Borikuas in Hawai'i

The first “Ricans” arrived in Hawaii in 1900.

Hispanics in Hawaii: 214 Years of meaningful contributions

In August of 1899, San Ciriaco, a huge hurricane, punished Puerto Rico for two days with winds of 110mph – 150mph. It left the island completely devastated, its agrarian society destroyed, and most of its agricultural workers suddenly unemployed.

The Hawaii Sugar Planters Association (HSPA) was looking for experienced workers for their plantations. When they found out about the hurricane, they started recruiting workers in Puerto Rico. Between 1900 and 1901, the HSPA brought 5,000 Puerto Ricans workers to toil on Hawaii’s plantations. We call the descendants of these early residents “Local Ricans” – Puerto Ricans born in Hawaii.

As a result of this migration, some Puerto Rican traditions were adapted to their new environment. The traditional "arroz con gandules" is called "gandule rice" in the Hawaiian Islands. And "pasteles" have become "pateles." You will see many roadside vendors selling "pateles" as you drive around the islands. No matter what you call them, they're good eating!

Links:
Hawaiian Borikua Inreview With Tony Castanha - Video
Puerto Ricans In Hawaii - Video
Cuatro Mike Balles
Puerto Rican immigration to Hawaii
Aia Na Ha`ina I Loko o Kakou (The Answers Lie Within Us)
Summer Salsa in Paradise 2009
Guide to the Blase Camacho Souza Papers
Puerto Ricans Arrive in Hawai‘i
Hawaii Hispanic News
Salsa After Dark
Puerto Ricans in Hawaii begin centennial celebration
Hawaiian Roots

Told You So...Nativist GOP is a Loser!

Since this December '06 post, I have been warning the GOP that nativism against Latino immigrants is a political loser -- and they would seal their own fate in '08 if they didn't change course.

Between then and the election a few weeks ago, I wrote over two dozen posts on this very issue. (See links to some below). A train wreck was coming. But the GOP turned deaf.

Of course, they wouldn't listen to a pro-immigration Latino blogger, but they tuned out their own as well. It was like they collectively covered their ears and yelled nah, nah, nah, nah...at the top of their lungs to tune out the warnings of Linda Chavez, Clint Bolick, Mel Martinez, George W. Bush, Wall Street Journal and John McCain and others.

I'm not one to say 'I told you so', but I really did warn them early and often. And I'll tell them again. Nativism may help marginal politicians in loser districts and counties. BUT IT WILL DESTROY ANY POLITICAL PARTY IN AMERICA THAT PURPORTS TO BE MAINSTREAM. Period!

Nativism is both an individual as well as a social illness. And today's GOP has an especially virulent strain. It's an illness which causes its victims to think and behave irrationally, including self-destructing. Unfortunately, the self-destruction is usually proceeded by feverish frenzy to bash those outside the tribe.

The following are a few articles since the election in support of what I've been saying for two years.

Republicans: Fenced In By ImmigrationUntil now, the conventional wisdom has been that illegal immigration is a wedge issue that works to mobilize “the base” in the Republican Party, win over swing voters frustrated with the problem, and hurt Democrats who support comprehensive immigration reform. Conventional wisdom has also held that the number of Latino voters who could hold anti-immigrant politicians accountable for their rhetoric is too small to make a difference outside of Democratic strongholds. This election stands that conventional wisdom on its head.

More Immigration Losers
Immigration wasn't a dominant issue this fall, and other factors contributed more to the GOP defeat. But the political reality is that Republicans who thought that channeling Lou Dobbs would save their seats will soon be ex-Members.

THE GOP & THE HISPANIC VOTER Full throttle on wrong track
Hispanics voted 67 percent for Barack Obama, playing a key role in flipping Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Florida to the Democratic column. Even more frightening for Republicans is the strong possibility that Latino voters could soon deliver Texas and Arizona to the Democrats. If this happens, Republicans can turn out the lights on their presidential hopes, lock the door and go on vacation for a decade or three.

Immigration: Fresh blood for reform
Immigrant rights groups are casting an eye toward five newly elected, pro-immigration-reform senators they hope will examine immigration issues in a different light. They are Mark Warner of Virginia, Mark Udall of Colorado, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Tom Udall of New Mexico.

Hispanic Panic for the GOPWhat happened? Many blame the debate over comprehensive immigration reform, which produced fierce legislative showdowns in 2006 and 2007. "It was the tone of the debate," says Diaz-Balart. "The tone of some Republicans was offensive to the vast majority of Hispanics." He believes this "had a devastating effect" on the party's standing with Latino voters.

