What I Accomplished This Summer

As I mentioned in a previous post, my work with the Southside Day Labor Center has been fraught with challenges. However, I still am able to reflect on my experience and say that I have accomplished a lot for the community I served and I grew as a person.

While our classes were not always as well organized or attended as we hoped, I still think they were useful for the men. Our English tutoring improved the men’s English skills so that they are now slightly better at communicating with their patrones. Also, we taught the men how to create and use an email account and how to use craigslist and google search during our computer classes. Finally, we conducted a workshop on heat stroke, which is especially important since the men are working in extreme heat and sun exposure.

Other projects we completed include the making of an instructional video to show new members of the center the new rules. We also researched wage abuse and how the men could take action against patrones that do not pay them for their work. This is a constant problems for them and is particular tragic given that there is little work for the men to come by and that many are earning money to support their families either here in the U.S. or in their native country.

On a personal level, we established strong relationships with the men. I really thought of them as friends and I think they thought of me in the same way. We shared good conversations and had laughs. We also watched much of the World Cup together. Several of them have my phone contact information and I hope to keep in touch with them. I think I got a lot more out of this experience because I was able to be friends with the workers, some of whom are migrants from Mexico or other Central American countries. I had a personal connection with these individuals rather than just witnessing them from objective perspective that we were getting from some of the other experiences. Being close to these individuals was the most moving aspect of this trip. I also think they had a lot more fun with us around; we made things more exciting for them.

Two Stories

I am generally dissatisfied with the news media in this country, particularly television news. The networks seem to focus primarily on providing entertainment. It seems like every time I watch the news on television I see flashing objects and people screaming at each other. I rarely witness stories that go behind a superficial analysis of the subject.

The case of migration is no different. There are very few stories in the media that go beyond the basics of the issue. I mostly see stories about SB 1070 or people arguing with each other over immigration. However, there is a lack of information on what the immigrants must do to cross Arizona and what their lives are like when they are here. This is not to say that 1070 is not important, but rather that focusing on it to such an extent leaves huge gaps in the migrant story. I also find it interesting that the biggest controversy over 1070 seems to be that it will lead to increased racial profiling. While I think this is a significant problem with the bill, I see many other issues with it. By just pointing out the aspect of racial profiling, people seem to be suggesting that it is okay to harass undocumented workers currently in the U.S., just as long as you can separate them from legal citizens. I would like to see more people upset over the way the bill pressures the police to make more deportations and increases the fear that migrants have of the police.

The overall story of the migrant that this news depicts is not overly sympathetic. I have seen many reports about jobs being ‘taken’ by migrants, although I have seen comparatively fewer stories detailing the terrible working conditions that these people must endure. Few people think about what the farmers are going through to grow their crops. The migrants that work as farmers are typically paid very low wages for long hours of doing extremely difficult work under abusive bosses. I think a greater appreciation of the migrant’s situation once they come to the US would be part of a more balanced presentation. These people are not coming to the US and taking easy jobs. Rather, they are extremely hardworking and dedicated. Often they send every extra bit they make to their families.

I also notice that the news media blows every act of violence along the border out of proportion. For instance, in the case of the Arizona rancher that was recently killed the media made it a breaking news story. Though, there seems to be no rationale for considering this event as much more significant than other murders that occur every day in the United States. Given that the media highlights such cases, people get the impression that many of the migrants are violent criminals or drug smugglers. This impression is reinforced by anti-immigrant politicians, who exaggerate the number of migrants involved in illicit activities. For instance, Jan Brewer recently claimed that the majority of the illegal trespassers that are coming into the state of Arizona are under the direction and control of organized drug cartels and they are bringing drugs in. There are also many claims that migrants are causing crime to increase greatly. However, the vast majority just want a better life for themselves. Nearly all the migrants I have spoken to have been kind and respectful. Crime has in fact been decreasing as the immigrant population goes up and contrary to what Ms. Brewer asserts, the majority of migrants are not drug smugglers.

