Wednesday, April 19, 2006

Newsweek's Robert Samuelson on assimilation and integration

Robert Samuelson in Newsweek on immigration and assimilation, here, via RCP:

***
April 19, 2006
Newsweek

It's All About Assimilation

By Robert Samuelson

WASHINGTON -- It's all about assimilation -- or should be. One of America's glories is that it has assimilated many waves of immigrants. Outsiders have become insiders. But it hasn't been easy. Every new group has struggled: Germans, Irish, Jews and Italians. All have encountered economic hardship, prejudice and discrimination. The story of U.S. immigration is often ugly. If today's immigration does not end in assimilation, it will be a failure. By this standard, I think the major contending sides in the present bitter debate are leading us astray. Their proposals, if adopted, would frustrate assimilation.

On the one hand, we have the ``cop'' school. It adamantly opposes amnesty and would make being here illegally a felony, as opposed to being a lesser crime. It toughens a variety of penalties against illegal immigrants. Somehow, elevating the seriousness of the crime would deprive them of jobs, and then illegal immigrants would return to Mexico or wherever. This is a pipe dream; the numbers are simply too large.

But it is a pipe dream that, if pursued, would inflict enormous social damage. The mere threat of a crackdown stigmatizes much of the Hispanic population -- whether they're legal or illegal immigrants; or whether they've been here for generations. (In 2004, there were 40 million Hispanics, says the Pew Hispanic Center; about 55 percent were estimated to be native born, 25 percent legal immigrants and 20 percent illegal immigrants.) People feel threatened and insulted. Who wouldn't?

On the other hand, we have the ``guest worker'' advocates. They want 400,000 or more new foreign workers annually. This would supposedly curtail illegal immigration -- people who now sneak into the country could get work permits -- and also cure ``shortages'' of unskilled American workers. Everyone wins. Not really.

For starters, the term guest worker is a misnomer. Whatever the rules, most guest workers would not leave. The pull of U.S. wages (on average, almost five times what can be earned in Mexico) is too great. Moreover, there's no general shortage of unskilled workers. In March, the unemployment rate of high-school dropouts 25 years and older was 7 percent. By contrast, the unemployment rate of college graduates in March was 2.2 percent. Given the glut of unskilled workers relative to demand, their wages often lag inflation. From 2002 to 2004, consumer prices rose 5.5 percent. Median wages rose 4.3 percent for landscapers and not at all for waitresses.

Guest worker advocates don't acknowledge that poor, unskilled immigrants --whether legal or illegal -- create huge social costs. Every year, the Census Bureau issues a report on ``Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage.'' According to the 2004 report, Hispanic children in poverty are up 43 percent since 1990; meanwhile, the numbers of black and non-Hispanic white children in poverty declined 16.9 percent and 18.5 percent, respectively. Also, Hispanics account for most (60 percent) of the increase of Americans without health insurance since 1990. The overall increase was 11.1 million; Hispanics, 6.7 million.

We have a conspiracy against assimilation. One side would offend and ostracize much of the Hispanic community. The other would encourage mounting social and economic costs. Either way, we get a more polarized society.

On immigration, I am an optimist. We are basically a decent, open and tolerant nation. Americans respect hard work and achievement. That's why assimilation has ultimately triumphed. But I am not a foolish optimist. Assimilation requires time and the right conditions. It cannot succeed if we constantly flood the country with new, poor immigrants or embark on a vendetta against those already here.

I have argued that our policies should recognize these realities. Curb illegal immigration with true border barriers. Provide legal status (call it amnesty or whatever) -- first, work permits, then citizenship -- for most illegal immigrants already here. Remove the job lure by imposing harsh fines against employers who hire new illegal immigrants. Reject big guest worker programs.

It's sometimes said that today's Hispanics will resemble yesterday's Italians. Although they won't advance as rapidly as some other groups of more-skilled immigrants, they'll still move into the mainstream. Many have -- and will. But the overall analogy is a stretch, according to a new study, ``Italians Then, Mexicans Now,'' by sociologist Joel Perlmann of Bard College. Since 1970, wages of Mexican immigrants compared with those of native whites have declined. By contrast, wages of Italians and Poles who arrived early in the last century rose over time. For the children of immigrants, gaps are also wide. Second-generation Italians and Poles earned typically earned 90 percent or more compared to native whites. For second-generation Mexican-Americans, the similar figure is 75 percent.

One big difference between then and now: immigration slowly halted during and after World War I. Outsiders and insiders could adapt to each other. We should heed history's lesson.

1 comment:

Patrick said...

It's hard to fathom how an article such as you've featured by Robert Samuelson has not drawn any commentary.

His comments seem to squarely fit in with many made by Hanson in the book Mexifornia.

Although not Hispanic, I'd consider myself a byproduct of Assimilation, having been born and raised in Hawaii with grandparents that were disallowed citizenship by virtue of the Immigration Act of 1924 and earlier legislation that set one group of racial identities into a category of its own. Many of my classmates had the same background as did nearly the entirety of the 442'nd, most decorated Army group in the history of the USA

So it is with some degree of authority that I both applaud and endorse Samuelson's stance and, as well, most of his observations.

The USA, by their policies over many decades, backed itself into a corner which brings us to the present time and really has no alternative to continuing on as we have.

Laws will require considerable revamping along with attitudes, these will be the more difficult to overcome as they are apolitical, despite an underlying and unadmitted National Hypocrisy in our approach to those citizens who are classified by government definition as "visible minorities".

Having come into adulthood well before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it's just my own opinion that this created as many or more problems than it was intended to solve. Despite my "other" status, I'd already become quite successful and knew others, including Blacks that were similarly situated and were well on their way to the American Dream without governmental intervention or social engineering.

But this isn't about me, it's about Robert Samuelson's article which is nearly foursquare with how many people like me feel.

Hawaii has been, for the past 100 years, been a case study of mandated assimilation and ought to be studied carefully to see why it works so well there. Where but in Hawaii, a State dominated by Orientals who are predominantly Democrats would a Jewish Female Republican not born in Hawaii have succeeded to become Governor?

It will be a long road to achieving any solutions and there will have to be some drastic changes. But they cannot be ignored any longer.