Political desperation leads to savagery, and we’re seeing it on the Republican campaign trail. It’s as though they’re so far behind they have to be outrageous just to get attention -- like Mitt Romney’s wanting to "double the size of Gauntanamo" or Rudy Giuliani comparing the Iraq war to "reducing crime in New York City." Doesn’t Romney know that the Supreme Court has ruled twice against Bush actions at Guantánamo and that another ruling is pending? If Giuliani can’t see the difference between policing a city and a foreign invasion and occupation, what kind of president would he make?
Few things, however, approach the Republican venom being spilt over immigration, which polarizes the nation, makes solutions more difficult and feeds a climate of hate and recrimination. Watch Univision’s Spanish-language coverage of immigration issues -- including last week’s debate among the GOP candidates -- and you understand why Hispanic support for Republicans is down to 23 percent.
Take the case of the mauled Honduran gardener in Princeton, N.J.
The man, Giovanni Rivera, was hired by a Hummer-driving Princeton matron to do work on her estate. He spent five days in a hospital, underwent a three-hour operation and received 65 rabies shots after being attacked by one of the lady’s five dogs. The lady’s insurance paid him off, but letters to newspapers and blogs, full of racial and xenophobic slurs, have sided with the dog, whom a judge has ordered put down.
"The dog deserves an award," wrote one enlightened compatriot. "One less Mexican (sic) alien is a boost to society."
In their lust to win the nativist vote, Romney and Giuliani and now Mike Huckabee forget three things: past, present and future. They were not anti-immigrant in the past; should they win the nomination, the redneck vote won’t gain them the presidency, and fences and deportations aren’t a solution to 12 million illegal immigrants.
Take Giuliani, for example.
Searching the archives of my former employer, I came across a column of mine from June 20, 1994. The occasion was Gov. Pete Wilson’s campaign for president, using California’s anti-immigrant Proposition 187 (later ruled unconstitutional) as a platform. Giuliani was mayor of New York City at the time. Here’s what I wrote:
If fences worked we wouldn’t have 12 million illegal immigrants in the nation, roughly two million more than in 1994. Over the past decade, annual immigration, legal and illegal, has been at its highest point since the "Great Migration" of 1900-1920. The foreign-born U.S. population hasn’t been higher since 1920.
A century ago our big empty country had opened its doors to immigration as we set out to settle the West and build a national industry. U.S. population in 1900 was 76 million. California’s population was 1.4 million (there were more people in Alaska than in the Golden State). We sought people from across Europe and left open the border with Mexico (population 13.6 million). Only Asians were barred from America under the infamous Asian Exclusion Act, passed after Congress deemed too many Chinese had been brought in to build the railroads.
A century later, there simply is no excuse for 1.1 million legal and an estimated 300,000 illegal immigrants arriving in this country annually. Polls show two-thirds of Americans want legal immigration reduced and illegal immigration halted. Controlling immigration has been the recommended goal of every important study of the subject done over the past generation (Hesburgh and Jordan presidential commissions, National Academy of Sciences, General Accounting Office, National Research Council, RAND’s Center for Research on Immigration Policy).
The hypocrisy of Giuliani and Romney (and open racism of marginal candidates like Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo) won’t help the nation achieve the kind of bi-partisan consensus it needs to overcome powerful pro-immigration lobbies. Congress can only solve the problem by adopting some of the measures recommended by the above expert groups -- above all, an identification system that allows employers to know who is legal and who isn’t, with appropriate stiff penalties for hiring illegal workers.
In power now for a wasted seven years, the Bush Administration has achieved nothing. Early on, when Bush still had some political capital to spend, there was a chance for a bi-partisan agreement on immigration, but Iraq and now the presidential campaign have destroyed any chance for legislation.
We’ll have another chance when Bush is gone, but fences and expulsions aren’t the solution. By courting the redneck vote, Giuliani, Romney and Huckabee show that, as president, they would achieve no more than Bush.
James O. Goldsborough has written on foreign affairs for four decades, both from the United States and abroad, where he worked as a foreign correspondent for The New York Herald Tribune, International Herald Tribune and Newsweek magazine for 14 years, reporting from more than 40 countries. Visit his website here. Submit a letter to the editor here.
Comments so far on this story:
1. Clint wrote on December 12, 2007 10:06 PM:
"Anyone who wants to legitimize illegals should adopt a family and promise to pay for all of their educational, medical, and social security needs, otherwise shut up. You want to spend My tax dollars on someone who has not contributed nor could they ever contribute enough to create need parity."
