City Council to Hold Hearings on Immigration

I'm going to disagree, Albany.

Many years ago I hid a Korean guy in my apartment while immigration was banging on my door (he snuck out the back and hid til they left). I had never in my life seen such a hard worker as him. Working in a restaurant 60 yours a week, trying to take classes as well. Eventually he got his green card and continued to be a productive member of this society.

If he had been deported back to Korea, who knows what would have happened to him.

Living in Chicago I have met many so called "illegals" from Mexico and from what I can see they work hard and contribute. I'm glad they aren't being deported.

If I wanted to get me or my family into this country to make a better life and I couldn't do it legally, I would probably do what I could to get in.

"There but for the grace of god go I."

I have no problem with undocumented workers if they are law abiding and contributing to society. A neighbor of mine works in the school system as a social worker, she's fluent in Spanish and mostly works with the Latino community. I have learned a lot from her about what goes on behind the scenes. I think we all need to try and walk in another man's shoes before we judge.

As I write this post, there is a crew of landscapers working on my yard. They are Mexican. I don't care one bit if they were all undocumented. They work hard, they do an excellent job and it's like 90 fucking degrees out there. If I knew for a fact that they were undocumented, I wouldn't report them even if it were the law that I had to. They deserve the right to work and to make a living.

Albany: Interesting ideas, most of which are reasonable and fair, if not as courageous as you imply in the beginning of your post.

But who cares?

Everyone has ideas of immigration. We have a surplus of free-floating ideas on this matter.

If you really want to be special, talk about a policy path that will actually lead to the next round of immigration reform in the USA. Tell me how such reform might find enough practical favor among the Congress, the President (the next one, I suppose), the Supreme Court and the corporations, as well as a good part of the voting public.

It really does not matter what one believes on this issue, not in any practical sense. It matters what one thinks can be done, and how one thinks reform can be done.

For example, you talk about deportation. How, then? Who pays? What if any PR damage will the USA suffer?

If you really want to stick your head in the lion's maw, really do it, then.

At the outset, I never used the term "illegals". That's a loaded word. It lets those on the right make people criminals and those on the left cry "no person is illegal"

They're both right.

No person is illegal, but coming into a foreign country without documentation is a crime.

Here's my practical solution.

Stop these "round-ups". They're creepy and militaristic and do more damage than good.

Put the impetus on employers. Sure, we do that now, but not really. You hold companies to criminal account for knowingly hiring undcocumented immigrants, that's a game changer

Foriegn Aid and reconstruction. Why did we spend half a trillion dollars trying to bring Jeffersonian democracy to Iraq when nations to the south of us are struggling to maintain subsitence economies with parasitic military governments (many of which, we helped put there) that drive people to cross the desert? Rising tide lifts all boats.

Fix the immigration process. I'm the child of two immigrants. My father spent 15 YEARS and thousands upon thousandsof dollars to become a citizen back in the 60's. The process has only gotten worse. He was a skilled craftsman with a job, a family network and a clean criminal record. It should not be that hard. The immigration process is already causing skilled tech workers from all over Asia to head elsewhere. Immigration made this country great, legal immigration. Why make into an ordeal?

Albany: You say "rising tide lifts all boats."

Does that extend to an expansion or revision of free trade, too? (Ignoring the recent Doha-round mess). I find it hard to talk about immigration without talking as well about free trade. What would you do in that area beyond simple aid dollars?

I have known, first or second-hand, many people who went through the experience your father did, and I imagine it must have been maddening and demoralizing and terribly unfair. That is one reason I am really interested in your concrete ideas.

Matilda:

The free trade policies we have with Mexico and other Latin American states are nigh criminal in how they treat labor. They are crafted by, of and for the wealthiest segments of those nations. You're absolutely right, you cannot talk about the immigration question without asking "Why are so many people from central and south america FLEEING their nations?"

Free and fair trade needs a great deal more emphasis on the FAIR aspect. It's not just about maximizing wealth for the already wealthy.

My dad's story is not unique at all. The only credit I have for the system is that the delays meant my father never settled down with his 60's girlfriend and instead ended up marrying my mom years later once he was legal and years after that producing...me.

My mom was somewhat fortunate in that she was declared a political refugee (she was a Catholic from Northern Ireland) and able to shave a few (not many) years off the process.

Imagine a world where people could live freely without the fear of genocide or racial hatred.

