The Washington Post December 7 article “Struggles of the Second Generation” describes how second generation Hispanics are doing no better than their parents and perhaps worse, having babies out of wedlock, dropping out of high school and getting involved with gangs.
23-year-old Javier Saavedra, interviewed in the story, lives in the basement of his girlfriend’s parents’ Maryland home with his two small children. He makes $12 an hour when he can get work, didn’t finish high school and has no health insurance for himself or his family. He and his family will likely become burdens to the taxpayers.
As David Frum notes in his most recent book, Comeback, Mexican immigrants receive about $55,000 more in benefits in their lifetime than they pay in taxes. Educating the children of illegal immigrants has also become a costly proposition. In 1982, a Supreme Court decision required local governments to educate immigrants equally with native-born Americans. This means that states must spend more money on resources to teach immigrants English and other basic skills alongside native-born Americans who already have mastered these skills. Frum writes:
In order to have our chickens plucked in America, rather than import them preplucked from Mexico or Brazil, the American nation has assumed a vast and protracted commitment to tens of millions of people-over and on top of the as-yet-unfulfilled debt owed to those who still carry the wounds of slavery and segregation.
About 34% of black children are living in poverty in the U.S. compared to 26% of children born to Hispanic immigrants. As of 2004, almost 70% of all black children are born to unmarried mothers and more than 11% of black males aged 25 to 34 were incarcerated in June 2006. Where’s the Democrats’ sense of obligation to poor, black, native-born Americans?
The first African slaves were shipped to the English colony of Virginia in 1607. Black American slaves built this country, but their descendants have had to wage their own fight and suffer death to gain basic civil rights to get a good education and be allowed to be patrons of restaurants, hotels and movies alongside whites. Today, the divide between prospering and poor blacks is growing. Poor blacks face an increasing rate of out of wedlock births, HIV/AIDS infection, imprisonment, and under-education. Don’t these concerns warrant the nation’s first attention? Won’t amnesty make them all worse, by expanding the population of the nation’s most hard-pressed poor?
Instead of throwing more money after bad and granting amnesty to illegals, as the Obama administration seems poised to do, the country needs to change course. Let’s get serious about enforcement and shift the immigration debate from the unskilled to the highly-skilled workers which are of greater benefit and less costly to the U.S. in the long-term. Real immigration enforcement when applied can yield results. Practical solutions to problems such as immigration are a formula more likely to yield winning results than “purity standards.”
11 responses so far
1 DFL // Dec 15, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Although I absolutely agree with Crystal Wright on the issue, she errs in her statement that African slaves came to Virginia in 1607. The first Africans did not come to Virginia until 1619 and it is not certain whether they were considered slaves or indentured workers.
2 garlic // Dec 15, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Are you making the argument that we shouldn’t educate the children of illegal immigrants, so we can spend that money instead on our current urban poor?
3 legalalien // Dec 15, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Since the 1970’s, I lived within 70 miles of the United States border, in Ontario, Canada. When I entered the US, I did so LEGALLY, passing through inspection at a border checkpoint being given a STATUS (tourist) and a VISA, which says that I could not remain in the US in a tourist status for more than 180 days per day. Because I regard the USA as a nation of law, when my business was finished I headed back to Canada.
When the day came in 2008 that I entered the USA with an immigrant status approved by USCIS (a branch of the Department of Homeland Security) and a visa approved by the Department of State, I did so in accordance with US law and presented myself for inspection at a border checkpoint by a representative of the CBP (a branch of Homeland Security). Having further presented myself for inspection to USCIS in accordance with the laws of the United States I am now a LEGAL ALIEN in a possession of an I-551, a green card. At the time set by Congress in the applicable statute I plan to apply for naturalization to become a citizen of the US.
Note that at any time since the 1970’s, I could have stayed here as an ILLEGAL ALIEN, but I chose to obey American law. Would I have been subject to the Reagan amnesty of 1986? Perhaps.
Folks who enter illegally make a monkey of all American citizens, permanent residents holding a green card, and foreign nationals here on a limited status (students, H category workers etc) who choose to obey the law. They understood the risks when they entered the country without passing through a CBP checkpoint. No matter how long they’ve been in the USA, they should be deported forthwith.
Their children born in the USA are natural born American citizens under the Constitution and have the full rights of all American citizens. The sins of their parents are irrelevant. The parents can always be sposored in due course under family reunification laws.