Hispanics will make Texas Democrat-friendly, some say
A major measure that would have given illegal immigrants a path to citizenship failed last year after a revolt from conservatives, who denounced it as an amnesty for lawbreakers. "If they do that again, it's going to be catastrophic for the Republican Party," he said.

Latinos supported Obama with huge majorities
According to an analysis by the Democratic group NDN, Latinos were key to Obama's victory.

Immigration steered Latinos to Obama
The challenge now, he said, is that [George W. Bush and John McCain] who represented the best hope for Republicans to connect with Latino voters on issues that matter to them, particularly immigration, have been spent.

Related:
A Nativist GOP Wired to Fail in a Diverse America
A Blue Texas? Latinos Will Decide

Runover by the GOP LOCO-motive, Senator Mel Martinez Cries 'No Mas'
Mel Martinez To Exit the GOP Train Wreck
Now We're All Responsible for Fixing Immigration
GOP Opposition Grows Against Iraq War
Republican Presidential Hopefuls Diss 1,000 Latino Leaders
Martinez to Diversify the GOP
Martinez Wins Against the Will of Bigots
RightWing Blackboots Go After Senator Martinez
Latinos Rising to Lance a Nativist GOP?
Hispanic voters gaining strength in key states
The GOP's Bitter Harvest to Come

The Radical Right Claims Victory
A Xenophobic Zeitgeist - Erasing GOP Latino Gains
WSJ -- The GOP's Anti-Latino Tone is a Loser
Linda Chavez: GOP's Self-Inflicted Wound
Republican Presidential Hopefuls Diss 1,000 Latino Leaders
The Coming Latino Voter Response to the Failure of Immigration Reform
Republicans: nativism is a proven loser
Clint Bolick: The GOP Must Now Prove Itself to Latinos
Linda Chavez' The Company You Keep: In Search of anti-Hispanic hostility
GOP Risks Losing Latino Voters
Latino Fear and Loathing
Letting Fear Rule: Nativism Is a Recipe for Long-Term GOP (and Dem) Losses
Immigration Reform: A Golden Opportunity for the GOP
Immigrants: They are America

Immigration Non-Harvest
The Loony Right Stupidly Attacks Rudy on Immigrant
U.S. Business, Bishops, Progressive Unions, President Bush and the Democratic-controlled Congress in Bid to Pass Immigration Reform
Virginia's Jackson H. Miller Pushes 'Black Codes' for Immigrants
Dumbest Move of 2006: Republican Hostility Toward Latino Immigrants
The Rightwing's Winning Strategy on Immigration - NOT!

127MM U.S. Latinos by 2050

The Pew Research Center issued population projections today showing that the U.S. population will reach 438 million by 2050 given current fertility, longevity and immigration trends. Of that population, 127 million, or 1 of 3 Americans will be persons of Latino heritage.

Additionally, the percentage of nonLatino Whites dips below 50% to a projected 47% of the population. People of color will comprise a majority. By comparison, White nonLatinos were 85% of the population as recently as 1960.

My view is that these demographic trends are the result of the Americanization of the United States and Canada. The restrictionists have been doing all they can to slow the process down through anti-immigrant pogroms, Berlin-type walls, black boot scare tactics, anti-Latino harassments, and illegal anti-immigrant worker municipal codes. However, the population trends are natural and irreversible.

Univision's GOP Debate: A View from the Coconut Caucus

I missed today's Univision Republican Debate, so no post-debate commentary from me.

Instead, I offer La bloguera's take as posted on the South Florida-based Adventures of the Coconut Caucus weblog, a site which proudly claims to put "the PANIC in Hispanic."

La Bloguera's comments are hilarious.

Liveblogging the Republican Spanglish debate

By La bloguera

Yes it is that time again another Univision Spanglish debate!!!!!

AND just like last time, the questions are asked in Spanish, translated to English, then the candidates speak English and are translated into Spanish by anonymous male voices.

We start out with Jorge Ramos and Maria Elena Salinas introducing the candidates… so far John McCain, our possibly first Hispanic republican presidente, has received the most applause…

Where is Tank???? how can we bash immigrants without him…

AND now our first audio glitch… with Giuliani…. and he has the voice of a a gay puertorrican!!!!

Romney gets a deep male voice and doesn´t answer the question…

Yo quiero tu voto

McCain has a nondescript voice to translate for him and says he saw some Hispanics on Thanksgiving

Thompson gets a high pitched Argentinian voice…

Duncan Hunter says something about Reagan and El Salvador and gets a bunch of applause

Now Ron Paul, with his usual the bridges are falling here while we are fighting in Irak (his translator dude can barely keep up with him)

Back to Giuliani and that hilarious gay guys voice who seems very happy to translate for him…

Finally!!!!! a question about immigration!!!! it only took less than 20 minutes

The candidates answers to the immigration question (why do you hate us?), is so convolute, the translators can barely find the right words in Spanish and keep making mistakes…

So now Jorge Ramos asks Romney about his relations with that landscaping immigrant…. he says his relationship with that immigrant IS OVER

Thompson, in that high pitched male voice he got, says we can´t have ALL of our relatives applying for immigration status…just wife and kids (first wife, second wife?)