How do you fix immigration policies when there is worldwide abuse of human rights and people just want to live without fear of random persecution?

In England there are many doctors from eastern Europe who are working as orderlies and janitors. That is not fair. It's not right.

I don't have any ideas on how to fix this problem, it's too complicated. I only form my opinions on my own personal experience. My ex husband came here when he was 20 years old and didn't speak one word of English. He learned English while simultaneously going to college and is now an executive making an income that only the top one percent of this country makes. And yes, he had an unfair advantage when he came here. He got to claim 'political refugee' status for some reason. His process to gain citizenship was quick and smooth. Even so, he still had to overcome a lot of hurdles to get to where he is now.

My ancestors came here through Ellis Island. They had their share of hurdles and they did it legally, but I still begrudge nobody for coming here under the radar.

People do what they've got to do, don't they?

p.s. I don't live a gilded life in Lincoln Park and I don't live off of my ex's largesse.

Our immigration laws should be upheld. Amnesty and lack of enforcement DO have negative consequences for all of us.

We should have a fence (yes, we have the technology to do it), an e-verify system for all employers to use, and a guest worker program for industries where guest workers are needed.

As for people here illegally? Yes, they are illegal. No point in dancing around the word. Illegal means against the law. If liberals want to change the law, let them try.

Liberals will get their chance after November, since both presidential candidates are shamnesty advocates.

I wouldn't be here if not for the marvels of illegal immigration (Serbian grandfather via Brazilian fishing boat), so it would be hypocritical for me to declare anything but "amnesty for all!"

A question about "amnesty", which I am guessing is the ignoring of the fact that many illegal immigrants have violated laws that the country can not enforce.

For those who are against amnesty, how do you propose dealing with the 10 million or so illegals here now? Building the fence is fine, but if they're already here, what to do? Also - remember you have to build that fence along the Canadian border as well, fortify the coast lines - I am guessing that all of that is going to cost several billions of dollars, as well as a major increase in the number of border patrol agents, Coast Guard, INS and police (assuming we don't use the military).

Here's my problem. The system is broke. But rather than come up with a real solution, the "conservatives" yell Amnesty, the liberals scream "racism", and nothing changes. So Ward Up, et. all - what is your solution?

Congrats, Clarence. Don't worry--it will be the first of many from the lovable mascot known as Spook.

fremo,

A solution would be a world where people from other nations didn't have to come here to escape poverty and persecution in their own countries.

Instead of trying to fix a problem here with prophylaxis, we could work to make the world a better place.

There is a news article today about a Saudi couple who are facing 950 lashes because they were caught having a phone sex affair.
Why don't we start there? Let's stop our dependence on oil and leave those Saudis in the dust.

ok..yeah...I know...I am simplifying, it's tongue and cheek (in a way). But the truth of the matter is, there is NO way to keep building fences and think we're going to keep people out.

That's like this ridiculous war on drugs. You're not going to stop people from smoking marijuana. (on a tangent here, but Chicagoist has not reported on the fact that Cheech and Chong are reuniting and are either going to go on tour or make another movie!!!! Yay!!! ) I digress....and why support China and the Olympics when China is rife with human rights abuse!
This country supports abusive regimes, we have this continuing problem with immigration and yet nothing ever changes...except for getting worse. Time to start trying things from a new angle.

Fences and more border patrol are a joke. Legalize marijuana and start working on world peace.

Ingrid,
I think your ideas are coming from the best place, and I greatly respect your desire for peace and justice. IMO I wouldn't participate in any Olympics with a country that has as much human rights problems as China. A lot of people correctly point out that the booming economy has the chance to eventually transform the country into a free democracy, but in reality they're still a communist regime - a dictatorship. One that US firms work with all the time. All I can think of is the students who got ran over by tanks in Tieneman Square. Yet, every time we hit the Target or Gap, check the label out. Made in China. The Saudis are the same - but we need that oil.

The question is how involved do we want to be in the world? Should the US be the world's policeman, or more of an inspiration? When the Iraq war became less about WMD and more about the liberation of the country from a cruel dictator, its a sham - we do business w/ those just as bad as Hussein. I avoid made in China - not because I believe in protectionism, but because the guy in China can't fight for better wages.