There is also a dearth of information on how the judicial process works for undocumented immigrants. Specifically, the media makes little effort to explain what deportation actually entails. Most people, including myself before this trip, have never even heard of Operation Streamline. They do not realize that some migrants may serve time in jail before being deported. During their time in jail the migrants are just provided packages of crackers rather than real meals. People are also ignorant of the fact that many migrants are separated from their family that they have been traveling with and are bused to cities in Mexico that are usually very far from where their hometown is located. To add to their difficulties, the migrants have little or no money on them when they are deported and no help is provided to them. I get the sense that the portrayal of the deportation process is one in which the migrants are escorted back to their home country in a respectful manner. However, I think this assessment to miss out on a lot of the details.

My conclusion is that the media presents a very superficial analysis of the migrant story. It is not necessarily meant to serve an anti-migrant agenda, but the media is unconcerned with getting all the details (as is the case for most subjects). It is important that people seek out more information so that when they are considering immigration as a policy issue, they know the true story of what is going on.

Another Brick in the Wall

Throughout this trip, I have constantly been reminded about how little the average person knows about borders issues. Most people I have talked to have no idea what ‘Operation Streamline’ is or about the massive numbers of immigrant deaths in the desert. I don’t mean this in a condescending way. The government and the media have a large role to play in the lack of information people have on the issue. These sources have not considered many aspects of immigration worthy of highlighting. Though, one notable area of the immigration issue that nearly everyone knows about is the border wall separating Mexico in the United States. While most people do not realize the full implications of the wall, they have heard it being discussed and have some sort of opinion on it.

The wall was started soon after the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and has been continued by the Bush and Obama administrations. So this is not just a Democrat or Republican thing but has significant bipartisan support. Many people I have spoken to favor the wall as a way to limit undocumented immigration into the United States. I think a closer look at what impacts the wall is having is important so that people know exactly what they are supporting.

We recently had a speaker from the Sierra Club explain the environmental impact that the wall has had. One such impact is that the wall has prevented movement of animals including roadrunners, mountain lions, and snakes. Limiting their territory prevents these animals from finding food and water sources and reaching mates. Further, the wall often lies in the middle of locations where water flows through, which alters the water availability to plant and animal species and causes flooding, sometimes in populated areas. And the construction itself requires degrading the landscape because of the need to create new roads for construction vehicles and fill in canyons.

A disturbing aspect of the government’s construction of the border wall is that they are permitted to bypass local, state, and federal environmental laws for its construction. This, among other things, means the government does not have to run environmental impact studies before construction and often elects not to do so. Regardless of how someone feels about the immigration issue, we can all agree that the government should not be able to discard environmental protection laws so whimsically for the purpose of a non-emergency project. If there ever was a time for bringing up the argument of the federal government intruding into state and local affairs, I this is it.

The border wall is also a very powerful symbol with different meanings depending on where one stands on the immigration issue. For those that see immigration as a security threat the wall is a form of protection. It keeps the bad guys (drug smugglers and people with criminal records) from entering this country. These people are very afraid and want to feel safe. Whether or not the wall actually has this effect, the increase in perceived feeling of security cannot be completely discounted. Alternatively, the wall is a symbol of hate and animosity towards those migrating. For those trying to cross it is a message that saying “you are not welcome here”. Further, for those in the US favoring more open borders, the wall represents the inhumanity of the current US policy on immigration. The idea of shutting people seems like such a cruel action to take towards the majority of immigrants who just want a better life for themselves.

The wall also seems to have a negative impact the U.S.-Mexico relations. On the one hand, we are claiming to have a very close relationship with our neighbor to the South. NAFTA is supposedly a direct result of this alliance. But countries that are allies typically don’t need a wall and thousands of forces patrolling the border region. Also, one ally does not purposefully funnel migrants from the other into a dangerous area where a large percentage of them will die. Some of this strain between the two countries over the handling of the border issue is evident from President Felipe Calderon’s tense visit to the US in May. As long as the US continues to build the border wall, Mexicans are going to feel alienated and threatened and hence relations will suffer.
Construction of the wall is a very expensive project. According to the Government Accounting Office (GAO), the border wall has cost $2.4 billion so far and will cost an additional $6.5 billion over the next 20 years to maintain. $8.9 billion may not seem like much given the trillion dollar deficit and the costs of our social program. But in 2008 we only gave $551 million in foreign aid to Mexico. Arguably, the money for the border wall could have been better spent by helping Mexico to develop so that people would not feel the need to migrate into the US.

