Race and Class in Arizona

There’s no getting past the racist implications of Arizona’s tough new immigration law that requires police to check the citizenship of anyone they suspect to be an illegal alien.
Supporters of the law claim that it is badly misunderstood and that Arizona is only doing a job that the federal government has so far not done. Too many Mexican drug gang fire fights have been spilling into border U.S. states. And we in Virginia have had our own version of such a law — Prince William County’s three years ago that authorized police to check immigration status at all criminal arrests.
Listen to the right wing media, such as American Family Radio, and you’ll hear of some “expert” tell use that Jose and Esmerelda want to sneak their 17 children north past the border so they can suck on the teat of U.S. social welfare programs, when, in fact, Hispanics tend to be among some of the hardest working and most conscientious people anywhere.
But you simply can’t get past the white-skin, dark-skin elements of the immigration dilemma and it brings up some very ugly traits in American society that are both racist and anti-intellectual. Not that long ago, for instance, North Carolina forbade Catholics from holding public office and “No Nothings” went after Irish Catholic immigrants in the 1840s, followed by the Ku Klux Klan in later years.
Immigration laws in the early 20th century set “limits” for what the dominant White Protestant power elite considered “inferior” races such as Italians, Irish, Poles, Croatians, Mexicans, Japanese, Chinese and so on. As for African-Americans, the record is incredibly evil. I read on the obit page last week in The New York Times about a champion female diver who was denied use of a swimming club at a ritzy San Francisco hotel in the 1940s because she was half English and half Filipino. Leading colleges held Jews to “quotas” until the mid-1900s.
Turning now to Arizona, one also finds a strange history. To be sure, I have never been there but I have been to neighboring states. For centuries, of course, the land that is now Arizona was dominated by Native American tribes. One of the first Western explorers was non-other than an Hispanic — a Spanish friar named Fray Marcos de Niza. He was wandering around the area in the 1530s, which is quite a bit earlier than the “White” Englishmen who founded Jamestown and Plymouth in the 1600s, or even, for that matter, Sir Walter Raleigh.
Like many areas in the U.S. Southwest, Arizona’s culture was dominated by the dark-skinned Spanish and Mexicans. An 1860 census showed that Arizona was still predominately Native American and was so until 1912 when it became a state.
The big change came in the 1960s when thousands of “White” Americans from the Mid-west and Northeast, many of them retirees from well-paying white collar or highly-skilled blue collar jobs, flooded into to new “communities” to take advantage of the dry, warm climate. They brought with them car-centric urban sprawl and golf courses that demanded millions of gallons of scare water that ended up changing the micro-climate by making it more humid and destroying one of the reasons so many came to Arizona in the first place.
These “Whites” also wanted to shape the state’s culture around what it was like back in suburban Detroit or Chicago or St. Louis or New York. They wanted everyone to speak only English, as they did, and conform with the small family, consumption-oriented lifestyle that they loved, along with white bread, schmaltzy programs such as Lawrence Welk on TV.
Now we find that Arizona is a “crisis” of illegal immigration and the culprits (no getting around this one, sorry) are “brown-skinned Latinos who actually have been in those parts quite a bit longer that the “come-here” and “White” retirees. So, we have a new and hateful law that will probably spur a more conservative federal law if and when it ever comes. The last attempt at one, supported by President George W. Bush by the way, couldn’t clear Congress. President Obama has been too sidetracked by health care and financial regulation to focus much on it yet.
Whatever happened in Prince William and can it be a guide? Consider this blog by Paige Winfield Cunningham in The Washington Post.
At first, she notes, Hispanics, the target of the law, fled PWC. English as a Second Language classes had been growing by 1,500 students a year but quickly fell to 760 before growing again. Surveys show that Hispanics overwhelmingly support local police but did not after the law.
As for the big crime crackdown that was anticipated, well, it turned out to be somewhat underwhelming. Of 12,839 criminal arrests in 2009, only 6 percent involved illegal immigrants.
Peter Galuszka

Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

70 responses to “Race and Class in Arizona”

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Demographics of Arizona (csv)

    http://arizona.wedding.net/demographics.html

    Interesting stuff. Sometimes the raw numbers are less histrionic.

    RH

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    They brought with them car-centric urban sprawl

    The vast majority of Arizona STILL has fewer than ten persons per square mile with almost all the growth occuring in or near Phoenix and Tuscon.

    If anything, I would suggest that the population density gradient has increased, meaning more concentration, rather than decreased.

    RH

  3. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Today's class assignment:

    1. Define racism.
    2. Use the word racism in a sentence.
    3. Find an example of a racist statement in the popular media.

    Answers:

    1. Main Entry: rac·ism
    Pronunciation: ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-
    Function: noun
    Date: 1933
    1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
    2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

    — rac·ist -sist also -shist noun or adjective

    2. Anti African-American racism existed as a semi-official policy in the state of Virginia through most of the 20th century.

    3. "…in fact, Hispanics tend to be among some of the hardest working and most conscientious people anywhere.".

    Shame on you, Peter. Had any author substituted "whites" for "Hispanics" in your sentence you would have been outraged.

  4. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Shame on me for what, Groveton? Your usual clarity is lacking here.

