• RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
Chernynkaya On March - 18 - 2010

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Emma Lazarus’ poem makes me tear up. I’m proud of America’s immigrant history, and grateful that the door was open when my grandparents fled Russia.

I am instinctively and emotionally pro-immigration. I enjoy living in a diverse and culturally rich atmosphere that is Los Angeles. But a review of serious, nonpartisan research reveals facts– some uncomfortable –about the economics of modern immigration, and immigration from Mexico in particular. If we are going to respond effectively to anti-immigrant demagogues, we have to acknowledge those facts.

Some Facts About Mexican Illegal Immigrants:

There are approximately 12 million unauthorized Latino immigrants living in the United States.

Mexico is by far the leading country of origin for U.S. immigrants, accounting for a third (32%) of all foreign-born residents and two-thirds (66%) of Latino immigrants. The U.S. is the destination for nearly all people who leave Mexico, and about one-in-ten people born there currently lives in the U.S.

The Los Angeles Times reports that over 6,000 migrants have died in the Arizona desert since the mid-1990s, when border enforcement in California was tightened and migration routes shifted east into barren, deadly territory.

The average wage in Mexico is about $4.15 an hour and those in the agricultural industry make even less. Individuals can barely survive on those wages and families cannot. Currently about 40% of the Mexican population is below the poverty line.

Once a Mexican immigrant successfully crosses the border into the United States, they generally have two main goals. Their first aim is to send part of their earnings back home to their family and their second goal is to bring more family members to the United States. Eventually they hope to gain permanent residency (green card) and possibly U.S. citizenship status. Other illegal immigrants come with a different purpose. They emigrate to the United States with the sole intention of finding a job that will allow them to save enough money to buy a house or set up their own business upon their return to Mexico. Whatever the specific intentions of the Mexican immigrant are, we can agree that their main desire is to come to the United States in search of a better life.

Immigrants prop up metro areas. Despite a slowdown fueled by fewer jobs in construction and service industries, immigrants are helping metro areas such as Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami and New York make up for the net loss of residents to other parts of the USA.

O’Reilly, Dobbs and other hate-fear mongers are wrong that undocumented immigrants don’t pay taxes. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office and the Social Security Administration, undocumented immigrants pay all kinds of taxes, including individual income, sales, property, and social security taxes.

Fiscal Implication of Mexican Immigrants From the Center for Immigration Studies (2004):

Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.

Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).

With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.

On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.

Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.

If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.

Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status — what most illegal aliens would become — can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.

Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.

The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain — many legal immigrants are highly skilled.

The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work.

While immigration may have raised overall income slightly (about 1%), many of the poorest native-born Americans are hurt by undocumented immigrants. Because Mexican immigrants have much less education than the average U.S. worker, they increase the supply of less-skilled labor, driving down the wages of the worst-paid Americans. A study of this effect, by George Borjas and Lawrence Katz of Harvard, estimates that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 % more if it weren’t for Mexican immigration.

It is intellectually dishonest to say that immigrants do “jobs that Americans will not do.” This is true in good times and more so in these times. The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays — and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants.

Basic decency requires that we provide immigrants, once they’re here, with essential health care, education for their children, and more. As the Swiss writer Max Frisch wrote about his own country’s experience with immigration, “We wanted a labor force, but human beings came.” Unfortunately, low-skill immigrants don’t pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the benefits they receive.

From Paul Krugman, writing about the Bush-proposed “guest worker” program and about the fiscal issues  in a 2006 editorial:

Worse yet, immigration penalizes governments that act humanely. Immigrants are a much more serious fiscal problem in California than in Texas, which treats the poor and unlucky harshly, regardless of where they were born.

We shouldn’t exaggerate these problems. Mexican immigration, says the Borjas-Katz study, has played only a “modest role” in growing U.S. inequality. And the political threat that low-skill immigration poses to the welfare state is more serious than the fiscal threat: the disastrous Medicare drug bill alone does far more to undermine the finances of our social insurance system than the whole burden of dealing with illegal immigrants.