The last major impact the wall has is on migration. Assessing the outcome for this aspect more difficult than the other issues because we can’t imagine counter factually what the numbers of migrants and the success rate would have been if the wall was not there. However, we can observe that design of the wall itself makes its impact seem trivial: the wall is fragmented and so there are some places where you can simply walk a few miles to get around the wall. In those places where you cannot reach a gap in the wall you can either climb over it using footholds in the wall or carry a ladder.

Though, perhaps the wall slows the migrants down enough that Border Patrol is able to concentrate on locations near the wall as focal points for apprehending migrants. Specifically, I think the wall has cut down on migrants crossing in well-populated areas. The wall coupled with the Border Patrol strategy has been funneling migrants to cross in desolate areas in Arizona where the terrain is harsher but there is no wall; this effect results in many more deaths among migrants, which both sides would classify as a negative outcome. Also, much of the border wall is designed to prevent vehicular crossing and it may be successful in stopping such crossings in the area where it has been built.

Personally, I don’t think the border wall is worth the monetary and environmental costs as well as the damage to relations and local sovereignty. I can still understand how someone may support the project, but I think it is important that they understand the full ramifications.

Challenges

At the beginning of any new experience I have always faced challenges that I must overcome. My time so far interning with Southside’s day labor program has been no different. I admit that my work there so far has been very frustrating at times.

But I have also found that these struggles teach me something useful about myself and the world around me. Rather than just staying frustrated and upset when we encounter such experiences, we need to reflect on these issues so we can learn from them and become more developed people. What does not kill me makes me stronger.

One of the main problems I have had so far is teaching the classes. While it may seem straightforward enough for someone who is fluent in English to teach the language, I have not found this to be the case. Our attempts at a systematic effort have not been particularly successful due to lack of interest and discontinuity of which people come which days, and lack of teaching experience. We have not completely failed in our efforts; we have produced documents that they can study from and we have helped teach some of the men basic phrases. However, I don’t think we envisioned the progress being as slow as it is.

Our computer classes have gone a little better and we have successfully helped some of the guys to set up email accounts. However, the classes mostly consist of answering questions the men have about computers and the internet. We were originally hoping to have a systematic approach, but this has largely been abandoned.

Another problem we have been having is the ambiguous instruction we have been receiving from our superiors. We do not really have any superiors we have to report to directly. There are various interns and a few people from the church involved, but no one that effectively oversees the program on a day to day basis and ensures that everything that needs to be done gets done well and in a timely fashion. The program is very democratic and the men and all volunteers give input in nearly all decisions. All this amounts to very different guidance that often conflicts and ideas that are unrealistic.

This is not to say that the experience so far has been a bad one. We have built good relationships with many of the day laborers. Also, we have been bonding while watching the world cup together and some of the guys now give me fist bumps when they see me. I thought it would be much harder to establish this kind of connection with the men.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, there is always something important to gain from these struggles and this case is no different. I can personally say that some of my thoughts and goals that I had coming into the program were idealistic and a bit naive. For instance, I thought that the day laborers would be extremely eager to come to our classes to better themselves instead of waiting outside in the sun just chatting with each other. But I have to acknowledge that very few people enjoy taking classes (often including myself), especially from teachers with little experience in making the material interesting. I wouldn’t call myself a horrible teacher, but realistically this is the first time I have tried it I still have a lot to learn. I should not have just assumed that I could jump right into teaching and be great at it. Also, the day laborers are there to get work; they are struggling to make a living and so learning English or computing skills are not priorities for them. I now understand that I need to listen to what the men want instead of trying to force my vision of how things should upon them. I have adjusted my expectations as to what I can do as a teacher and determined what skills I need to improve on to be of more help. Redesigning the computer classes to make them more loosely structured is a good example of reevaluating the situation and making the changes that better reflect the needs and desires of the day laborers. I am also better able to appreciate the perspective of the day laborers and the reasons they might have for not attending the classes.

