Blog on Chapter 16 The 1980s and Beyond

            Daniels describes the Immigration Reform Act of 1986 as ambiguous and it really characterizes so much of the immigration discussion and legislation we have revisited so often. Reforms can never be very “reforming” if they only seek to reflect the current tone of the nation and modify existing rules. Real change cannot happen if it is done without wanting to really change something. This is not to say that immigration policy is simple – it is clearly complex. But even Hesburgh himself wanted to walk the line – balancing America being a land of opportunity for the downtrodden yet also considering today’s harsh realities. Today, twenty years later, the chairman of a Select Commission could say the very same thing. The lack of a federal, comprehensive immigration policy and planning forces states such as Arizona, Alabama and California to take matters into their own hands out of frustration with their immigration issues.

            I agree with Daniels when he points out that the impact of immigration on the standard of living is a debate without end and that the argument has much more force and appeal in an era of economic stringency and lowered expectations. This is evident now as we live in the strain of high unemployment and a stagnant economy. It will be interesting to see the immigration discussions in the 2012 debates and election. What is very different now is that many non-immigrants are joining the ranks of those living near the poverty line or without health care. I’m not so sure that anti-immigration sentiment isn’t being replaced by anti-government sentiment. Many citizens, immigrants and non-immigrants have reached the end of their patience with the bitter partisanship and lack of leadership in our government.

            The explanation of the amnesty program was helpful to my understanding of how it actually works and the dilemmas it has also created for families and employers. It also seems that whatever good intention an immigration program has, it creates almost as many problems as solutions. Then there are always the exceptions made for the agricultural interests. You cannot have it both ways, there just has to be compromise somehow.

            It is interesting to think about Daniel’s prediction that the basic patterns that have been established since 1965, with most immigrants coming from Asia and Latin America, are likely to continue. Unless there is a disastrous depression like the one we experienced in the 1930s. We’ll see what happens.

             

Top 10 Reasons Alabama's New Immigration Law Is a Disaster for Education

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/11/alabama_top10_education.html

Center for American Progress Immigration Team. “Top 10 Reasons Alabama’s New Immigration Law Is a Disaster for Education. State’s Schools Seeing More Empty Chairs in the Classroom and Burdens on Educators.” Center for American Progress 17 November 2011.

            This article was written by the Center for American Progress Immigration Team, part of the Center for American Progress. According to their web site, the Center for American Progress is dedicated to improving the lives of Americans through progressive ideas and action and their work addresses 21^st century challenges such as energy, national security, economic growth and opportunity, immigration, education, and health care. They develop policy ideas, critique policy that stems from conservative values, challenge the media to cover issues that truly matter, and shape the national debate. It was founded in 2003 by Jon Podesta, former chief of staff for President Bill Clinton from 1998 to 2001 and has held many esteemed academic positions.  I believe the Center for American Progress is a credible source.

            This article discusses Alabama’s new immigration law and in particular, the impacts of Section 28 of this law. Under Section 28, every public elementary and secondary school in the state is required to document and report the immigration status of every student in the school. Schools are also required to report on the immigration status of every child’s parents.

            The article summarizes succinctly and with clarity what it identifies as the top 10 reasons Alabama’s new law is a disaster for education. It shows the far-reaching and devastating effects this law has on the educational, social and economic fabric of not just immigrants living in Alabama, but all citizens of the State of Alabama. While each of these reasons had its own merits, several were particularly striking: (1) The state is losing a potential pool of educated citizens; and a combination of 2 other reasons: Schools will be hurt financially – loss of enrollment as well as the cost of compliance with this unfunded mandate will cause a loss of revenues that the schools can ill afford; Alabama’s schools already face significant fiscal challenges with poor student results – state aid has declined the past few years decimating school finances. The state already ranks 33^rd out of 50 in overall pupil funding. Lack of funding affects student outcomes and poor educational achievement. For everyone.

            This article is informative and well-reasoned. Anyone with an interest in the effects of heightened immigration law and its impact on the children and families of America and Alabama in particular would appreciate the perspective it offers.