But modest problems are still real problems, and immigration is becoming a major political issue. What are we going to do about it?

Realistically, we’ll need to reduce the inflow of low-skill immigrants. Mainly that means better controls on illegal immigration.

Meanwhile, Mr. Bush’s plan for a “guest worker” program is clearly designed by and for corporate interests, who’d love to have a low-wage work force that couldn’t vote. Not only is it deeply un-American; it does nothing to reduce the adverse effect of immigration on wages. And because guest workers would face the prospect of deportation after a few years, they would have no incentive to become integrated into our society.

What about a guest-worker program that includes a clearer route to citizenship? I’d still be careful. Whatever the bill’s intentions, it could all too easily end up having the same effect as the Bush plan in practice — that is, it could create a permanent underclass of disenfranchised workers.

Earlier this month, President Obama held meetings on immigration reform with immigrant advocates and labor and religious leaders, with Senators Charles Schumer and Lindsey Graham, and with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. He came out reiterating his “unwavering” commitment to comprehensive immigration reform.

Some Immigration Reform Proposals

DREAM Act

The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act) creates a path to citizenship for undocumented students who entered the U.S. as children, provided they have finished high school and attend college or serve in the military. Passing the DREAM Act would better enable hardworking students to attend college, find good jobs and further contribute to our economy and society. The DREAM Act would not completely overhaul our immigration system. The bill would only affect students who entered the U.S. before 16 years of age; the Senate version includes an extra requirement that the student be under age 35.

An estimated 65,000 undocumented students graduate high school each year to face an uncertain future in this country. Only 10 to 20 percent of those who graduate high school are able to enroll in higher education. Though the bill directly affects a fraction of the undocumented population, it’s in our shared interest to see that it goes forward. Recent analysis from DMI’s Cristina Jimenez shows that passing the DREAM Act would boost our economy, strengthen our workforce and expand the middle class.

Schumer & Graham

Senator Chuck Schumer has been deputized by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid  — himself a strong advocate of reform — to be point man on this issue for the Democratic Majority. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has worked with Schumer for more than a year to create a bipartisan immigration reform bill.

Not much detail has been released about the Schumer/Graham proposal, but it is likely to track fairly closely to previous bipartisan efforts at compromise:

1) Stepped up border and interior enforcement targeting smugglers, criminals, and employers;

2) A worker verification system to allow employers to easily determine who can and can’t work legally in the U.S.;

3) A process for getting people who have been waiting for permission to come to the U.S. legally through the processing backlog that can stretch to 20 years currently;

4) Legal immigration channels for workers and family members as an alternative to illegal immigration; and

5) A requirement that people who are in the country illegally register with the government, pay fines, pass a criminal background check, and fulfill other criteria to get legal status that would eventually allow them to apply for U.S. citizenship like other immigrants.

Representative Luis Gutierrez, a Democrat of Illinois, already has offered a bill that legalizes immigrants who show that they have been employed, pay a $500 fine, learn English and undergo a criminal background check, among other things.

Wrong Immigration Reform

Two words: Joe Arpaio.

Sheriff Arpaio in the federal 287(g) program, which deputizes local law enforcement to act as immigration agents in street patrols and in jails. This program must stop. Sheriff Arpaio has a long, ugly record of abusing and humiliating inmates. His scandal-ridden desert jails have lost accreditation and are notorious places of cruelty and injury. His indiscriminate neighborhood raids use minor infractions like broken taillights as pretexts for mass immigration arrests.

To the broader question of whether federal immigration enforcement should be outsourced en masse in the first place, the answer again is no. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano unveiled a plan to repair the rotting immigration detention system. The Bush administration had outsourced the job to state, local and private jailers, with terrible results: inadequate supervision, appalling conditions, injuries and deaths.