  5. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    The primary definition of racism is "a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race."

    Your article tries to rail against the racism in Arizona with the following statement, "…in fact, Hispanics tend to be among some of the hardest working and most conscientious people anywhere.".

    I guess a primary determinant of being hard working or concientious is being Hispanic.

    Your statement almost perfectly fits the primary definition of racism.

    Therefore, it is a racist statement.

    Are you a racist?

  6. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Groveton,

    Why don't you read this front-page editorial from the Arizona Republic, rather than play word games?

    http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/05/01/20100501arizona-immigration-problem.html

    With best regards,
    Peter Galuszka

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    via the fed Eisenhower answer:

    http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0706/p09s01-coop.html

    and Ronnies answer:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986

    If public fear were the prime determinator of whether a law like this would pass, wouldn't NM or TX be first in line with it given the location of Juarez ? Is profiling the only real concern of the effect of the enforcement of this law ? Is there not already a 'path' to citizenship that immigrants utilize that doesnt involve a land bridge direct to the US ? Ah well, its a law now, perhaps it will prompt the fed to take some inane action that accomplishes little/nothing…

  8. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Interesting editorial. Long on blame, short on answers.

    However, one thing for sure – immigration is a power granted to the federal government in the constitution.

    Kind of makes you wonder why our national government breaks its brains chasing after a power it might or might not have (health care) while studiously ignoring a power which it is expressly granted (immigration).

    Oh wait … I fogot. The national government is completely incompetent, hapless and owned by special interests.

    Which is why Arizona passed the law it passed.

    Here are a few things I believe to be true about the Arizona law:

    1. You can't be stopped on suspicion of being an illegal alien. You have to be stopped for some other, legitimate reason. Like speeding.

    2. If you produce a valid driver's license of state issued identification card – you are assumed to be in the country legally.

    3. If you can't produce legal documentation you will be questioned about your status in the US. If you can't answer the questions to the satisfaction of the police – you'll be brought in.

    4. If you are in the country illegally you'll be arrested.

    Please note that all of the same steps would be applied to me if I were in Ireland (and I look Irish), Germany (I could pass for German) or Japan (where I would be assumed an outsider on sight).

    In fact, I have been stopped in each of these countries and been asked to show identification. I showed my US passport and was on my way.

    None of this bothered me.

    Why?

    Because I was in the country legally.

    In fact, if I go to Arizona and get stopped for speeding and can't produce a valid driver's license the police should ask a few questions. If I can't answer the questions to their satisfaction they should bring me in for more questioning.

    Who knows? I might be an illegal immigrant from Ireland.

    The real debate is not around Arizona's law. The real debate is about what we should do with the 10.8M people living illegally in the United States. Didn't Reagan grant amnesty back in 1986? And we're up to 10.8M illegal aliens in the country just 24 years later? I guess that brings forth the second question – why can't we secure the borders and will we ever really try in the future?

    This is not about racism. It's about the public policy question around immigration policy in the US. Should the US have essentially open borders? Because, under the administrations of Dubya and Dear Leader, the door has been wide open.

    I say no open borders.

    I say that I don't trust Washington to defend the borders since that's what they said in 1986 and then kept the door propped open anyway.

    Why would should we trust them now?

  9. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    You don't need to "secure" the border(s) (Canada also?)… not that you could anyhow.

    I would invite anyone who thinks you can to go down to Arizona and take a little trip along the border.. and then come back and tell us how you would "secure" it without it looking like the East German border used to look – an at what cost.

    it's a totally dumb-ass idea coming from folks with messed up synapses.

    if you want to stop illegal immigration, one simple law will take care of it.

    Make it a felony with mandatory jail time for anyone caught hiring illegals.

    and then proceed to put these folks in jail… no excuses, no exceptions… and see how this problem magically goes away.

    We're hypocrites.

    We want that cheap labor on one hand.. and all the better to keep it cheap since the workers can't tell anyone if they are being paid a crummy wage or being treated unfairly…

    just one law – and the problem goes away.

    this is all right-wing racist theater… and they have no intention to make it "illegal" to hire "illegals" because then it takes away a red meat issues for their ditto-heads.

  10. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Groveton,
    I worked in the oviet Union for three years and then in the Russian Federation for three years. Both times I drove around in a Zhiguli car (72 Fiat type) with yellow license plates that spelled out that I was an American news correspondent.

    I got used to having GAI (traffic cops) stop me at every outpost due to restrictions on U.S. diplomats and correspondents. I sometimes had to wait an hour or longer until the GAIK-niki telephoned the local KGB honcho to see if I was legit. I was but if not, the Gai guy got a big red star on his forehead.
    Later, I got stopped by the GAI-niki because of the very same license plates. This time, they wanted bribes, preferably in dollars. Once a Gaiki-niki actually shoved the barrel of a shorty-version Kalashnikov in my gut to underline the point.
    I guess profiling depends on the country and/orstate.
    PG

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "then come back and tell us how you would "secure" it without it looking like the East German border used to look – an at what cost.

    it's a totally dumb-ass idea coming from folks with messed up synapses."

    Get it done at half price: hire Mexicans to build the wall.

    Or do what Larry said.

