Illegal immigrants 'are not free-loaders,' says Guatemalan bishop

Catholic News Service ^ | 04.13.05 | Agostino Bono

[Coleus]

Illegal immigrants 'are not free-loaders,' says Guatemalan bishop

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- Illegal immigrants "are not free-loaders" but hard-working people who are seeking better lives for their families because social and economic improvements are not readily available to the Latin American poor, said a Guatemalan bishop.

"Some call them 'illegals.' But according to the market model, they are better described as entrepreneurs without assets, pursuing the American dream," said Bishop Alvaro Ramazzini Imeri of San Marcos, Guatemala.

"They work hard, often in several jobs, supporting a way of life that many take for granted," he said April 13 in written testimony delivered before the House Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere.

Bishop Ramazzini testified at a hearing on the proposed Central American Free Trade Agreement, known as CAFTA, between the United States and five Central American countries. Negotiators for the six countries have agreed on a text, but the accord still has to be ratified by the United States and several other countries.

Better salaries and better working conditions are the main reasons Latin Americans come to the United States, he said.

Working conditions in Central America will only get worse under the proposed free trade agreement, as this pact threatens "to lock in a much lower level of protection for workers and their families," he added.

"Poor working conditions make for bad economics. Without enforceable labor rights that are part of trade agreements with sanctions for noncompliance applied to them, we will not raise standards of labor and standards of living in my country," said the bishop.

"I know of repeated instances where workers were treated in a way that would be against basic labor law in the United States," he said.

"Industrial workers, equipped with the basic rights to have a say in the workplace, were key to the growth of a middle class in your nation," and formed "a key element in making the United States the economic powerhouse it is today," said Bishop Ramazzini.

"This is not happening in Central America and it will not happen as long as hundreds of thousands of workers are suppressed, not empowered, at the workplace," he said.

Guatemala is among the 10 worst Latin American countries regarding unequal income distribution and needs to develop a strong middle class for economic and political stability, he said.

In Guatemala, 56 percent of the population is poor and 16 percent is extremely poor, he said.

Policies governing trade need to be integrated with development programs if life for the poor is to improve, he said.

"Trade policies need to be complemented by institutional reforms and a broader development framework that affords each person their right to participate in a market that is fair and compassionate," he added.

Bishop Ramazzini also questioned whether Guatemalan farmers could compete with subsidized U.S. agricultural products if tariff barriers were dropped.

"Our farmers are hard-working" but they "cannot compete against the U.S. Treasury and the $170 billion subsidies granted in your farm bill of 2002," he said.

Almost 25 percent of Guatemala's gross national product comes from farming, he said.

The bishop also questioned the long-term benefit of CAFTA to poor countries, saying its approval could override more favorable terms being negotiated worldwide by the World Trade Organization.

"It is widely expected that low-income developing countries, such as Guatemala, will be afforded 'special and differential treatment' under World Trade Organization rules currently being negotiated," he said.

"CAFTA will likely trump such measures that are designed to allow developing countries the time and space to foster integral human development," he said.

Rather than concentrating on making it easier for goods to cross borders, trade pacts "must look at trade policies from the bottom up -- from their impact on the lives and dignity of poor families and vulnerable workers across the hemisphere," he said.

Bishop Ramazzini's testimony is the latest in a series of efforts by Latin American bishops to criticize aspects of free trade agreements being promoted by the United States.

Last June, Bishop Ramazzini was part of a delegation of Central American bishops visiting the United States to discuss their criticisms of CAFTA with church and government officials. Last July, the Central American and U.S. bishops issued a joint statement outlining objections.

In February, a delegation of bishops from the Andean countries in South America visited the United States to air similar criticisms.

Church officials have said that they are not opposed to the concept of free trade, but are objecting to specific treaties they have judged to be prejudicial to the Latin American poor.

[politicalwit]

" You know telling those evil business owners the kind of people they have to hire..."

Now that was certainly a foolish statement. Can't you see the difference between someone that is legally entitled to work in the USA and those that have come to this country illegally? Perhaps we can find an illegal alien to replace you in your career. Perhap we can have an illegal to move into your home. Have you considered adding an illegal to your insurance policy or your healthcare insurance. Have you considered adopting a few illegals and provide 100% financial responsibility?

I have this strange feeling your "compassion" would come to a screeching halt if you had to assume full responsibility for a couple of illegals.

[Coleus]

there are a lot of liberal, pro-illegal immigration priests and religious in the American Catholic Church.

[Coleus]

Communism’s Resurgence
Stoptheftaa.org ^ | 01.24.05 | William F. Jasper

[Dane]

Now that was certainly a foolish statement. Can't you see the difference between someone that is legally entitled to work in the USA and those that have come to this country illegally? Perhaps we can find an illegal alien to replace you in your career. Perhap we can have an illegal to move into your home. Have you considered adding an illegal to your insurance policy or your healthcare insurance. Have you considered adopting a few illegals and provide 100% financial responsibility?

I have this strange feeling your "compassion" would come to a screeching halt if you had to assume full responsibility for a couple of illegals

Where have I said that I would take full responsibility for them?

