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]

Ignorant people from the third world don't fall into that category and they drag done(sic) rather than drag up our GDP per capita

Thank you, IMO, for showing your true motivation.

[Dane]

BTW, jack, couldn't America be considered the original "third world" nation. Afterall America took in all the dregs and rejects from Europe(dirty Irish, wop Italians etc.etc.) and prospered beyond their wildest dreams.

[ClintonBeGone]

How exactly did the "Indians" prosper ?

Let me start by asking you how you prosper from the air you breath? I think the answer to my question is as obvious as the answer to yours.

[ClintonBeGone]

He's against CAFTA.

His implication is that trade is good, provided we address the labor and enviromental issues. Since CAFTA, in his mind, doesn't address those things, he's against it. He's no different than the trade union/Buchanan/Perot thugs that fought NAFTA.

[ClintonBeGone]

You know, I would rather see the US implement a policy whereby they expel their dregs and welcome with open arms those from other countries that are willing to put in an honest day's work. Sometimes it seems to me that folks like Jack would rather have in his country a crack smoking welfare queen than a hard working Mexican bus boy. It makes no sense to me.

[NoClones]

this biship/priest character is just another liberal in disguise...

the term that should be applied to these deadbeats is criminal!

[jackbenimble]

BTW, jack, couldn't America be considered the original "third world" nation. Afterall America took in all the dregs and rejects from Europe(dirty Irish, wop Italians etc.etc.) and prospered beyond their wildest dreams.

Dane, I can do without the implication that my views are racist. I am half Cuban.

As I said before, the defining characteristic of a first world country is labor scarcity. During most of our history we have had a vast unsettled and undeveloped continent to occupy so labor has almost always been scarce and by that definition the answer to your question is: no.

There have been periods in our history where we have had labor greatly in excess of our capacity to create jobs. Once such period was the era in the late 1800s which is referred to as "The Gilded Age" which was characterized by sweatshops, labor exploitation and what came very close to a two-tiered society with the ultra rich industrialists living like royalty. We came close to a third world system then and the result was a backlash and the rise of populist politics, trust busting, inheritance taxes and other similar things and it culminated in the mid-1920s with almost a complete termination of immigration.

Immigration has ebbed and flowed in our history and right now it is at a historical highpoint. I think the backlash is in progress.

[JarheadFromFlorida]

[[Alvaro, if you like them so much you have them, bring them into your home. Build a free hospital and put out the word to come live with you. Don't spend other peoples money, spend your own.]]

Force,

I have been thinking about putting together a website called the "illegal alien fund" and see how many liberals will put their money where their mouth is. I'll bet if these very same liberals received a monthly bill of say $300.00/month from the federal goverment titled the "undocumented migrant resettlemnt fund", that they would not be so damn compassionate since when they saw how much it was costing them and they had to write that check every month.

Liberals love to give away everything that they don't own.

[in the Arena]

Let me start by asking you how you prosper from the air you breath? I think the answer to my question is as obvious as the answer to yours.

From your reply to raybbr's post I was under the impression that you implied that the "Indians" prospered from free trade. Is this not correct ?

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

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

[Dane]

Sometimes it seems to me that folks like Jack would rather have in his country a crack smoking welfare queen than a hard working Mexican bus boy. It makes no sense to me

You are correct about that, CBG. People like jack are always talking about the welfare fraud committed by illegal immigrants, but are silent about native born Americans committing the same fraud.

Ronald Reagan, IMO, is rolling in his grave by those who are taking his name in the cause of hispanic animus. Ronald Reagan was against the welfare queen/king, no matter her/his color or creed.

[TheForceOfOne]

So true.

Calling any liberals bluff is like watching a house of cards cave in.

[ClintonBeGone]

From your reply to raybbr's post I was under the impression that you implied that the "Indians" prospered from free trade.

Correct.

[uncitizen]

Why not have a "Guatemalan Dream"? We will share our ideas about liberty, individual responsibility and free enterprise

My ancestors were here before the Revolution. They were here to build this country of ours into something never before seen in the world. That is what the Mexicans and the Guatamalans have to do. They have to get their act together and build the country of their dreams. And STOP coming here and leeching off of what belongs to we Americans. I'm sorry they didn't have the luxury to be born in America like i was. But not everyone can be.

[jackbenimble]

I would be happy to end welfare and put poor people who are sponging off it to work. As things are now, and as they will be, it is impossible to deport lazy Americans no matter how much you or I might want too.

Once a poor person is a citizen we are stuck with them. I want them to stop being a burden on me and other taxpayers so I think it is in my enlightened self-interest to help them stop being poor. I want them to earn a good wage and that is not going to happen as long as we keep flooding the labor market with an infinite supply of additional poor people willing to work for low poverty wages. And all those poor immigrants bus boys end up sponging off the public largess in one way or another, whether it is free health care, food stamps for their anchor babies or the earned income tax credit.

Poverty is already a big problem in America. I see no reason to import more of it. It makes no sense to me.

[Dane]

As things are now, and as they will be, it is impossible to deport lazy Americans no matter how much you or I might want too

Nah jack, IMO and with your rhetoric, you want to deport the hard working people, especially the people with Spanish surnames, again JMO.

[jackbenimble]

That's the second time you've had to use the resort to the race card in this discussion. You've lost the intellectual argument and I'm done discussing it with you.

Please do me the favor of not replying to any of my posts in the future because I have no further interest in conversing with you.

DP

[Dane]

That's the second time you've had to use the resort to the race card in this discussion. You've lost the intellectual argument and I'm done discussing it with you

Huh when did the people with Spanish surnames become a "race". Oh yeah that's correct under LBJ they did.

[truthkeeper]

Your post at #17 speaks for plenty of us.

[WRhine]

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

Thanks for the laugh. If you want to expound on this statement by my guest.

Recently an insightful Freeper upon reading one of your many outrageously bizarre posts speculated that you are really here to purposely undermine your own professed cause for open borders. I think he might be right. If so....Thank You. In any event keep on posting please. It’s good for laughter is nothing else.

[Cultural Jihad]

Point of fact: Crossing a border without permission and not immediately consigning oneself for review is an administrative misdemeanor, not a felony, unless there was already a misdemeanor conviction for same.

And lose the "Open Border Buddies" ad hominems, please. There are no open border advocates here.