More

Beyond Jan Brewer And Lou Dobbs: A Calm Center In The Immigration Debate


First Posted: 04/14/11 01:54 PM ET Updated: 06/14/11 06:12 AM ET

In 2002, shortly before the Iowa caucuses, billboards began popping up in small towns across the state. The signs, featuring archival photos of German, Scandinavian and Eastern European immigrants -- all of whom had emigrated in numbers to the state in past generations -- read: "Welcome the Immigrant You Once Were."

The billboards were part of a statewide effort to influence the discussion on immigration, according to Devin Burghart, Vice President of the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights and one of the campaign's organizers. "We saw efforts to toxify the climate, to make it less hospitable to new immigrants into the state," he says. "We knew where things were going [on immigration], but we had a hard time convincing people that it was going to get as nasty as it did."

The current tenor of the immigration debate makes 2002 -- a time when Jan Brewer was still largely unknown to the American public -- look like the Golden Age of Tolerance.

But, even though the tone of the national debate has heated up, communities in several states across the country are coming together to address the anxiety and fear surrounding immigration in a bid to strengthen ties between foreign born and native residents.

Born out of those first billboards in Iowa, the effort coalesced into a national group called Welcoming America in 2007. Four years later, the movement is currently operating in 15 states: from Birmingham, Alabama to Crete, Nebraska to Yamhill County, Oregon.

Along with billboards, there are now posters, radio ads, and television PSAs extolling welcoming messages. Complementing these efforts are dances, potlucks and picnics convened by local "Welcoming Committees" and held in partnership with Rotary clubs, church groups and civic organizations, all in an effort to forge stronger, more integrated communities.

Watch a clip of Welcoming America's PSA in North Carolina:

Listen to one of the organization's radio ads here:

Though this effort remains distinctly grassroots, Welcoming America now counts blue chip philanthropist George Soros as one of its biggest supporters -- his Open Society Institute granted $150,000 to the organization in December of 2010.

Raquiba LaBrie, the program director for OSI's Equality and Opportunity Fund, says of Welcoming America, "We thought this was a powerful model for reducing anxiety and undermining prejudice about immigrants and refugees through old school methods," specifically, person to person contact.

OSI is not the only organization noticing Welcoming America's efforts. Two weeks ago, the Draper Richards Kaplan Foundation, established in part by venture capital guru William Draper, awarded a $300,000 "entrepreneur" grant to the organization's executive director, David Lubell. And, on May 24, PBS will nationally broadcast a documentary about the program called "Welcome to Shelbyville."

Anne Marie Burgoyne, the portfolio director for Draper Richards Kaplan, believes Welcoming America is implementing a model that could change the way immigration is discussed on a national level. "We make general operation grants to innovative organizations to help take them to scale," she says. "We only fund things we think will have a high impact."

According to Lubell, what sets his project apart from other immigration-focused initiatives is its focus on resident populations, rather than just immigrant communities -- which tend to be the traditional focus of outreach efforts, including English language programs and jobs training. "A lot of groups are trying to water the seed, and not the soil surrounding it," says Lubell. "We're trying to water the soil. Nothing's going to grow just by watering one alone."

Suzette Brooks-Masters, who oversees immigration-related grantmaking at the J.M. Kaplan Fund, which put $90,000 towards Welcoming America activities in 2010, explains, "What I really liked about Welcoming America was that it was addressing a problem that a lot of philanthropists and a lot of advocacy groups had not tackled. Namely, how you talk to mainstream America" about immigration?

She adds, "A lot of energy has been put into the immigrant rights movement, creating infrastructure for that movement, building power -- which is all incredibly legitimate -- but the problem is it that it doesn't actually address how to talk to native Americans."

According to Lubell, one of the reasons his group is able to reach these resident populations is because Welcoming America events and communication efforts avoid any discussion of immigration reform or politics. "We don't advocate for policy,"he says. "We're a community building organization."