    A contractor friend points out another issue. If he hires an illeagal alien and gets caught, the fine could be $50k. but an illegal alien operating without a license gets fined $5k.

    RH

  12. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    here's the other dishonesty.

    the law is to do what:

    1. – stop illegal immigration

    2. – stop illegal drug dealing on the border

    notice how the two have gotten intertwined by implying that the illegals are a crime threat to non-Hispanics?

    Well who is the crime threat?

    the folks sneaking across to find a job?

    or the folks sneaking across to sell drugs an then sneak back with no intentions at all to find a job?

    How come we don't secure our border against Columbian Cocaine dealers?

    How come we're not stopping cars in Florida looking for illegal Cubans and Columbians?

    this thing is so bogus that it stinks to high heaven.

  13. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    you can't build a wall and walk away from it … it will end up with holes in it overnight…

    that's how stupid this is.

    you need a WALL and a PAID border patrol guy 24/7 or else the illegals will just go find where you DON'T have a border guard.

    Does anyone know how long the border is?

    does anyone know how much it would cost to post a guard every 1/4 mile or so 24/7?

    are you going to buy the land that is needed for the wall and build access roads and provide buildings an facilities to the guards?

    do you think a wall is going to stop drug smugglers? Like we are really good at stopping Columbian drug smugglers?

    goofballs on parade.

    I highly recommend that folks who think this is "doable" get their plump behins down there for a little visit and look at the land and the geography involved.

    it's just plain idiocy to think about this being done until at least we know the cost seeing how these same folks hot to trot on this issue say that they are opposed to govt waste and abuse.

    DUH!!!!!

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Make it a felony with mandatory jail time for anyone caught hiring illegals."

    An "Amen" for Larry. The hypocrisy on both sides is overwhelming.

    Most people simply want the law enforced. If we want open borders again, repeal the immigration laws. If not, enforce them. Where is DHS? Where has DHS been since it was created? Too busy kissing lobbyists' butts to do its job. If you don't want to round up workers, then round up the employers.

    Peter, your post overstepped. The law only allows a cop to check immigration status in connection with a lawful stop. If it's OK to check for seatbelt usage when a cop stops a driver for a broken tail light, why is checking ID wrong?

    My kids were born in Korea and my wife was told to carry their green cards in her purse until they were naturalized. Why is wrong to expect other lawful immigrants to do the same? Or more significantly, why is wrong to start immigration proceedings when an immigrant does not have any green card or cannot produce it?

    The goal has been to have an immigration law, but to ignore it. Why is that good public policy?

    TMT

  15. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    In the words of Dear Leader:

    Q: Do you think your vote on the border fence or the implementation of it was wrong?
    A: The key is to consult with local communities, whether it’s on the commercial interests or the environmental stakes of creating any kind of barrier. The Bush administration is not real good at listening. I will reverse that policy. There may be areas where it makes sense to have some fencing. Having border patrolled, surveillance, deploying effective technology, that’s going to be the better approach.

    Source: 2008 Democratic debate at University of Texas in Austin Feb 21, 2008

    Patrol the border, add surveillance, deploy technology … secure the border!

    In the words of "Dear Larry":

    "I would invite anyone who thinks you can to go down to Arizona and take a little trip along the border.. and then come back and tell us how you would "secure" it without it looking like the East German border used to look – an at what cost.

    it's a totally dumb-ass idea coming from folks with messed up synapses.".

    LarryG – Why is everything black or white?

    You can improve security at the border.

    In fact, we'd better. Because drug dealers, MS-13 gang members and terrorists don't care whether employers get charged or not. None of them sneak into the United States with any intention of getting employed. It doesn't help much with relatives who come to the US to live here until they have the anchor baby and get to stay.

    The point about prosecuting employers is dead on. I'd toss the illegal alien employees in jail too. They knew what they were doing when they snuck into the country.

    You employee illegal aliens – you go to jail.

    You get caught in the US illegally – you go to jail.

    Good by me.

    Now, what to do with the 10.8M illegal aliens already in the country and the people who employ them?

  16. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    " LarryG – Why is everything black or white?

    You can improve security at the border"

    normally it's not black and white but saying you can "improve" the security at the border is like saying you can stop a flooding creek.

    you can dam it up in places.. but the water will just find a different path.

    If we cannot stop cocaine coming into this country through Florida – what makes anyone think we can stop drugs at the Mexican border either?

    as long as there is a demand for drugs in the U.S. the suppliers are going to find a way to deliver the goods no matter whether they are Mexican Hispanics or Columbian Hispanics and no matter whether it is Floria or Texas.

    It's dishonest to conflate the drug problem at the border with people not dealing in drugs who are only after a better life an a job.

    The folks dealing in drugs will kill a border patrol guard in a heartbeat if he gets in their way.

    The average guy trying to immigrate is not a threat any more or less that the rest of the population.

    To say that we must stop illegal immigration because the crime threatens people is just plain dishonest in my view.

    And when you have a group of people with an agenda who are not above using dishonestly in their arguments, then for me they lose all moral authority and are just barely better than a plain old hypocrite.

  17. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    "The folks dealing in drugs will kill a border patrol guard in a heartbeat if he gets in their way.".

    Great point!

