Whatever the politics, Bush’s plan on immigration reform is a good start

A New Deal For Some Of The Region’s Labor Force

The thousands of people here illegally from Mexico, Poland, Ireland, Colombia, China and other countries who prepare our Cantonese soup with dumplings, deliver our tuna sandwiches on wholewheat toast, press our shirts and blouses, sweep under our beds, and prune our shrubbery may have reason to be pleased that President George W. Bush has announced what appears to be genuine and wholesale immigration reform.

Bush proposed this week that the United States set up an expanded system of ‘guest workers’, similar to what is in place in many countries in Europe, which would allow people from other countries to work here for a limited number of years. He also proposed amnesty for those who are already here who apply, and to expand the number of ‘green cards’ given that would allow people to work here indefinitely.

This system, if it plays out as it has in Western Europe, has its own flaws and problems. Germany, for example, is still figuring out how to handle guest workers from Turkey who have now been in the country for two or three generations. But despite such a new system’s potential flaws, it would still be light years ahead of the current system, where millions of people work here illegally in what is really a kind of indentured servitude. Minimum wage laws, required overtime pay and health and safety laws are essentially optional when it comes to illegal workers because they fear approaching any legal authority.

What’s sometimes overlooked in discussions about illegal immigration is that our current immigration policy is really a labor policy. By allowing, with one eye closed and one hand behind our back, millions of people to cross our border illegally and work here illegally we are not so much doing them a favor as setting up a source of cheap,exploitable labor. Southern California, New York and other regions would shut down if the laws on the book prohibiting employers from using illegal immigrants were enforced, or if the borders were suddenly made non-porous.

These issues are especially pertinent now, because in the economic boom of the 1990s the number of people working here illegally swelled dramatically.

According to various estimates, more than 10 million people are in the United States illegally, several times the number a decade or two back. And of course, a huge number are here in the tri-state region.

Given this, it will be interesting to see how the politics of this issue plays out. Where will Wal-Mart, a company that has profited from having illegal workers clean its hallways at night, stand on this issue? Will business groups support or oppose establishing more clarity into who works and how?

However it plays out, few regions will be affected more than ours. Along with Southern California and the Southwest, we have one of the highest percentage of legal immigrants, which usually means a higher than average share of illegal immigrants. Latest census figures show that Manhattan is essentially a gleaming pyramid supported on a huge base of foreign-born labor, of which some percentage is here illegally. In the wider metropolitan area of 20 million people, on average 42 to 50 percent of the population were foreign born, while in Manhattan the figure is 18 percent. How we handle illegal immigration and illegal labor is a key regional issue precisely because so much of our labor force is affected by these questions.

The illegal immigration issue has a way of popping up every few decades. In 1987, as a graduate student at Columbia Journalism School, I did a story for a reporting class by taking a subway out to the immigration center in Queens and talking to people applying for amnesty under the Immigration Act of 1986. This act legalized immigrants here before 1982, and for the first time made it illegal to hireillegal immigrants. But this did not change things as much as planned because illegal labor was so crucial that police essentially stopped enforcing this section of the law.

What is so potentially praiseworthy about Bush’s plan is that it not only sets up an amnesty plan similar to the 1986 act, it sets up a system where future workers would be here legally, without having to wait a decade or two for some rights. Right now, it’s only the high-skilled, higher paid workers, such as Indian software writers, who get to work here temporarily with rights and privileges.

No doubt Bush’s initial proposal will be only the first step. Congress is the body that actually writes the bill, and what emerges from under the white dome of the Capitol will almost certainly look very different than what went in. But Bush, the former governor of Texas, apparently sincerely believes in immigration reform. He was prepared to back a reform measure before Sept. 11 pushed it from the table. If he manages to reform the now exploitive and oppressive system of illegal immigration and undocumented labor, he will have marked his presidency with a laudable achievement.

–Alex Marshall, an independent journalist, is a Senior Fellow at RPA and editor of Spotlight.

 

Jackson Heights

An Anachronism Finds Its Way

[Excerpt From Chapter Five]

The Star restaurant it was called. It sold “Chops, Steaks and Seafood.” It was the kind of small Greek coffee shop that used to abound in Manhattan, but has been dwindling even there. Here, it stood out as a leftover from a bygone world.

The shop sat on Thirty-seventh Avenue, the principal shopping street of Jackson Heights. The street was a swirl of color and activity. Colombians on their way to Ecuadorean restaurants to eat yucca or ropa vieja. Koreans and other Asians came out of small stores selling herbs and spices. Indian women walked by wearing scarfs and other components of traditional dress. The street was a river of life, bustling with people and commerce.

In this flowing river, the Star restaurant sat like an island or an alley, part of this world but not of it. It somehow signaled that it was of another era, and might not be long for the present one.