Napolitano wants to centralize federal control over the system that handles detainees. But she insists on continuing to outsource and expand the flawed machinery that catches them, including 287(g) and a system of jailhouse fingerprint checks called Secure Communities, which increase the likelihood that local enforcers will abuse their authority and undermine the law.

Programs like 287(g) rest on the dishonest premise that illegal immigrants are a vast criminal threat. But only a small percentage are dangerous felons. The vast majority are those whom President Obama has vowed to help get right with the law, by paying fines and earning citizenship. Arpaio and other Nazis like him should be stopped by reform, and they must be.

Why Democrats Should Pick A Fight On Immigration

Finally, there are very practical political reasons for the Democrats to spearhead immigration reform. Besides the clear moral arguments for fixing our corrupt, exploitive system, the long-term politics are plain: Latino communities nationwide are young, growing and increasingly ready to show up at the polls. And the certain-to-be xenophobic reaction of the GOP’s loudest voices today will not only motivate Latinos this November, it might alienate independent voters as well.

Obama’s embrace of immigration reform helped elect Democrats  in 2008. Latino voters arguably made victory possible in places as disparate as Indiana and Florida, and their political networks have only matured since. Throughout both the South and the Midwest, motivated Latino voters can strengthen Democrats’ hand. If the Democrats fail to address the immigration issue – an issue to which Latino voters are particularly sensitive and which helped drive their increased turnout in 2008 – the Democrats face even longer odds with voters in 2010.

President Obama is determined to pass immigration reform, but has acknowledged the challenges, saying, “I’ve got a lot on my plate.” He added that there would almost certainly be “demagogues out there who try to suggest that any form or pathway for legalization for those who are already in the United States is unacceptable.”

Almost 400,000 immigrants were deported last year. Those deportations touch legal immigrant families — voters — throughout America, and they increase the pressure building within the Latino community for action. On March 21st, a huge national march will take place on the Mall to express the frustration of the immigrant community that even as deportations continue, there has been little action on immigration reform. The American people have been far out front of the politicians on this issue, overwhelmingly supporting comprehensive reform. Washington can still catch up.

Categories: News & Politics

Written by Chernynkaya

I am an artist and have lived in Los Angeles all of my life, except for a brief hippie period when I lived in SF. I am currently (semi-unwillingly) retired, but have had several careers.

70 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. Chernynkaya says:

    This is very good. Perhaps these two groups have seen through the divide-and-conquer strategy and it will no longer work:

    • Chernynkaya says:

      I read that this morning too, BT. As always, my gut reaction is against that biometric card because I don’t trust the govt (or more precisely, some government worker) to NOT put personal info on that ID card.

      But I already have a card that has a strip that can be swiped and who knows what’s really on it? It’s my Calif. drivers’ license. And the fact is, that unless we are willing to allow illegal and some criminals and possibly terrorists to work here--and some in sensitive positions-- what else can we do? Maybe there is another, less problematic way?

      • KQuark says:

        I think the stupidity is the cards are redundant. If you are already a US citizen you have plenty of documentation proving such. I like UKs compromise. Cards for legal immigrants and optional cards for citizens. I mean so what if you can’t prove your citizenship instantly when getting a job. It’s not like you get a new job every day.

          • bitohistory says:

            E-Verify is mandatory in AZ also.

          • KQuark says:

            Yup another reason the card is an unnecessary redundancy.

            I’m sensitive about this because my wife had a hell of a time once proving she was a citizen because FL had perpetuated a typo in the spelling of her middle name. One cop almost took her GA drivers license away going into a government building just for this typographical error. It’s going to be an administrative nightmare to go to these cards for no good reason.

