Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Cynara Velazquez

The Need to Include Trade Reform in Comprehensive Immigration Reform This year, immigration reform will again be debated in Congress. There will be those who want to close our borders and penalize without exception and there will be those who wish to open our borders and allow for mass legalization. I am extremely wary of each of these proposals and all they fail to address the root causes of immigration. And without addressing the causes of immigration, any solution based solely on the effect of immigration can be effective or truly humane. Progressive groups are pushing for mass legalization and understandably so, because there are now 11.9 million people living and working in the shadows,[1] under constant threat of abuse, penalization, or expulsion, despite their contributions to our society and a rate of criminal conduct lower than that of US citizens.[2] These people deserve a chance to obtain their American dreams and contribute to creating better society for all Americans. No legislation proposed will provide a solution for all undocumented immigrants. The legislation, in order to get through Congress, will contain restrictions on who qualifies for legalization. These restrictions will probably exclude anyone with prior criminal convictions no matter how small or how old the offence. They may exclude people with prior immigration expulsions. There could be stiff financial penalties that are financially ruinous to already struggling immigrants, and extraneous requirements such as returning to country of origin for duration of process are also possible. Regardless of how inclusive the legislation is there will be people that are excluded. Circumstances for those that cannot be legalized will be more even more difficult than the hurdles they currently face. In exchange for immigration reform, we will be asked to accept stiffer penalties and increased enforcement with aiming of making life so unpleasant for undocumented immigrants here in the US that immigration is no longer an attractive option. What those in the immigration enforcement camp fail to realize is that life is already incredibly difficult for undocumented immigrants. In order to reach the United States, they have left their homes, their friends and their family. They have risked their lives at sea and in the deserts. They suffer abuses at the hands of employers and landlords and live each day to know that everything for which they have worked can be taken from them in an instant if they are discovered. Knowing the difficulties that these immigrants face, the question should not be one of how can we make life even more difficult for undocumented immigrants, but what circumstances were they facing in their home country that would compel them to risk their life to come to the United States as an undocumented immigrant. The root causes of immigration lie in the country from which an immigrant emigrates. Unless we are willing to examine this root cause of their immigration, we will not understand how to mitigate the circumstances causing their immigration to the US. People immigrate for three principle reasons - violence, political instability, and economics in their country of origins. When these issues are dealt with, people stop immigrating and in many cases return to their country of origin. This is accepted with war refugees when there is violence, people flee. When the violence stops, people no longer flee their country in large

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Cynara Velazquez

numbers, and though some war refugees settle in their host countries, many eventually feel safe enough to return. The same is true for economic refugees. In the past, those with the means to do so left China in search of better opportunities in the Unites States and other western countries. Today, with Chinas booming economy many Chinese are choosing to return to China, despite having lived comfortable professional lives abroad[3],[4]. In Europe, migration from Eastern Europe to Western Europeans slowed dramatically despite open borders within the European Union, as conditions of Eastern European countries have steadily improved. The reverse is true between the United States and Mexico. Though people tend to assume there has always been a high rate of migration from Mexico to the US, this has not always been the case. For most of the 1960s, when the standard of living was high in Mexico[5], the rate of migration to the US was extremely low less than 50,000 undocumented migrants per year[6], despite a porous, and poorly guarded, border. As income inequality grew in Mexico, so did migration, and for the last twenty years we have been stuck in a cycle of Mexican economic crisis, influx of immigrants to the US, and backlash against the surge of Mexican immigrants. Any legalization measure that is passed by Congress will not provide a path to legalization for all, though progressive groups lobby to include as many people as possible. But what can we do for those that will not qualify for legalization? The possible regulations of the new law will affect them immediately as national IDs and harsher fines are put into place. And how do we stop people from winding up in the unfortunate set of circumstances that cause them to become undocumented immigrants? The answer is to give them a chance in their home country, an opportunity to go home to a place where they can support their family, where their children can go to school and where opportunities exist. Once the intense flow of undocumented immigrants begins to slow, immigration regulations on that country can be relaxed, allowing people to more easily obtain visas to the US to visit relatives, take a family vacation, or comfort a sick loved one. Imagine if immigrants from other countries could flow in and out of the US as easily as Canadians or British without harassments - without arbitrary decisions from immigration judges, without extreme time and monetary commitments for visa? Practically speaking, this is only going to occur when the flow of immigrants from that country is eased enough that the border restrictions can be suspended. The flow of immigrants is only going to be eased when the living conditions of the immigrants home country are improved. I realize that what I am proposing is not a short term solution. But short term solution will not lessen the hardship in the long term, if we do not deal with the root causes the immigration the cycle of hardship, immigration and retribution against immigrants will continue, as it has for the last twenty five years. In order to examine how this might occur, we need to examine the factors causing immigration on a country by country basis, of the countries from which the US receives immigrants. While this may seem like an overwhelming task, the logical step would be to start with country contributing the largest number of immigrants to the US. Over 75% of US immigrants come from Latin America and more than half of all undocumented immigrants in the US come from

