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.

[Dane]

Absolutely correct. The defining difference between the first world and the third world is labor scarcity. In the first world we don't have quite enough and that is a good thing because it means that working people get treated decently, paid well and it results in a strong middleclass

Hmm if that is true why is India and China booming while in Western Europe, where deaths are going to overtake births, the economy is in the tank.

[Little Ray]

Ya know, once upon time, an empire faced tremendous illegal immigration by folks seeking a better life. The illegal immigrants brought lands under cultivation that the empire's citizens wouldn't cultivate and did work they wouldn't.

That empire was Rome and those "immigrants" were Teutons, Vandals, Goths, Visigoths, etc.; i.e. 'barbarians." And they ended up destroying Rome.

Wake up! Close the freakin' gates and toss the barbarians OUT!

[1rudeboy]

[raybbr]

That chart is really less than informative. It doesn't take into account all the vagaries inherent in third-world systems. To declare free trade (which has not ever existed) a factor has not been proven.

[1rudeboy]

It doesn't take into account all the vagaries inherent in third-world systems.

Such as? Are you familiar with Heritage's annual Index of Economic Freedom?

[raybbr]

There is a correlation between economic liberty and prosperity.

So, what economic liberties are we restricting in Guatemala?

[raybbr]

Gosh, please enlighten me.

[1rudeboy]

It really is sad that I must. Click here.

[NewRomeTacitus]

See post #26. Most illegals come here intending to earn their own way but too often their plans don't pan out. When that occurs they find we have a virtual charity industry eager to "help" them at taxpayer expense, legal aid designed to help them avoid deportation and preposterous laws that assure free emergency health care and education for their offspring.

What is lacking is any incentive to return to their home countries. The bishop is correct when he pointed out that these trade agreements have nothing to offer the underclass of poor Latin American countries - any fool has but to look at Mexico to witness how NAFTA helped "all boats rise" there.

We're already floating over 10% of Mexico's former population. Are you prepared to accept an even larger inundation from the poorer nations below it?

[jackbenimble]

Hmm if that is true why is India and China booming while in Western Europe, where deaths are going to overtake births, the economy is in the tank.

Dane, normally I have no interest in talking to you because I've seen your debate tactics but in this case you asked a respectful question so I'll answer you once.

There are lots of ways to measure economic performance. One would be the size of an economy (measured by GDP) and another would be the standard of living an economy provides for its people (measured by GDP per capita).

China will almost certainly someday soon have the world's largest GDP. It is doing a better job of employing its one abundant resource. But even if it successfully (which it won't) grabs every job in the Western world, it will still have a vast under/un-employed population and those who are employed will not be enjoying our standard of living. They will not enjoy our GDP per capita because labor is the world's most abundant resource and it only takes a fraction of the world's people to produce all the goods and services the world can consume.

China and India have booming economies and Europe is in the economic tank but where would you rather live: India or Italy?

People are voting with their feet and if you look at immigration patterns you will find that they are not running towards India or China.

I am far more interested in maintaining and improving the standard of living for Americans then I am in winning the race for economic growth with China and India. I want to live in the best economy measured by GDP per capita rather than the biggest economy measured by just GDP.

I am not hostile to economic growth or immigration. But the kind of economic growth I want is not the junk growth driven by importing an ignorant population (we import 10,000 people so we build a new Walmart and a new McDonalds). Real wealth is either farmed, mined, invented or manufactured. You cannot consume your way to riches. I am happy to have immigrants that contribute more real wealth than they consume. Ignorant people from the third world don't fall into that category and they drag done rather than drag up our GDP per capita.

[NewRomeTacitus]

"I've left my door open this night. In the morning, I would be delighted to find a mexican family in my kitchen. Perhaps they would be cooking some tasty enchiladas. Naturally, I will invite them to stay. They may do some work around the house, maybe not, but it's not important. Perhaps, they will get ill and I'll bring them to the hospital and pay their bill. I'm a Republican and I support George W. Bush."

Pleased to meet you, Ben. My name's Fletch.

[politicalwit]

" Ah, so you've never driven past the posted speed limit, eh? If so, then you are a . . . CRIMINAL!"

I have NEVER, knowingly or willingly violated any speed limit. I've never received as much as a parking ticket. I'm a conservative that believes in following the law. I should note however that there is a BIG difference between a driving CITATION and a FELONY. (but then again,to you OBB's (Open Border Buddies), violating the law is no big deal as long as it benefits YOU. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[blackie]

Protect our borders and coastlines from all foreign invaders!

Be Ever Vigilant!

Minutemen Patriots ~ Bump!

[Serenissima Venezia]

Saying illegal immigration is good for the economy is like saying 911 was a boon for the building industry in lower Manhattan.

Great analogy!

[ClintonBeGone]

Prove it. Show me one instance in the history of civilization where a) there was true free trade and b) everybody prospered.

History is full of such examples. Let's start with free trade with the Indians.

[swampfox98]

This article is very suspect: All I know is the Catholic Churches in my area are some of the worst offenders bringing in illegals for the tax payers to support. They flout it by having pictures on the front page of the local paper showing little Mexicans singing in the kiddie choir displacing little citizens. They brag about directing Grandmas and mamas to- be to our local hospital for free medical care. Also they are guilty of giving illegals identification cards, hoping they can eventually vote.

Also our rust belt state has sent money here for years to have free Hispanic health care fairs.

Most of the world is foaming at the mouth to be able to come to America and steal from the taxpayers. Americans are hated above all other nations because we have made living wages for many years. Because of that, we are sitting ducks here in America, and we have a president who doesn't care about the citizens, or the future of America.

[Serenissima Venezia]

I am happy to have immigrants that contribute more real wealth than they consume. Ignorant people from the third world don't fall into that category and they drag done rather than drag up our GDP per capita.

I may be wrong about this, but I was under the impression that in order to come here legally an applicant had to show a skill that we needed. A friend of mine that came from the Phillipines said she had to prove she had a degree in architecture before she could come live here.

[in the Arena]

History is full of such examples. Let's start with free trade with the Indians.

Please, do start with the Indians (I assume your referring to the aboriginal peoples within the boundries of the United States from the mid-1600's until the late 1800's).

How exactly did the "Indians" prosper ?

[Tribune7]

He's right. With free trade, all the trading partners and their people will prosper.

He's not saying that. He's against CAFTA.

[jackbenimble]

I may be wrong about this, but I was under the impression that in order to come here legally an applicant had to show a skill that we needed.

There are several routes to legal immigration. You are describing one of them. There are green card slots for: skilled workers, unskilled workers, family reunification, refugees, visa lottery winners and I think very rich people like George Soros.

By far the largest category is family reunification. Once one immigrant becomes a citizen he can petition to bring his parents, spouse, children, brothers, sisters, aunts and uncles. And as each of these become citizens they can likewise petition. We end up with chain migration where we import whole villages and tribes and a lot of them are older folks and unskilled folks who represent a taxpayer burden.

This area of our legal immigration policy badly needs reform. We should make family reunification easier, faster and in fact almost automatic but it should be limited strictly to spouse and minor children. Once somebody is a citizen they can always go visit their parents and extended family or have them visit America but the taxpayer should not get stuck with welfare for a bunch of old people and ignorant people who have never contributed anything to the tax base.