|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
Announcement :: Labor |
|
MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
Current rating: 0 |
by Danny Parsons
Email: parsons.danny (nospam) gmail.org (verified) |
08 Mar 2006
|
|
UPCOMING IMMIGRANT RIGHTS MARCH IN CHI |
March for Immigrant Rights! -- March Against Anti-Immigrant Legislation!
March for Immigrant Rights!
March Against Anti-Immigrant Legislation!
People Unite! — Day of General Strike!
*Yes! To the Legalization of undocumented immigrants
*Yes! To Illinois being a "SANCTUARY" for all immigrants
*Yes! To a National GENERAL STRIKE!!
*NO! To the racist “Minutemen Projectâ€
*NO! To the wall on the Mexico/US border and to the criminalization of Immigrants.
*NO! To Anti-Immigrant legislation: Sensennbrenner Bill HR 4437 which states that:
*All immigrants in process of deportation will have to remain in jail.
*There will be criminal charges against any person or organization that assists an undocumented person. This includes emergency situations and organizations that provide humanitarian aid.
*It will be a serious crime (felony) for any person who is undocumented in the U.S.
(This means that this person will not be able to process his/her status in the future.)
Friday, March 10th 2006
Meeting Point and Departure of March
Where: Union Park @ Ashland & Lake
When: 12 p.m. (Noon)
Rally Point
Where: Federal Plaza (Kluczynski Building) 230 S. Dearborn St.
When: 2 p.m.-5 p.m.
Sponsoring Organizations: Alivio Medical Center, Calor, Casa Aztlan, Casa Michoacan (FEDECMI), Centro Sin Fronteras, Centro Romero, Congreso PolÃtico De Mexicanos en el Exterior, ConfeMex, Durango Unido en Chicago, Enlaces América, Familia Latina Unida, Fed. Chihuahua, Fed. Guerrerense, Fed. Hidalguenses, I.M.E,, I.P.L.,Latinos Progresando, L.O.S., M.C,N, NALACC, Nahui Ollin Danza Azteca , Organización del Distrito Federal, Pilsen Neighbors, R.P.D. de Guatemala, UNIRR, UIC-ISO, Unión Latina, Universidad Popular |
Related stories on this site:
Illegal Workers: the Con's Secret Weapon
| 
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by bob stovall
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
08 Mar 2006
|
|
Do you folks have any idea what illegals have done to the hospitals in S. CA? How do you propose addressing that? How are people (even illegals) going to get medical care when they need it if hospitals keep shutting down because of bankruptcy? Just some thoughts. |
|
Hey Racist Troll |
by wake up and smell the coffee
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
08 Mar 2006
|
You might want to read up on the facts to avoid displaying your overwhelming ignorance in public. As an aid to your education, read this:
http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display/112832/index.php |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by bob stovall
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Mar 2006
|
|
Did you even read what I posted? No, you didn't. Dude, I'm a freakin' democrat and you insulted me without knowing who I am. Lighten up and get over yourself. You direct me to a article that didn't address my questions. Why? I want the hospitals open, but they can't stay open because the people they serve have no money. Any ideas besides insulting me do you have to address this or are you really not that educated? If you want debate answer questions and don't insult. How old are you? |
|
Get a Clue |
by wustc
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Mar 2006
|
OK, then you explain to me where:
illegal immigrants=failed healthcare system
The US healthcare system would still be a mess if there wasn't a single illegal immigrant in the country.
Simplistic equations like the one your argument postulates seem to be far more derived from the racist/classist attitudes that drive faulty premises like those your opinion expresses than they do from anything to do with immigration.
You're not only stupid and racist, it's hard to see how you're even on topic in this thread, given the illogical construction of your argument.
As for how old I am, that's absolutely irrelevant, too. Let's just say I'm old enough to know better, but that could literally be anywhere from old enough to read to one foot in the grave. Fortunately, ignorance is curable, but you have to take the first step and admit you have a problem.