OK, people i am completely bilingual, and I can´t understand WTF they are saying!!!! they are all saying they love immigrants and want to deport them at the same time, and we are a country of laws, and protect the border and let immigrants in…… NO ENTIENDO un carajo!!!!!

Yipee, finally a commercial!!!

the first one is for toilet paper, excellent

OK everybody we are in MIAMI so we have to ask about Hugo Chávez…. and the audience totally boooos Ron Paul says we should talk to Chávez and then all travel to Cuba!!!!, most fun so far!!!!

All the rest say Chávez is an evil dictator and get much applause…

IN CASE YOU FORGOT we are in Miami, so now they are talking about Cuban and how evil Fidel Castro is…

Bikini TV does politics

Finally Irak, and so far according to all the candidates we are winning!!!!

Until of course Ron Paul, bring the troops home!!! and he actually gets some of his applause back.

On to health care…. over an hour, how long is this thing anyway????

Well they all seem to be in favor of health care for everybody and for money for everybody to pay for it without raising taxes…

8:10 PM another commercial… calling cards…and then one about a clairvoyant or something that can tell you if your significant other is being unfaithful…

now unto education…. they are all in favor….

Duncan Hunter says the solution to public education is inspiration and Hispanic astronauts…

So finally the last question: How will Hispanics shape the future of America, i.e. Please pander to us about how great we Hispanics are forever and ever amen…

Ron Paul: Read the Constitution…

McCain: Something about freedom and back to Chávez

Giuliani: Viva Cuban americans, oh and those in NYC too

Romney: Please stop having children without getting married

and it is over!!!! Al fin!!!!

I will get to my post debate hangover later, for now the best moment of the debate was Ron Paul telling an auditorium full of Cubans in Miami that we should all travel to Cuba

AND in case you are wondering what the old media types are saying about the debate, here goes that too

And since once is not enough you can watch the whole thing again here

Hasta La Vista, Hillary!

Columnist Miguel Perez believes "[i]t's time for Latinos to say adios to Hillary" for selling out Latinos.

For Perez--and for many other Latinos--it's what they saw and heard in the span of two weeks from Ms. Hillary that is so disturbing. Hillary embraced New York Governor Spitzer's plan as a matter of public safety. She then equivocated. A week later her camp waspressing Spitzer to withdraw his proposal. Finally, Hillary puts an exclamation point on naked political expediency when she snapped "No!" at the CNN pseudo "debate" in Nevada.

To both sides of the immigration debate, her flip-flopping response was very telling. To anti-immigrant Republican conservatives, it showed that their movement has gained enough strength to make even the Democratic front-runner waver. But to Latino voters, this was also a clear demonstration that Clinton is not the champion they are looking for.

For Perez it's Hasta La Vista, Hillary!

Spitzer Scraps License Plan and Calls for a National Immigration Fix

New York Governor Eliot Spitzer has ended his controversial pursuit of licensing undocumented immigrant drivers. Instead, Spitzer is calling on the President and Congress to end the paralysis and pass a comprehensive solution to the nation's broken immigration system.

Here is the release:

Dear Gerry,

As you know, over the last two months, I have been advancing a proposal that I believe would improve the safety and security of the people of New York by addressing the fact that New York is home to one million undocumented immigrants, many of whom are driving on our roads unlicensed. After serious deliberation and consultation with people I respect on all sides of this issue, I have concluded that New York State cannot successfully address this problem on its own.

This morning I traveled to our nation’s capital to announce that I am withdrawing my proposal.

I chose to make this announcement in Washington, because ultimately, my original proposal was a response to the fact that the federal government has lost control of its borders, has allowed millions of undocumented immigrants to enter our country, and has no solution to deal with it.

When the federal government abdicates its responsibility, states, cities, towns and villages still have to deal with the practical reality of that failure.

Governors, Mayors and chiefs of police in every state face that reality every day in schools, hospitals, and on our roads. In New York, that reality means one million undocumented immigrants, many of whom are driving without a license and without insurance, live in the shadows -- out of reach of law enforcement.

A consequence of the federal failure to address illegal immigration is that Americans and New Yorkers are demanding a comprehensive solution. Piecemeal reform, even if practical, is unacceptable. It fails to address the many important, competing interests and values.