That said, a law is a law. I believe the greatest challenge facing this country now is the current slate of elected leaders - all of them - that have been sticking around and have basically blown it. When you have an open ended political life (IE, no term limits), your major concern is going to be getting re-elected. The side effect is tons of laws passed (especially in Chicago) for political reasons, that stand little to no chance to be effective.

fremo,

I see what you're saying. But I don't think we need oil as much as we think we do. We could have had electric cars, but those got 'killed', remember?

Also, a good place to start would be companies such as.....Nike paying overseas workers a LIVABLE wage. It just gets my hackles up that they will pay gajillions for celebrity endorsements of their stupid products and little kids are slaving away in their factories for pennies a day. So, that would be a good place to start.

Because, yes, I agree with you...we cannot be the world's police force. But I do think it's going to take a little bit more than leading by example though. Not that being a good example is such a bad thing, but there are other ways to implement change than by invading countries with sadistic rulers under false pretense.

I know my posts above have made me sound like a bleeding heart liberal Pollyanna, but the truth is that so far the system isn't working and there are no signs of our government doing anything different. Their thought process of "More fences. More border control. More money..." ARRGGHHHH!!!
It's like our medical system of throwing more drugs into our bodies instead of working with a more holistic approach.
Their way: Are you depressed? Feeling down? Take another paxil, prozac, effexor, etc."
They don't say: "Get off your ass, get some exercise and eat healthy." It's always about throwing something at the problem. Not trying to work with it before it gets really bad.

Ingrid,
Believe me, I'd be the first in line for an electric car. I've seen the documentary, and aside from the bullshit "funeral" the celebrities had for the E-1, I thought it made some good points. The truth though is that oil drives our economy, and a lot of people have a huge stake in it. Those same people are not about to get into alternative energy sources, or promote conservation - which I think is what we should be doing no matter how much oil is located wherever. Regardless of what some people think, we will run out of oil eventually. Maybe not in 15 years, or 50...but we will.

Again, the reason why I don't think anything changes really is that who is in charge (Democrats/Republicans) never changes. I think Obama and McCain are both learning right now who really runs their parties.

Fundi, I'm with you in that I'd like to see an interview with Mr. Lopez. How does Chicagoist go about sending contributors to do that?

I would not mind if Chicagoist published an interview with the pro-amnesty person mentioned above.

However, Chicagoist should not publish such an interview without an similar-length interview with someone with an opposing viewpoint, e.g., an Illinois politician with a pro-enforcement viewpoint.

All the illegal aliens, mostly Mexicans are in the process of destroying the poorer members of the black community.
Poor blacks are the ones most affected by the illegals that have taken all their jobs away.
10 years ago, all the junk pickers on the North Side were black guys & you would get 2-3 a week coming through to pick up scrap metal that was thrown out. Now I see at least 8 junkers a day in my alley & all of them are Mexican illegals in the worst, most broken down, overloaded & polluting pickup trunks you've ever had the misfortune to see.
The only other group that's been affected almost as much are the blue collar construction workers that do the small projects around here. Every one of the thousands of houses & small condos that were built before the housing bust had mostly Mexican illegals doing the work.
They also have huge families and are forcing the public schools in Chicago & some suburbs into bankruptcy. Cook County Hospital has enormous costs from illegals, as do Mt. Sinai, Norwegian American, Illinois Masonic & McNeil in Berwyn.
Mexico has decided that the best way to fix its wretched economy is to export its poorest & illiterate citizens to the US.
And contrary to fremo, no fence is needed with Canada. Canadians don't want to move here illegally, they have excellent government, single payer healthcare.

"....Ward Up: The FCC, under Ronald Reagan, stopped enforcing the Fairness Doctrine in the mid 1980's, and the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in 1986 that the Fairness Doctrine wasn't law. The Supreme Court upheld that ruling. When congress attempted to make it law in 1987, Reagan vetoed the legislation...."

Kevin, I am very familiar with the fairness doctrine.

Perhaps you did not understand that my suggestion was a suggestion, not court decree. I am not a judge.

Of course, expecting a balanced presenting of viewpoints from Leftcagoist was perhaps a bit too much for me to request.

A venting opinion by yours truly.

I can't stand liberals OR conservatives. Right and Left. Democrat or Republican. I think the main reason why is that the leaders on either side stand to benefit on non-cooperation. Listen to a Michael Moore, or a Rush Limbaugh and the number one thing they advocate is no compromising.