By avoiding the specifics of reform -- and instead focusing on the social and cultural fears surrounding immigration and changing communities -- Lubell says he is able to speak to what Brooks-Masters calls "the 60 percent in the middle."

According to Lubell, "Our main goal is to reach those people who are unsure whether immigration growth is a positive thing or not. And some of them are very reasonable -- they're just not getting accurate information about immigration."

So far, it remains difficult to assess how effective the organization's efforts have been -- especially as communities across the country continue to push forward with divisive legislation, including controversial English-only laws.

While Lubell is making a concerted effort to analyze his organization's efficacy (Welcoming America is set to begin pre- and post-event surveys for certain participants later this year) the relatively small scale of the efforts thus far and the inherently intangible nature of assessing public opinion -- as opposed to, say, measuring poverty rates or test scores -- makes such analysis difficult.

In 2010, for example, Lubell estimates that Welcoming America has targeted 8,611,247 individuals in the communities where initiatives (including communications and public events) have taken place. Of this group, the organization estimates it reached 736,185 immigrants - or 10% of the total audience.

Both Lubell and his foundational supporters say person-to person contact is creating more resilient communities. "The events," Lubell says, "are the most transformative." And while the organization contends that community dialogues and presentations are the best opportunity to change perceptions about immigration and fuel a strong "ripple effect", others question whether attendees of the local mixers aren't already inclined to have a favorable, or at least a considerably more progressive, view of immigrants.

Suzanne Donato, a professor of Sociology at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee, where Welcoming America has launched several initiatives, says that those "conversations can overwhelmingly feature an audience that feels the same way." In Donato's mind, Welcoming America is most successful in reaching that elusive 60% via its media and communications efforts.

"Those billboards were very dramatic," she says, referring to signs that were erected in Tennessee in 2006. "They certainly got peoples' attention -- everyone who drove down Interstate 40. Many different kinds of people saw them. And then there were letters to the editor [that followed]: ones that were pro-immigrant, some were anti, some were in the middle. But the billboards initiated conversations."

Donato also underscores the effectiveness of Welcoming America's targeted outreach programs: "They send people out to have conversations with people who, in the local paper or in the news, have said things that might have been considered unwelcoming to immigrants. Or that suggested the person saying them was smart, but may not have understood the full immigration story."

These outreach efforts, Donato contends, reach local officials: county commissioners, district attorneys and some law enforcement members -- providing a considerable ripple effect in small towns and cities.

Another issue complicating Welcoming America's mission is the fact that many of its local organizers are also independently involved in immigration advocacy efforts. Darcy Tromanhauser, a Nebraska coordinator for the Welcoming America activities, is also the director of the Immigrant Integration & Civic Participation Program at the advocacy group Nebraska Appleseed. Speaking to this potential conflict, Tromanhauser says, "I think those sorts of dividing lines happen all the time. For example, at a non-profit we can't do any partisan political activities. People are used to that in this space."

Convincing resident populations that Welcoming America is not part of any pro-immigration advocacy or policy efforts can be tricky even when the local representatives are completely independent. Kristin Collins, who runs Uniting North Carolina, Welcoming America's local affiliate in the state, notes that, "We're the only organization that operates as an independent non-profit, not affiliated with any advocacy groups. But our message is pro-immigrant -- so people tend to think, 'Oh they're just another one of those immigration advocacy groups.' We're really trying to show people that we're different. We're working hard to go to places where there's a mixed crowd with various beliefs and political positions."

Welcoming America organizers insist that they are trying to reach these disparate voices, but the organization has yet to make inroads in some of the battleground states where the immigration debate is at its fiercest, including Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada.

Of Arizona, Lubell says: "It's a place that we'll get to, but our organizations are still getting their feet wet and learning how this all works." Going to the state now, he contends, would be akin to "going straight to a senior high school AP class while you're still in junior high."