2. jj wrote on December 12, 2007 10:08 PM:
"I would disagree with the comment “but the facts on U.S. immigration haven’t changed in years.” A major change is that large numbers of citizens have started paying attention. Once upon a time only their employers and illegal alien supporters knew this was going on. Politicians like Rudy et al are caught in the change. Once upon a time they got large campaign contributions from ignoring the law. Now the chickens have come home to roost and their past actions put them on the wrong side of the voters."
3. Umm wrote on December 13, 2007 1:03 AM:
"Pete Wilson was hardly doomed. He was losing in the polls before he tied his fate to 187, and made a triumphant return afterward to trump Kathleen Brown."
4. thenerd2008 wrote on December 13, 2007 1:36 AM:
"Well said. The madness and desperation to get the votes through these unrealistic uncomprehensive approaches is not even funny, it is starting to generate a problem of major magnitudes that the general public has not even started to grasp. Amercia needs wake up and stand against these mindless irrational ideas that brings nothing to solve to unite an already divided nation."
5. Bettybb wrote on December 13, 2007 1:36 AM:
"This journalist is another legal immigrant hater. Is it because he would prefer the Hispanics over say Africans and Asians? The pro illegals NEVER say they want legal immigrants, guessthey want to avoid certain races coming to the USA. Republicans are staying true to Americans. DIP (Democratic Illegals'Party, formerly the Democrati Party) is only interested in policy that benefit illegals,ie racist amnesty in prefernce over all other Americans families, depression of wages, kicking Americans out of their jobs, overcrowding residences, gangs, Mexican drug cartel, overcrowded schools, no funds for deteriorating infrasture, Americans having to carry the illegals financially for 3 generations before they pay their own way The illegals' version of the KKK, La Raza/Mecha teaching little kids that all non brown people need to be exterminated. Loss of Americans social security and medicare benefits ( the economists say we cannot have this number of low skilled immigrants without bankrupting the country."
6. daveg wrote on December 13, 2007 5:39 AM:
"James, stop with the name calling. I am more educated than you and more well traveled, and I don't like what is happening to the US. And I speak Spanish. Look at your own paper: gang crimes are up in San Diego. California has $14 billion dollar budget deficit and growing. If illegal immigrants "paid more than their fare share" California should be awash in tax dollars. Hasn't been that way for eight years and counting. Oh, and we face a water shortage too! It is time we stop name calling and start to get control of this situation. The wall is one element of an overall immigration control strategy."
7. Juanfelipe wrote on December 13, 2007 6:58 AM:
"Goldsborough, thank you for your informed, inclusive and historically conscious voice! JF. My new book: 187 Reasons Mexicanos Can't Cross the Border: Undocuments 1971-2007"
8. JAD wrote on December 13, 2007 8:05 AM:
"Ah, where to begin with the latest Goldsborough diatribe. He begins with the usual rant that anybody who opposes illegal immigration is a vicious redneck. Sure Jim, everyone concerned about porous borders sics vicious dogs on humble, hardworking Mexican nationals, egged on by pandering Republicans. No hysteria in your nuanced argument, because that's the domain of the hypocrites, correct? In your 1994 column you flat out state that politicians favor those of the same ethnic background. If that's not racism, I'm not sure what is, but not a peep on the current state of affairs that finds Hispanic politicians doing exactly the same thing. Finally, Jimbo, spare us the pointless garbage that you scoured the UT's archives to dig up one of your own columns. Like you don't a copy of everything you ever wrote on your hard drive? Uh huh."
9. Steve K wrote on December 13, 2007 10:59 AM:
"It's time to do what Ronald Reagan did--amnesty for otherwise legally employed undocumented workers. This time, get all workers up to speed with a high-tech social security card, and from that point on, punish employers that don't follow employment regulations. Trying to stop illegal immigration at the border is never going to be effective--about half the illegal workers come via other means (coming on non-work visas and staying, etc)."
10. JR wrote on December 13, 2007 10:59 AM:
"1. Re-create a Bracero program. 2. Issue work visas that have to be renewed on the Mex side of the line. 3. Mandate employer-paid insurance, subtract taxes from pay and issue drivers' licenses only on proof of insurance. 4. Unionize all foreign workers in the US. 5. Loosen the border so that Americans can own property and establish businesses within a border zone of operations; make the same possible for Mexicans in the US in a similar border zone. 6. Embark on a public outreach campaign to encourage every immigrant to learn English. 7. End the slur of the ''anchor baby''. Those are American citizens--as good as you or anyone else---you're looking down on. 8. Embrace every immigrant's kid in the education system; it's the best way to export American values that we have. 9. Encourage revolution in Mexico; they're due for one and exporting democracy would keep more Mexicans home if they had more opportunity. 10. Ignore racists."