I underestimated that sentiment in putting forward this proposal.

I continue to believe that my proposal would have improved an unsatisfactory situation. But I have listened to the legitimate concerns of the public and those who would be affected by my proposal, and have concluded that pushing forward unilaterally in the face of such strong opposition would be counterproductive.

Beyond the crisis of illegal immigration that I have tried to address in some small way, please allow me this brief observation about another crisis – the crisis of political discourse in this country that was on full display these past two months.

While people of good faith opposed my plan for fair reasons, some partisans unleashed a response that has become all too familiar in American politics. In New York, forces quickly mobilized to prey on the public’s worst fears by turning what we believe is a practical security measure into a referendum on immigration.

Political opponents equated minimum-wage, undocumented dishwashers with Osama Bin Laden. Newspaper headlines equated a drivers’ license for an undocumented migrant laborers with a “Passport to Terror” and a “License to Kill.” Based on the New Yorkers I speak to each and every day, I feel confident in saying that this rhetoric is wildly out of step with mainstream values -- doing nothing to offer solutions and everything to exploit fear.

Nothing reflects the result of hyperpartisanship more than the current immigration debate, which has become so toxic that anytime a practical proposal is put forward, it is shot down before it can even be weighed on its merits.

The consequence of this fear-mongering is paralysis.

Here are the facts:

Tomorrow, undocumented workers will not stop driving.

The federal government is not going to deport one million undocumented workers from New York by the end of this year, any more than it did last year or the year before.

And we can be sure that those who beat their chests the loudest will still have no solution at all.

As attorney general, I often had to step into the enormous vacuum left by a federal government that did not embrace its most fundamental responsibilities. Whether it was ensuring fair play in the markets, protecting the environment, enforcing labor laws or product safety, time and again, the attorney general’s office was forced to step into the void left by federal inaction.

As governor, it has not been much different. Whether it’s health care, climate change, education or, in this case immigration, states are feeling the brunt of federal abdication and conscious neglect of a problem that is crying out for a solution.

But what I have learned here is that, while there are times when states should be laboratories, immigration is not one of them. It’s too complex and too macro a challenge to be solved by a patchwork of state policies. But the reality of 14 million undocumented immigrants nationwide and one million in New York isn’t going away. So my challenge to the federal government is this: fix it. Fix the problem so the states won’t face the local impact.

With that, I look forward to getting back to an agenda that addresses the needs of all New Yorkers.

Governor Eliot Spitzer

Mexican Immigration and U.S. Culture

Over the next few decades the strongest force shaping American culture may well be Mexican.

Read A blended people, an Economist.com review of Mongrels, Bastards, Orphans, and Vagabonds: Mexican Immigration and the Future of Race in America, a book by Gregory Rodriguez.

Don’t Look to Democrats for Immigrant Rights

Latinos Democrats looking for constructive change on the issue of immigration should pay close attention to what Roberto Lovato is saying in Don't Look to Democrats for Immigrant Rights (New America Media, October 31, 2007).

Lovato's point? That Democrats may not have the stomach to fight the good fight on behalf of immigration reform.

Nativism sells in the current anti-immigrant environment--and it sells just as well for Democrats as it does for Republicans. Consider the popularity of New York's Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy. A popular Democrat, Levy is about to win re-election with upwards of 95% of the vote.

The evidence? Not only links Hillary's equivocating on immigrant licenses during last night's debate to honcho Rahm Emmanual's declaration that immigration is the new third rail, but also to Bill Clinton and his post-Oklahoma bombing efforts at what some call "crimmigration”, the criminalization of immigration.

The bottomeline? The GOP is horrendous and getting worse on Latino immigration, but the Democrats may be no better--and could be worse.

Notre Dame Forum on Immigration: Barletta is still wrong

I just watched the full 110 minute forum on immigration sponsored by the University of Notre Dame. Finally, a constructive discussion of this most important yet contentious national issue.

Moderated by PBS's Rey Suarez, the panel included Senator Mel Martinez, Cardinal Michael Mahony of Los Angeles, Arizona Governor Janet A. Napolitano and Hazelton, PA mayor, Louis J. Barletta. While framed by the imperatives of Catholic social justice teachings, it was not a one sided open-borders forum. Barletta and three white male students from the audience represented the anti-immigrant side, while really only the Cardinal argued a strong pro-undocumented immigrant line. Martinez and Napolitano represented the more nuanced middle ground.

I highly recommend watching the forum. Why? Because the immigration issue is not going away soon, and given what has transpired thus far in the debate, it'll take a much better educated citizenry before sensible solutions will be politically doable.

