By John Ballard
This piece from the December 17 issue of The Economist is recommended reading.
Immigration reform is high on a list of proposed presidential initiatives. Poor George Bush had ambitious immigration reform ideas that never got far. And his successor faces no less a challenge as former supporters are crushed to learn he's not the super hero of their heated imaginations. They cannot understand why he can't resolve in one presidential term problems that began and have endured since before most of them were born.
Snips here.
Because America is so big and diverse, immigrants have an incredible array of choices. The proportion of Americans who are foreign-born, at 13%, is higher than the rich-country average of 8.4%. In absolute terms, the gulf is much wider. America�s foreign-born population of 38m is nearly four times larger than those of Russia or Germany, the nearest contenders. It dwarfs the number of migrants in Japan (below 2m) or China (under 1m). The recession has dramatically slowed the influx of immigrants and prompted quite a few to move back to Mexico. But the economy will eventually recover and the influx will resume.
[...]
...America has 50 states with 50 sets of laws. Virginia will never ban hunting, but even if it did, there are 49 other states that won�t. In America, people with unusual hobbies are generally left alone. And power is so devolved that you can more or less choose which rules you want to live under.
If you like low taxes and the death penalty, try Texas. For good public schools and subsidised cycle paths, try Portland, Oregon. Even within states, the rules vary widely. Bath County, Kentucky is dry. Next-door Bourbon County, as the name implies, is not. Nearby Montgomery County is in between: a �moist� county where the sale of alcohol is banned except in one city. Liberal foreign students let it all hang out at Berkeley; those from traditional backgrounds may prefer a campus where there is no peer pressure to drink or fornicate, such as Brigham Young in Utah.
People move for a variety of reasons. Alejandro Mayorkas, the head of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, cites two. People come to America, he says, either because they yearn for freedom or because they are fleeing something. That something could be a civil war, or it could be a culture that irks them....
This portion of the message needs to be reproduced and widely distributed.
...a country�s economic prospects depend in large measure on whether it is a place where people want to be. Desirable destinations draw talented and industrious migrants. Less desirable ones suffer a brain drain. Desirability is tricky to measure, however.
People cannot vote freely with their feet. No rich country allows unlimited immigration, and the rules vary a lot, so it is impossible to know which country is the most attractive to the largest number of people. But there are reasons to believe that America ranks at or near the top.
That perception of America is what most of the world still holds. Americans take if for granted, referring to any kind of success as "achieving The American Dream."
Some of America�s talk-show hosts are quite vicious, but no openly xenophobic politician can attract the kind of support that France�s Jean-Marie Le Pen did in 2002, or that Austria�s J�Haider did before he got drunk and killed himself in a car crash. Political rhetoric in America is often heated but almost never leads to violence. Ms Hirsi Ali recalls watching the vice-presidential debate on the television last year with friends in New York. Her Democratic friends thought Sarah Palin was ghastly. Her Republican friends were equally appalled by Joe Biden. Tempers rose so high during the election campaign that Ms Hirsi Ali thought the country might come to blows. But then polling day passed, and the tension was gone. She saw her Republican and Democrat friends eating cupcakes together. Americans get passionate about politics, she observes, but the next day they get on with their lives.
[...]
America is a uniquely attractive place to live: a lifestyle superpower. But it cannot afford to be complacent, for three reasons. First, other places, such as Australia, Canada and parts of Western Europe, have started to compete for footloose talent. Second, rising powers such as India and China are hanging on to more of their home-grown brains. There is even a sizeable reverse brain drain, as people of Indian or Chinese origin return to their homes. But neither India nor China attracts many completely foreign migrants who wish to �become� Indian or Chinese.
Third, since September 11th 2001 the American immigration process has become more security-conscious, which is to say, slower and more humiliating. Even applicants with jobs lined up can wait years for their papers. Many grow discouraged and either stay at home or try their luck somewhere less fortress-like.
Lots to think about here. Last paragraph.
The stakes are high. Immigration keeps America young, strong and growing. �The populations of Europe, Russia and Japan are declining, and those of China and India are levelling off. The United States alone among great powers will be increasing its share of world population over time,� predicts Michael Lind of the New America Foundation, a think-tank. By 2050, there could be 500m Americans; by 2100, a billion. That means America could remain the pre-eminent nation for longer than many people expect. �Relying on the import of money, workers, and brains,� writes Mr Lind, America is �a Ponzi scheme that works.�
This part is worth repeating for those who may have skimmed over it without paying attention:
Even applicants with jobs lined up can wait years for their papers. Many grow discouraged and either stay at home or try their luck somewhere less fortress-like.
Let's say it plainly. The president has an uphill challenge. Meaningful immigration reform will involve some form of amnesty for undocumented immigrants. That "A" word (amnesty) is as inflammatory to the issue as the other "A" word (abortion) is to many of the same narrow-minded crowd who never liked Obama to begin with.
When the time comes I hope he retains enough supporters to meet the challenge. At the moment his pragmatic approach to problem solving is driving them away like gnats in a gale. When he confronts a problem this man's approach is more boring than that of a research scientist. I propose a neologism variant of PTSD. Instead of POST-traumatic stress disorder we are witnessing a variant that might be called PRE-traumatic stress disorder.
Really? Really? Their "super heated imaginations" didn't spring forth without a lot of prompting from a massive advertising machine that promised a whole lot, much of which seems was never intended to be delivered. (And remember that he got a lot of people to vote who had never voted, or voted Democratic, before because he promised to be transformational.)
ReplyDeleteSo do you think that he'll address the nation as if we're mature, informed constituents when it comes time to talk about immigration reform? Do you think he'll actually take a stand for the people who get the shortest end of the stick...the immigrants and migrant workers who often end up in near slavery conditions for the sake of corporate profits? Or will he toss them under the bus to appease the corporate donors and his idea of "bipartisanship"?
And i think you've got most of his critics wrong. Few of them expect miracles. But they certainly didn't expect to have their interests sold to corporations so cheaply. They thought that Mr. Obama might actually do something about all the Constitutional evisceration of the previous administration. I don't know, maybe some people who "hoped" are a little disappointed that his administration has now argued before the SCOTUS that people captured by the US military should reasonably expect to be tortured. Maybe they really wanted a little of the transparency that he promised, and less of the secret meetings with lobbyists. Maybe they're a little disappointed by a Peace Prize winner who's keeping one war going, escalating the second and now starting a third conflict...and who still yammers on about terrorism in the same way that his predecessor did.
But if it feels better to blame all the people who aren't marching in line like they should, by all means do so.
The article from The Economist was the point of the post, not my snarky remarks. Struck a nerve I see. But with immigration not yet on the docket I do sense PRE-traumatic stress.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally, the line was he's not the super hero of their heated imaginations, not "their super-heated imaginations," the point being that he can't resolve in one presidential term problems that began and have endured since before most of them were born.