As for your party, assuming a small 'd' democrat is even a party label, what exactly have the Democrats done for healthcare at the national level lately? Virtually nothing. They've been in retreat since the bungled Clinton proposal of the early 90s. Call us back when you have something to report. |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by BD
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Mar 2006
|
|
I suspect you're alluding to the Charles Drew hospitol in LA. Indeed, why are black and brown people the ones hit the hardest by the broken health care system? Its the same neglect of a white power structure that left people stranded in New Orleans. As progressive white folks, when are we going to start calling it what it is. EVERYONE has a human right to health care, on whatever side of the border. Americans are now running to Canada for scripts. Why are we worried about who comes from the South? |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by bob stovall
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Mar 2006
|
|
I am appalled at the intolerant bigotry that is boldly on display here. I asked valid questions and received nothing but hate and intellectual laziness in response. Forget ever wanting to join your group. I feel great pity for the lack of knowledge you don't know you don't possess. How terribly sad your existence must be to resort to name calling rather than answer simple questions from someone who is basically on your side. |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by Media? Really?
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Mar 2006
|
|
Hey, what good are you media folks if you don't read the media. You guys read the news to stay informed and not just look at the pictures right? Media? Bueller? Bueller? Read yesterday's (3-8-06) USA Today on page 3A. It may enlighten some of the 'intellectual laziness' that is obvious here or maybe ya'll will blow it off since white people own the paper huh? Ya'll are amazing. |
|
Not On My Side |
by wustc
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Mar 2006
|
Anyone who thinks that illegal immigrants are the cause of the borken US healthcare system is definitely not on my side or the side of any sort of progressive cause.
In fact, to even assert such a thing, offer no evidence that is the case, and then condemn me for calling you on your BS is undoubtedly enmeshed in "intolerant bigotry...[and] intellectual laziness..."
BD got it exactly right. "EVERYONE has a human right to health care, on whatever side of the border." |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by Hey, wustc!
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
10 Mar 2006
|
|
Maybe you need some coffee. Reread my post and tell me where I said anything about the healtcare system. I said nothing of the sort. Please address my question of what to do to keep hospitals open and providing medical treatment to those who need it including illegals. Got that? Talk to me about the hospitals not the healthcare system. My concern is to keep the hospitals open. Feel free to google it. I don't have the time to hyperlink every article, but they are there. Again, how old are you that you can't see that, but go off on tangent rants? I find it very curious you would call me a racist and yet have no idea what race I am. And why would that be used to determine whether I can even ask questions that affect people namely illegals? Is this how you normally treat people who disagree with you and don't know? |
|
Pardon Me, But |
by wustc
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
10 Mar 2006
|
OK, Joe, then explain to me what other interpretations I'm supposed to have when you state:
"Do you folks have any idea what illegals have done to the hospitals in S. CA?"
That sure sounds to me like you're blaming illegals for the problems of hospital closures. The rest of what you wrote then certainly didn't clarify what you meant, either.
Anyone who knows anything significant about this problem knows it is related to the larger issue of the failure of the overall healthcare system and has next to NOTHING to do with illegal immigration.
The most anyone -- legal or illegal -- without healthcare is going to get from a hospital is a brief encounter with the emergency room, where their immediate problem will be superficially treated. Then they will be dumped back on the street to fend for themselves as soon as they can be pushed out the door.
Maybe if you avoid conflating the two issues in a unclear and ambiguous manner, people would be in a better position to evaluate what you really mean.
The original thread had nothing to do with healthcare, so your vague, off-topic post was obviously misintepreted by me. Your subsequernt posturing didn't help, until you've [semi-]clrified things now. My apologies if I didn't read your mind to find out what your real position was.
Work on your writing skills and people are more likely to have a productrive conversation with you. |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by bob stovall
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
10 Mar 2006
|
Ignore, deflect, rant, ad hominem attacks, name calling, ignore some more, misdirect. Where did you go to school wustc?
I asked a specific question to a problem that is occuring in the American Southwest specifically Southern California. I can't get any clearer than that, and if you can't wrap your brain around that I can't do anything more for you. You made the leap from hospitals in Southern California to national health care not me. You misunderstood what the question was and attacked me and then still attack me for your failing by blaming me for not being specific enough.
You still have not addressed what is a very straightforward question and insist I'm talking about the larger issue of healthcare which I agree is in terrible shape, but I talked specifically about how illegals are draining hospitals of resources treating illegals who are uninsured and force the hospitals to close depriving people in the area including illegals medical treatment. Because illegals make up a hefty percentage of the population of southern California they are also the biggest users of emergency rooms and are required by fed law to be seen. How does the hospital get reimbursed for the expenses and time and money lost dealing with that issue? You still don't answer that.