    Letting really bad murderers into the country is something we just can't stop. So … let's not try.

    Brilliant!

    Wasn't it just yesterday that the all-powerful, all-knowing federal government was going to end industrial accidents forever if we'd all just let them regulate more?

    Now, that same organization can't stop murderers from just walking into the country.

    "The average guy trying to immigrate is not a threat any more or less that the rest of the population.".

    Let's assume you mean illegally immigrate. Haven't the illegal immigrants already decided they can break our laws just by illegally walking over the border? So, they willingly became criminals the minute they stepped on American soil but they will revert to law abiding cit..um…er.. law abiding illegals I guess once they take that second step.

    You live in a fantasy land.

  18. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    " Letting really bad murderers into the country is something we just can't stop. So … let's not try."

    A drug dealer that uses AK-47s and Mac 10's needs something more than a border guard to stop them – no matter what border they chose to come in across.

    it's a different problem than illegal immigration and a wall with a guard is not going to stop them.

    wrong solution.

    …" So, they willingly became criminals the minute they stepped on American soil "

    in the same way you did when your foot made your car go 85.

    to compare either of them to a guy toting a MAC10 on his way to meet an accomplice, after which he returns across the border to get more drugs…

    is.. well.. it's dumb Groveton.

    it's one size fits all but worse it's disengenous to say that an ordinary guy trying to get a job is as much a danger as a guy with a Mac 10.

    this wins you no points at all and actually puts you in the group who does not care about the truth – only what they want an if the truth is the first casualty.. then fine..

    we don't need folks like this in the political process.

    they're political vandals…

    they're not going to solve any problems.. they're only drawing graffiti for racists.

  19. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Would it be racist if the US were to apply the same principles of law to Mexican citizens who are unlawfully in the United States as Mexico applies to citizens of other countries who are unlawfully in Mexico?

    Is it, or should it be, a principle of international law that anyone looking for a job can lawfully immigrate to any other nation?

    What are the principles here? Despite the wink-wink of Clinton, Bush and Obama, are we a nation based on law or not?

    TMT

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    You employee illegal aliens – you go to jail.

    You get caught in the US illegally – you go to jail.

    The US already has one of th ehighest proportions of its citizens in jail. now we want to add the citizens of other countries – because we can't support their making a living here.

    My advice? Find ten illegal aliens and give them all your social security number, then stop worrying about your retirement.

    RH

  21. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I tried to sponsor a guy to get a temproray agricultural visa. he would be her 5 months, then go home.

    Couldn't get it done.

    It is criminal, I tell you, the way INS works.

    RH

  22. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Either you guard your borders or you don't.

    Either you permit people to illegally enter your country or you don't.

    Lots of bad guy American citizens tote guns to drug deals. The police, the ATF, the DEA and other heroic law enforcement officers take their lives in their hands and stop them (or at least they try). Sometimes some numb nuts with a bag of reef in his pocket gets swept up with the real bad guys. They go to jail too. If some of the real bad guys start shooting sometimes the schmuck with a bag of reef in his pocket gets shot.

    If I get caught driving 85 then I have to be ready to pay the price. If a person gets into the US illegally and gets caught then he or she has to pay the price. Different crimes, different prices.

    And … for the record … I have never gotten a ticket for a moving violation.

    More security at the border? Big Sis agrees! Send in the predators:

    http://www.drudgereport.com/flashhs.htm

    LarryG – I believe that you are the only person in America who thinks we should just give up on trying to increase the security at the border. Or, perhaps I should say, you are the only person legally in the country who thinks that.

    Obama – increase security
    Big Sis – increase security
    Groveton – increase security
    LarryG – give up and run away

  23. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    does anyone know how much it would cost to post a guard every 1/4 mile or so 24/7?

    Oh, maybe .00001% of what it would cost to to ensure zero pollution.

    RH

  24. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Use one oz. of solvent three times to clean a paint brush. Don't use 3 oz. the first time and expect the same results.

    Same with the border. Apply the best pracable solution and don't expect it to be perfect. Then back it up with two more layers of protection,also not expected to be perfect, but good enough for the money.

    Use a multi-pronged approach, and don't expect miracles.

    RH

  25. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    we are TMT – based on law but immigration is a tough nut when various members of a nuclear family are half legal and half illegal.

    it's really hard to deport grandma … makes it sound like a different time and place when families were separated "because".

    We cannot get to the answer though as long as we have what I feel is less than honorable agendas involved … the latest which have no problems equating the crime that comes from drug dealers to crime that comes from a brother trying to sneak across the border to live with his sister and get a job.

    I think this kind of thing pollutes the issue and polarizes people … puts them in hard positions to defend and in the end – a stand-off … with no way to move forward.

    we won't move forward by insisting on ultimatums in my view…

    each side is going to have to give a little.

    I say arrest employers but grant some kind amnesty or at least provide an amnesty-type path.. not an easy path.. but a path.. for ones already here.

    or something along these lines.

    no line in the sand on either side is going to lead to resolution.

  26. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    I agree with Ray about the prisons.. 30-40K per person… instead of them earning money/paying taxes.

  27. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    re:

    " Either you guard your borders or you don't.