          • Chernynkaya says:

            BT, I honestly think that corps that hire large groups of illegals do so knowingly. I think if anything kills Immigration Reform, it will be the Chamber of Commerce. Oh, they won’t be honest and say they like a under-payed workforce who can’t vote, they will raise all sorts of false claims about how reform will take away our freedoms and produce Mexican welfare queens. They will pull out all stops and go full-bore into scare tactics and it will work. But at least the Dems can show to the Latino voters that hey really did try.

            • KQuark says:

              The COC will love it if they make the slaver err… guest worker program large enough for them.

            • Chernynkaya says:

              :-) Yep. Such a drag not to be able to outsource agriculture, meat packing and construction,huh?

      • Khirad says:

        I understand the ACLU position, and everything. But I remember this being a huge issue in the UK a couple years back.

        Maybe I’m a new generation, or just a “sheeple” who needs to “Wake UP!” -- but as to the hysteria over this -- I could never help the feeling they were sometimes based more on woo woo notions.

        Not to say I’m not exactly with you in my gut. Merely, how is this so drastically different than our other current forms of ID?

        In other words, I’m willing to get educated and will start with BT’s article below.

        • KQuark says:

          All bills go through the sausage grinder, it’s just never been this visible before. But the card does bother me allot because it’s an undue burden especially on the working class and quite frankly the government that has to administer them.

        • Chernynkaya says:

          Yep. I agree. And also, I think every piece of legislation is going to be a ridiculous battle. I can only hope that the Dems learn from HCR that they cannot count on more than at most a hand full of Blue Dogs to come on board and even fewer Reptilians. They are going to have to change the rules to accomplish anything. And I feel that unless they can accomplish more, faster, voters will become more and more fed up.

          • bitohistory says:

            Senator Ghram said if the HCR bill is passed, the immigration bill is dead. He will pull out of it.
            I don’t think this bill will be even written until after the November elections.

    • Khirad says:

      I always wonder. What exactly do they mean by biometric data? Like what? Will it be able to do retinal scans? Or do they mean like just a fingerprint?

      • SanityNow says:

        here is a Wiki definition of Biometric Data:

        Biometrics comprises methods for uniquely recognizing humans based upon one or more intrinsic physical or behavioral traits. In computer science, in particular, biometrics is used as a form of identity access management and access control. It is also used to identify individuals in groups that are under surveillance.

        Biometric characteristics can be divided in two main classes:

        * Physiological are related to the shape of the body. Examples include, but are not limited to fingerprint, face recognition, DNA, hand and palm geometry, iris recognition, which has largely replaced retina, and odor/scent.
        * Behavioral are related to the behavior of a person. Examples include, but are not limited to typing rhythm, gait, and voice. Some researchers[1] have coined the term behaviometrics for this class of biometrics.

      • bitohistory says:

        Khirad, don’t they have cards like that now for daily crossers?

  2. Chernynkaya says:

    Funny that I have to hear about this from the Guardian, huh?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/mar/18/immigration-evangelical-christian

    Evangelical about immigration

    Pro-immigration activists are marching on Washington DC this weekend, and evangelical Christians play a key role in their fight.

    Thousands of pro-immigration activists from across the country will flock to Washington DC on 21 March to demand that President Obama and Congress pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill in 2010. Mainline Catholics and Protestants who have long defended the rights of illegal aliens plan to be front and centre, as they have been for years. But marching alongside them this year will be some fresh religious faces: evangelical Christians.

    Last October, the conservative-leaning National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), which represents some 30 million evangelical Christians, passed a resolution at its annual meeting in support of comprehensive immigration reform.

    • Khirad says:

      And yes, the Evangelical community is not a monolith, though that particular group is noteworthy -- but along with their own demographic flock to tend to, they have changed some positions. Evangelicals are often caricatured to be rigidly partisan, when they can straddle. This is why I reserve ‘Talibangelical’ for a very certain type.

      • Chernynkaya says:

        I believe that is the largest evangelical group. So it is very significant. I am tempted to say this change is all about keeping Latinos as parishioners, but I will be charitable and take them at their word.