I'm looking for a way for everyone to get medical care and looking for ideas to discuss and all you can do is name call, and deflect the issue in a condescending way as though I was Newt Gingrich or some such idiot. I am very interested in immigrant rights, but also have concerns. There didn't appear to be anywhere else to bring this topic up except here, and it seemed appropriate since there are people who would deny them medical coverage.
Your logic is incredible to behold. You would rather argue the 'vague'ness of my question and appropriate thread placement than address an issue. You didn't even begin addressing it, but called me racist. You are unbelievable. Why don't pull your head out and get over yourself for a moment. Sheesh. Anyone who knows anything huh? Well, you don't seem to know anything, but call people names and make a person feel real unwelcome here. Wrap your brain around this article that i ran across in a medical journal.
http://www.jpands.org/vol10no1/cosman.pdf |
|
Pure and simple, You're Scapegoating |
by wustc
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
10 Mar 2006
|
OK, I'll put it plain and simple, so you have at least a chance at understanding the point I was trying to make in my original reply.
You are scapegoating illegals.
That is why I posted the link to the scapegoating that conservatives have done around this issue. I can see absolutely no difference in what you're doing than what the Minuteman Project is doing.
BTW, the problem of hospital bankruptcies IS nationwide and related to the failing healthcare system. And it has pratcially nothing to do with illegal aliens. As I've already noted, if there was not a single illegal in the country, the problem would be almost exactly the same. It is also NOT a problem confined to California, despite your assertions of narrowminded parochialism.
How do hospitals get reimbursed for uncovered emergency room care? By charging everyone else more for their care. But since 45 million plus Americans do not have healthcare coverage, this is hardly a problem of being illegal.
To solve the problem, what the US needs is a national healthcare system like most other advanced countries do. If you get hurt or sick and need medical care. you get it. In almost every case, your immigration status is not an issue. Why should it be any different here, especially if, as you claim, you really do care about illegals?
If you choose to climb into bed with conservative memes, then don't be surprised when people here call you on it or express their disgust with your point of view.
All I can say is, since I neither know you nor can I read you mind when you engage in such duplicious rhetoric, if I address you in what you consider to be "a condescending way as though I was Newt Gingrich or some such idiot..." is that if walks and talks like a duck, it probably is a duck. Nothing you've said since really dispells that kind of odor from the message you're conveying. |
|
correction |
by corrector
corrector (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
10 Mar 2006
|
March for (illegal) Immigrant Rights! -- March Against Anti-(illegal)Immigrant Legislation!
March for (illegal) Immigrant Rights!
March Against Anti-(illegal)Immigrant Legislation!
(illegal Immigrant) People Unite! — Day of General Strike!
*Yes! To the Legalization of undocumented (illegal) immigrants
*Yes! To Illinois being a "SANCTUARY" for all (illegal) immigrants
*Yes! To a National GENERAL STRIKE (of illegal immigrants)!!
*NO! To the (pro-legal immigrant) racist “Minutemen Project†|
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by wustc, Grow Up
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
10 Mar 2006
|
I had hoped to engage someone or others in a exchange to see what can be done to keep the hospitals open and medically treat everyone, but I have been met with hate and intolrance by what I thought we people I knew and I am sorely disappointed. I wish others would have posted to discuss this, but apparently this is not a well viewed site.
I find it incredible that I may have marched with you in some protests and stood in the same rallies repeating the same slogans. You have accused me racism, called me names, haven't read the journal article, and you continue with your immature diatribes without supporting your ad hominem attacks. I can only surmise you are under 18 and need a few years to understand that vitriolic emotional responses to legitimate concerns from a fellow democrat is no way to bring in others under our umbrella.
It is no wonder why our party keeps losing the big elections. If people like you would just pull your heads out and attempt to talk to people in a rational manner without kneejerk wacked responses we might get somewhere. Feel free to make more fun of me and call me other names and misdirect my concerns as it appears that is all you are capable of doing. |
|
Well, Let's Put It This Way |
by wustc
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
11 Mar 2006
|
Uh, Joe, you're right. I didn't read the entire article you posted the link to.
That was because I didn't really need to get past the second paragraph to see where it was going.
I didn't mention that in my last post because, well, because I thought I'd try to keep you from further embarrassing yourself with your own ignorance.
Or, given your jumping up and down and letting us know it's really all about you, probably you are just a troll, as I originally suspected.
Everyone at home can look at the article you linked, too, if they wish. But to save 'em some time and cut to the chase, here's the topic sentence of the second paragraph:
"Illegal aliens' stealthy assault on medicine now must arouse Americans to alert and alarm."