Seems that they are taking full responsibility for themselves by taking back breaking jobs, that you and me were brought not brought up to take.

And I know the yada, yada, yada, spiel that will happen afterwards, they don't speak English(etc.), well no wonder, with frothing mouths such as yourself, why should they talk to you, with you saying that they are taking away welfare benefits and closing down hospitals, did you ever consider talking to them about the benefits of private health accounts and tort reform.

I sincerely doubt it.

[Trinity5]

I was refering to this particular thread in which we are discussing illegal immigration. When responding to those comments, others replace that term with "migrants" or just "immigrants". Very disconcerning to me. No different then when the Democrats replace "taxes" or "spending" with "investments".

[redrock]

"It is time for the government . . . to start rounding up all of the illegals and their progeny, load them on buses and planes and ship them back . . ."

To which you replied.....

"If you want to talk about deporting native-born American citizens then please ping me when you have suspended the Constitution."

So...you would send just the parents back???(which IS obeying the law)...and leave the children here???

You are one heartless person...breaking up families that way.

redrock

[redrock]

Good to see you again.

redrock

[Trinity5]

"Then look a little closer. There was a poll wherein 7.6% of members want to end all legal immigration from Mexico."

And 59.5% approve or might approve some variation of a guest worker program. You ignore the majority opinion to try to prove your point?

[Cultural Jihad]

You ignore the majority opinion to try to prove your point?

Not at all, and I am included in that majority opinion, by the way. My statement was posted merely to counter the false assertion that no one here is against legal immigration.

[Trinity5]

"My statement was posted merely to counter the false assertion that no one here is against legal immigration."

Please see post #325.

[superiorslots]

Thanks for showing the graph "Trade Openess"

I did not realize chinese people made that much.

[politicalwit]

"Seems that they are taking full responsibility for themselves by taking back breaking jobs, that you and me were brought not brought up to take."

I believe that an employer should pay an employee what the market will bear...the legal market. (not slave labor from 3rd world nations.

"And I know the yada, yada, yada, spiel that will happen afterwards, they don't speak English(etc.), well no wonder, with frothing mouths such as yourself, why should they talk to you, with you saying that they are taking away welfare benefits and closing down hospitals,"

My Mexican wife would laugh in your face. She too knows that you have been thoroughly brainwashed or using slave labor.

" did you ever consider talking to them about the benefits of private health accounts and tort reform. "

Why in the hell would I talk to an illegal about a private health account or tort reform? What in the world have you been smoking? Did your illegal smuggle something across the border for you?

[Cultural Jihad]

I believe that an employer should pay an employee what the market will bear...the legal market. (not slave labor from 3rd world nations.

I am reminded of the anecdotal story of the fellow who needed to have some brush cleared from his land, and how he went from local teenagers to the state casual employment office, and how they either worked too slowly or didn't want to work hard at all, and he was paying the prevailing wage.

Disappointed and aghast at how long the task was taking, he somehow asked an illegal alien if he'd be willing to work, but the man stated clearly that his going labor rate was $15 an hour, almost twice what anyone else had been paid. The man worked hard and got the job finished the same day.

You could argue that the property owner got whatever he was willing to pay for, but you can't argue that the illegal was willing to undercut the wages of the local teenagers or the native-born casual laborers.

[in the Arena]

How about have you ever seen any anti-illegal immigration poster on any thread state "...build a wall twenty feet high and throw them all back..." or anything resembling that?

Take all the time you need.

Quit playing games and post a link...

[in the Arena]

I didn't see any posts on the thread you linked that were anti-legal immigration. Sure, a person whose job is in jepardy because of an supply of workers that exceeds the voted on H1/2-B cap has a legitimate complaint, their job is at risk...

[Ben Ficklin]

First you tell me that visa holders are illegal and now you tell me I can't read.

Un-scrunch your eyes.

[politicalwit]

"Disappointed and aghast at how long the task was taking, he somehow asked an illegal alien if he'd be willing to work, but the man stated clearly that his going labor rate was $15 an hour, almost twice what anyone else had been paid. The man worked hard and got the job finished the same day."

Utilizing your rationale I guess it's OK to "recruit" a physican (forget verifying credentials, educational background, criminal background) from some third world, sneek them into the USA illegally, pay them low wages and justify your actions by saying they're working 80 hours a week instead of a legal resident of the USA working only 60 hours a week. Additionally, they are working for $25K while those ignorant legal residents are charging $85K. We could care less about qualifications or background because they're are saving us a sh*tload of cash.

The simple point is that these folks are here illegally. Rules and regulations and LAWS were established to allow an orderly flow of "legal immigrants" into the USA. You follow the rules or pay the price of arrest and deportation.

[harrowup]

For a fellow pretending to want solutions you sure do order people around alot.

Were you bottle fed?

[M. Espinola]

Islamic terrorists blending in with other illegal aliens "are not free-loaders", no, of course not, they are just potential mass murderers, with numerous forms of currency & forged ID's.

Due to our lack of meaningful border enforcement controls who knows how many moles have already made it here.

How many more terrorist moles are on route?

[1rudeboy]

Huh?