    Either you permit people to illegally enter your country or you don't."

    same deal for the Canadian Border?

    Groveton – I don't think we should give up.

    I'm a pragmatist.

    How much will you have to spend to go from 90% to 95% and how many will that stop?

    do you know the cost?

    are you in favor of any efforts no matter the costs to read 99%?

    same deal for the Canadian border when the 911 guys got in?

    Groveton – drudge? boy you ARE polluting your mind aren't you?

    gawd

  28. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Think of this like a flowchart, LarryG …

    Do you agree with Dear Leader, Big Sis and Groovy Groveton that the United States should spend more and try harder to secure our southern border against people illegally entering the country?

    If no, how would you protect the country against drug dealers, criminals and terrorists who might use our porous southern border to enter the United States?

    If yes, after a person is caught illegally entering the United States would you arrest them even if they didn't have a MAC-10 or crates of drugs in their possesion?

    If yes, you have (perhaps unwittingly) helped to slow the wave of illegal immigration.

    If no, what would you do?

    That's as easy as I can make it LarryG. I could almost compile it.

  29. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    stopping the drug trafficking including the home invasions is a different issue than immigration.

    first off believing they are the same and need the same solution is not very smart…

    then.. demanding an essentially tightly sealed border no matter the cost is doubly dumb.

    it's not about being opposed to border security.

    it's about being opposed to dumbness…

  30. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    " Do you agree with Dear Leader, Big Sis and Groovy Groveton that the United States should spend more and try harder to secure our southern border against people illegally entering the country?"

    Groovy Groveton?

    you're a businessman Groveton.

    Would you spend ANY amount to achieve a certain outcome?

    I doubt it.

    Why do you want govt to do that?

    I thought you were opposed to BIG, WASTEFUL, INEFFECTIVE – govt.

    let's agree on how much.

    how about $1000 per immigrant stopped…???

    is that OK?

  31. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    re: stopping drug trafficking… don't we already have folks that do that – and they're NOT called Immigration and Border Control?

    Why do we want someone other than the folks who already deal with drug trafficking to deal with Hispanic drug trafficking?

    what kind of logic is that?

  32. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    OK, LarryG …

    Here's one from today's Huffington Post …

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-gardels/an-immigration-solution_b_560191.html

    Here's the key quote …

    "2. To prevent such a plan from becoming a precedent that would attract further illegal immigration instead of stem it, the border would have to be secured. This would also help stem drug violence spilling across the border and ward against terrorism.".

    You are all alone, LarryG … all alone.

  33. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    " the border would have to be secured. This would also help stem drug violence spilling across the border and ward against terrorism.""

    same deal for Canada and Florida?

    how many shrimp [sic] boats in the gulf wind through the Mississippi delta with drugs and illegal immigrants?

    how many will there be when the land border is tightened?

    are drug dealers terrorists?

    do we have drug dealers and terrorists sneaking across the Great Lakes or anywhere else along the really, really "porous" Canadian Border that has few fences and precious few border guards?

    are the "terrorists" that come from Mexico more deadly than the ones that might come from Canada?

    How many more totally flawed arguments do you want to "follow"?

    If you want to deal with the immigration issue then why not deal with THAT issue and not conflate it with the need for world peace?

  34. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Here's another one for you, LarryG.

    This one from a Virginia-centric site…

    http://virginiatomorrow.com/2010/05/03/wyatt-durrette-arizona-and-the-immigration-debate/#comments

    Here's the key quote:

    "On the two major issues, everyone-or almost everyone-seems to agree that closing the border and border security are paramount.".

    I am glad the sentence included the " – or almost everyone -" clause. It must have been added especially for you.

  35. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    "same deal for Canada and Florida?".

    I am a big salt water fisherman. I have been stopped by the authorities in both Florida and Georgia. Been stopped by both the Coast Guard and the Maryland Department of Natural Resources in the Chesapeake Bay.

    Seems like people are tying to secure those borders.

  36. Mimi Stratton Avatar
    Mimi Stratton

    What I'd like: Pass the Border Security and Responsibility Act. Allow legal daily passing back and forth because the economy along the borders of Texas and Arizona depend on it–like the Bracero Program. Provide for a path to citizenship. And tear down the wall, and stop building it. It's totally ineffective, and a waste of taxpayer dollars.

  37. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    " agree that closing the border and border security are paramount"

    no matter the cost and no matter how effective it might be (or not)?

    do you want to pay:

    $1000 per stopped illegal?

    $5000 per stopped illegal?

    how about 100K per stopped illegal? 500K?

    so you say that will never happen?

    an this comes from the guy who says Dear Leader and his Govt is hopelessly incompetent and fiscally irresponsible?

    but in THIS situation – to heck with the cost – right?

  38. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    securing the border?

    same fence for Canada to stop drug runners an terrorists?

    you're starting to waffle Groveton…

  39. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    so…. if the people are not brown on the northern border.. it's a different deal than brown-skinned people on the southern border?

    TMT asked if we should have the same laws for all – right?

    so I'm asking.. same policies for all our borders?

    see the border issue is a RUSE.

    we need one simple law.

    make it a felony to hire illegal immigrants – no matter what color anybody's skin is and we won't have a problem any longer of having to "secure" our borders because there won't be any jobs to cross the border to get in the first place.