Strange, I haven't seen any reports of illegal aliens assaulting our healtcare in the local police blotter. Maybe that is a California thing?...not.
The best way to sum this up is to Google the author's name, with an appropriate key word. Try this:
"Madeleine Pelner Cosman" immigration
Then we get lots of interesting links, for instance --
She's featured on Eagle Forum:
http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/immigration/index.shtml
My, my, now there's a progressive group...not.
Guess what? Some rightwing nutjob website praising the Minuteman Group's efforts:
http://www.steinreport.com/archives/2005_07_18.html
Here's one that plays the old racist tune about diseased foreigners:
http://www.carryingcapacity.org/alerts/alert0905.html
That one goes back to at least the 19th Century. I guess some racists really can't even be original in their hate anymore.
Here we go with the Aynal Probe:
http://www.objectivismstore.com/pc-303-27-illegal-immigration-and-american-medicine.aspx
Maybe Greenspan's new book will tell us more?
Joe, if you really are a Democrat, you're a Joe Lieberman Democrat. But why come here with the thought that is going to postively influence anyone around here? Indymedia started as an anarchist project, but a few left Democrats do hang around here -- nobody who probably wants to attend any demonstration you'd attend, except to protest IT -- along with assorted Greens, socialists, probably a communist or two, and other unaffliated progressives.
Joe, the ONLY way I could be an "idiot" is if at this point I really believed you're just some misguided, but sincere fool, instead of just being a troll. |
|
Illegal Aliens March on Chicago |
by repost from Freedom Folks
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
13 Mar 2006
|
http://freedomfolks.blogspot.com/2006/03/illegal-aliens-march-on-chicago.html
Illegal Aliens March on Chicago
"Si, se puede!" was the cry of the crowd in Chicago today -- yes we can. Thousands upon thousands of illegal aliens and their supporters gathered in Union Park, then marched down Jackson Street to The Loop. Jamming the plaza, as well as the surrounding streets and sidewalks, they rallied to cheer on those who had come to speak.
They demanded legalization for all immigrants. They patted each other on the back for working hard and having dreams. They lauded politicians who devote themselves to representing "the people," which evidently, in their minds, includes "the people" who have come here illegally and don't get to vote. They demanded justice. They jeered HR4437, the House bill passed last December that would make coming here illegally a criminal offense, rather than a civil one, that calls for a fence on the border, and that would penalize anyone who hires and/or helps someone to come or stay here illegally.
Mayor Daley even got up to add his support, which made no sense:
"Don't let anyone tell you you're an immigrant," he shouted. "We're all immigrants!"
???
"Si, se puede!" Yes we can WHAT, one wonders?
Yes we can...make demands of the government, even though we're here illegally? Yes we can...break your laws then demand to not only not be penalized, but to be rewarded for it? Yes we can...take taxpayer-funded services like education and healthcare, and in exchange we'll drive down wages and refuse to assimilate? Yes we can...shout loud enough about our civil rights that the politicians will forget that civil rights are, by definition, for citizens?
Watching these people flood the streets of Chicago today, shouting angrily for what is not theirs to ask, let alone demand, I listened. Amid the shouts of "Si, se puede!" and among the signs and banners calling for legalization and guest worker programs, I listened.
I listened for an answer from within myself and found that, walking along with these thousands of people cheering and yelling and demanding, my answer hadn't changed.
No, you can't. |
|
Vignettes From The Reconquista |
by repost from Freedom Folks
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
13 Mar 2006
|
http://freedomfolks.blogspot.com/2006/03/vignettes-from-reconquista.html
Vignettes From The Reconquista
While attending the illegal immigrant reconquista march today I made a point of stopping every so often and chatting with observers.
I noticed this lady was crying so I asked permission to snap a photo and then asked why she was crying. She informed me that she had been working with "these folks" for a number of years and she wanted them to feel at home here.
Let me start by saying this was a very nice lady, she truly was. I'm sure those who know her would say she has an enormous heart.
But she's an idiot and indicative of a phenomena I noticed along the marches path. Upper crust white women lined the path and had a look on their faces I can only describe as a mother watching her child. It was a species of pride that galled my soul.
It was almost unbelievably arrogant, but arrogance cloaked in compassion. And this type of empty headed compassion is killing this country. We can't allow every person on the planet to enter so where do we draw the line?