  3. javaz says:

    Cher, have you seen this article?

    This weekend, several thousands of people are expected to gather on the National Mall to demand action on immigration reform. The immigration restrictionist group NumbersUSA is meanwhile responding with a four-day campaign to

  4. Questinia says:

    Another informative article, Cher. Did you happen upon any research about illegal aliens and their effect on the nation’s health care?

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Great question, Questinia!

      From Center for Immigration Studies:

      Social Security and Medicare. Although we find that the net effect of illegal households is negative at the federal level, the same is not true for Social Security and Medicare. We estimate that illegal households create a combined net benefit for these two programs in excess of $7 billion a year, accounting for about 4 percent of the total annual surplus in these two programs. However, they create a net deficit of $17.4 billion in the rest of the budget, for a total net loss of $10.4 billion. Nonetheless, their impact on Social Security and Medicare is unambiguously positive. Of course, if the Social Security totalization agreement with Mexico signed in June goes into effect, allowing illegals to collect Social Security, these calculations would change.

      And I was just now reading this!:

      Immigration provision has Hispanic Caucus threatening

      • Questinia says:

        Yes, that’s the reason I asked. I worked the ER during my residency training at a hospital in NYC which is now going bankrupt (bad business model), and I was amazed at the amount of free health care illegal aliens got. Of course, it had to be given, we took an oath. But I could see the writing on the x-ray.

      • Khirad says:

        I remember them threatening this. I was like, — I feel you — it’s not fair, but this is the last thing we need. I hope they’ve gotten/will get something practicable, but let’s wait for the next item on the agenda… por favor?!

  5. javaz says:

    Another great article, Cher, and it took me until this morning to figure out that the ICE was in regards to immigration and not in regards to Johnny Weir and figure skating!

    DOH!

    Here’s another Sheriff Joe immigration story, and as you know the sheriff is very popular for his anti-immigrant stance, but he’s also under a Grand Jury investigation for abuse of power.

    Phoenix, Arizona, March 18, 2010

    • Khirad says:

      Heh, I just got the ICE part on my own this morning, as well.

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Sheriff Arpaio is a blight on this nation. I am ashamed to live in a country where he has any power. And that might be in understatement. He is, as I mentioned, a true Nazi.

      About Thompson’s book, I haven’t heard of it, but there is a real need to make people understand that the price they pay for their food is directly related to undocumented--almost slave--labor. Thanks for posting that Javaz!

  6. Khirad says:

    I know this is tangential, but I really do believe in the power of films to give us a more direct perspective, and to cut to the complexities beyond doctrinaire political debate (though to the consternation of the right, complex realities can often lean left -- never mind screenwriters).

    Two films I am reminded of in this -- which are most poignant, as they do not include Mexican-Americans (though I’m trying to remember some titles to this effect):

    In America
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_America

    The Visitor
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Visitor_%282008_film%29

  7. Khirad says:

    Sadly, with all that Lou Dobbs said in which I disagreed, he would predicate it upon the fact that corporations wanted cheap labor and that if wages were higher Americans would work those jobs. As much as I hated it, I couldn’t always disagree with him -- though his singular obsession was disturbing.

    However; without unions, I have doubts on meat packing (think Fast Food Nation). When my parents were in High School -- early college, they would work the fields, picking berries or working in the cannery. That may still be true, but I still see it as another job legals don’t generally want to do.

    Fields like construction are different. That is where they hurt American blue collar workers.