I did, however, find it interesting watching and listening to Barletta who tried very hard to sound reasonable and even compassionate. But while he struck an earnest and even soft tone, his tactic was the same: Blame "illegals" for every horrific crime that's occurred in Hazelton, while obscuring his ineffectiveness as a community leader and mayor.

His rap didn't sit well with me, nor apparently with many others, including student Michael McKenna who wrote the following as part of a larger reaction to the forum posted online:

Mayor Barletta painted a fairly pristine picture of life in his town pre-immigrant, while glossing over the fact that Northeastern Pennsylvania has been declining economically for decades, arguably since the decline of coal mining after World War II. To ascribe all subsequent problems to immigrants is a classic case of scapegoating. The crimes he described were indeed horrific, but to suggest that they were committed by undocumented people on a scale disproportionate to their makeup in the population is difficult to believe. Also, a large percentage of the Latinos in Hazleton are Puerto Rican, who are by law U.S. citizens. But by creating a political climate of fear, very likely these U.S. citizens will suffer the social consequences as well.

McKenna makes an important point: Barletta props up his case against undocumented immigrants with distortions and myths about life in Hazelton. And a new study by Zogby International provides the evidence. The study found that on all of the negative conditions attributed to the city's undocumented immigrants--crowded schools, higher unemployment, higher crime levels, etc.,--none are true.

Congratulations to Notre Dame U. for the terrific forum. Now, if only we can get the folks on television, radio and the U.S. Congress to follow suit.

Immigration Losers

Immigration Losers is Richard Nadler's reflections on the findings and lessons derived from Border Wars: The Impact of Immigration on the Latino Vote.

The main lesson for the GOP:

To retain their Hispanic gains, Republicans need to repudiate only the immoral, uneconomical goal of mass deportation.

Good luck!

As I've said before, it's too late--at least for 2008. A rhetorical or minor policy shift on the part of the GOP will not do.

As long as the GOP and its presidential candidates continue bowing at the alter of Nativism, an anti-Latino bigotry propping up the likes of Dobbs, O'Reilly, Savage, Coulter, Tancredo, Buchanan, et. al., Latinos will rightly keep their distance. It's the honorable thing to do.

Related: The GOP's Bitter Harvest to Come

WSJ Photo: The dishonorable and defeated J.D. Hayworth

The GOP's Bitter Harvest to Come

Linda Chavez asks "Will immigration sink Republicans?" in 2008 and beyond. It's a hunch a number of us have expressed here, here and here.

But now comes a new report “Border Wars: The Impact of Immigration on the Latino Vote,” released by the conservative group Americas Majority Foundation, which Chavez writes "demonstrates that congressional Republicans' ham-handed approach to immigration will cost them dearly at the polls."

The lesson is simple: You reap what you sow.

Related Posts:

A Xenophobic Zeitgeist - Erasing GOP Latino Gains
WSJ -- The GOP's Anti-Latino Tone is a Loser
California's Booming Latinos: 52% by 2042
New York farmers confront feds on migrants
Linda Chavez: GOP's Self-Inflicted Wound
Republican Presidential Hopefuls Diss 1,000 Latino Leaders
Experts: Economies grow in Hispanic-heavy areas
The Coming Latino Voter Response to the Failure of Immigration Reform
The Radical Right Claims Victory
Republicans: nativism is a proven loser
Clint Bolick: The GOP Must Now Prove Itself to Latinos
Linda Chavez' The Company You Keep: In Search of anti-Hispanic hostility
GOP Risks Losing Latino Voters

A Xenophobic Zeitgeist - Erasing GOP Latino Gains

A Xenophobic Zeitgeist (by Arian Campo-Flores - September 24th Issue of Newsweek) is yet the latest installment about the quickly fading Latino support for the GOP as a result of the party's association with anti-immigrant/Latino bigots.

Illustrating Campo-Flores' point is the fact that Latino marketing guru and former consultant to Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, Lionel Sosa, is now campaigning for Democrat Bill Richardson for president. Additionally, Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the evangelical National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, a group representing the most conservative portion of the Latino population has this to say about today's Republican Party:

"Right now, the nativist and xenophobic constituency is in charge of the Republican Party. That's a party the Hispanic-American voter cannot support."

Even Karl Rove is quoted as saying: "I am worried. You cannot ignore the aspirations of the fastest-growing minority in America."

Can the GOP save itself from its headlong plunge into political darkness? Campo-Flores cites outreach by Romney and McCain as a hopeful sign. But counting on the likes of Romney is nonsensical given his unabashed pandering to the nativists. McCain offers more hope but last I looked he was still a decided long shot.

In my view, it's too late for the GOP to repair the damage--at least in time for next year's national elections.

2012? Only if Republicans such as Jeb Bush and Rick Perry oust the bigots.