The restaurant was filled, appropriately enough, with elderly Jewish women. They seemed like refugees from a storm, huddled in this sheltered place while the passions of color, language, and dress swirled and stormed outside on the street. They sat in black-vinyl booths and at square-topped tables, drinking coffee and discussing events. They eagerly surrounded me when I asked them about the neighborhood, eager to have a visitor, and a relatively young man at that. Most had lived in this neighborhood for their entire adult life, some fifty years. The stores they walked to, the candy shops, the movie theaters, the five-and-dimes, were largely gone now. They were widows, their husbands passing before them. They did not like being minorities now in ethnicity, custom, and style in a neighborhood they helped build.

“These people are so dirty, they are filthy,” said a woman with big glasses who had just finished showing photos of her trip to Italy. “They throw their trash in the street. There is crime.”

“They change the child’s diapers in the car, and throw it out on the street, just like they do in India,” said another woman.

“And let the child diddle in the curb,” said still another.

“I even saw a man stand up against a wall and do it,” said the first woman.

This account of the immigrants’ bathroom habits seemed unfair, but probably true. Having lived in Spain for two years, I’m aware that Americans’ bathroom habits are unusually fastidious compared to most. It was common in Spain for a mother to help a child urinate into the street. Men would routinely pee against a wall on a downtown street. I became accustomed to doing so myself.

One woman, less angry than the others, said she still liked it here, but that things had changed.

“There used to be so much to do here. There were the movie theaters. There was a candy store.”

“There was the bingo hall down the street,” said another woman.

“Even the Woolworth’s is closing,” said one woman. The national chain had just closed all Woolworth’s in the country, but to these women it was just one more familiar friend departing.

The women’s complaints were ironic, because while they noticed how much things had changed, I noticed how much things had stayed the same in Jackson Heights. Even if the color, religions, and languages of the people on the street changed, Jackson Heights was still a neighborhood that took working-class immigrants not long off the boat and lifted them into the middle class by providing them the opportunity for hard work. What makes Jackson Heights a rarity is that it is an urban neighborhood, based around the subway and elevated train line. Unlike most urban neighborhoods, Jackson Heights had not become either a slum or a giant fern bar.

Working in the City

As the suburbs have become ubiquitous, the urban neighborhood like Jackson Heights has become a specialized place, for the artist, the junkie, the rich, the homeless, the gay, the intellectually curious. What it isn’t, generally speaking, is home to the police officer with two kids, the assistant hotel manager, the school teacher, and, of course, the factory worker. In other words, the working and middle classes. The classic working-class urban neighborhood, where a guy with a lunch pail walked to work or to a streetcar, subway, or bus, has become a rarity as the systems that produced it become a rarity.

The same goes for the classic ethnic, immigrant neighborhood. For many immigrants today, the town-house complex near the freeway ramp–in other words, the suburbs–has become the destination after getting off the boat. Only in a few cities, or parts of cities, are the walkable street, the walk-up apartment, still the first stop. The inner-city areas are either too expensive or too much of a slum.

But one urban area that is still home to the emerging middle class and the immigrant is New York City. In most cities, urban neighborhoods have become vestigial organs, either kept alive as luxury items for the well off, or abandoned to decay. In New York, urban neighborhoods still create the middle class, taking poor or less well-off people and providing them the environment by which they can make their way to a more established position economically.

One of those neighborhoods in the city is Jackson Heights in Queens. It’s been a ladder for an emerging middle class for most of its existence, and it still is. Latin Americans, Koreans, and Indians have replaced or merged with Italians, Jews, Germans, and Greeks. These changes have often been wrenching sociologically. But the bottom line is that Jackson Heights is still where new immigrants come, get their first jobs, and move up.

Why does it still exist? Why has it become neither a slum nor a gentrified boutique neighborhood? What keeps its inhabitants living, with jobs, in a neighborhood where the car is still an uncommon element? In answering these questions, we see several things:

One, is the uniqueness of New York City, which, after a destructive flirtation with the highway midcentury, has in the last generation become more and more dependent on mass transit. This makes it unique among America’s cities. It has not been easy. It has managed to revive and enhance and build on a seventeenth-, eighteenth-, and nineteenth-century street pattern. Grids of streets where factory workers walked to jobs are now inhabited by stockbrokers or fashion executives who use limousine service. Neighborhoods like Jackson Heights still revolve around the central star of Manhattan, whose economy warms all the outer boroughs and gives life to their streets. Two, we see how transportation determines form and thus lifestyle. People live differently in Jackson Heights, and most of New York, because they get around differently. Three, we see the uniqueness of the street-based life that non-car-centered transportation produces. There is a closeness, an intimacy to life, in Jackson Heights that must at times be suffocating but which I often yearn for. We gave up something when most of our cities opted to build highways and Interstates, rather than train lines or subways.