    On the Napolitano thing, (not mentioning the shortfalls of her position) it should be noted that she and Joe were nemeses to each other in Arizona. That’s why when I found her using her federal position to target him, I couldn’t help my sardonic laughter. Mwahahaha! 😈

    • Chernynkaya says:

      When immigration reform is discussed in the media, they only briefly--and as an almost afterthought--mention the employers. The fact is, agribusiness, meat packing, and other sectors (like construction) exploit and rely on cheap illegal labor. After all, those businesses can’t be exported. Here in CA, we’d probably pay $5 or $6 for a small box of strawberries if not for undocumented workers.And you’re right that most legals don’t want to do the jobs that immigrants do, but that’s not saying they wouldn’t do them if they were paid the minimum wage, and if there were no other unskilled jobs. I also think that if there were no undocumented workers the path to unionizing would be possible if not likely. I just think that if we want to have a principled discussion of immigration, we need to be honest, and the fact is, they suppress wages.

      I am not sure what you mean about Nepolitano getting back at Arpaio though. Yes, she’s cleaning up the jails, but leaving in place the way local law enforcement--Like the sheriff--is involved. You know more about that than I do, so please let me know. I might not have those facts straight.

      • Khirad says:

        Yeah, I don’t know if you completely understood me or not, but I was generally agreeing with you. Minimum wage is key. And, meat packing was once an ugly but living wage, as well.

        On Napolitano: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/03/11/20090311investigation0311.html

        I just saw this on MSNBC:

        Tacos Para Justicia!
        http://www.latinovotersleague.net/tacos.php

        • Chernynkaya says:

          Oh, Ok, I did misunderstand-- I thought you were saying that legals wouldn’t do those jobs no matter what. Sorry!

          I love that the DOJ is investigating Arpaio, but that’s not the issue-- unless I am misunderstanding again. (It is early for me!) Napolitano is not involved in that, right? What she is doing is cracking down on detention centers but leaving the local enforcement (not the feds) in place, and that means Arpaio. Right?

          Tacos Para Justicia! has a slightly um, not racist but weird ad strategy, IMO. I mean, where to find good tacos and get immigration reform at the same time? Odd.

          • Khirad says:

            I could have worded my first post with better qualifiers.

            Last month, four key Democratic members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee asked Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to investigate Arpaio.

            You’ll have to forgive me, as well. My memory is hazy right now. I just remember at the time some of us in Arizona were laughing about Janet’s revenge. Don’t recall at the moment how it panned out.

            I have no particular opinion on Tacos Para Justicia as of yet. Just saw it, that’s all. I don’t think it’s the worst idea ever.

            • Chernynkaya says:

              Thanks, I didn’t know about the Judiciary Committee. Still, they need to tar an feather Arpaio, at the very least. And stop outsourcing federal law enforcement to local yahoos.

            • Khirad says:

              Of course. I can’t say I’m not disappointed.

  8. whatsthatsound says:

    Great article, Cher, and powerful visual. Is it yours? I recall that a. you are an artist, and b. you said that your work is “dark” so I’m suspicious. If so, take credit!
    The quote about wanting a labor force and getting real, actual human beings is so poignant. That’s the way this sorry world works, and each of us is the lesser for it. People don’t come first anymore, if they ever did. Profits, productivity, power; those are the words that drive the current madness that we euphemistically refer to as “civilization”. Thank God for people like AlphaBitch. In a saner world, they would be the folks running things.

    Reminds me of the story about heaven and hell. The exact same scene, a pot of food, and handles too long for people to place the food in their own mouths. In hell, they starve. In heaven, they feed each other.

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Thank you, What’s! Heh, no that is not my artwork, but it is so interesting that you think it could be because--it almost could be! I was attracted to it as it is a bit similar to my style. I am also very attracted to Mexican folk art and modern Mexican artists. The kind of art I do most often is what is called Outsider Art, similar to the movement of the fancier name Object Trouve. But I guess one could call the art in the image I posted a good example of that too. I’ll really have to get some photos posted.

      Anyway, I’m glad you liked it and the post too! I was taken by that quote from Max Frisch as well. It kind of says it all.

  9. SueInCa says:

    Great post Cher. As long as the Corp community needs their labor, I wonder how much real reform will be passed. I am surprised that Lindsey Graham is working with Schumer but I truly hope they can come up with something substantial. As it is with most things nowadays in our country, Corp is king. They use these people because they can pay less and they also put these people in their sweatshops still here in the US. They know there will be no complaints since they could be deported and it is wrong, just wrong.