Sanctuary Cities As '08 Wedge Issue

Update: Through the magic of YouTube and bloggers like NewsHound, I just watched yesterday's entire Geraldo Rivera vs Tom Tancredo segment. You can watch it, too, here and here.

Ellen of NewsHound and others believe Rivera got the better of Tancredo in the exchange. I'm still not sure about that.

Yes, Rivera brought up good and reasoned arguments, but this issue--and the rest of the whole immigration debate--has little to nothing to do about who has the most well thought out argument. It's about the rightwing using very dirty and dishonest tactics in order to distract and divide Americans. And, as long as Americans are open to rightwing appeals to bigotry and racism, the Tancredos, Romneys and Hannitys of the world prevail.

An important question for Americans in the run-up to the 2008 election is: Do they even want an honest and intelligent discussion on immigration, or do prefer an issue that allows them and the nation to spew racism?

So far, it looks like preference is for the latter. But there's a ways to go until November of 2008 with plenty of opportunity for the emergence of a statesman or two. We'll see.

Sanctuary Cities As '08 Wedge Issue

I'm watching an incredible game between two of baseball's best teams: the New York Yankees and the Los Angeles Angels.

These ball teams hail from cities which the nation will soon come to know as leading "Sanctuary" cities.

During a commercial I decide to see what the anti-Latino/immigrant topic of the night is on TalkCable. I click on Fox and there's Tom Tancredo battling Geraldo Rivera on Hannity & Colmes. The topic: the Newark slayings and immigration.

Rivera/Colmes are trying to make the point that it's wrong to blame all undocumented immigrants for the crimes of a few.

Tancredo/Hannity are blaming Newark and other so-called "sanctuary" cities for refusing to collaborate with federal authorities in identifying and jailing undocumented residents.

By keeping the conversation focused on the horrific slayings in Newark, Tancredo/Hannity kept Rivera on the defensive, so much so that by the end Rivera predicts that "Sanctuary Cities" will be the seminal issue of the 2008 presidential elections.

Meanwhile, Tancredo is totally in his element making the rightwing case against sanctuary cities. After all, Tancredo has been a staunch critic of pro-immigrant and Sanctuary cities for years.

I agree with Rivera that Sanctuary Cities will emerge as a major political issue this campaign season. It's already being used to tag Republican Rudy Giuliani as a liberal on the immigration issue. But more importantly, the issue will be used to paint the Democrat presidential nominee--Hillary--as weak on border security AND crime.

Sanctuary Cities as the Willie Horton of 2008?

Anna Quindlen: America Needs Its Newcomers

By Anna Quindlen (Newsweek - 8.20-27, 2007 Issue)

Some people talk about immigration in terms of politics, some in terms of history. But the crux of the matter is numbers. The Labor Department says that immigrants make up about 15 percent of the work force. It's estimated that a third of those are undocumented workers, or what those who want to send them back to where they came from call "illegals."

The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that one in four farmhands in the United States is an undocumented immigrant, and that they make up a significant portion of the people who build our houses, clean our office buildings and prepare our food.

All the thundering about policing the border and rounding up those who have slipped over it ignores an inconvenient fact: America has become a nation dependent on the presence of newcomers, both those with green cards and those without. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York testified before a Senate committee that they are a linchpin of his city's economy. The current and former chairmen of the Federal Reserve have favored legal accommodations for undocumented workers because of their salutary effect on economic growth—and the downturn that could follow their departure. Business leaders say agriculture, construction, meatpacking and other industries would collapse without them.

Last year the town of Hazleton, Pa., became known for the most draconian immigration laws in the country, laws making English the official city language, levying harsh fines against landlords who rent to undocumented immigrants and revoking the business permit of anyone who employs them. There was a lot of public talk about crime and gangs and very little about hard work in local factories and new businesses along the formerly moribund Wyoming Street. In that atmosphere, those with apartments to let and jobs to fill could be excused if they avoided any supplicant with an accent. Oh, the mayor and his supporters insisted that the laws were meant only to deal with those here illegally, but the net effect was to make all Latinos feel unwelcome.

When the law was struck down by a federal judge, there was rejoicing among Hazleton's immigrants, but some said an exodus had already begun. Longtime residents seemed to think that was just fine. This is part of a great historical continuum—the Germans once derided the Irish, and the Irish trashed the Italians—but it is a shortsighted approach. Economists say immigrants buying starter homes will keep the bottom from falling out of the housing market in the years ahead. Latinos are opening new businesses at a rate three times faster than the national average. If undocumented immigrants were driven out of the work force, there would be a domino effect: prices of things ranging from peaches to plastering would rise. Nursing homes would be understaffed. Hotel rooms wouldn't get cleaned.