As an aside, I would like to note that having had my green card about a year, I already employ natural born Americans in my business.
4 garlic // Dec 15, 2009 at 4:15 pm
It seems like Matthew 20: 1-16 applies.
5 legalalien // Dec 15, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Garlic: No. You are wrong. These folks are fully responsible for their own predicament. This is not about christian charity or “equal pay for equal work” or any other issue. Its about whether people who break the laws of the USA to come here should be allowed the benefits of American residency and citizenship, including entitlement programs. You may not know this, Garlic, but as a LEGAL IMMIGRANT, I had to pledge that I would not be a burden on the public purse for a period of 5 years (no entitlement program eligibility) and we had to show to two different agencies of the US government our financial solvency.
6 connor25 // Dec 16, 2009 at 3:42 pm
As my first post, I wonder. What would people of center-right philosophies do? We let the extremists complain about immigration in 2006 that made the GOP lose much face with Hispanic voters despite W’s efforts to reach out to them. Can there be other solutions besides amnesty?
7 sinz54 // Dec 16, 2009 at 7:10 pm
connor25:
I would like to restore the concept of ideological exclusion.
That is, what matters to me with foreigners is not who they are or what they are–but what they believe. If they’re coming here to America to find a better life and become loyal citizens, we should welcome them. If they’re coming here to turn America into Mexico or Arabia, we should not.
Time was when the Government was able to question prospective immigrants on whether they were Nazis or Communists or Fascists. If they were, they weren’t allowed to come here. Then liberals like Barney Frank shot down this entire idea, because it had been misused to inquire about prospective immigrants’ sexual orientation.
Now, the Government can’t even find out if a Muslim immigrant from the Middle East is coming to America to help bring about the day when the Prophet’s Green Flag flies over the White House. Such a person with such an ideology should not be allowed here. He will never be able to call himself an American.
8 Kanzeon // Dec 16, 2009 at 10:05 pm
“Amnesty” won’t “expand,” as you say, the population of the most hard-pressed poor.
The immigrants are already here, working and collecting benefits. “Amnesty” in current political debate tends to include paying into the system, not free passes like Reagan gave. So, if you’re really looking for some money to help the poor and minorities, perhaps you would support one of the many proposals that condition application for citizenship on payment of a large fine , which could be diverted to social programs for those already citizens.
But, of course, we all know you aren’t thinking of proposing anything that would help the desperately poor, but just trying to invent some new, divisive, diversionary rhetoric to support the same old do-nothing approach.
9 legalalien // Dec 17, 2009 at 9:35 am
SINZ54 will be pleased to note that on applicable USCIS and Department of State forms (available for download on the net) questions pertaining to what he/she calls ‘ideological purity’ — for example, intent to engage in terroristic acts — and what Congress defines as moral turpitude — for example, drug related offenses and prostitution related offenses — do indeed appear and have to be sworn or affirmed.
Even after successful naturalization, an alien who LIED on the forms is subject to prosecution and penalities which could lead to removal of US citizenship and deportation. Whether the political and judicial will is present to enforce these laws is (as the failure to prosecute Nazis active in WW II shows) a matter of debate.
10 legalalien // Dec 17, 2009 at 9:46 am
To summarize: There is a yawning chasm between LEGAL ALIENS who obtain permanent status (green card) and later, citizenship through an extensive and thorough process of examination by five different departments of the federal government (CBP at entry, State for visa, USCIS for status, judiciary for naturalization, government MD’s for health certification and background checks by the alphabet soup of US law enforcement and intelligence data base holders) and ILLEGAL ALIENS who have never — because they know that they would not quality — subjected themselves to the most basic of examinations.
I suggest that illegals be deported forthwith. Those who have ‘connections’ in the USA will have no problem returning under laws presently in place for family reunification. Perhaps additional funding is required to reduce the extensive waiting times for USCIS processing in some family reunification classes, but no more action than that is required UNLESS it is the goal of the political classes to create a voter group obliged to them for status, as happened in Canada and the United Kingdom since the 1960’s.
11 mic // Jan 29, 2010 at 10:58 pm
Kudos to Frum for employing a non-native born American because clearly Crystal has not mastered English, sentence structure, logic, and other basic skills. Good verbal diarrhea though.
You must log in to post a comment.