The High Price of Cheap Labor - Immigration's darker side

NRO ^ | 0122/04 | Jack Dunphy

[gubamyster]

January 22, 2004, 9:06 a.m.

Heather Mac Donald is stirring up trouble again.

A petite, unassuming woman, Mac Donald is not one who on first acquaintance gives the impression of a rabble-rouser. But recall the dustup that greeted the publication of her last book, Are Cops Racist? How the War Against the Police Harms Black Americans, which I reviewed in this space a year ago. Now, just when the hate mail engendered by the book has begun to taper off, she returns with the makings for another, perhaps even larger, controversy, one especially ill timed for the Bush administration.

Her latest article for the Manhattan Institute's quarterly, City Journal, is called "The Illegal Alien Crime Wave," and it presents some inconvenient facts for those inclined toward a less restrictive immigration policy. She points out that among the tempest-tost arriving at our golden door are not just the poor, the tired, and the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, but the killers, rapists, and assorted thugs who take gleeful advantage of our already schizophrenic attitudes on border enforcement. Consider some of the statistics Mac Donald cites:

In Los Angeles, 95 percent of the outstanding murder warrants are for illegal aliens, as are perhaps two-thirds of the 17,000 outstanding felony warrants.

Southern California's largest Hispanic street gang, 18th Street, has some 20,000 members, roughly 60 percent of whom are illegal aliens. (The LAPD and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, by comparison, have a combined strength of about 17,000 officers.)

In 2000, nearly 30 percent of federal prisoners were foreign-born.

These numbers are troubling to our friends at the Wall Street Journal, who quite naturally see the world with a view toward the corporate bottom line. In a January 9 editorial titled "Immigrant Realities," the Journal cites the wide disparity in per-capita income between the United States ($32,000) and Mexico ($3,679) as the primary attraction for the estimated eight million illegal immigrants currently living here. (Eight million is the Journal's number; others put it as high as twelve million.) Granted, the grass is far greener on our side of the fence, but this "reality" is no more real than those cited by Mac Donald, who reminds us that all that cheap labor comes at a price that may not be so cheap, most especially to the victims of crimes perpetrated by illegal aliens. The New York Post reported last week on the sentencing of one Victor Cruz for the December 2002 attack in which he and four codefendants kidnapped and raped a Queens woman near Shea Stadium, a crime the sentencing judge described as "one of blood-chilling inhumanity." All of the attackers but one were illegal aliens, a fact that, as Bill O'Reilly noted on his television program Friday, was overlooked by the New York Times, the Daily News, and Newsday. Only the Post, which ran the story under the headline "Evil Rape 'Savages,'" took note of the perpetrators' immigration status.

Mac Donald reports that NYPD officers previously had arrested three of these illegals for such crimes as assault, attempted robbery, possession of firearms, and drug offenses, but, following department policy, the officers never reported any of these arrests to the INS, a step that may have resulted in the men being deported and thereby sparing the unfortunate woman her life-altering ordeal. In New York, as in Los Angeles and many other cities, locally enacted sanctuary laws prohibit police officers from inquiring into a person's immigration status except in extraordinary circumstances. In Los Angeles, this prohibition goes to the laughable extreme of protecting even those who have already been deported after being convicted of a felony and serving time in a California prison. Thus, as I have experienced, if a police officer is driving down the street and spots a man whom he has arrested in the past, and who he knows has been sent to prison and then deported, he is constrained from making an arrest or even a detention, this despite the fact that re-entry into the United States under such circumstances is a federal felony. And on those occasions when I have arrested previously deported aliens for misdemeanors or nonviolent felonies (drug dealing, for instance), immigration officials have told me they would not pursue federal charges unless the underlying local charge was more serious. In fact, it is frustratingly common for police officers to find on an arrestee's rap sheet the notation "deportation proceedings initiated," prompting the question: Well, then, why is he here?

He is here because we have been unwilling to stop him, even now with the nation under threat of attack. The men and women of the Border Patrol, who at the Mexican border work under some of the harshest conditions in law enforcement, know they are fighting a war that some here at home would just as soon see them lose. Imagine risking your life day after day at the border, in extreme weather and over treacherous terrain, then driving to Los Angeles to see entire neighborhoods teeming with people who not only evaded your efforts but who seem to have little fear of being apprehended. It is clear that with our thousands of miles of international borders and open coastline it would be impossible to prevent anyone possessed of sufficient initiative from coming here if he chooses, but must it be as easy as it is today? In its editorial, the Wall Street Journal says smugly, "We could always next build a Berlin Wall along the 2,000 miles of U.S.-Mexican border, or deploy the 101st Airborne, but we doubt Americans would be morally comfortable with either." Perhaps this is so, but I suspect Americans are even less morally comfortable with the Journal's analogizing the recognized border of this freest of all nations with that stark symbol of Communist tyranny, a barrier erected to keep people in, not out.