11. Rachel wrote on December 13, 2007 11:22 AM:
"History will reflect that our failure to get the immigration situation under control is 100 percent a lack of will. This, like so many social issues that never budge -- abortion, anyone? -- is a tool by the Right to stir up the emotions of their irrational base. They pay lip service to wanting to solve the problem, then do nothing. It's a joke! Big and small business relies on illegal immigrants to remain competitive. California's agriculture, tourism industries? Dead in the water if the immigrant labor pool is drained. Stop kidding yourselves -- no one truly wants to solve this "problem" because secretly, they realize it's not truly a problem! Illegal immigration is great for business."
12. Realist wrote on December 13, 2007 12:11 PM:
"I think The Voice lets Goldsborough spew his garbage just to keep readers fired up and tuned in. There's no value in anything he has to say."
13. OneifbyLand wrote on December 13, 2007 12:24 PM:
"It can no longer be denied that Mexico is doing everything it can to create an Illegal MEXICAN NATION and SHADOW GOVERNMENT within the borders of the USA! Dual citizenship,aiding,a and even urging its citizens to illegally emigrate to the USA calling them "heroes and Mexicans first ,just living north of the border". Now we know... if you don't think it's an invasion, look what happens when you try to stop it!"
14. Daves wrote on December 13, 2007 1:14 PM:
"Whether your an Hispanic, German, Korean or from Indian, you should want to enforce our laws of U.S. sovereignty? You have been given permission by the American people to enter these shores; not the elected public servants, but by THE PEOPLE! This wonderful privilege should not be taken for granted and you should strongly desire, as a new citizen or permanent resident to by abide by the rules of THE PEOPLE. Why is their any argument regarding this matter in the first place? Are you here to become part of American society, or have you come here to demand rights for people who intentionally broke our immigration laws? What gives foreign nationals of any country have the right to demand that the U.S. majority, give them amnesty; a path to citizenship? To jump ahead millions of honest, sincere people who jump through the hoops of immigration laws"
15. VoxPopuli wrote on December 13, 2007 2:18 PM:
"The hypocrits elected to office have nothing to lose by displaying their overt racism on this subject. They neither have an understanding of American history nor have they read the Constitution. This is just one more disgraceful act of people too cowardly to come out of their racist shells and look honestly at themselves. Our country was once a great nation because of the people - not the politicians. WE NEED GREAT PEOPLE BACK IN POWER. Not the same old mamas boys, born with a silver spoon, multimillion dollar inheritances and an IQ of 40. And while you're at it-ask those people now living on casino money and tiny pieces of land far from the city when illegal immigration started..."
16. Steve K wrote on December 13, 2007 3:34 PM:
"A green card is not the road to citizenship--it's a permit to work in the US, legally. Restrict citizenship requirements, if necessary, but we've got a huge segment of employees that can't or won't comply with employment requirements, as they are now, and the government doesn't have the will or ability to enforce them. The panic about too few workers to support the Social Security System, when baby boomers retire, could be solved with this workforce, if it were legal."
17. Afront wrote on December 14, 2007 8:42 AM:
"Illegal alien advocates constantly try to marginalize those who disagree charging "racism". It's not racist to demand that: (1)US law be enforced. [8 U.S.C. 1325 makes illegal entry a federal misdemeanor the first time and a felony for repeat violations. (2)Mexico, the source of over half the illegal aliens in the US, stop aiding violations of US law. (3)Mexico, which has over half the billionaires in South America, devote its assets to its domestic problems not foisting them on the US. (4)Mexican diplomats stop interfering in US domestic political matters, (5)Those who violate our immigration laws not obtain no advantage over lawful applicants, and (6 US sovereignity be respected against foreign military incursion as Mexico has done many times, by some counts over 200. The charge of racism is bovine scatology."
18. JDMB wrote on December 14, 2007 9:04 AM:
"Re Comment 2 by jj: Facts are hard numbers, data, provable or corroboratable information - not subjective opinions or attitudes (which do change on a whim)."
19. Tony C wrote on December 14, 2007 11:22 AM:
"Prop. 187 was anti "Illegal" immigrant. So Mr. Goldsborough, in the future don't leave that out."
