[CLUE-Talk] Rep Tancredo's Anti-Immigration Stance

[Jeff Cann]

On Sunday 26 October 2003 10:04 am, Rita Gibson wrote:
> Boy, I hate to get into political discussion on this list, but I can't
> hardly resist piping up on this.
>
> I support much of what Tancredo stands for on immigration. I am for further
> limiting legal immigration,

How can you argue this, based on the fact that all of us (I'm assuming no one 
has native american ancestry) are immigrants or descendants of immigrants?

> The numbers of people who are granted permanent legal status are
> staggering, IMHO. Based on the below numbers, I believe we grant legal
> immigrant status to more than enough people. 

IMHO, this argument is subjective.  1 Million people out of 280 Million 
Americans is not significant - that's 1 immigrant for every 280 people in the 
U.S.

If there were 30 Million immigrants last year, then perhaps it would be a 
significant burden.

> The students who don't speak english, legal and illegal, require additional
> resources from a system that is already stretched to the limit.

I think this is an educational funding priority problem, not an immigrant 
volume problem.  Don't forget that according to the Denver Post, the Denver 
area is the 4th most popular place for Mexicans to immigrate; so we must deal 
with this issue in a more constructive way than:  'there's more than enough 
immigrants'.  

Tancredo has offered no alternatives.

Unfortunately, the *one* educational reform related to this issue that I 
supported was English immersion for immigrant students in Colorado.  It's the 
only way these kids will become proficient in English, but some educational 
groups were threatened and responded with enough FUD that this proposal was 
voted down in the 2002 election.

OTH - Some companies and industries have responded to this influx of Mexican 
immigrants - ever notice how many Spanish language radio stations are in 
Denver?  What about Spanish billboards?  Companies are able to capitalize on 
the need for immigrants to operate in capitalism.  If you're a fan of GW 
Bush's logic, this unfocused 'economic activity' should 'create more jobs'.

> I don't know the answer to this situation, but I do feel that if we have
> rules, we should enforce them. If we aren't going to enforce those rules,
> then we must change them and make provision for paying the costs
> (additional services for healthcare, education, affordable housing, etc.).

I agree with this point, but as a person whose grandparents came to Denver 
from Ireland in the 1920s, I cannot look a Mexican immigrant in the eyes and 
say:  "Sorry, we're full."  In addition, the number of annual immigrants 
relative to the entire population does not justify the alarmism created by 
Rep. Tancredo's jingiostic opinion.  Yes, I agree we have more of a burden in 
Colorado, so we need a better response than his.  Don't believe his 
exaggerated claims - they are not based on facts!

What is alarming and sad, really, is that Tancredo blames the immigrants for 
our inability to help them.  IMHO, shouldn't he blame his ancestors as well 
(his are Italian)?  They were a burden on the citizens of this country when 
they arrived - yet no one told them to go back to their home lands. 

Looking at our history, it does not take too long to understand the historical 
perception of a threat of each new group of immigrants: Italian, German, 
Irish, Chinise, etc.  Now the FUD has shifted to Mexicans.  IMHO, it's not 
morally right and difficult to argue without being hypocritical - which is 
what I think Rep. Tancredo is doing.

Later,
Jeff