We are still, as President Bush said in announcing his immigration proposal, a welcoming country. May we always be. But can't we demand that our guests cross the welcome mat at the front door and not come like a thief through the back window? Can't we expect them to mind their manners while they're here? And can't we above all choose whom to welcome and whom to turn away?

— Jack Dunphy is an officer in the Los Angeles Police Department. "Jack Dunphy" is the author's nom de cyber. The opinions expressed are his own and almost certainly do not reflect those of the LAPD management.

[gubamyster]

ping

[PersonalLiberties]

to bad people cannot pool together and purchase the border land, and police it themselves since the govt. doesn't want the hassle (I know, this is not realistic - so please don't jump down my throat) just an opinion

[WayneM]

It is a real shame that the situation is such that the officer cannot even use his own name for fear that he will be punished somehow for speaking out against a criminal class.

It is an even bigger shame that some "conservatives" seem to have no problem with this, and wish to reward these criminals - along with their enablers and co-conspirators - with an amnesty program.

[MissAmericanPie]

Well, here's the thing, being able to identify who is coming in, implies an ability to keep them out. How is a government, whose agenda is to over run the native population with an illegal invasion, suppose to look innocent if at the same time if they have the ability to know who is entering the country?

[rovenstinez]

And a view from the South. Here in Mexico, we suffer because we have single moms trying to raise teen age boys who need their dad! Of those I personally know who went to the USA through the back door and NOT the welcome mat, 80% of them had criminal records. Paying $5.00 to get an appointment at the Embassy and $100 for an interview to get a visa.....passports cost $80 US dollars. It is just much more simple to sneak in. (Even the US President wants to give them legal status!)VISAS need to be easily acquired, and let the good guys in, and nail those who come in with false IDs. Send them back home to be fathers to their kids.

[spodefly]

BTTT

[newgeezer]

On a related note, I keep hearing that these illegals are filling jobs that Americans "don't want" or "won't do." I hear it from liberals and conservatives alike.

Well, that's just a lot of cr*p. It's not that we don't want or won't do the job; it's just that the employer isn't willing to pay whatever it will take to get someone to accept the job.

Close the borders. Now, you can't get someone to clean your toilets, slaughter your pigs, or dress your chickens for $5.50/hour? Double the wage offer, and don't stand in front of the door, lest you get run over by the stampede of people who allegedly "don't want" or "won't do" those jobs.

Nah, the real problem isn't the jobs. It's the standard of living we've come to expect and demand, thanks to cheap labor the world over.

[netmilsmom]

Something also has to be said for the gov't regulations, employer taxes and such that goes into employing American workers. When one compares the cost of a worker (unemployment cost, paperwork costs etc.) with a Migrant worker, the employer would not only have to pay more but it would cost more than the amount in the difference in pay. This is the reason why the "Guest worker" program may not work. Hire someone who is now a worker with paperwork or an illegal with none. The illegals will still run rampant.

[Gritty]

In its editorial, the Wall Street Journal says smugly, "We could always next build a Berlin Wall along the 2,000 miles of U.S.-Mexican border, or deploy the 101st Airborne, but we doubt Americans would be morally comfortable with either."

Yeah? Try me!

That said, we don't need a low-tech cement block wall with guard towers and machine guns. We can do a 95% job with hi-tech, the military and choking off the demand for illegal labor.

But we can never do it while sitting around wringing our hands in anguish we might offend somebody who shouldn't be here and doesn't deserve to be here in the first place - nor their smug enablers!

[PersonalLiberties]

that is so true. The employer's share of the taxes, plus workers's comp, unemployment, it adds up. Plus, with the white collar job, here US students, for the most part, has student loans to pay off, so need to make above minimum wage. Does the foreign worker have student loans? But it is definately that we are not willing. I too get so mad when I hear that. Living in TN as I wrote earlier, a lot of manufacturing has been stut down since I moved here, about 6 months. Those people are looking for jobs. Cleaning or farming would be fine to them.

[BiffWondercat]

From what I've read here from folks and farm owner's on the border, they are barely allowed to protect their own.
Nothing is going to change until we get super-pissed and
sream 24/7 to our 'leaders'! Hell, that won't even work anymore. Anybody got a few billion so that I can 'contribute' to a few poli's?