Which leads us inexorably to our second vignette. I came upon a bank where most of employees had gathered on a raised brick planter to watch the march pass by. A gentleman in his mid thirties stood nearest the end where I hopped up to join him.
I asked him his thoughts on the march. He replied that he thought it was great, that these people definitely deserved to hold a march like this. He was waxing quite eloquent when he uttered an oopsie. He went on to say that we should welcome everybody.
I queried, somewhat astonished, everyone on the planet? It was fascinating to me to watch his facial expressions cycle through surprise to astonishment. I honestly don't think he'd ever thought it through before, that we can't welcome every person on the planet no matter how much the president might want to. My interviewee had just bumped nose first into a hard reality. I noticed over and over how many people merely recited cant whenever you asked them questions about immigration, nation of immigrants, immigration has always been good, etc., etc., etc.
Yet if you followed up and began asking hard questions such as "well, should we just allow a couple of billion people to move here then?" Their eyes would get big and they'd stammer for a bit before saying no. I'd ask, so where do you draw the line? They never had a cogent answer.
I think that really sums up the public debate on immigration in America today. We want to be a nation of immigrants, yet realize this may no longer be possible as it was in the past.
A young black gentlemen provided a slightly different take. When I asked him his thoughts on the march he at first tried to avoid answering but I kept at it and finally he allowed that he thought it was a good thing. Again, that they should be allowed to march, then he uttered his own oopsie. He said he thought they should be allowed to march because they came from a poor country. When I pointed out that in terms of the whole world Mexico was actually a fairly rich country with a decent standard of living compared to many countries he was literally dumbstruck.
If today's march taught me anything it was just this. In terms of the average Jane and joe American the two biggest enemies proponents of sane immigration policies face are rank ignorance and romantic notions. |
|
Immigration: An Ending and a Beginning |
by repost from Freedom Folks
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
13 Mar 2006
|
http://freedomfolks.blogspot.com/2006/03/immigration-ending-and-beginning.html
Immigration: An Ending and a Beginning
We've been posting about the march and rally supporting ILLEGAL immigration in Chicago today. I've really been thinking about a feeling I had as we were fighting our way out of the crowd of 100,000+. We spent about 40 minutes pushing through half a city block of the throng to make our way to public transportation.
As we finally made it through the shouting, chanting horde, we turned the corner to walk past Berghoff, which sadly shut its doors at the end of last month. For those not familiar with Chicago, Berghoff was a traditional, family-run German restaurant, an institution famous for holding the first liquor license issued by the city after Prohibition ended.
Gazing into the darkened windows of the restaurant, I felt a real sense of something ending and something beginning. Many who disagree with me on the need to fight ILLEGAL immigration often bring up our country's history of immigration and diversity, as if I am somehow maligning them by speaking out against ILLEGAL immigration.
One of the things I love most about Chicago, my favorite city and current home, is the great diversity of its residents and neighborhoods. Berghoff embodied how immigration is supposed to work in my mind. It honored the traditions of its owners' cultural history while celebrating the opportunities and freedoms of America.
That is what I did not see much of in the crowd today, and certainly did not hear from the speakers who egged them on to demand legalization and denounce HR4437. As I listened to Gutierrez and Daley and Blagojevich, I did not hear an enticement to become Americans in any real sense.
What I heard was a call to demand rights and opportunities that have to be earned. These are precious gifts bestowed upon those who are born here, and those who come here legally. They are most certainly not something to be unrightfully demanded or stolen by those who would disrespect this country and its citizens by those who choose to come, stay, and work here ILLEGALLY.
What I saw today was a defiant mission to impose a mass of people, their culture, and their language on another country. There were many claims of loving America, but talk is cheap. It is your actions that truly speak. If anyone loves this country, they will show it by their efforts to make it a better place. Since when do lawlessness, a constant breech of national security, and economic and cultural destruction make this a better place?
I love this country. I embrace and appreciate our melting pot of cultures and traditions. But our country only works when our country and its citizens come first. I would never ask another nation to put the interests of America before their own -- it's ridiculous!
It makes me angry and sad when people come here ILLEGALLY and demand that of America. |
|
Illegal Workers: the Con's Secret Weapon |
by Thom Hartmann
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
13 Mar 2006
|
Conservatives are all atwitter about illegal immigrants. Some want to give them amnesty. Others want to reinstitute the old Bracero program. Others want to build a wall around America, like the communists did around East Berlin. Some advocate all of the above.
