prospects of the Democratic Party. Think about the impact of the growing Hispanic vote, which in the past has been roughly evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, going 85 or 90% for the Democrats, like the African-American vote.

To see why Tom Tancredo running for president might have that effect take a look at the “Cultural Impact” page from his Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus website. http://tancredo.house.gov/irc/culture.html Whenever Tancredo talks about the harmful effects of immigration, although the first few sentences refer to illegal immigration, most of what he says applies equally well, like that “Cultural Impact” page, to both legal and illegal immigrants. Although he does not come right out and say it, it is clear from the harmful effects he cites and his preoccupation with the southern border that he thinks Hispanics are a big problem.

If you are not Hispanic the racist undercurrent of everything he says and does may not be immediately obvious, but I can assure you that it is very clear to Hispanics. So as long as he is always clearly identified as a Republican and the other Republicans continue to not denounce him and his views I think increased exposure of his views could be very good for the prospects of the Democratic Party.