20. JDMB wrote on December 14, 2007 12:55 PM:
"Re Comment 10 by JR: Good points, but #5 is unrealistic. It could be done on the US side, but Mexican politicians will never go for it, it's a sacred cow (they can't seem to forget how Texas wound up changing hands). And for the record: Foreigners CAN own property in Mexico, it's only restricted along the border and coastline (see Texas again). And foreigners can of course own property anywhere in the US, virtually no restrictions. As for #9: Be careful what you wish for!!! Do you really want an armed uprising 10-25 miles away? Besides, let's be honest: Washington would just use it as an excuse to move in "until things settle down," to protect the border (it already happened, and twice!, in Mexico)."
21. JDMB wrote on December 14, 2007 1:10 PM:
"Re comment 17 by Afront: (1) No argument. (2) How does the Mexican government "aid violations of US law"? (3) Mexico (which is in Latin America, not South America) does not have said wealth at its disposal without confiscation, which would just lead the billionaires to pack up and leave before it was taken away. (4)When has this happened? At the very least it would elicit a protest from the US (or any other) government. (5) Agreed, but in practical terms how do you deal with those already here and productive? and finally, my favorite: (6) HUH?! It's the other way around: the US flag flew over Mexico's Presidential Palace in 1914 three months after US troops disembarked at Veracruz in just the latest example."
22. JDMB wrote on December 14, 2007 1:10 PM:
"Re comment 17 by Afront: (1) No argument. (2) How does the Mexican government "aid violations of US law"? (3) Mexico (which is in Latin America, not South America) does not have said wealth at its disposal without confiscation, which would just lead the billionaires to pack up and leave before it was taken away. (4)When has this happened? At the very least it would elicit a protest from the US (or any other) government. (5) Agreed, but in practical terms how do you deal with those already here and productive? and finally, my favorite: (6) HUH?! It's the other way around: the US flag flew over Mexico's Presidential Palace in 1914 three months after US troops disembarked at Veracruz in just the latest example."
23. JDMB wrote on December 14, 2007 1:14 PM:
"Re comment 13 by Oneifbyland: ... Nah... No comment... Speaks for itself..."
24. JDMB wrote on December 14, 2007 1:14 PM:
"Re comment 13 by Oneifbyland: ... Nah... No comment... Speaks for itself..."
25. SBS wrote on December 14, 2007 3:45 PM:
"Other people will take on the broader and more important issues with what Mr. Goldsborough has to say. I have one small nit to pick: The population of Alaska has never been 1.4 million. Today, with thirty years of solid growth behind us, we are at a little over 600,000. The immigration debate is a lot of smoke and mirrors. If we stop allowing immigrants to this country and treat potential citizens like criminals we are forfeiting our right to be considered a democracy. An oderly process is sensible but we are overreacting to the folks who want to stop immigration because they are already here and don't want others to have the came opportunity."
26. jt wrote on December 15, 2007 10:13 AM:
"senTed Kenedy change our immigration polocy from cchain immigration to family reunifcation in 1965.its time we when back tto chain immigration.under chain immigration we had 170,000 immigrents per year.i wish more cities would use 287(G) to arreest and deport illigal aliens!and the senate dosnt know jack about immigration"
27. Lyn C wrote on December 15, 2007 4:45 PM:
"Attrition thru Enforcement ONLY No Amnesty (by any name) Make English the official language Repeal the 14th Amendment Make entering or being in our country illegally a FELONY Be a patriot...support our country & American citizens."
28. Coast Watcher wrote on December 17, 2007 12:18 PM:
"The whole 'immigration thing' is a made up hysteria brought to you by Karl Rove. As our country crumbles under the weight of an immoral 'war' and its trillions of dollars of cost, this focuses the American public away from issues like education, health care, corporate greed, environmental needs, etc. So called immigrants prop up our economy in every quarter- food production, services and construction. Until Bush's corporate buddies are brought to task for indiscriminantly hiring illegals, nothing will change in a positive fashion."
29. Dev wrote on December 18, 2007 4:30 AM:
"Why do Americans not want to differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants ? I was on H1B - paid social security and medicare taxes for 6 years and left US - due to the frustrating long delays in getting a green cards. I am not here to complain about the taxes I paid for social security and medicare. I am here to write a few suggestions which are pro legal immigration. Wages in US can get depressed because employment based green card needs to be sponsored by the employer. H1B employees are frequently abused by the employer. Change the system for legal migration. Introduce a point based system which allows legal immigrants into the country. Initially, allow them to stay in US for 2 years. If they show economic success (earn $100,000+ per year), give them a green card."
[simpleblog:comments:1000::::1:100:1]
PRINT 
E-MAIL STORY
SHARE
FACEBOOK
REDDIT
NEWSVINE
DIGG
DEL.ICIO.US
BLINKLIST