I have also learned a lot about how organizational structures work for programs like the day labor center and the problems they face. One common issue I am seeing is that there are many different visions among the different volunteers. I think the program would work more effectively if there was one consistent vision that everyone was working towards. It feels like we have been confused because we don’t know which direction to branch into because of these conflicting messages from our many superiors. I don’t know if this is an inherent problem with organizations that emphasize having everyone’s opinion count equally. Perhaps there needs to be someone making the final decision on which direction the program is headed.

Doin' Work

My work with the day labor center at Southside Church has provided me with greater knowledge of the working conditions for many immigrants coming into the U.S. I should mention that although some of the participants in the in the day labor program have immigrated into the U.S., others have lived in the U.S. for most or all of their lives.

Specifically, I have been learning about the problems these workers face. On many days, the participants are unable to find work. It seems like only one out of every four or five people there find work through the center each day. Even when they do find work, many of the patrones do not pay them well or sometimes do not pay them at all. Due to the informal nature of the jobs, the workers are virtually powerless in these types of situations.

These problems are especially disheartening because many of these workers are here to earn money for their families that still live in their country of origin. These men left everything behind to support their families and because of the recession and abusive patrones, they make very little money.

I realize that some people may question whether day labor centers should exist that help undocumented laborers, in addition to documented laborers, to find work. Won’t this just encourage more undocumented immigrants? While some people may not find this particularly objectionable I claim that even for those that do not want fewer undocumented immigrants should still favor the creation of more day labor centers like the one at Southside. That is, I think that such centers should be promoted by people on both sides of the issue. This is an important distinction to make since I recognize that many people object to undocumented immigrants, but they realize that people will come regardless and humane measures should be taken.

My reasoning is that such day labor centers will do little to encourage further migration and will also increase safety for both the undocumented workers and the communities in which they live. The centers also require little resources to run and foster a sense of community among the laborers.

Day labor centers do not lead to significant increases in the number of immigrants coming into the U.S. People will immigrate into the U.S. as long as there are jobs that pay better than in the countries where they live. Most of the immigrants I have spoken to said that they have come to the U.S. for higher wages; these people are very desperate and are immigrating as a last resort because they cannot make sufficient money in their home countries. And jobs in the U.S. will pay better regardless of whether there are day labor centers. So immigrants will be entering the U.S. in roughly the same numbers either way.

I find this notion similar to the argument that more immigrants will cross because people put out water in the desert. The immigrants are going to cross either way, the water just serves to ensure their safety when crossing. Likewise, the day labor centers work to improve worker safety without actually causing more people to immigrate.

Day labor centers offer protection for the workers involved. Having some sort of organization allows them to share information on which patrones require workers to face dangerous conditions or pay unfair wages. Otherwise these abusive patrones would be able to get away with these kinds of practices and continuously hire new workers since stories of their practices would not circulate.

The centers also benefit the workers in other ways. At Southside and other labor centers there is a sense of community among the workers. They have group meetings and they are planning on having a party together. They are not competing directly for jobs because the order of who gets work first is determined by a raffle. If they were just out on the streets then they would be in direct competition with the other workers and there would be no sense of solidarity.

Day labor centers also offer safety to the surrounding community. Since the workers are not allowed to show up under the influence or in possession of drugs or alcohol, they are discouraged from using these substances. When workers are disorganized and on the street looking for work most of the time, drugs and alcohol are a major temptation. Less use of these substances will translate into a safer community. Further, these workers realize that bad behavior will jeopardize their chances their chances of finding work. For instance, Southside imposes punishments that suspend the workers from participation in the program for a time in proportion to the offense. So the workers are especially concerned about maintaining good behavior to ensure continued participation in the program. Being on the streets in a disorganized manner also promotes violence and threatening behavior.