    Either that – or do what Ray sad – give them a social security number and collect FICA.

    this stuff about "securing the border" against "illegals" while not charging felonies for employing "illegals" just proves what this is really about in my view.

    We could stop the lions share of this kind of thing – virtually overnight without spending a dime on the border – if we were really serious about it.

  40. Mimi Stratton Avatar
    Mimi Stratton

    We will never stop hiring undocumented workers. Do you want to have to pay $10 for a tomato?

  41. Mimi Stratton Avatar
    Mimi Stratton

    Have you all seen a movie called "A Day Without A Mexican"?

    Summary: One day California wakes up and not a single Latino is left in the state. They have all inexplicably dissappeared. Chaos, tragedy, and comedy quickly ensue.

    I highly recommend it: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0377744/

  42. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Illegal immigration permits explotation of workers and postpones improvements in technology. If we have a guest worker program, foreign workers must get permission to work before they come to the U.S. and then should receive all protections of US labor laws. No one should be permitted to hire someone who has no right to work here. Otherwise, a guest worker program will fail.

    Also, if farm labor costs rise, there will be more investment in replacement technology. People used to complete each telephone call through an operator. But technology replaced labor costs. There are lots of technologies that could replace human labor in farm fields. But why invest in it, if the owner can hire people for next to nothing.

    Mexico needs to reform its political and economic system and stop using the US as a safety valve. Immigration from Mexico needs to be legal immigration, just like every other country.

    Let's enforce the existing law; secure the boarders; and then talk about changes. We also need to bring educated and highly skilled people to the U.S. from many countries. It's stupid to import poverty.

    TMT

  43. Mimi Stratton Avatar
    Mimi Stratton

    A lot of Mexicans don't want to live here in the US. They want to come here, work for a while, then go back. With a national immigration policy in place that allowed this, it could work to everyone's advantage. Our nation's broken immigration system will not be fixed at the local level, and the ad hoc legislation targeting immigrants just fuels divisiveness.

  44. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    re: $10 tomatoes

    re: exploitation of workers

    both true.

    by NOT fining those who employ illegals, we guarantee exploitation of these people.

    are those of us that want cheap tomatoes causing the exploitation and giving ammunition to those who want to continue to be able to hire illegals an exploit them?

    Canada has a worker program like Mimi advocates and the workers go from Mexico to Canada, harvest the crops, and go back home.

    Why do they not stay?

    because their work visas expire and employers can't hire without the govt coming after them.

    we should be going after the employers not the illegals.

    It's the employers who are breaking the law – and causing people to sneak across the border instead of getting temporary work visas like they do in Canada.

    we don't solve the problem because the folks on the left have drawn a line in the sand and the folks on the right have also.. and neither are willing to give an inch.

    an then.. then.. we BLAME the politicians … for being on the fence… ha ha ha…like they are supposed to fall on their sword or something..

    what part of "politician" do folks not understand?

    Leader… yes.. we need a leader… and my money is on chain-smoking "Dear Leader" to do what you know who did not do.

    Of course he will be accused of making back room deals and 12000 page legislation and kissing both cheeks of Pelosi and Reid (that's all 4)…..

    of stomping on business and trying to turn the country to socialism… etc, etc…

    FECKLESS is an interesting word.

    hard to call a President "feckless" when he RAMS DOWN THE AMERICAN PEOPLES THROAT…right?

    and then turn around and propose overhauling Wall Street while the Republicans were acting like a snake has just gotten into their hen house…

    will he actually get to Immigration ?

    I'll wager this.. he's going to do MORE than his predecessors did… but he won't satisfy the zealots.. L or R.

  45. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    here's Canada's way of handling the Mexican labor issue:

    http://www.rhdcc-hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/workplaceskills/foreign_workers/sawp.shtml

    interesting:

    " … Offer the wage rate paid to Canadian agricultural workers doing the same work or the prevailing wage rate set by HRSDC/Service Canada, whichever is higher. In a unionized environment, pay the wage rate established under the collective agreement."

    so Canada has provisions to NOT exploit workers…

    and we not only do not.. we want the system to stay that way…

    ugly

  46. Mimi Stratton Avatar
    Mimi Stratton

    Those Canadians do manage to enact a lot of reasonable legislation. I see, so you don't necessarily have to exploit agricultural workers . . . Cesar Chavez tried to show us the way.

  47. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Larry loves to deceive by ommission. The Canadian labor law he cites:

    1. Requires that the job be posted first for Canadian workers.
    2. Requires that a form requesting an out-of-country worker be filed with the Canadian government.
    3. Allows the government 8 weeks to decide whether to allow you a worker or not.
    4. If you are allowed a worker, the employer must pay for airfare to / from Canada.
    5. The worker may work for as little as 240 hours and as much as 8 months.
    6. Employer must collect and remit all applicable taxes accruing to the worker.

    The policy has nothing to do with illegal aliens in Canada. It is the policy for argricultural guest workers.

    I doubt either Republicans or Democrats would have any issue with the application of these rules in the United States.

  48. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I doubt either Republicans or Democrats would have any issue with the application of these rules in the United States.