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Cynara Velazquez

one country. If we want to solve the problem of undocumented immigration in the US, we have to engage with the country that is sending them the majority of them. We have to focus on Mexico. MEXICO Mexico is the country of origin for 59% of the undocumented immigration to the US[7]. Therefore, if we address the issues causing immigration from Mexico, we can significantly reduce the total flow of undocumented immigrants to the US. Some progressives balk at the idea of trying to lessen immigration rates from Mexico. People, including people from Mexico, they argue, should be able to live where they choose. And if they want to live here and contribute to our society, that should be okay. While this is a valid argument, the decision to migrate is often not a true choice. While we often imagine people flock to our shores because they embrace our lifestyle, culture, or have grand economic ambitions, the truth is that people often want the opportunity to live in their own country, surrounded by friends and family in their own culture, every bit as beautiful as that of the US. Undocumented Mexican immigrants I speak with speak longingly of their home and their family, their cultures and traditions. While some have adapted to their new environment the point where they would not choose to return, for most there is no choice economic necessity dictates that they migrate to, and stay in, the US. And while legalization will hopefully give most of these people the opportunity to stay in the US, do we want future generations of Mexicans to have no choice, but to immigrate to the US? The situation for blue collar workers in Mexico is very grim. The average blue collar worker in Mexico earns between 113 188 pesos per day [8] ($8.64 $14.37). According to recent statistics by the Mexican government, 70% of Mexicans do not earn enough to buy the basic goods needed for nutrition, hygienes, and other necessities [9]. These people are barely surviving in Mexico and are unable to improve their circumstances, with just enough money for day to day expense.. Is it any wonder, giving those circumstances that people are willing to risk life and limb in order for a chance to, quite literally, feed their family? And the situation only continues to worsen. In the last two years, prices for key Mexican foods have risen by 67%, and the buying power of the Mexican consumer has fallen by 37%[10]. The Mexican minimum wage is only 52 55[11] pesos per day ( $3.98 - $4.20 USD). This is not enough to even cover food on the Mexican market. While it can be argued that almost no one in Mexico pays the minimum (though some employers do) most wages are tied to the minimum wage. In general, unskilled workers are paid $5 - 10 dollars more per day than the current minimum wage. This is still not enough to cover basic necessities [12]. The US minimum wage is currently 16 times that of the Mexican minimum wage [13]. Until we reduce that gap, people will continue to head north. The enforcement lobby seems to think that the solution is to build a wall so that people cannot escape the extreme poverty they face in Mexico. Immigration is often cited as the reason that Mexico has not failed as a state. Immigration has functioned as an escape valve for unemployed youth that would otherwise be revolting against their conditions. By trapping