Lastly, these day labor centers require very little resources to run. At Southside, the workers mostly run the program themselves. Volunteers support their efforts, but they mostly take a backseat to the process of finding work; in my capacity as a volunteer I am providing services like computer and English classes. The main thing that is necessary for a day labor center is a site to host their operation. Southside would have the parking lot regardless of whether they had the day labor center. The only costs incurred by the church are providing basic supplies and the use of a small fraction of church officials’ time. So altogether, the operation is very inexpensive.

Together these points lead to the conclusion that day labor centers such as Southside provide an important service regardless of how you feel about undocumented immigration. Elimination of such centers would only make life worse for undocumented immigrants and communities as a whole.

Across the Great Divide

The group trip into Mexico allowed me to explore the root-causes for immigration from Mexico into the United States. In contrast, most of the time in Tucson has focused on the effects of migrants after they cross the border. I both aspects of the issue are important for fully understanding the issue of immigration.

In several instances during the trip, the group was able to speak with migrants to better understand their reasons for attempting to cross into the U.S. One of the most common reasons they cited was the lack of jobs in Mexico and other economic factors. The migrants thought that by moving to the U.S. they could have a better life than the one they currently had. Some of these migrants either did not have a job where they came from or had such a poor paying one that they could not support their families. They are willing to undertake this journey that puts their lives in mortal danger often so that their children have enough to eat.

The minimum wage at the maquiladoras was only about seven dollars a day. While the conditions in the maquladora we visited were not at the level of sweat shops (though this was one that was willing to show off their factory, so there are probably ones that are less safe and and treat their workers worse), many of the workers at the factories had to live in shanty-towns. We were able to view one such neighborhood and it was a very depressing experience for me. I felt bad that some people have to face such abject conditions such as these with little hope of escape. Many of the ‘houses’ were just pieces of wood haphazardly put together. There was no running water and there was also unsupervised young children playing. It is no surprise then that people would undergo great risks to get away from such circumstances. Others common reasons consisted of having family in the U.S. or having lived there and established their lives for many years (one person that was planning to cross had been living in the U.S. for 14 years). A major part of their lives exists in the U.S. and they are trying to reclaim that.

I should note that the person we talked to from Grupos Beta, an organization that works to help migrants, claimed that many of the migrants choose to cross after seeing people come back with trucks full of goods from the U.S. That is, they envy their success and want to be ‘bigshots’ like them. While it may be true that some people immigrate into the U.S. because they want purely material goods, from my talks with the migrants themselves it did not seem like this was not the main reason for anyone crossing the desert. I think desperation is a more accurate explanation for the majority of migrants.

The personal conclusion I reached is that I could not blame these migrants for trying to cross. If I was living in poverty and crossing was my best chance for having a better life for myself or my family, then I would take it even if it meant violating the laws of the country I am entering. In such cases I judge the duty of the individual towards their families to be more of a priority than following the laws of the U.S. If I had to choose between the welfare of my family and breaking a law that does not cause direct harm to others, I would choose my family and would expect others to do the same. So, I would not classify immigration through non-legal means as an immoral act on the part of the migrants. I understand why they do it, and I see them as justified.

However, this should not be taken as an endorsement of open border policies. I am claiming that the immigrants are justified for doing what they are doing. But, this does not entail what the responsibilities are for the U.S. It is unfortunate but also true that people all over the world suffer from the effects of poverty and they will continue to do so even if the U.S. starts a concerted effort towards providing aid for such individuals.

So at this point there are still a few questions I am wondering. What exactly are the responsibilities that the U.S. government has toward these migrants? Is the U.S. government be acting ethically when it works to limit immigration into this country? The U.S. government is choosing to exercise this option of limiting immigration and I want to know if this is inherently immoral. I am separating this from the question of whether the specific process being used is moral or not. I am more certain that elements of the current process, like funneling immigrants through the most dangerous crossing points (the Arizona desert) and severely curtailing their rights through Operation Streamline are wrong. Rather, I am wondering is it necessarily a violation of the rights of migrants by not allowing them to enter the U.S.