But none will tell Americans the truth about why we have eleven million illegal aliens in this nation now (when it was fewer than 2 million when Reagan came into office), why they're staying, or why they keep coming. In a word, it's "jobs." In conservative lexicon, it's "cheap labor to increase corporate profits."
Recently George W. Bush insulted working Americans by saying that we need eleven million illegal immigrants here in the United States because (in a slightly cleaned-up version of the more blatantly racist comments of Vicente Fox) there are some jobs that "American's won't do." As the modern-day Sago miners, and the 1950s Ed Norton character Art Carney played on the old Jackie Gleason show (who worked in the sewers of NYC) prove, the reality is that there are virtually no jobs Americans won't do - for an appropriate paycheck.
It's really all about breaking the back of the most democratic (and Democratic) of American institutions - the American middle class.
One of the tools conservatives have used very successfully over the past 25 years to drive down wages, bust unions, and increase CEO salaries has been to encourage illegal immigrant labor in the US. Their technique is transparently simple.
Conservatives well understand supply and demand. If there's more of something, its price goes down. If it becomes scarce, its price goes up.
They also understand that this applies just as readily to labor as it does to houses, cars, soybeans, or oil. While the history of much of the progressive movement in the United States has been to control the supply of labor (mostly through pushing for maximum-hour, right-to-strike, and child-labor laws) to thus be able to bargain decent wages for working people, the history of conservative America has, from its earliest days grounded in slavery and indentured workers from Europe, been to increase the supply of labor and drive down its cost.
In the 1980s, for example, the increasing supply of labor (both from Reagan-allowed consolidations eliminating redundant jobs, and from illegal immigration, which was around 3 million illegals by the time Reagan left office) fed massive union-busting in industry sectors from those directly hit with illegal immigrant labor (like construction and agriculture) to those who only felt its fallout but nonetheless were pressed (like coal mining). In part, because of these national downward pressures on organized labor, the miners who died in the International Coal Group's Sago Mine didn't have union protection.
Indeed, as the International Coal Group's June 2005 form S-A/1 filing notes about one of their other recent mine acquisitions: ".assets are high quality reserves strategically located in Appalachia and the Illinois Basin, are union free, have limited reclamation liabilities and are substantially free of other legacy liabilities." Similarly, it's estimated that the construction industry enhanced their profits last year by over a billion dollars because the availability of illegal immigrant labor has so significantly pushed down the price of construction labor.
"Union free" is good for the CEOs and stockholders of giant corporations. Reagan helped make it possible by reducing enforcement of the Sherman Anti-Trust and similar acts, by making the Labor Department hostile to labor, and by thus producing an environment into which illegal immigrant labor could step. He busted PATCO and popularized anti-union rhetoric, at a time when union membership was one of the primary boundaries that keep illegal labor out of the marketplace.
Today, this fundamental economic rule of labor supply and demand is most conspicuous in the conservative reluctance to stop illegal immigration into the United States. All those extra (illegal) workers, after all, drive up the supply - and thus drive down the cost - of labor. Even in areas where there are not high populations of illegal immigrants, their presence elsewhere in the American workforce drives down overall the cost of labor nationwide. And when the cost of labor goes down, there's more money left over for CEOs and stockholder dividends.
Conservatives can't just come out and say that they are pleased with the estimated eleven million illegal workers in the United States driving down wages. They can't brag that, behind oil revenue, Mexico's second largest source of income is money sent home from illegal "cheap labor" workers in the United States. They can't point out that before Reagan declared war on working people in 1981 we didn't "need a fence" to keep out illegal immigrants from the south, in large part because the high rate of unionization in America at that time, and enforcement of laws against hiring illegal immigrants, served as barriers to the entry of illegals into the workforce. They won't acknowledge the corporate benefits of a workforce whose healthcare is paid for by taxpayers but whose productivity belongs to their corporate masters.
But conservative strategists have noticed that the workers - and the voters - of the United States are getting nervous about nearly 10 percent of our workforce being both illegal and cheap. This has led conservative commentators and politicians to resort to classic "wedge issue" rhetoric, exploiting Americans' fears -- while working to keep conditions relatively the same as they are today.
They talk about building fences. They worry out loud about brown-skinned Middle Eastern terrorists slipping in amongst the brown-skinned South- and Central Americans. They warn us of all the social security money we'll lose if illegals have to leave the country and stop paying into a system from which they'll never be able to collect. They even find themselves obligated - catering to both working-class fears and to the bigots among us - to promote the idea of giant fences around the country to keep illegals out. (A fence that would, no doubt, tremendously profit their big contractor friends.)