Sure, it would be great if everyone were here legally, if the immigration service weren't such a disaster that getting a green card is a life's work. It would be great if other nations had economies robust enough to support their citizens so leaving home wasn't the only answer. But at a certain point public policy means dealing not only with how things ought to be but with how they are. Here's how they are: these people work the jobs we don't want, sometimes two and three jobs at a time. They do it on the cheap, which is tough, so that their children won't have to, which is good. They use services like hospitals and schools, which is a drain on public coffers, and they pay taxes, which contribute to them.

Immigration is never about today, always about tomorrow, an exercise in that thing some native-born Americans seem to have lost the knack for: deferred gratification. It's the young woman in New York City who splits family translation duties with her two siblings. Her parents showed extraordinary courage in leaving all that was familiar and coming to a place where they couldn't even read the street signs. Does it matter if they don't speak English when they have children who aced the SAT verbal section and were educated in the Ivy League? It's the educated man who arrived in the Washington, D.C., area and took a job doing landscaping, then found work as a painter, then was hired to fix up an entire apartment complex by someone who liked his work ethic. He started his own business and wound up employing others. Does it matter that he arrived in this country with no work visa if he is now bolstering the nation's economy?

The city of Hazleton says yes. And if towns like Hazleton, whose aging populations were on the wane before the immigrants arrived, succeed in driving newcomers away, those who remain will find themselves surrounded by empty storefronts, deserted restaurants and houses that will not sell. It's the civic equivalent of starving to death because you don't care for the food. But at least everyone involved can tell themselves their town wasted away while they were speaking English.

A Nativist War at Home

Immigration debate gets angrier: Groups loudly press for state, local crackdowns.
(by Dave Montgomery - SacramentoBee - 8.19.07)

1) Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and stealth Republican presidential candidate recently declared "a war here at home" against illegal immigration, which he says is as important as the US-Iraq War.

2) "Even though immigration is always unsettling and somewhat controversial, we haven't had this kind of intensity and widespread, deep-seated anger for almost 100 years," said Doris Meissner, a senior fellow with the Migration Policy Institute and former commissioner of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

3) The Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate groups, said the number of "nativist extremist" organizations advocating against illegal immigration has grown from virtually zero just over five years ago to 144, including groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and Aryan supremacists.

4) Eighty-three percent of immigrants from Mexico and 79 percent of immigrants from Central America believe there is growing discrimination against Latin American immigrants in the United States, according to a poll conducted by Miami-based Bendixen & Associates.

5) As prospects for congressional action appeared increasingly in doubt this year, all 50 states and more than 75 towns and cities considered -- and in many cases enacted -- immigration restrictions, even though initial court rulings have declared such actions unconstitutional intrusions on federal responsibilities.

Elvira's Faithfilled Fight

NO WAY OUT (by Don Terry, Chicago-Tribune - 8.5.07) is a moving account of Elvira Arellano's life in sanctuary in the aftermath of the rightwing's victory over immigration reform.

The article begins with Elvira waving a small Puerto Rican flag as she watches the local Puerto Rican Day parade from within the Adalberto Church. In a sign of Latino solidarity, Elvira's son, Saul, marches as an honorary grand marshall.

Shamefully, the spirit of solidarity is punctured by the profound ignorance and hate of someone the article describes as a Puerto Rican woman. Pathetically, this woman screeches out the ever popular "go home" racist taunt.

Nonetheless, there are wonderful and poignant moments in Elvira's story--examples of the human spirit rising above the pathetic constraints of the debased and the faithless.

Here are my favorites:

Beti Guevara, the assistant pastor at Adalberto, holding onto Saul's hand jumps on a bench and leads the crowd in a passionate chant in Spanish, "Puerto Ricans and Mexicans fighting hand in hand!"

Arellano and Saul's food and clothes are mostly donated by friends and strangers, like the man in Vermont who sends a check for $7 each week.

Elvira's only escape is to step-out onto the tiny fenced-in and blacktopped space behind the church. It's where two long, wooden planters where peppers, avocados, mint and tomatoes grow in what she calls "a garden of hope."

Elvira lights charcoal and incense in a conch shell and a bowl she calls a Poposhcome, waving the smoke into her face. It's an ancient Aztec ritual in which she asks her ancestors and the Great Creator for energy and strength and wisdom to continue her fight.

Finally--and for me the most moving, a delegation of African-American ministers gathered around Elvira in prayer, placing their hands on her bowed head. She said, "At that moment I felt very protected." The humanity and faithfulness of that image is very profound--and filled with hope.

Click here for an account of Elvira's story in her own words.