    I think the rules for th eguy I tried to bring in were similar. I had to explain why I didn;t use locals, pay taxes and gurantee his return.

    The problem wasn't with the rules, it was with the way they were applied: slothfully inthe extreme. so much so that the process was unworkable.

    I haven't seen him, but no doubt my guy is here illegally, somewhere. Too bad, we could have let him be legal, and he would be happy to go home to his wife in winter.

    RH

  49. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "There's no getting past the racist implications of Arizona's tough new immigration law that requires police to check the citizenship of anyone they suspect to be an illegal alien"

    Leave it to Peter to start off an editorial with a complete exaggeration and followed up with an outright lie.

  50. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The problem we face with Mexico (and everyplace else by extension) is the same problem the British faced in India. 7 billion people cannot be ruled by a wealthy minority of 350 million, if they don't wish to be.

    RH

  51. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    And all this time I thought race and class in America meant NASCAR and Jeff Gordon.

    RH

  52. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    Groveton – it's a policy that allows Mexicans to leave their country to earn money without becoming illegals AND it requires that they NOT be exploited.

    It's exactly what our greedy employers will not do and what our hypocritical anti-immigration people won't allow.

    It's the reason why Canada does not have the problem in the scope and scale that we do.

    We have a dumb-as-a-stump, doomed-to-fail policy and we refuse to deal with the issue by assigning blame on the workers and not our dumbass policies.

  53. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    instead of dealing with the problem – as Canada has done – we continue to WANT TO MAKE it ABOUT RACE and racism – both sides.

    I'm convinced the righties do not want this problem to be fixed.

    They want the right wing base to act the same way they did with the continued bad treatment of blacks… and Groveton himself has brought this up – Massive Resistance – 100 years after the civil war – we as a people refused to admit and grant black people the right to an equivalent education and while we did it – flew the Confederate flag in the chambers of the GA.

    That's what this immigration issue is really about.

    We could set up a guest worker program like Canada. We could assure that poor Hispanics are not exploited.

    We could target the employers who would hire those without work visas and exploiting them because they were not legal – but we won't do it.

    I guarantee you that if this President offers a work visa program and sanctions for employers that the party o "no" will once again be opposed because if they support it – their far right base will go berserk.

    People who want this problem delt with effectively and fairly want racism out of the picture – others do not.

  54. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry, I think you are ignoring the economic impact on less-skilled workers. I fully understand the desire for cheap labor and support the premise that labor rates must be reasonable. But why do we as a society have an obligation to help Mexico and various Central American countries avoid political and economic reform by repressing wages for very many Americans?

    Why should we further stress social benefits and the public schools by importing poverty?

    I am not arguing that a guest worker program should not be adopted. There may instances where this makes sense. And if it's done, there should be protections for those workers, but not including a right to bring one's entire extended family to the U.S. That is stupid policy.

    TMT

  55. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    re: a policy to import uneducated labor as families.

    this is not racist – I agree.

    and it's true that for other kinds of immigration – we usually do set a higher bar for qualifications except for those fleeing despotic conditions.

    there is no easy way to fix the current nuclear family problem in my view.

    for those already here, we need to give them a path to citizenship while at the same time making it a felony to employ illegals to stop new unskilled immigration – and to encourage those who are here – to leave if they do not want to do the requirements of the path to citizenship – which in my mind would REQUIRE them to get a GED and pay taxes.

    I'm in favor of solutions not the current dialog that definitely has racist aspects to it – at the SAME TIME that those same people will not support serious sanctions against the employers.

    Now what does that mean?

    to me, it means that tey are not really serious about solving the problem but instead letting it fester on… – as a political weapon.

    I have no patience for folks who hold their ideology more important than pragmatic solutions.

    none.

    I call them political vandals and that's what they are in my view.

    not you TMT – you've articulated quite decently some of the issues – even though we may not agree on exactly how to fix it…

    I do believe that you and I could collaborate an approach where each of us gives an inch an swallows something we don't like – in the interests of getting a solution.

    Why can't we do that as a society and a political process?

  56. Darrell -- Chesapeake Avatar
    Darrell — Chesapeake

    There is already a guest worker program. No one uses it because it's easier/cheaper to just drive by the local 7-11 parking lot and pick up what you need.

    http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=889f0b89284a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=889f0b89284a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

  57. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    From Business Week 5/9/10 "One obvious but imperfect way to relieve the pressure is to increase the number of low-skilled immigrants who are admitted legally. The need for them will only grow in the years ahead. The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicted last year that between 2008 and 2018 the U.S. economy will generate 8.1 million jobs requiring no more than on-the-job training or experience in a related occupation. That's far more than the 4.8 million new jobs that will require a bachelor's degree or more. What makes this solution imperfect is that flooding the job market with immigrants, who don't dare complain about pay or working conditions for fear of being fired and sent home, will harm less educated, native-born Americans and earlier- arriving immigrants who compete with them for work. "When employers say they need 400,000 visas a year, they're saying 'we need indentured servants,' " says Eileen Appelbaum, a Rutgers University economist."