At the same time, catering to compassionate Americans who don't realize this is all about driving up corporate profits and driving down workers' wages, cons like Arlen Specter are promoting legislation that would decriminalize the illegals currently in the United States, thus making legal our increased workforce. As Rachel L. Swarns reported in The New York Times on February 25, 2006: "Advocates for immigrants said the [Bush/Specter] plan failed to protect the rights of immigrant workers, who they argue deserve a clear path to citizenship. And the AFL-CIO warned that a guest worker program of unlimited scale would depress wages and working conditions while creating a perpetual underclass of foreign workers."
None of the various con proposals - from a fence to amnesty - address the fundamental truth of the situation: Conservatives and the businesses they represent want to maintain a large, illegal or marginally legal, and thus powerless workforce in the United States, to keep down the price of labor and help them finally destroy the union movement - and, thus, that politically pesky middle class.
The reason for all these lies and obfuscations is simple, and found in the core notions of conservatism, articulated from Burke in the late 1700s to Kirk in 1953 and Greenspan over the past two decades. It's all about power, and since wealth equals power, about the control of wealth in society.
Conservatives believe that what John Adams called "the rabble" - you and me - can't really be trusted with governance, and therefore that job should be kept to an elite few. The big difference between the old-line Burke conservatives and modern conservatives is that Burke and the cons of his day felt that an hereditary ruling class was desirable (because it would inculcate rulers with a sense of "noblesse oblige"), whereas modern cons like Adams, McKinley, Kirk, and Bush believe that the ruling class should be more of a meritocracy - rule by the "best."
And - in the finest tradition of John Calvin (who suggested that wealth was a sign of God's blessing) - what better indication of "best" could there be than "richest"? They believe there should be a thin veneer of democracy on these old conservative notions of aristocracy in order to placate the masses, but are quite certain that it would be a disaster should the rabble ever actually have a strong say in running the country.
This is, at its core, why conservatives embrace the idea of eliminating the American middle class and replacing it with a Dickensian "working poor" class, and are working so hard to use illegal immigrant labor as the lever to bring this about.
As the '60's and '70's showed - during the height of the American middle class's economic and political power - a strong middle class will challenge corporate power and assert itself economically and politically. This represents a very real threat to conservative ruling elites. "The people" may even suggest that the most elite of the elites should pay stiffer taxes on the top end of their income, so that money can be used to provide the economically most disadvantaged with an opportunity to become socially and economically mobile. It would reduce the most massive of the wealth and the power of the most elite of our conservative elites.
Offshoring, union-busting, and nurturing a huge population of illegal workers (while pretending to be frantic about it and bleating about building fences, fielding vigilantes, or offering "amnesty") are the core ways to destroy an economic middle class, thus ensuring the ongoing political power of the conservative elite takeover that began with the so-called "Reagan revolution" and continues to this day.
This is why conservatives who complain about illegal immigration in front of the cameras won't lift a finger in the halls of congress to pass legislation that would put employers of illegals into jail. (They may support "tough fines," just so long as they're high enough to sound like a lot of money to the average working stiff but low enough to be a "cost of business" for a corporation that gets caught.)
If Congress were to pass a law that said, quite simply, that the CEO of any business that was caught employing illegal immigrants went to jail for a year - no exceptions - then within a month there would be ten million (more or less) people lined up at the Mexican border trying to get out of the United States. The US unemployment rate would drop close to zero, and wages would begin to rise. The American middle class would begin to return to viability, as would the union movement in this nation.
Legal immigration is a good and healthy thing for a nation, because it is done at a rate and in a way that allows a country to collectively decide what sort of labor/jobs ratios it wants to maintain. Limitless illegal immigration, however, leads to the modern-day equivalent of slavery, benefiting only the conservative corporate elites.
Thus, progressives need to begin a new dialogue about immigration in the United States. (Similar discussions are already underway in many of the countries of Western Europe.) Issues include:
* To what extent should the United States bleed its middle class because Mexico is a corrupt oligarchy run by a corrupt former Coca-Cola executive?
* How do we work out fair and reasonable options for illegal families living and working here who have birthed "anchor children" in the US, now citizens of this nation?
* How can we ensure "security" along our southern border in an "age of terrorism"? (A good start may be to stop promulgating policies that cause the world to hate us, but that's another article.)