These "movements" also tend to create ridiculous "you're with us or against us" lines; why is it there can be no pro-life feminists? I've been challenged and derided by both sides who just refuse to give an inch. I've been told I stand for nothing because I am an independent. Baloney.

I know this has been going on for generations, and things eek by as time goes on - but whenever one side gets in charge, things tend to regress. The immigration bill that was killed last year, mostly because of conservative activist working against it, was an honest, if flawed compromise.

So, for all the leftists and rightist on the board here, let's get back to the issue. So we build a wall along the Mexico border, to stop Mexican illegal immigration. Thats fine. We still have at least 10 million immigrants here. What to do?

Here's how I see it:

1. They broke the law and should be deported. This is going to cost us a fortune to do.
2. We go with a bill where the illegals are declared Foreign workers, force employers to collect income taxes off of them, and any violation of laws results in immediate deportation. This will also cost a lot, but not as much as rounding up 10 million people and sending them over the border.
3. Do nothing and argue about it.

What do you think?

Fremo, First of all they're far more conservatives and liberals than "Michael Moore" Types.

People who compare Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh are Gooo Gooo Dumb Liberals. Michael Moore types have never controlled government in the U.S and don't have nearly the resources of Limbaugh types. We are in the minority because we are willing to give a real critique about the power structure in this country Obama,Pelosi, Daley liberals are not.

O.k. to the issue. Lets give 10 million people blanket Amnesty, but F*ck it then, how many will continue come in? And show me how allowing them to stay permanently is cheaper than doing regular immigration enforcement that results in illegal’s being sent back home? Its not some western round up going on here, just beefed up enforcement that seems to be working!

Heck poor American workers probably use more services (because they are not paid enough) than they pay in taxes. And as the average number of children for a Mexican illegal house hold (poor people of all colors tend to have more kids) is four kids, show me some numbers? Or are you just pro Amnesty but trying to subterfuge behind objectivity.

Just like you don't know the costs of allowing 10 million people just to say F*ck Federal law.

Oh and what about Americans who need jobs, but rightfully so will not crowd into a house with ten other families to earn less than minimum wage? What about them?

Spook,
I stand by what I said - either side doesn't get anything accomplished. A critique is not action, especially if a response to a critique is a critique of that critique. And then more attacks on how Liberals don't do this, or Conservatives don't do that. On and on. From your response I take it that you aren't a "goo goo dumb liberal" - whatever the hell that means. You're more along the lines of an FDR liberal, then? Maybe I shouldn't have singled out the major pundits, but as I talk to the people I know and the people in the news, the pundits get to define the issues for each side. Which sucks, to me.

As for the issue:

"And show me how allowing them to stay permanently is cheaper than doing regular immigration enforcement that results in illegal’s being sent back home? Its not some western round up going on here, just beefed up enforcement that seems to be working!"

That's debatable. The cost of deporting one illegal immigrant is something like 10000 dollars. A liberal think tank came up with 41 billion to get rid of all of them. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR2005072501605.html. Other figures say around the same thing. Likely, it would be much higher. What is doesn't track is the various companies that employee them - how many will go under, etc. This is the slaughter houses, farms, some factories, the like.

So if we do nothing (which I am not advocating), you save those billions. This isn't counting a fence, or guards for that fence, or the economic results of ditching a few million menial workers.

As for amnesty, the pros are you get to finally tax their income, maintain some semblance of who is where (meaning they're offically registered with the Fed government), and I assume level some fines. Again, this will cost money as well - you'll have to beef up INS, you'll have to process all of the lousy paperwork. I don't think it will cost the billions to line everyone up. For criminal offenders, one infraction and you get deported. That might help get the illegals out of the prison system in a hurry, which could save money.

For doing nothing, I've heard that it costs California, which has the highest level of illegal immigrants, something like 9 billion a year for jails, education, and the like.

It may be the economic downturn chases more than a few off, and the report link I posted may be evidence of that. But I don't buy "enforcement" as a solution, because honestly the man power isn't there. Hence the cost.

One law that should change immediately to curb the flow is that unless your parents are citizens of the US, by being born here does NOT make you a US citizen.

So what good is the law if we can't enforce it? Its gotten way out of hand. So either we bite the bullet and throw everyone out, or work something else. Would you take another 3 to 4% tax hike to get rid of the illegals in Chicago? Figuring it will take about 5 billion to do so?