Immigrant Day was acknowledged at the California State Capitol last month, and though our agenda aimed to protect and help integrate immigrants into California, the word on my mind was "Arizona."
The now-infamous Arizona law, which many feel institutionalizes discrimination, passed just weeks earlier. It has sparked many protests and counter-protests, and seems to have only further polarized an already contentious arena of debate that now lands everyone in one of two camps: pro-immigrant or anti-immigrant.
At least that's the picture of the country we are shown on TV news, with dueling rallies, angry flag-waving crowds and people shouting. It's the high drama of what we are told is a divisive issue, a possibly irreconcilable controversy. But as always, reality is more nuanced.
I believe it is this: While the immigration debate rages on TV screens and via public opinion polls, a strong majority agrees on the fundamentals of a solution -- and perhaps not surprisingly, that solution is practical and moderate, having nothing to do with either amnesty or mass deportation.
A recent New York Times poll bears this out. On the question of whether recent immigrants to the United States contribute to the country or harm it, the public is fairly evenly split -- with 49 percent responding "contribute" and 31 percent "harm." But on the question of how to solve the immigration puzzle, a resounding two-thirds of the country agrees on the basic premise that illegal immigrants already working in the country should be allowed to seek legal status and stay working.
These results suggest that the country may not need to agree on a definition of a problem in order to agree on the solution.
As strong advocates for immigrants in California, we have long argued that immigrants contribute to our state in ways that are substantial and far reaching. In fact, some of us argue that our future economic viability depends on how we treat immigrants, since they make up a third of our work force, contribute some $30 billion each year in federal taxes and will soon count for a third of potential voters in California if you consider naturalized immigrants and their adult citizen children.
Entrenched prejudices against recent immigrants, especially those who have no viable way to obtain lawful status, can render these arguments ineffective as a rationale for moving forward. This state of permanent inaction is hurting California. It is getting in the way of our best thinking about the future of our state, because as we know from our past and our present, immigrants help to build what together we envision.
Our task is to consolidate our support for solutions, including a clear path to legalization for those unauthorized immigrants who are currently in the country. We must use our strength as one of the largest and most vibrant states in the country to move us all forward.
So, by Immigrant Day 2011 we must be living in a post-Arizona era, when we have achieved comprehensive reform of the immigration system and are finding ways to promote our state's workforce, encourage our population to engage actively in their communities, vote, and participate in our economy. This way and only this way will we move forward together as Californians and fully value the contributions immigrants make to our great state.
This post originally appeared at Mercury News.
Claudio Ivan Remeseira: Walt Whitman and the Immigration Debate
What would a poll in SF SAY about GAY MARRIAGE??
BEAM ME UP SCOTTY!!!!
If there is to be any kind of legalization, the ONLY documents that can be accepted are passports, and Mexican voter IDs. Those are the documents Mexico cares about, and their acceptance of those should be good enough for us. If Mexico does NOT accept the Matricular, then it is STUPID for the US to do so.
The fact is that over half of all illegals work off the books and pay NO taxes at all. So they are a BIG drain on services such as education and health care. Even the pro-illegal Texas comptroller report states that while the State of Texas gets marginally more from illegals, the local government are in the hole to the tune of over ONE BILLION dollars. If we legalize all the illegals who are here now, the costs will go through the roof since they will have legal access to ALL the state sponsored programs.
Think that suddenly all the illegals will demand that their crooked employers start paying their taxes if they are granted amnesty? I doubt it. Think the illegal workers will demand that their already low wages be CUT to pay their fair share of taxes? Hardly. So this is simply a prescription for not only financial disaster, but a demographic one too as MORE illegals will cross the border to take advantage on an amnesty. The last time we did that we got a flood of fraud and double the numbers projected.
ILLEGALS are sucking our systems dry, taking jobs that CITIZENS and LEGAL immigrants want and need, and they are costing us BILLIONS of dollars. ILLEGALS also fill our prisions and jails and contribute to our gang problems. None of this "benifits" CA.
Is that the ignorance you were talking about?
Some people have suggested that BP has done something wrong by releasing (we need to avoid prejudicial terms like "dumping") oil into the Gulf of Mexico. This is terribly misguided.
BP has simply done what people naturally do. Follow economic incentives. Producing oil is highly profitable. Producing oil safely is of course more expensive and BP has every reason not to.
It only makes sense for BP to take big risks trying to improve its lot in the world.
We need to avoid hateful, discriminatory language like "illegal oil dumping" and call it what it, "undocumented oil distribution" or really just "oil distribution".
Since BP's activities might conflict with one or more laws we need to understand that the problem is the law interfering with BP and not the other way around. Strong economic incentives are at work here and they must not be denied.
Since some people have a problem with this a way for BP to "get right with the law" is needed. I call it "earned legalization" (not something bad like "Amnest
As for all of the people supposedly hurt (dead workers, shrimpers, fishermen, hospitality workers, etc.) by the recent event, let's not loose perspective here. America runs on oil. without oil our nation would collapse, oil is good for America. Careful studies have shown that oil companies pay taxes and oil increases GDP.
We need "comprehensive oil reform" that recognizes market forces and allows oil companies such as BP to do what they want to do for all of our benefits. "Comprehensive oil reform" must include the following elements. First, a way to bring undocumented oil distribution "out of the shadows". Any company that distributes oil offshore should be "required" to come forwards and pay a $1 per barrel fine and "get right with the law". Second, to minimize such problems in the future the "oil patrol" should receive additional resources including 6 new drone aircraft (1 per year for the next 6 years). Third, 1 new inspector will be hired to monitor the roughly 6,000 offshore platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.
This innovative, responsible, and comprehensive plan will finally put the undocumented oil distribution problem behind us and allow our nation to move forward as a nation. Remember "America runs on oil", "oil is America".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/27/mexico-dangers-migrants-to-us
Sometimes it pays to look outside the tiny box we call our opinion.
I am writing on behalf of your silent constituents—children who reside in the United States whose parents are not legal citizens. Children whose voices will not be heard at a City Council, Neighborhood Council, or Town Meeting, they cannot speak for themselves, and are at the mercy of the adults who are in charge of them.
We live next a family that appears to be bringing illegal immigrants from Latin America. For 2 years, 3 elementary school children and 1 toddler who reside there screamed for hours while their parents were drinking and playing music so loud it shook the our walls.During one party, there was a shooting.
For 6 months, a man walked through the side-gate adjoining our house to the “room addition” beat-up his girlfriend. The boy stood with a pacifier into his mouth, holding his pet bunny and crying.
The Father of the 3 children left to go to another state, the little boy disappeared, his “dad” shot his pet chicken and the bunny was hit by a car.
This is a day in the life of some children whose parents are here illegally. The children are sometimes denied the opportunity to attend school, and if they are in school, educators and other children have to deal with the mental illness these children are suffering from as a result of their adult caretakers’ choices.
Does anyone remember that Cedillo is the guy who tried to get driver's licenses for illegals in California. Davis signed his bill when he got desperate. It was then repealed after the people of California revolted and elected Arnold.
If the people of California won't give driver's licenses to illegal aliens why does he think America is going to hand out Amnesty?
However, if we want to be rational about maximizing wages for American workers, maybe we should consider deincentivizing the hiring of undocumented workers, and try harder to find decent ways to encourage those who come here in violation of the laws to return to their respective home countries.