What I learned from Mexico helps me to better understand the issue, but I still need to determine the answers to these questions before I can take a stand on what type of solution I would like to see for the issue of immigration. There’s no easy answer here even though both the left and the right see it that way. This is a tough, emotional issue, which I felt much more personally after this trip into Mexico.

Reflections After the First Week of Delegation

Why did I decide to spend the last summer of my undergraduate experience trying to understand the issue of immigration issue?

The primary reason that I made this decision is that this issue connects very well with my academic interests. I am a public policy major and immigration is one of the top domestic policy issues and it will remain so for some time. Arizona has just recently passed new legislation targeting this issue (Senate Bill 1070) and the possibility of some sort of federal comprehensive immigration reform legislation is in the beginning stages. Any such legislation will have to address both what happens to the undocumented immigrants currently in the country and future immigrants. This problem seems like an especially difficult one to resolve since people have such strong opinions about it. On the extremes, one side wants all the undocumented immigrants deported, while the other wants amnesty for those in the country already and open immigration policies. With the level of vitriol between the two sides and compromise seems unlikely. I am interested in studying the issue and seeing what policy approaches could potentially resolve this gridlock.

Additionally, immigration relates well to my interest in philosophy, which is my other major. Immigration and the way America treats its immigrants is a key ethical dilemma that will define who we are as a country. Currently, we are accepting very few immigrants through the legal mechanisms and so we inevitably induce people in desperate situations to come into this country without documentation. The ways of getting into this country are dangerous and many immigrants die each year coming through the desert. America then exploits the labor of those immigrants that make it here without dying or being caught by having many of them do jobs below minimum wage in substandard conditions. These immigrants face the threat of being deported at any moment even if they have lived in the United States for decades and have family here. If we consider the United States to be a country of strong moral principles, we must ask ourselves whether this kind of treatment of these immigrants follows acceptable standards for morality? What rights do undocumented immigrants have and are we as a country not fulfilling these rights? Who deserves to be a citizen of the United States?

The group has dived right into this issue during the first week here. We have spoken with many of the key players in the immigration issue here in Tucson. One particular speaker that struck me was the border patrol agent we visited. This talk helped put a face on the border patrol whereas previously I had just heard and read stories of abusive and aggressive behavior towards immigrants. The agent seemed like a nice, sociable guy that you would want to hang out with. He made quite a few jokes, which sometimes did undermine the seriousness of the issue we were discussing. Nevertheless, I still formed a positive impression of his character.

However, some of his comments and the way he presented the material made me question some of the organizational attitudes present in the border patrol. The agent showed us the weapons that agents take out into the field. These include a gun that shoots pepper pellets and a shotgun. It may be my underlying bias against guns, but he seemed to be treating the weapons like they were toys and this was just show and tell. But at the same time I realized that these are these guns have likely been used to hurt or intimidate people. So I felt like the situation required a bit more seriousness than he was giving it.

At another point in his presentation he played a video showcasing the new technology available to the border patrol. This video had the feel of a video game trailer and featured heavy rock music in the background. This further undermined the gravity of the issue. People are dying on the border and the border patrol seems to see this problem as some kind of macho game.

I realize that it’s unfair to generalize about the border patrol as a whole. I am sure there are some very nice people that are border patrol agents, and this particular agent seemed like one. But from what I have read about the border patrol and this presentation it seems like they are unable as an organization to take the power they have over the safety and well-being of the immigrants as seriously as they should.

I am not sure exactly what the implications are for the immigration issue. Some ideas I have is for the border patrol to put the welfare of immigrants as a higher priority. Perhaps if the border patrol agents were required to meet with undocumented immigrants and discuss issues with them they would be better able to understand their situation and not see them as much illegals that need to be stopped and deported. Though I am not sure if this would fit with the U.S. government’s attitude towards immigration to not be lenient and so maybe having more sympathetic border patrol agents would not be in the government’s best interest. I am also starting to think that the solution has to come from the top. Whenever someone is given as much authority as the border patrol agents have, some abuse will always follow. We see this among soldiers and police officers alike. So maybe it will take comprehensive immigration reform that limits or better defines the role of border patrol agents before the well being of undocumented immigrants is ensured.