    We have a long history in this country, despite our statue of liberty, we have treated immigrants different. The Italians, the Irish they went through it too. I truly hope we get there someday soon.

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Thank you, Sue. Yes it is another example of the venality of corporations. And the hypocrisy--no matter how much they exhibit it--is stunning. The business interests who use these people are like slave owners of the south, in many cases.

  10. AlphaBitch says:

    Hey everyone: great article, lots of interesting points. The reason I’ve been missing lately is trying to get an organization off the ground that will help refugees -- those who are here at the very invitation of the US Govt. The US accepts between 20,000 and 50,000 refugees each year -- many are now coming from Africa and Iraq, as well as Bhutan and Burma. The resources available at one time have shrunk, as has the economy. Instead of leaving these newbies to their own devices, we are trying to help them realize that -- with the exception of very few -- most of us have families that came from somewhere else. We are all part of the thread that makes up the tapestry that is the United States. With the exception of Canada and perhaps a few other countries, we can be proud of the fact that we are not a homogenous society, but rather a very diverse one.

    I recently met a family of nine who WALKED -- WALKED -- across Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya and finally arrived in Ethiopia, where they lived for seven years in a refugee camp. The father had an infection and had to have a colostomy; because of his medical needs, he was given asylum in the US. He is fed exclusively by IV nourishment. His wife works at a minimum wage job; they have seven children, from late teens to probably 8 or 9 years old.

    The woman’s job will end this month; their four to six months of assistance also ends. They could face eviction.

    Their needs are huge, but they were invited here. It seems to me that if we take refugees such as these, we have an obligation to “help” them more than 4 to 6 months. Can you imagine if the situation were reversed, and you ended up in Burundi?

    I don’t get to weigh in often -- love God’s Blog, as it always makes me laugh -- but this is so critical. There is a difference between legal and illegal immigration. Refugees are an entirely separate status than immigrants, meaning they have no sponsor or family member to help them. Our organization will work to pair an American family with a refugee family for emotional support, cultural assimilation, and friendship for one year, to enable them to become familiar with their new homeland.

    Do yourselves a favor: contact Catholic Charities in your region. I have a list of “needs” for the newly arrived families- honestly, towels, blankets and lamps are the most desired items. When you buy something new, or if you have a friend who is doing the same, consider passing along your former things to a refugee family. It’s a small act of kindness we can all do. They are TRULY the tired, the poor and the huddled masses.

    Thanks for the great article, Cher!

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Alpha Bitch-- it’s so good to see you! But after reading about what you’ve been up to, I can only say: Bravo!! That is such important and truly humanitarian work. This country needs to clone millions more of you!

      • AlphaBitch says:

        Cher -- I’m truly not trying to be humble (trust me -- those who know me well would agree) BUT -- there is no “Bravo” for me. I look in awe on the strength and courage and determination of these folks that I have just started meeting, and feel like a small grain of sand. I’m just trying to irritate the world as my oyster to get that pearl to help those folks. That’s all.

        Thank you for the compliment -- but again, it’s THEM not me who deserve praise. And towels and lamps.

        And the Blov shudders with the thought of millions of me…..my greatest strength is also my greatest weakness, as is so often the case…..I don’t think we could take hundreds more, to be honest…..

    • kesmarn says:

      You’re doing God’s work, AB! No wonder you love His blogs so much. You’re kindred spirits!