And while critics are certain to measure Welcoming America's work against the strength of conservative efforts -- the passage of laws requiring immigration status checks, or continued debate over the 14th Amendment, for example -- combatting the hardliners isn't really part of the organization's mission. "Some people are never going to be persuaded that this country needs to have fair immigration policies," says Raquiba LaBrie of OSI. "And I don't suggest they waste time trying to."

Some foundational supporters may have their own internally articulated goals inextricably tied to broader immigration policy reform, but Lubell remains defiant in his belief that reaching the moderate center and building stronger communities is the focus of his efforts. Regardless of the ultimate outcome, it's undeniable that Welcoming America exists as a haven from the otherwise heated rhetoric emanating from both sides of the aisle.

In explaining why he does what he does, Lubell recalls a personal anecdote: "I switched high schools when I was younger, and there were those students who were really welcoming to me, who gave me a good orientation -- and as a result I really succeeded in that school. I became head of the community service program, which got me headed in the direction I'm in today. It's similar with immigrants and the people who want to make communities stronger. When you feel more welcome, you succeed."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
In 2002, shortly before the Iowa caucuses, billboards began popping up in small towns across the state. The signs, featuring archival photos of German, Scandinavian and Eastern European immigrants -- ...
In 2002, shortly before the Iowa caucuses, billboards began popping up in small towns across the state. The signs, featuring archival photos of German, Scandinavian and Eastern European immigrants -- ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 245
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sean777
05:23 PM on 04/15/2011
Lou Dobbs has no moral authority to talk about immigration enforcement because Dobbs hired illegal immigrants as Meg Whitman did.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/07/lou-dobbs-hired-illegal-immigrants_n_753799.html
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cclaker
Save democracy. Campaign finance reform now.
08:33 AM on 04/15/2011
I've learned that Americans are not the fractious group the media and those in Washington perceive us to be. Most of us are fair-minded folks just trying to do the best we can. This group is illustrative of the tolerance that is one of our essential principles. We can develop a sound immigration policy, and we must demand that our legislators do that. The American people want it, and the demagogues in congress must no longer refuse to address this important issue.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:03 AM on 04/15/2011
great deer in the headlights photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aznurse
10:34 PM on 04/14/2011
nobody is talking about how the State university tuition are going up, but University of Phoenix and the Apollo Group just got a big tax break.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aznurse
12:26 PM on 04/15/2011
It's the END OF THE WORLD!!!
Brewer vetoed the tax break bill!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
The Cause Endures
07:08 PM on 04/14/2011
Great points Alex! Now, will you marry me? You are so bodacious.
FoundersFan
right = correct
06:56 PM on 04/14/2011
To in ANY way equate illegal aliens with immigrants is a dispicable slur against all immigrants.
02:09 AM on 04/15/2011
F & F!

#89
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sean777
02:25 AM on 04/15/2011
illegal aliens?

dispicable slur against humans
FoundersFan
right = correct
10:16 AM on 04/15/2011
So, what would you call them?
06:35 PM on 04/14/2011
We cannot accept illegal or legal immigrants into this country any longer. Over one million Legal immigrants are permitted to enter the US and become citizens every year. In addition to the Legal immigrants, over one million illegal immigrants sneak into the country every year, work illegally, don't pay taxes, pop out 10 anchor babies, have no intention of assimilating, refuse to learn English, get free healthcare, and are very racist towards white and black people. We have an extremely high rate of unemployment in this country. Why should we allow this to continue? Because if we stop it, it will hurt their feelings? Please join Numbersusa to stop illegal and legal immigration and support the US citizen. They are a responsible, moderate, educated, loving organization. They love the United States citizen!!! Go online and google Numbersusa and sign up to their action buffet to send faxes and letters to Congress, sign petitions, and support the US citizen. Numbersusa
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dtairtime
It is what it is
08:29 PM on 04/14/2011
If we had a requirement that the government prove we have the resources to provide for the over one million legal immigrants we allow every year BEFORE they can come here it would end.