[marron]

I keep hearing that these illegals are filling jobs that Americans "don't want" or "won't do."

You are right, that is just more elitist thinking. They assume that because they wouldn't take the job that you or I, or your brother-in-law that can't find a job, wouldn't take it.

The fact is that when they say Americans don't want those jobs, they mean that they won't take the job at the price and conditions offered.

There is a powerful fallacy driving this that low wages are good for the economy. The reverse is true. America is what it is because traditionally labor was very expensive.

Expensive labor is what allowed families to live on one paycheck. Expensive labor is what drove modernization of manufacturing methods. Expensive labor is what allowed my older relatives to work those same fields that foreign workers are in today, when work was slow and they couldn't find anything else. They would load the kids in the car and travel cross country following the harvests. It was enough to raise their kids, at least until other things opened up.

Expensive labor is why America has always been fairly egalitarian without laws enforcing it. A man could make enough to live by the sweat of his brow, but couldn't afford to pay someone else to do his chores. Thus it was customary even in well-to-do homes for people to cut their own grass, do their own laundry, and fix their own cars.

It is also the reason Americans were mostly practical people, who knew how to do for themselves. They couldn't afford to have work done, they learned to do it themselves. But they earned enough to live on one wage.

[Siamese Princess]

Expensive labor is why America has always been fairly egalitarian without laws enforcing it. A man could make enough to live by the sweat of his brow, but couldn't afford to pay someone else to do his chores. Thus it was customary even in well-to-do homes for people to cut their own grass, do their own laundry, and fix their own cars.

It is also the reason Americans were mostly practical people, who knew how to do for themselves. They couldn't afford to have work done, they learned to do it themselves. But they earned enough to live on one wage.

I never thought of it that way -- you are right. In third world countries, even a middle class family will have a servant or two to help out -- labor is so cheap. Thanks.

[PersonalLiberties]

"There is a powerful fallacy driving this that low wages are good for the economy. The reverse is true."

Thanks for the thought provoking post.

[FITZ]

Here in Mexico, we suffer because we have single moms trying to raise teen age boys who need their dad!

It's very common for the illegals to send money back to their wife and kids for a little while --- but they soon forget them ---- and when the money stops coming, there is desperation. Then the mom usually packs up and goes north to be some domestic servant raising other peoples' kids --- not her own or to work in a maquila.

That's one of the reasons Mexico is having skyrocketing crime rates. Their families are being destroyed and when you see many illegals, it's not their own families they're with but some live-in girlfriend on welfare. It seems more rare than common to hear of an illegal still supporting his kids after 2 or 3 years of being here ---- many just cut off all connection in a fairly short time.

A real temporary guest worker program would be much better --- the guest worker could come up by bus or plane for just the harvest season --- 3 months max ---- return to the family and village and with the money he brings back, invest in his home and neighborhood.

All this massive migration is bringing about a lot of instability --- some towns have half their population gone --- and families and neighborhoods that once provided stability and security are gone for good.

[PersonalLiberties]

Here is an interesting article I found today. Regarding globalism.

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/mfg_jobs.htm

[marron]

The article points out that part of the cost of labor is the fact that employees make workmen's comp claims against their employers, whereas Chinese workers don't.

We have to figure out what it is we want. We put a system in place to protect workers, to allow workers to recover some of their losses when they are injured, which also puts pressure on the employer to provide a safe workplace, and then gut the system by allowing the jobs to be outsourced to a place beyond the reach of US labor law, or we employ workers who are not eligible to claim workman's comp.

So really we are just kidding ourselves. Either we are serious about enforcing our workplace laws, and we shut off illegal employment, and close the doors to imports made by workers who don't have those rights, or we get rid of the laws we aren't willing to enforce.

What we are doing now is just a pantomime. We enact laws which will never be enforced, since the workers in question are illegal workers, or Chinese.

[Nanodik]

We can do a 95% job with hi-tech, the military and choking off the demand for illegal labor.

No need to go to the expense. We can take the low-tech way and fence in a 200m mine field along the border. It works everywhere it's tried.

[rovenstinez]

Mexico has also an illegal problem. They deported 81,000 Guatemalans, 58,630 Hondurans, 217 USA citizens, 28,000 from El Salvador, and on, and on. Which shoe does this foot fit_ http://www.inami.gob.mx/paginas/estadisticas/enedic03/rechazos.mht