Immigrants on America’s doorstep

BY RAMÓN SÁNCHEZ-PARODI MONTOTO

THE U.S. Congress is coming back from its Easter recess. Huge demonstrations throughout the United States during the last few weeks by a sent a clear message to U.S. legislators from a large sector of the country’s population regarding their rejection of a proposed immigration law passed by the House of Representatives.

Citizens and residents of that country, who come from all over, oppose the repressive measures contained in that legislation, and they are demanding fair treatment for the millions of undocumented immigrants who live and work in the United States. To emphasize that demand, some groups are advocating a boycott of the country’s economy on May 1 (a day when, unlike the rest of the world, International Workers Day is not celebrated in that country).

The immigration question in the United States is very complex and difficult to solve. Different opinions on what to do regarding the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the country – most of whom are low-income Latin Americans – reflected in the bill passed by the House and the inability of the Senate to draft and approve an alternative, confirm the opinions of observers and analysts who say the immigration issue will be the most important in the this year’s legislative elections. Possibly, in the opinion of this reporter, it will be just as or more important than the discussion regarding the war in Iraq.

The demonstrations have been the most resonant street protests since the 1960s, during the Civil Rights and anti-Vietnam War movements. For now, the people’s demands have been limited to warning Congress that the course begun by legislators is unacceptable and must be corrected. This time, protests have occurred without police repression, and were peaceful, without breaking with the existing "social consensus."

The following is a simple, but essential presentation of the current confrontation:

On one side, there are the anti-immigrant extremists who think illegal residence in the country is a crime, and believe both these immigrants and their employers should be punished, and strict, quasi-military measures should be taken to seal the borders and stem the flow of immigration. These positions are expressed in House bill HR-4437.

On the other side, there are those who recognize the need for immigration and are demanding measures to normalize the presence of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country through amnesty and a "guest worker" program that would make it possible to attain permanent residence and possible access to U.S. citizenship. That is basically what is contained in the Kennedy-McCain bill introduced in the Senate.

There are various arguments on each side of the debate. Those who favor repressing immigration say that immigrants accept low salaries and take away jobs from U.S. citizens while benefiting from social services that "illegals" should not have access to because they don’t pay taxes. In addition, they say, it is necessary to close off the U.S. borders crossed by immigrants in order to prevent terrorist actions.

Opponent say immigrants greatly contribute to the country by taking jobs rejected by U.S. citizens, above all in agriculture, construction and services, producing much more than they earn or than what they receive in social services. They brandish the supposed U.S. tradition of offering shelter to the poor, dispossessed and persecuted of the Earth.

However, the U.S. Congress, immersed in ideological struggles, contradictory economic interests and political and election aspirations, has been unable to find a viable solution.

Now, it is up to the legislators, coming back from their "vacations," and to the president, to listen to the people’s demands and look for solutions that correspond to the aspirations of U.S. society. Otherwise, the issue has the potential to make protests become more radical, and as occurred in the 1960s, the "social consensus" could be broken.

Many of the reasons put forth by the enemies of immigration have an undeniable weight, but there are other consequences of immigration, legal or illegal, that have a decisive influence on U.S. life from ethnical, cultural and political points of view that agitate and exacerbate the racist prejudice that underlie the mentality of those who favor taking strong measures against legal or illegal immigrants, and which cannot be rid of or prevented by any legislation.

Demographic projections for the period covering 2000 to 2050 by the U.S. Census Bureau, summed up in the table, reveal immigrants’ impact on life in the United States, related to their ethnic origins, different from the white majority of the current population.

The population is expected to grow by almost 138 million by 2050, and 89% of that growth corresponds to ethnic groups that are not "white-only" (more than 123 million), while the "white-only" group is expected to grow by only 14.5 million individuals, or the equivalent of 10.55 of total population growth during those years. Thus, the latter group’s specific weight will decrease from 69.4% in 2000 to 50.1% in 2050 (according to the Census Bureau). By that date, there will be a virtual population tie between "white-onlys" and the other ethnic components of the U.S. population.

The conservative Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a group that wants to reduce immigration as much as possible, estimates that by 2050 (a little more than 40 years), the U.S. population could grow by 22% (66 million) to 67% (200 million) depending on the severity of migration restrictions; in other words, the difference between the effects of the House bill (HR-4437) and the Senate bill (Kennedy-McCain proposal). According to FAIR, to the more the population grows as a result of immigration, the more serious consequences will be for the country in energy imports; the ability to produce enough food to feed the population; restrictions on the availability of fresh water; aggravated population growth in urban areas; greater traffic congestion; increased "greenhouse effect;" and greater income inequality, among others.

Behind these expressions of xenophobia lies the spirit of the "fearful and insatiable U.S. Americans:" fearful of losing their privileged position and insatiable for the consumerist orgy of the post-World War II "American way of life."

Today, one of every eight residents in the United States is Hispanic, but if those figures are added to those on African-Americans, Asians and the "other races" included in U.S. Census Bureau graphs, the total (including "illegal" residents) is more than 100 million people, more than one-third of the population, currently estimated at more than 298 million people.

The United States is on the road to transforming itself by mid-century (a brief time, historically) from a traditional white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant society to a multi-racial society with a population that is not predominantly of European origin. Language, music, religious beliefs, preferred foods, literature, visual arts and other artistic expressions will substantially change, as is now occurring. And, of course, election politics will change as well. Voters from the so-called "minorities" will go on to become the majority, and they will have the ability to influence decisively on federal, state and local elections. It may be expected that, in a parallel manner, the number of elected officials from those sectors will increase.

Without taking away any of the brilliance of the magnificent, vibrant demonstrations of the last few weeks, or the just and necessary demands for respect for the human, political, economic and social rights of "illegal" immigrants, who are frequently harassed and pursued like animals by the Border Patrol and racist "vigilantes," or who fall victim to predatory traffickers in human beings, as well as the minorities who continue to be victimized by racist discrimination and economic exploitation, we should note that what we are seeing today is the beginning of an overwhelming mass movement that will substantially transform U.S. society.