Unless you know where:
50 million extra gallons of good water are every day.
45 million extra gallons of oil a day.
Millions of kilowatts of electricity a day.
Landfill space for 1.6 BILLION pounds of garbage a year.
Etc
Etc

Those amounts are only the EXTRA we need based on our legal immigration numbers. If we include the 12-20 million illegals and the foreign visa holders the numbers of extra people becomes absolutely unsustainable.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
conscioushope
"There is no darkness but ignorance." Shakespeare
06:30 PM on 04/14/2011
Lew and Brew 2012

Campaign Slogan:
any color but brown
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Targetdog
Remembering recent history...
06:28 PM on 04/14/2011
A potential 11 million taxpayers right on our doorstep, hmmmmmm.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
TggerJen
Protect at snowleopard.org
07:40 PM on 04/14/2011
From the Pew Hispanic Center:
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1190/portrait-unauthorized-immigrants-states
"They are especially likely to hold low-skilled jobs and their share of some of those occupations has grown."
and
"Adult unauthorized immigrants are disproportionately likely to be poorly educated. Among unauthorized immigrants ages 25-64, 47% have less than a high school education. By contrast, only 8% of U.S. born residents ages 25-64 have not graduated from high school."
and
"A third of the children of unauthorized immigrants and a fifth of adult unauthorized immigrants lives in poverty. This is nearly double the poverty rate for children of U.S.-born parents (18%) or for U.S.-born adults (10%)."

People who live in poverty and those who earn low wages don't pay much in taxes. They don't make enough income even when they work on the books (instead of off the books) and they don't have a lot of discretionary income to use on shopping sprees and real estate either. They do use more social/government services than people who make middle class and upper middle class incomes though.

Those who have school-age children and earn low wages cost us two free meals per school day plus free books and free English language tutoring if the children aren't English proficient. According to the non-partisan CBO, it costs us 20-40% MORE to educate children who do not read and write English fluently. That's a lot of educational resources diverted from American children and the children of legal immigrants. It's also a factor in why dishonest foreign nationals here illegally are a net drain on local, city, and state budgets; people who are uneducated and earn low wages don't pay much in income taxes even when they pay income taxes, and they don't have sufficient disposable income to pay much in sales and property taxes either.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8711/12-6-Immigration.pdf

Americans and legal immigrants without high school diplomas (with or without GEDs) and with a diploma but no post-secondary education or training have the highest unemployment rates of all groups, and that group is disproportionately minority in composition. The simple fact is that there's no reason that working poor, under-educated and minority people who are citizens or legally here should face illegal competition that interferes with them making a living. I know that none of the politicians in the two major corporate parties cares about the unemployment rates for these undereducated, under-employed and obviously under-represented Americans, but it's wrong to hand their jobs to dishonest foreign nationals and leave them without any recourse in their own country.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Targetdog
Remembering recent history...
07:50 PM on 04/14/2011
Nice cut and paste job. Pure unadultered BS. Hope you sleep well at night.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sean777
12:38 PM on 04/15/2011
"Americans and legal immigrants without high school diplomas (with or without GEDs) and with a diploma but no post-secon­dary education or training have the highest unemployment rates of all groups, and that group is disproport­ionately minority in composition. The simple fact is that there's no reason that working poor, under-educ¬ated and minority people who are citizens or legally here should face illegal competitio¬n that interferes with them making a living."
Where did you get that statement? The last Census published different data there are no enough Americans with the transferable skills to replace the current undocumented workers.
Besides the Pew Hispanic Center and the Congressional Budget Office agreed that the only way to deal with the problem is a Comprehensive immigration reform that implement enforcement like E-verify for all employers but allows the legalization of the undocumented already here because the country cannot afford the cost of mass deportations.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/03/deportation_cost.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR2005072501605.html
photo
pseudonymXXVI
I (Respectfully) Disagree
05:31 PM on 04/14/2011
I think this organization is doing great things, but I'm not sure if this is quite the center.
05:19 PM on 04/14/2011
Unfortunately, many people use the immigration debate as a way to express their racism, plain and simple. Many of the uneducated people who scream about "illegals" break laws on a daily basis. They only care about the law when it suits them, and if it doesn't they scream about amending the constitution.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
hrpmap
Retired man still active..
05:21 PM on 04/14/2011
Got a miror handy? You just described the pro illegals.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
The Cause Endures
07:09 PM on 04/14/2011
Care to name anyone who is "pro-illegals"? Then how this applies to them?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
TggerJen
Protect at snowleopard.org
05:32 PM on 04/14/2011
There's a fundamental difference between an American who occasionally breaks a law and a dishonest foreign national who is living every minute in violation of federal law, not counting when they drive illegally, work illegally, and often evade taxes as well.
Anyway, Americans who break the law are subject to the legal consequences for their law-breaking behavior. And it's entirely appropriate and fair and logical to expect that we can hold dishonest foreign nationals accountable and that they will face the consequences for their law-breaking behavior. So, the consequences for coming here / staying here illegally include deportation, but they and their supporters are demanding that they get rewards for their law-breaking behavior rather than consequences that are appropriate.
It's not so much the Americans who support law enforcement who demonstrate that they only care about the law when it suits them- it's the dishonest foreign nationals and their supporters who do that most consistently.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
The Cause Endures
07:12 PM on 04/14/2011
"Often evade taxes" How is that? They pay just as much taxes as anyone else - FACT.