           

            

Blog on Chapter 15 Caribbeans, Central Americans, and Soviet Jews

            Haiti is a country of great interest to me because I was quite involved in fund-raising for them after the earthquake in 2010. One of my former teachers has been a committed activist in Haiti for many years and he has a multitude interesting and quite harrowing stories of his experiences there. He goes there frequently on mission trips, often with students and his parents were missionaries there when he was a child. We have spoken numerous times of the dire circumstances of poverty there and of course the various political and social problems for the people. He has developed a special relationship with schools there and his life gives such voice to what one person can do and how their life’s work can impact so many others, such as students like me. The plight of the unwanted refugees is so compelling, and of course, they are not from Haiti alone. I don’t know what the best policy is for these people – but I think often of the work Seth is doing and I think in some ways his approach is very good. He has developed strong relationships with people – such as school administrators and he knows with as much certainty as possible where funds he has raised are going. Often, he is there doing the work of rebuilding and educating right in the villages himself Funds that go directly to organizations dedicated to putting them to the best use possible gives those funds a very good chance of being well-invested in those who need to benefit from them the most. He is trying to build them into stronger communities right their in their own country – it would be impossible to bring every needy refugee here and give them the support that they need.  Investing in their futures right in their own countries seems like one effective way to improve their lives and maybe hope for the future. A child at a time. A village at a time.

            Immigration policy is just that – policy. It is challenging to make policy when human lives and their very futures depend on the generosity of humanity. Imagine a life expectancy of somewhere in your 30s and living in what the World Bank calls absolute poverty. But there are hands reaching out for help across the globe and of course, you do not need to travel very far from here to see hands reaching out close to home. So, which hands do you reach out to? It will always be necessary for our government to make immigration policy and we must elect officials that we believe will be just and balanced and informed in their decisions. I also believe that I have my own responsibility to make a difference in some way – in whatever way I can. Big or small. But every action matters – we can’t just let it be everyone else’s problem. 

Blog on Chapter 14 The New Asian Immigrants

            I really liked the approach Daniels used I this chapter in grouping the New Asian Immigrants together. It allowed them to be discussed individually, yet it very impacting to consider them as a whole. The comparison of the Japanese and Chinese experience presented information about their communities that I didn’t fully appreciate. The bifurcated nature of the Chinese American community, the ABCs and the FOBs versus the more uniform Japanese experience were important factors that effected their acculturation to America. The “silent” Chinese of San Francisco is not surprising if you have spent any time in Chinatown there, but I am sure many people reading this text who don’t have the chance to visit there would be surprised.  I wonder if other Chinatowns across the country this same dichotomy.

            Education is such an important factor in the successful immigration of any group and we see it often in this text. Groups who either come here better educated to begin with or make it a priority for their children to have a good education seem to see more upward mobility and economic stability in the next generations.

            I am always shocked at the total number of Vietnam War refugees and their children in the United States. I did not realize that our treatment of them was not uniform across the country  - that programs such as federal Aid to Families With Dependent Children is administered by the states. There are so many very poor and not well-educated among them and it is very difficult in these economic times to find the resources to support them and give them what they need.

            Until these New Asian immigrants were presented together in this chapter, I didn’t have an appreciation for this group as a whole and their patterns of immigration when put in this context and much more clearly seen, at least to me.

             

Blog on Chapter 13 Changing The Rules: Immigration Law, 1948-1980

            The more chapter we read in our text, I realize how closely my own education in U.S. History resembled that of the ”experts” who made immigration policies, particularly in the years discussed in this chapter. Immigration and immigration policy were never considered as an overarching contribution to American history and foundation. It was almost always a sort of anecdotal part of the curriculum – incidental but not fundamental to the shaping of our country. Immigration was so often a side bar – interesting, even inspiring in the moment, but its contribution was never recognized for its strength and importance. It was so often either a politically correct or politically incorrect, depending on the mood of the voting public and legislators. Policy never seemed to be deliberate. It seemed to be reactionary and it continues to be the same today.

            The Mariel Crisis is an excellent example of how complex these issues can be. Their plight moved the country and the boat lift was a great humanitarian gesture. But then it gets complicated – 125,000 refugees in a matter of weeks – and what to do with them. This was echoed again with the earthquake in Haiti in 2010. A massive humanitarian effort was made to evacuate desperate and needy people to the United State by the thousands. But what to do then? Who would be responsible and how would they get this done? These are challenging situations, but we faltered badly in our country’s handling of our own disaster in Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Policy made in reaction is too often bad policy. The victims of Kartina seemed liked the boat people of Haiti – no one wanted them – poor and black.

