March 14, 2004
“We are a
nation of immigrants, we welcome them if
they enter legally” – yeah,
right.
By Patrick Osio,
Jr./HispanicVista.com
The most often heard
comment on the immigration issue from
both politicians and common citizens is
– “As a nation of immigrants we
welcome new immigrants, but legally
– as did the millions before them.”
Sound good and it sounds fair – but
suppose obstacles so onerous are put in
the way making it almost impossible for
one group to enter legally, while
allowing another group to easily qualify?
Suppose Mexicans can enter with little
restriction while Canadians are made to
jump through so many hoops so as to not
qualify with the same ease?
Let’s play the
“suppose” game. Suppose the US
has an agreement with both Canada and
Mexico that requires the three countries
to grant temporary entry to each other’s
professional citizens That the profession
must be included in a list of more than
sixty professions listed in the
agreement, and the professional must have
the specified educational qualifications.
Suppose the United States imposes no
limit on these visas for Mexican
professionals but restricts Canadian
professionals to 5,500 visas per year.
Suppose that in
addition to the numerical limit, Canadian
professionals face more onerous visa
requirements than Mexican professionals.
Both must have a letter offering
employment in the United States, proof of
citizenship of their respective country,
and proof of professional engagement in
one of the listed occupations. But
suppose Canadians must also show a
non-immigrant visa, a prior petition by
the US employer, and US Department of
Labor certification. And suppose Mexicans
can apply for the visa at the border, but
Canadians must apply in advance at a U.S.
consulate or embassy.
Suppose that in
fiscal year 1999, the United States
admitted 68,354 non-immigrant workers
under this type of visa - 67,076 from
Mexico and 1,278 from Canada. The
disparity in visa numbers issued is due
to the additional requirements imposed on
Canadians.
Would politicians
and common citizens agree that if the
above suppositions were actual fact
terrible favoritism is shown to Mexicans
at the expense of Canadians? But if this
“suppose” game were true, why
haven’t we heard about it before?
Why aren’t the Canadians hollering
and pointing out the unfairness?
Canadians have no
need to holler and point the above “suppose”
game as unfair to them, because if you go
back and start at the beginning of the
article and substitute Canada and
Canadian for Mexico and Mexican – it
stops being a “suppose” game
– it is for real and it’s
happening. Not only for professionals but
also for business visitors, traders and
investors and intra-company transferees.
So why the
incredible unfairness when the agreement
(NAFTA) the US signed with both countries
is supposed to be the same? Why honor the
agreement with one, but make the rules so
tough on the other knowing far fewer will
qualify for the visas and then complain
about “illegal immigration”?
And politicians say – “We
welcome immigrants, but legally.”
And then there is
the agricultural worker who signs up in
Mexico with one of several dozen centers
that process applications for farm labor.
Farm labor applicants present proof of
citizenship, and residency; letter from
local police, and take a medical physical
exam – those qualified are ready to
go. But they don’t go because the US
temporary agricultural worker visa (H-2A)
is not granted to the applicants
directly. No, these are applied for in
the US by farmers or their cooperatives
that need the farm hands. But they don’t
apply – why?
Because in applying
for H-2A visas farmers have to agree to a
pay scale equal to what they would pay a
US citizen or legal resident. Obviously
higher wages might reduce the need if not
entirely, at least in part of temporary
workers. Instead, farmers contract with
‘Labor Contractors’ that in
turn send recruiters to Mexico –
“cross however you can, we have jobs
waiting.” Thus farmers circumvent
the need for the H-2A visas and the
higher wages they would have to pay.
Are US citizens so
naïve as to believe that our elected
officials, both Democrats and Republican,
are not aware of these issues? That they
condone the favoritism shown to Canadians
and in fact many of them (during Clinton’s
watch) wrote the rules?
Is this just a
simple case of political hypocrisy?
Favoritism? Or is it more than that?
Can one better
understand why Latino civil rights’
leaders cry foul, and suggest racism is
at work here? Or what do you call it?
________________________________________________
Patrick Osio, jr. is
Editor of HispanicVista.com (www.hispanicvista.com).
Reach at: PosioJr@aol.com
|