Further, there are people here against their will, brought as children and raised knowing no other place but America. They get their licenses and drive legally. Why do you insist on living in a world you just make up?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:18 PM on 04/14/2011
I'm sure that there are many fine points in your article but since you don't make the difference between immigrant, who are welcome, and illegal immigrants, those point are lost.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
realitytrumpsbull
two 'alves of coconut!
05:17 PM on 04/14/2011
Sorry, clicked on the wrong window, meant to post the budget thing with the budget story. Anyway, on immigration, I have to side with 'immigration first', and figuring out whose responsibility it is to actually deal with the immigration issue, primarily. I think part of the problem with this issue is that so much money and attention has been spent on Overtheristan(s), that insufficient resources remain to actually tend to federal duties here at home, one of which is to tend our Nation's borders. There's a Border Patrol, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, both of which combined should be more than equal to the task of dealing with the immigration 'issue', especially with informed public support. 
Dobbs? Brewer?  He's a broadcaster, she's a Governor, closer to being 'government' and law enforcement than Dobbs is, but both should be soliciting views from the public weekly, in the interest of promoting wider debate, and building a larger database on the entire issue. The issue here mainly concerns Mexico, but not just Mexico. And Mexico, as we know, is having all kinds of problems, and a big one is drug-related violence, a cross-border problem, because many of the consumers of the drugs produced in Mexico, live and work in the US and call it 'home'. And, I think that the organized crime is more of a concern for many people, than the Mexican citizens themselves. But, there's also 'reconquista', and 'la raza', and so forth, and an atmosphere of antagonism, probably left over from the days of the Gadsden Purchase and before. 

Can we have better relations with Mexico, and other countries of origin for illegal immigration, in the future? I think so, but it will require more cooperation, more openness, and more information-sharing. America can't be all things to all people, and other countries, Mexico included, need to stand up and make good things happen for their own citizens, so that they have more options and choices besides packing a suitcase and scaling a fence at midnight, just to get away.
photo
RobietheCat
Altruism with someone else's money isn't
08:53 PM on 04/14/2011
Imagine any state, NY or Florida, able to get rid of the least educated, least skilled, poorest among their citizens to a neighboring state.

Now imagine a country that has no commitment to population control or caring for its citizens, and imagine a country that also has an abundance of criminals they wish to rid themselves of.

That would be Mexico. And we are the recipients of their 'export.'