            But politicians do not like to talk about immigration or refugees, or even asylees. The most desperate of the desperate have a quiet, almost silent voice. Nativist sentiments seem to be stronger every day, but as Daniels said in an earlier chapter, nativism runs high when fear runs deep. There never seems to be a ‘good’ time to talk about immigration. But the 2012 election will bring lots of discussion forward. I wish I believed the candidates understanding and respect for the history of U.S. Immigration would be better than what we have seen so far. Let’s be optimistic!

Blog on Chapter 12 From The New World: Mexicans and Puerto Ricans

            The history of Mexican and Puerto Rican immigration is not something I knew very much about – most of what I understood had ended at with the annexation at the end of the Mexican-American War and the Treaty of Guadalupe–Hildago and with the annexation of Puerto Rico at the end of the Spanish-American War. Immigration from the New World, considered as its own part of overall immigration, gave me a different and important understanding of its unique contributions to immigration history.

            I wonder how it feels to be a second or third generation Mexican American or a descendant of Californios and fully realize the mistreatment of my own people. I feel disappointment and disgust myself, but I cannot imagine the level of their anger and bitterness at such injustice. I don’t know where you put those feelings, how you take that energy and make it positive. Especially at a time when there is still such discrimination and rising anti-immigration sentiments. I don’t know if you can ever make right such a wrong. Like apologizing to Japanese Americans and making reparations – as if that could be enough. Even if the gesture is genuine, can damage be repaired?

            Daniels discussion of the Mexican-American border issues was important and especially relevant to many issues today. The drug cartels and lack of rule of law in some parts of Mexico is very concerning and impacting to people on both sides of the border. Seasonal workers are still an important factor in the agricultural economy, especially in California. There needs to be a different approach to how immigration especially from Mexico and Central America, too, is treated. The bracero program created the massive immigration of Mexican Americans to the United States – you cannot just bring people here and expect them to leave when you don’t want them anymore. It doesn’t seem that anyone ever considered the acculturation of Mexicans Americans to this country when they came as part of this. Many were treated as second class citizens with no rights, experiencing discrimination and harsh and brutal treatment by the authorities. Second and third generation Mexican Americans have an improved situation, but there is still an uncomfortable gap between the Mexican American community and the rest of America.

            I had never considered Puerto Ricans as mixed race before and seeing it as a social and racial problem for them on the mainland gave me a different perspective of their immigration history. I was surprised to learn why many do not want to become independent – the economics of their current state of relationship with the United States is probably not really understood by many Americans. 

Blog on Chapter 11 Migration in Prosperity, Depression, and War, 1921-1945

            The intensification of the new pattern of immigration following the end of the “century of immigration” is interesting to think about. Immigration from Europe dropped while it continued to increase from the New World. While the goals of immigration restriction were considered a qualified success, this same restrictive legislation causing more and more people to enter the United State illegally. It was becoming even harder to “count the uncountable.” People will always seem to find a way –illegal crossings, loopholes in legislation, etc. I think Daniels was correct when he said patterns of immigration would probably not have changed if our prosperity had continued – but it didn’t, and everything changed. It’s also noteworthy that while quotas were discussed relative to immigrants from the New World, they were never brought forward because we needed labor. So often it is about the money.

            I was disappointed that FDR did not take a more proactive role in altering immigration legislation – so frequently using the conservative views of the State Department to shape his actions. Even though he was not a nativist, he held their belief that the country was completed and immigration was a thing of the past. It was particularly irresponsible to be indifferent to the fate of Jewish and other refugees – it was well put by Walter Mondale that we failed the test of civilization by not seeing the need to offer asylum to so many. That the State department made it so difficult and often impossible for most refugees to enter this country is really a tragedy – the cases of Lewkowitz and Spanier were heartbreaking and there were countless others. It is a great testimony to those refugees that did make it here that there contributions would so far exceed their numbers.

            Our treatment of Japanese Americans was inexcusable and I am sure still felt today. Daniels points to race, prejudice, hysteria and a failure of political leadership as the broad historical causes that shaped these decisions. Our own country today in many ways does not seem so far from this point at times. Does history repeat itself?