Michael Bloomberg's "Boy, Let 'em Come" Video

“This city and this country were built by immigrants. Thrive on immigrants. And without more immigrants we don’t have a future.” Michael Bloomberg

Americans Still Support Immigration Reform (including citizenship for the undocumented)

Behind Acrimonious Debate, Public Support High for Comprehensive Immigration Reform

National Immigration Forum -7.30.07

In the spring of 2007, Congress engaged in a bitter debate on the issue of immigration reform. A fierce battle was fought between those who seek practical, comprehensive solutions to our broken immigration system, and those who favor only the enforcement of the broken status quo.

The debate was conducted in an atmosphere poisoned by the followers of conservative talk radio and anti-immigration reform groups who complained loudly that any practical immigration proposal was “amnesty.” They managed to intimidate Congress into a stalemate. Until Congress picks up immigration reform again, the nation will continue to suffer the consequences of a broken immigration system.

In the aftermath of a debate that had strong anti-immigrant and anti-Latino overtones, citizenship applications are at record levels, and new Americans are registering to vote and preparing to have their say in the next election.

If recent experience proves to be a trend, however, the defenders of the broken status quo may come to regret their opposition to comprehensive immigration reform. In 2006, the Republican leadership...listened to the loud voices of immigration restrictionists and bet their political careers on...demonizing undocumented immigrants. [T]he American people were not impressed, and...Latino voters...offended—not to mention moderate and Catholic voters, who deserted the Republicans in droves. Many hardliners lost their seats and leadership positions.

Unfortunately, as the recent debate has demonstrated, lessons were not learned. The general public continued to show steady support for immigration solutions that include enhanced border security, workplace and employer enforcement, and earned legalization for undocumented immigrants with a path to citizenship. Yet, Senate immigration hardliners continued to take their queues from the loud minority opposed to reform.

Click here for a summary of recent public opinion polls on the immigration reform debate.

U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez: Congress should restart immigration reform process

Congress should restart immigration reform process (by Rep. Luis Gutierrez, The Hill - 7.26.07) In recent weeks, we have heard a lot of tough talk from those who worked to stop immigration reform in the Senate. What we haven’t heard are any solutions. What do they propose we do now?

As most people who are familiar with the legislative process understand, being against something is easy. Embracing heated political rhetoric is easy.

Pandering to conservative radio hosts and playing into people’s fears is easy.

You know what is not easy, and what was often overlooked during the debate, is the struggle and sacrifice of the immigrant who gets up at the crack of dawn each morning to go take care of someone else’s kids, or the young father working the midnight shift on a cleaning crew, or the woman picking vegetables in oppressive heat for 12 hours a day. You know what is not easy is worrying each day that your husband will not come home from work or that you will be swept up in a raid and your U.S. citizen children will be left helpless and alone.

At the end of the day, that is what the immigration debate is all about, and why I believe it so is important that we keep fighting.

More

Pro-immigrant activists opposed the 'inhumane and unjust' immigration bill

While the anti-Latino immigrant lobby is overjoyed at their success in killing the so-called Border Security and Immigration Reform Bill, many on the pro-immigrant never lifted a finger in support of that bill--and they, too, were pleased by its dismissed.

The mainstream media reported the proposal's defeat as a defeat for the pro-immigrant side because a few visible organizations such as the National Council of La Raza signed on as supporters. But groups like La Raza are longstanding inside the Beltway operators with a range of political and economic interests--and a history of engaging in "practical" politics. Their calculation was clearly that a bad bill was better than nothing.

However, the people on the front lines of the immigration divide never had much love for the mess that was being sold in Washington as immigration reform.

For example, Enrique Morones of Border Angels and his fellow activists support a humane and just solution to the immigration problem--and they view the defeated proposal as offering neither. In their view no bill was better than a very bad one.

These are some of the larger organizations that called for the defeat of the bill: Labor Council for Latin American Advancement (LCLAA), the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities (NALACC), the Mexican American Political Association (MAPA), Hermandad Mexicana Latinoamericana and the William C. Velasquez Institute (WCVI).

Morones rightly observes that "...true change for justice takes time"-- and that no amount of political expediency should be allowed to compromise what's right.

His prescription for a human and just immigration reform?

As a human rights activist, Morones advocates marching forward against the stiff wall of bigotry and hate erected by the right. He advises "…let’s continue to peacefully lobby, educate, organize, etc…lets register more people to vote…protect all our people as humane reform will take place."

BTW: Morones has paid a heavy price for standing up for what's right. The San Diego Padres relieved him of his executive position for acting on his civic and moral duty to save people from dying at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Click here for more on Enrique Morones and his humanitarian organization Border Angels.