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Cynara Velazquez

desperate people in an untenable living situation on the other side of the border, we risk destabilizing the region. Wouldnt trying to resolve their situation be a more humane, and secure approach, then simply walling off the problem? The issue is not that there is not enough wealth circulating in Mexico to provide for its people. Mexico is not a poor country it has the 11th highest GDP in the world, greater than Spain, Canada or Australia[14]. It also is home to one of the richest men in the world, Carlos Slim, who made his fortune in the Mexican domestic market, overcharging average Mexicans for telecommunication service[15]. The problem with Mexico is not a lack of wealth, but how it is dispersed. Mexico's billionaires have a potential income almost 400 times the top 0.1 per cent of the population and 14,000 times the national average.[16] The argument we most often hear for not addressing the income gap in Mexico is that this is Mexicos internal problem. Yet, how can we pretend to care about issue of undocumented immigration if we do not want to examine its cause? Moreover, the US has not been neutral regarding income inequality in Mexico we have actively contributed to it. Our trade policies and agreements with Mexico, especially NAFTA, are the biggest contributors to the ongoing wage suppression among the Mexican working class. NAFTA was designed in such a way as to make cost the main competitive criteria among comparable goods. Basically, whoever can make something the cheapest will win the business, regardless on which side of the border that manufacturer is. There are three components to costs: cost of raw materials, production and transportation costs, and labor costs. Of three components, the easiest cost to cut is labor. This is done by lower wages, and cutting benefits. Which is exactly what we have seen in Mexico since NAFTAs inception. Real wages are now lower in Mexico than when the agreement was enacted[17]. As real wages fell, immigration rose dramatically after its signing. As long as NAFTA is in place in its current form, we will continue to create incentives for companies operating in Mexico to depress wages and violate labor laws. NAFTA also allowed American companies to invade the Mexican market, taking advantage of its cheap labor and poorly enforced labor laws. Walmart, Ford and Coca Cola dominate their respective Mexican markets. Walmart did not exist in Mexico prior to 1991. After NAFTA took affect, Wal-mart expanded its own stores into Northern Mexico, while buying the biggest grocery chain in the center and south of country, Bodego Aurrera, and it continues to expand into the clothing and banking industry. Today Walmart is the largest employer in Mexico. It does not pay its baggers (they earn only tips), and Walmart recently went to the Mexican Supreme Court to fight for the right to pay its other employees in Walmart vouchers[18]. Walmart may have lost that battle, but how much money are our multi-national conglomerates giving to the Mexican government to maintain salaries low and labor laws unenforced? While there is no official US government action to encourage Mexico to raise the salary of its working class, the message from our trade agreements and companies has been extremely effective continue suppressing the Mexican working class. It doesnt have to be this way. If pressure was put on Mexico to enforce its labor laws (which are decent but un-enforced) and raise its shamefully low minimum wage, the Mexican working class could earn enough to succeed. A relevant comparison can be made to the European Union.

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Cynara Velazquez

After pressure was put on Spain and Italy by their northern European peers, they were able to raise their standard of living dramatically. The United States is Mexicos largest trading partner, purchasing 73% of their export goods[19]. The United States could immediately put trading pressure on Mexico to raise its minimum wage. NAFTA could also be revised to add incentives for companies to raise wages and to enforce labor laws. We have all the leverage to raise the standard of living in our neighbor to the south, and in doing so, go a long way towards solve our own undocumented immigration issue; we simply need the will to do so. There is also a moral obligation to address undocumented immigration through improvements in the standard of living. Here in San Diego, we live less than 60 miles from the Baja California wine country, where, according to an expose on Mexican National Television, workers are bused up from Oaxaca, forced to live in squalid condition without running water, heat or toilets, multiple families to a room, miles from town, as indentured servants, paying off their bus fare from Southern Mexico over a period of months. Mexico is not a faraway country but, rather, our nearest neighbor, less than an hour away. How can we stand up for human rights abuses and inferior wages in our own country while turning a blind eye to such abuses that are minutes away from our doorstep? Moreover, when those workers from Oaxaca finally make enough money to escape indentured servitude, there is a good chance that they are not going back to Oaxaca. Most likely, theyll be heading north, to become undocumented immigrants in the United States.
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=107 http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/local/article_1592092.php http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/24/MNGE7KO8FJ1.DTL http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2007/s2105924.htm http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2006/01/02/index.php?section=sociedad&article=032n1soc http://www.agec.ntu.edu.tw/faculty/huang/paper/Pus%20pull%20in%20recent%20Mexican%20migr ation%20to%20the%20US.pdf [7] http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=107 [8] http://www.conasami.gob.mx/Archivos/INFORMES%20DEL%20IMSS/2009/SPC/cuadro_4_3_jul_ 2009.pdf [9] http://www.primicias.com.do/articulo,21462,html [10] http://www.primicias.com.do/articulo,21462,html [11] http://www.conasami.gob.mx/Archivos/TABLA%20DE%20SALARIOS%20M%C3%8DNIMOS %20PROFESIONALES/2009.pdf [12] http://economics.ucr.edu/people/fairris/minwages.pdf [13] http://www.conasami.gob.mx/Archivos/TABLA%20DE%20SALARIOS%20M%C3%8DNIMOS %20PROFESIONALES/2009.pdf [14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP) [15] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim [16] http://www.banderasnews.com/0708/edat-leftbehind.htm [17] http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/19/world/report-finds-few-benefits-for-mexico-in-nafta.html [18] http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssConsumerGoodsAndRetailNews/idUSN0546591320080905 [19] https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/mx.html#Econ