By Alan Caruba
I was fortunate to know both sets of grandparents, people who immigrated from Russia and Italy. It was not until they had passed on and I was older that I realized that they never spoke of their nations of origin. In the late 1800s they were nations that offered little opportunity and America was all about opportunity.
In the “Atlas of Human Migration” it says that “The message of this book is so important that it bears repeating here at the outset: migration is the history of the world. Humans are born migrants; human evolution is linked to the very act of moving from one habitat to another and then adapting to that new environment.” Migration scholars have called the last twenty years the “age of migration.”
“Some people—mainly the residents of the rich countries of the world—are allowed, even encouraged, to move. Others—the nationals of poor countries—are not. This exposes the stark social inequities that result from globalization and migration control policies.” The result for the United States and Europe has been the rise of “illegals”, people who find a way to access a better life in a better place. Some, however, have brought with them a variety of social problems. Some—Muslims—have demanded changes to their adopted nation’s laws to accommodate the oppression they experienced in their home countries. Quotas worked in the past, but are rejected today.
Since 1986 when President Reagan signed an amnesty act—which he regarded as one of the worst mistakes he made—America has been grappling with a migration of illegal immigrants that includes not only those from Latin America, but also from Islamic nations.
As a recent Wall Street Journal editorial noted of the previous effort to address immigration that the reform “offered citizenship to (then) current illegal immigrants but it failed to set up a process for future legal immigration to meet the needs of fast-moving labor markets. Thus it created an incentive for foreigners to arrive illegally and never leave lest they never be able to return to the U.S. if they did go home. Avoiding that mistake should be one of the main goals of this or any other immigration reform. On that point, the Senate framework has promise, but also has a long way to go.”
The current bipartisan bill owes much to the fact that Hispanic immigrants voted three-to-one against Republican candidates in the last election. Politically, that changing demographic cannot and should not be ignored. The Republican sponsors of the proposed bill are the now-classic “RINOs”—Republicans in Name Only—as comfortable with Democratic initiatives as any of their own party.
As just one example, the Huffington Post recently reported that “Hispanics for the first time will become California’s largest ethnic group by the end of the year, according to a report on California’s shifting demographics contained in Gov. Jerry Brown’s 2013-2014 budget proposal.” Hispanics now represent 20% of California’s electorate. There were 5.9 million eligible Hispanic voters in 2012. As reported in The Hill, “Comprehensive immigration reform could make millions of people suddenly eligible for assistance under President Obama’s healthcare law, assuming a final deal paves the way for undocumented immigrants to receive papers.”
What was true in 1986 is true today. Illegal immigrants will continue to come to America and clearly legislation to address this is likely to fall short of deterring them. The expansion of the federal government to address the problem has failed and we’re told that a larger one will be needed to process the newly empowered illegals with a means to work here and gain citizenship.
There is little discussion of building a fence long enough and high enough to deter the traffic across our southern border and even less of the well-worn trails and areas that are known to provide access.
The cliché is that “America is a nation of immigrants”, but those who arrived before and since the 1800s were different in ways than today’s. They were eager to assimilate, learn English, and to prosper. They brought skills and labor necessary to the expanding industrial base of the nation. They did not have a panoply of government programs to provide them with healthcare insurance, food stamps, financial assistance for housing and other benefits. Today’s do and that puts further pressure on a nation that is already in serious financial trouble.
The reality is, however, immigrants—legal and illegal—will keep coming and some effort must be made to integrate them into our society. We cannot send eleven million people back to their home countries. We cannot export their children who have been born and grown up here. We must address the problem of “anchor babies” born here for the purpose of securing citizenship for their entire families.
As the Wall Street Journal editorial says, “A path to citizenship would also assist the process of assimilation that has been one of America’s historic strengths. The U.S. should not want a permanent class of residents who can never be citizens and thus have less incentive to adapt to U.S. cultural mores, speak English, or move out of segregated ethnic enclaves.”
With or without immigration reform, history demonstrates that people will migrate, so our response to the current population of illegals and some kind of reform is now a priority.
© Alan Caruba, 2013
As I read your article, Alan, I kept thinking to myself that there is something missing. You referenced the "illegal immigrants" and you also referenced the "legal immigrants" - two groups who are already here. But what you left out (or should I say abandoned) are the millions of lawful immigrants-in-waiting. You know, those people who are trying to lawfully come to America from all around the world but are stuck at the back of a slow-moving line, made slow-moving by the millions of illegal immigrants who have "Lance Armstronged" their way ahead of everyone else.
ReplyDeleteIf you and others would stop abandoning the lawful, hopeful, faithful, would-be immigrants, then the premise and conclusions of your article would change significantly.
For example, you pointed out the cliché, “America is a nation of immigrants” but then you proceeded to use one yourself, "We cannot send eleven million people back to their home countries".
I ask why not? Is it because you think we would lose our labor force? If you consider the millions of lawful immigrants-in-waiting, then you realize that our labor needs would be filled by lawful immigrants as quickly as the illegal immigrants departed.
If you say that we cannot deport eleven million people because of "moral" reasons, then I must ask where is the morality in abandoning millions of lawful immigrants who are trying to enter our country the right way while we reward those who have cut in front of them? After all, to grant the illegal immigrants a continuance of their stay in this country means, necessarily, that the lawful immigrants-in-waiting will be delayed even longer!
You began your article by saying, "There is no easy answer to America's illegal immigrant problem." That's right. Because the easy answer is the wrong answer. The right answer is difficult but it goes like this:
If you are in this country illegally, then you are in this country illegally. Those are the terms under which YOU chose to enter this country and those terms will not change. You violated the laws of another nation knowing every step of the way that it was wrong - but you did it anyway. You stole the opportunity of a lifetime from those who tried to immigrate the right way, and for that you, and you alone, must bear the responsibility for making reparations to them. It is you, the illegal immigrant, who must take the corrective action - not the government of the United States or her lawful citizens who spent billions of dollars to keep you out.
The sooner this country correctly places the blame for this problem, the sooner the problem will be solved.