      • AlphaBitch says:

        Hey Kesmarn -- back at ya! You and your job caring for the sick. I applaud your work and know that I could never do what you do. I have many nurses in my family, and have such respect for all of them. And I met two of the most fabulous women, who are also “community partners”, and who teach at our local med school (nurse practitioner courses). They have adopted one apartment complex of refugees, and give of their time and energy by going over each week to do checkups -- blood pressure and sugars mostly. Word has spread by mouth, and many others from neighboring areas are also showing up. They are trying to learn all the cultural issues -- men can’t see women alone, or maybe not at all and vice versa. They are energized and just the most wonderful people. What I’m trying to do -- although needed -- seems like such small potatoes.

        So keep up the good, honest, true work Kes. You are one of my inspirations here.

  11. kesmarn says:

    Cher, what a fine job you’ve done in covering such a complex issue.

    It’s heart-breaking. I live in a rust belt area with incredibly high levels of unemployment. The population is about 68% white, 22% black, 8% Latino and 2% “other.” This was as of 2000. I suspect the 2010 census will show a fairly sizable increase in the Latino population.

    What has been the consequence, though, for immigrants, of the economic downturn that has hit this area so hard? To unite and mobilize poor Whites, Blacks and Latinos? Sadly, not. What I’m hearing in talking with my Black and Latino friends is growing mistrust and even hostility between the two communities! They’re often in competition with each other for the same jobs. Black workers are unhappy with what they see as johnny-come-lately immigrants from Mexico. And Mexican immigrants feel that their work ethic is second to none, hence they get work that no one else in the area wants. Meanwhile, wealthy business owners are having a field day with a glut of workers who have moved beyond eager to desperate. They (owners) are the only winners in the game of escalating tensions. I know of some Hispanic voters (who voted for Obama the first time around) who are ready to vote Republican in the next election based on this situation alone!

    It’s madness to have the poor battling each other while the wealthy profit from cheap--even illegal--labor. As you point out, Cher, there has to be a way to fix this.

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Hi Kes, thanks, and yes, heartbreaking. The point you bring up is so true: Minorities fighting over the smallest slice of the pie. The tension between the black and Latino communities has a long, sad history. It is particularly volatile here in Long Beach.

      Interestingly, in the early 1960s, with the advent of the civil-rights movement, public opinion began to view the Bracero program-- which was a program that hired Mexican workers to pick during the harvests — as exploitative of Mexican workers. So the black civil rights movement also highlighted the plight of migrant workers. If only they had formed a lasting coalition then! I bet if Dr. King and Ceasar Chavez had each lived longer, that might have happened. Hmmm.

      It is very much in the interests of corporate power to encourage divisions between minorities. (I would love to find proof that the are actively involved in this.) If minorities and the poor ever were capable of uniting, watch out!

      • kesmarn says:

        Cher, the most glaring example of corporate power actively being engaged in encouraging divisions between minorities that I can think of is Fox and Clear Channel pushing the Beck-Limbaugh agenda.

        Like you, I hope minorities and the poor figure out soon just what that Gulliver/Lilliput story is all about…

  12. FrankenPC says:

    Wow Cher… Your posts are so elegant. I’m seriously jealous.

    These are my thoughts: We need control of the borders to ensure no illegal nuclear/biological weapons make it into the US via this route. BUT, we need to abstract this need from illegal immigration. I feel that we Americans are treating humans as cattle. Something to be corralled. This is wrong on so many levels it’s unbelievable.

    Also, I would remind the white supremacists disguised as conservative white males that the entire U.S. was established by immigrants. Hell, we owe the entire intercontinental railroad to Chinese labor. Sigh. Yet another reason to be deeply irritated by the grand hypocrites who call themselves Americans.

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Thanks, Franken, but you have nothing to be jealous about!

      I couldn’t agree more-- the immigration issue is only tangentially connected to the terrorism issue, yet they have become confused. Immigrants are not terrorists and only a few are criminals. But yes, we definitely need to control our borders and our ports. I read that it costs about $1 million for each mile of fence along the border-- and it’s a 2,000 mile border. It would seem that with technology, we should be able to secure our borders--and don’t forget, most terror suspects came in from Canada.


Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories
Features