Mexico is hardly a good neighbor. It is a very nationalistic country, that has always been antagonistic to the US.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
saint bernard mom
and Newfie Gram ♥spay♥neuter♥adopt♥
05:11 PM on 04/14/2011
And congratula­tions to anyone that comes here to live, work, go to school, etc and goes thru the legal processes. I have met many legal immigrants thru the years from Vietnam, Germany, Mexico to name a few, and  they are some of the hardest working, nicest people that I ever met.
 
I live in Tx and we do have a large population of people here illegally. I personally feel one of the biggest safety issues regarding those here illegally is the driving without a license, registrations, safety inspections, and insurance. 
 
There are reasons we have the legal immigratio­­­n process and other processes and that is to ensure everyone's safety. 
 
Drivers License: People take written, eye, and profiency tests to prove that they are competant to be behind the wheel of a vehicle. It makes sure that you know the laws and rules of the road, you have good depth perception­­­, checks for night blindness, that you can safely maneuver a vehicle on the road and follow the road signs and instructio­­­ns, etc. So if I buy a drivers license from someone selling one on the black market, how safe is that for you and your family while I am on the road with no training, may or may not even be able to read road signs, need to have restrictio­ns on my license for vision correction­s, or testing of my skills?
 
Vehicle Safety Inspection­­­: Most states require that a vehicle be tested yearly to make sure it is in proper working condition. They check, lights, brakes, turn signals, tires, etc. So, if I purchase a "counterfe­­­it" safety inspection­­­, how safe is that for everyone else on the road, not knowing if my tires are worn out or my brakes are shot?
 
Legal Immigratio­­­n Visas: Legal documents check a person's ID, criminal history, background­­­, medical, etc. Maybe this person never had so much of a parking ticket, but maybe they had dealt drugs, maybe they stole things, maybe they did something to hurt someone else, or they were in contact with TB, etc. So a person can walk across the desert, or swim the Rio Grande and cross the desert, because they want to have a better life, but does that ensure that this person is someone that is safe to be in family neighborho­­­ods or around children?
 
There are reasons that we make rules, whether it is for an electrical contractor­­'­s license, a day care license, a drivers license, school bus driver license, brake job mechanic, immigratio­­­n visa, etc, and that is because it ensures that the people doing these things are able to do these things safely and are not a danger.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
realitytrumpsbull
two 'alves of coconut!
05:03 PM on 04/14/2011
Well, we'll see if it's actual debt reduction, or just deficit reduction. Some people say basically they should cancel the government's MasterCrack Platinum, and start demanding payment in full, and go forth and spend no more (promissory monies).   The idea that we can further indenture ourselves annually as a nation by 1.6 trillion dollars for all perpetuity is ludicrous. We have a great country, but they have that word, 'exceptionalism', and other countries have gone bust before, by printing too much money to the point where it lost all respect on international markets, and ultimately, became worthless. Do we want to 'go there', or do we want a dollar, either paper, or digital, to retain value as currency-in-trade? Obama also mentioned about across-the-board cuts. In 2014. I say if they're a good idea in 2014, they're also a good idea in 2011. No one likes that phrase, 'budget cut', but I think it comes down to wants, needs, and luxuries, and differentiating between them. What do we want, what do we actually NEED, and what constitutes a luxury, something basically unaffordable but nice-to-have, the 'shiny thing' that can go right back on the shelf where the budget people found it, until such time as we can really afford it?   I say that government runs a risk of becoming hoist by its' own promissory petard, there's all this stuff about 'federal poverty level' and so forth, I say that's another work of artful political fiction, back to needs, a person NEEDS 3 things, to live, food, water, and shelter, nothing in there about a Mercedes 500 SEL.   If we can un-skew our priorities, and line them up in line with actual needs, then we'll be closer to fulfilling them, and creating opportunities in which people can get up off their lazy butts, and start tending to their own needs, as in time of old before red-ink nannystatism.