* How do we recalibrate our business and tax laws so businesses - particularly small and middle-sized businesses - can adjust away from depending on a terrified "working-poor-competing-with-even-more-terrified-illegal-labor" workforce and move toward being able to pay a more robust, domestic, unionized workforce?
* How can progressives join with the few remaining populist Republicans (like Lou Dobbs and Patrick Buchanan) to forge an alliance to make this an all-American effort and not have it further split the nation?
* And how can we all collectively work to prevent Bush and Specter from re-instituting the brutal Bracero "guest worker" program of the last century?
As the anguished mining families in West Virginia show, Bush was wrong when he said there were jobs Americans "won't do." But in the face of massive illegal immigration and the union-busting and wage deflation it spawns, there are increasingly jobs that Americans "can't do" and still maintain a viable lifestyle.
While some geographically-specific industries (like coal mining) don't appear overwhelmed by illegal immigrant labor, its impact on the nation as a whole has made it easier for union-busting to take place from the construction industry in New Mexico to the coal mines of West Virginia. Directly or indirectly, illegal immigration affects all working Americans.
Condemning the frightened working-class white guys organizing citizens' militias along our southern border, or vilifying those who listen to Limbaugh and are convinced that "liberals" are in some sort of collective plot to undermine America may feel good, but it doesn't address the real problem. Progressives will be most effective when we reach across the divides created by Bush, Specter, et al, and point out how this is really all about corporate conservative efforts to replace the American middle class with a workforce of "working poor" Americans and powerless illegal immigrants (or powerless "amnestied" workers) - all so CEOs can fatten their paychecks and further reward the "conservative" investor class.
Only then will Mexico and other countries to our south have an incentive to get their own houses in order, and will our middle class begin to recover decent bargaining power and the living wages that accompany it.
Thom Hartmann is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show carried on the Air America Radio network and Sirius. www.thomhartmann.com His most recent books include "What Would Jefferson Do?" and "Ultimate Sacrifice" (co-authored with Lamar Waldron). His next book, due out this autumn, is "Screwed: The Undeclared War on the Middle Class and What We Can Do About It."
Copyright by the author. All rights reserved. |
|
Tell Our Senators: Vote No on HR4437, the "Jim Crow" Immigration Bill |
by via my mailbox
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
13 Mar 2006
|
For more info:
http://www.highlandercenter.org/r-immigration.asp |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by Just A Reader
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
13 Mar 2006
|
Using Thom Hartman as a reference is just as bad as using Bill O'Reilly. Not matter how intelligent both may be (side with who you want), both are as biased as a Quarter. No matter what, either side will never see the other side.
In all reality, not only is illegal immigration a problem, but so is the way the current system legally lets people in. As AMERICANS, we need to come together to help people. But to help them in a way that they can become prosperous and productive AMERICAN citizens to enable others to follow in the same footsteps.
All the pity bickering on both sides of the aisle makes you look like children. Only when both sides can come together, LOGICALLY, can this work. Otherwise, as long as the liberals try to use race as a political card and the conservatives use liberals to show whats wrong in the world, everyone will continue to fight bitterly.
I'm not saying that both sides need to come together and sing Kumbaya, spirited debate is what makes us AMERICAN. But tables need to be turned, and we must take the sight from our opposition and make it our own.
And to make an ending to this rant, the original article is racist and demeaning. I served my country not only by standing up besides her and fighting in the US Army, bu I spend my days volunteering to and working hard to make it a better palce. A better place where those would proudly and willingly stand in line to earn the rights that our ancestors, my family, and my friends have died to defend. |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by curious
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
14 Mar 2006
|
|
The problem is 'Just A Reader' that the 'line' or a 'crowd' of illegal immigrant is specifically created to eliminate rights and achievements you forefathers gave you in this country as your inheritance. That is what neoconservatives are doing (or trying to do) all over this planet: to eliminate middle class and to achieve the model of world's society as a group of a very few all mighty oligarchs and uncountable crowds of workers who can barely support themselves working almost 24 hours per day. That is what 'back to middle ages' (or whichever else it is called now) presents, as the economic reality. That is what Bush and his associates are trying by all means to implement. |
|
Re: MARCH FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS |
by Raquel
olivasrocky (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
27 Apr 2006
|
|
I don't know why they are trying to put that law if they are going to cause a bigger problem! |
|