    "So increasing legal immigration can't be the whole answer. The other—less familiar—solution is to reorganize the American workplace to diminish the number of jobs that require low skills and hence command low pay. That would pull in more Americans who have drifted away from gainful employment. Sound far-fetched? In other developed nations, nannies, sales clerks, and waiters are well-trained and earn living wages. A study of labor conditions in six wealthy nations by the Russell Sage Foundation found that the U.S. had the highest share of low-paying jobs, defined as work that paid less than two-thirds of the median wage. The U.S. share was 25%, followed by Germany at 23%, the U.K. at 22%, the Netherlands at 18%, France at 11%, and Denmark at just 9%."

    Yet, let's keep open borders and drive down wages for more Americans. We can lead the world in low-paid jobs. As the liberals argue, it would be racist to do otherwise. Of course, this also increases employment for the professional caring class. Enforce the law. Then, let's talk about changes.

    The commentary is quite good. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_19/b4177007121223.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

    TMT

  58. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    I agree with you TMT but let me draw a picture here.

    We have Americans – with dismal education levels… dropped out of school and having kids they cannot afford to clothe and shelter and we have to pay to feed them at school – and these folks don't want work – they want benefits.

    Then we have some non-Americans that are willing to work hard at the same jobs these other folks turn their noses up at.

    these are the folks that the immigrants are "taking jobs from"?

    that's a question.

    I'm not seeing the competition for these jobs… wrong?

  59. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry, with a reduced labor pool, wages for these undesirable jobs will increase and should attract more American workers of all races, creeds and places of birth. Keep in mind that quite a few employers simply do want "indentured servants."

    When I was a kid, stockyard workers made reasonably good wages.

    Enforce the law; reduce illegal immigration and immigrants through attrition; watch the labor market; if we do, indeed, need many more lower-skilled laborers, change the law to permit guest workers. And give them protection of labor laws, not the right to bring their extended families here.

    TMT

  60. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    TMT – so you don't buy the idea that Hispanics will take jobs that our "entitlement" folks refuse to take?

    Here we are… trying to figure out how to make our "give me my benefits" folks – get a job – and at the same time – we don't want others willing to do that work – doing it?

    something is not quite right here…

    can't quite get my finger on it just yet… but I'm ruminating on it.

  61. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Go pick lettuce for a day, and then talk to me about migrant workers.

    RH

  62. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ray – As I said< Enforce the law; reduce illegal immigration and immigrants through attrition; watch the labor market; if we do, indeed, need many more lower-skilled laborers, change the law to permit guest workers. And give them protection of labor laws, not the right to bring their extended families here."

    Create a rule that would permit migrant farm workers from other countries, if we need them. Give them protection under the labor laws and fine the s^*t (say $5000 per day, per worker) for anyone who hires non-certified guest workers. Even better, let private parties enforce the rules against employers and have the loser pay attorneys' fees. You'll clean out the illegal worker problem in three years max.

    TMT

  63. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    just to be contrary … should we expect big govt to actually be able to handle illegal immigration competently?

    After all they've been at it for a while and the problem has not been fixed.

    Mr. Groveton talks about how incompetent the govt is – that is when it's not on the industry "take"…

    do we dare expect "big" govt can actually competently build a wall good enough to stop the skulkers, even more so with chain-smoking "dear leader" in charge, eh?

    Do we REALLY want employers to ask the Feds for permission to hire people?

    If they did, would it take 20 pages in triplicate, witnessed by a notary and signed by the administrator in charge and 3 months later a "Dear scumball business owner".. "you have been approved… to hire said immigrants – and no we don't want to hear that your crops rotted in the field 2 months ago .. OH.. and you owe us $1200 for processing ….pay up now or we'll sic the IRS on you.

    signed – your obedient civil servant – Kissmy Butt

    Did Groveton really say this?

  64. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry, I think the feds ought to handle immigration and enforce the laws instead of being involved in "No Child Left Behind" ala George Bush and "Health Care Reform" ala Barack Obama. I'd sleep better if the President focused on protecting our borders than from worrying about carbon emissions. But that's just me.

    Governments should drop a lot of what they try to do and try to do what they were created to do and empowered to do much better.

    TMT

  65. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    so TMT…knowing who businesses who hire illegals probably contribute to… what party would you more expect to actually fine employers?

    do you think the businesses that contribute to Republicans expect the Republicans to not fine businesses that hire illegals?

  66. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry, I suspect that employers wanting to keep illegals working without interference from the feds are contributing to both political parties. Corruption is stronger than ideology.

    TMT

  67. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry, I suspect that employers wanting to keep illegals working without interference from the feds are contributing to both political parties. Corruption is stronger than ideology.

    TMT

  68. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Did Groveton really say this?,

    I actually got a letter pretty much like that instea fo being signed Kissmy Butt, it was signed Rosario Rodriguez.

    No kidding.

    RH

  69. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Create a rule that would permit migrant farm workers from other countries, if we need them. Give them protection under the labor laws and fine

    And I am telling you we have such a rule. It is call ed a temororary ag visa.

    But now go try and actually get one, as I did.

    Two years later you get a letter back saying, by the way, we got your application, but we need it in duplicate please. Do not write to us or respond to this letter becasue it will delay your application.

    We have a system, and it is broken.

    RH

Leave a Reply