Arlington Gets Antsy about Illegals

Kirsten Downey with the Washington Post framed her story last week about Arlington County and fears of illegal immigration just perfectly:

Arlington County, which prides itself on racial tolerance and economic diversity and has sneered at anti-immigrant policies in nearby jurisdictions, now finds itself facing some of the same questions.

Many longtime residents are voicing fears that a new zoning proposal will bring an influx of immigrants and poor people. Support for affordable housing initiatives is almost an article of faith in the Democrat-dominated enclave, but the proposal to allow rental units in single-family neighborhoods is challenging that orthodoxy.

At issue is a proposal to allow homeowners to add rental units to houses in single-family neighborhoods. Other jurisdictions permit "accessory dwellings" -- garage apartments, granny flats, and such -- and they're touted by New Urbanists as a way to create affordable housing for students, young people, the elderly, domestics, laborers and others without creating income-segregated neighborhoods. By creating more affordable housing close to the Washington region's urban core, the proposal also would allow people of modest means to live closer to where they work, which would eliminate long commutes and take traffic off the region's congested arterial highways.

It makes sense in many ways, but the idea has spurred a vocal backlash among residents who fear the idea would "worsen parking problems, traffic congestion and crowding and increase the number of absentee landlords and illegal immigrants," Downey reports.

Retiree Rick Barry, 75, said that he considers the plan a wrongheaded assault on Arlington's way of life and that he fears it would attract immigrants displaced from Prince William County, which has enacted a crackdown on illegal immigrants.

"You work hard to get your family into a single-family neighborhood," Barry said. "We have a very nice neighborhood character, and we should do whatever it takes to keep it as it is."

Merryl Burpoe, a government relations consultant, said Arlington's "beautiful, stable" neighborhoods are at risk.

"We moved here for the quality of life Arlington affords," she said. "We paid a lot for our homes."

So, here's the big question: Does this mean that the residents of Arlington County, an unofficial "sanctuary" jurisdiction and politically one of the most liberal, bluest-of-blue jurisdictions, are... racist? Are phrases like "overcrowding" and "traffic congestion" and "absentee landlords" just liberal white peoples' code words for not wanting brown people around?

It's one thing to lambaste retrograde attitudes towards illegal immigration when the people allegedly behaving in a retrograde manner are Republican-leaning troglodytes in Prince William County. Clearly, the issues they raise about noise and poor upkeep and too many cars parked in the yard are indirect expressions of prejudice.

Or maybe, just maybe, the clash over illegal immigration really isn't about racism. Maybe it is a clash of cultures, reflecting the difficulty of integrating immigrants (legal or otherwise) accustomed to Third World villages and barrios, where certain norms of behavior are perfectly acceptable, into American suburbia, where those norms of behavior traditionally have been considered obnoxious.

It will be interesting indeed to see how the citizens of Arlington County resolve the tension between accepting all cultures as equally valid -- especially when the foreign cultures reside at a comfortable distance -- with the prospect of those cultures getting up front and personal.

(Hat tip: Larry Gross. The views expressed in this post are those of the author only and do not necessary represent the opinions of the hat tipper!)

Another Datapoint on Illegal Immigration

Hundreds of foreign-born families have pulled their children from Prince William County public schools and enrolled them in nearby Fairfax and Arlington Counties, "imposing a new financial burden on those inner suburbs in a time of lean budgets," reports Amy Gardner with the Washington Post.

Normally, I find Gardner to be a pretty fair reporter, but her biases are showing in the way she framed this story. "The school-to-school migration within Northern Virginia started," she explained, "just as Prince William began implementing rules to deny some services to illegal immigrants and require police to check the immigration status of crime suspects thought to be in the country illegally."

Only lower in the story does the fact emerge that Prince William County expects to save $6 million a year thanks to a 759-student decline in the number of students enrolled in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) programs.

One of the biggest question marks in the debate over illegal immigration is how much illegals are costing citizens and legal residents in public services, most notably health care and ESOL programs. Now we have data suggesting that the ESOL costs are pretty significant. But rather than leading with a positive spin -- Prince William County policies are paying off during a time of economic hardship as illegal immigrants move out -- Gardner chose to lead with a negative: the cost that Prince William was imposing on its neighbors. And she did so despite evidence in her own story that the impact of the migration was so diffused that Fairfax and Arlington officials didn't even regard the shift as a hardship.

To my mind, the real story is the hard data it provides on the immigration debate, which has been conducted so far in a largely data-free void. To her credit, Gardner did pick up on this point, noting that the evidence of migration has been largely anecdotal until now and that data from school systems provides "the most concrete evidence to date that a significant exodus of immigrants is underway -- and that most of those leaving are settling in neighboring communities." But she didn't pursue that angle very far.

There's another interesting angle that Gardner could have pursued in the story, based on a quote from Prince William County board chairman Corey Stewart: "Stewart called those jurisdictions 'sanctuary' cities and counties, saying illegal immigrants are welcome there."

The Washington Post has focused its coverage overwhelmingly on Prince William County's policies, which have been hostile to illegal immigrants. There has been far less coverage of the policies of Arlington and Fairfax, which have been far more accepting. Stewart makes a significant charge: that Arlington and Fairfax function as sanctuaries for illegals. That charge may or may not be grounded in the facts. It would be interesting to know what the facts are.

Prince William, Meet Swan Quarter

One of my favorite flyspecks is the Tideland town of Swan Quarter, N.C., a tiny burg off the undulating marshes of Pamlico Sound. Years ago, I used to occasionally report from Swan Quarter for a small daily newspaper about an hour’s drive to the west. My late Dad, a urologist, got a fair number of patients from Swan Quarter, named for the thousands of migratory waterfowl that used to haunt its waters in winter.

So, I couldn’t help but note that The Virginian-Pilot had a story concerning Swan Quarter on April 20. Mattamuskeet Seafood, the story reports, had planned to open for crab processing season last week, but it couldn’t find any workers. Usually it gets 100 workers in season who commute up from Mexico for several months each year to do the smelly, dirty work of picking crabs. But not now.

The problem is on Capitol Hill where Congress hasn’t yet renewed a visa program allowing 66,000 non-farm, temporary workers into the U.S. each year. Thousands of foreign crab pickers and other workers are short in towns such as Vandemere and Columbia in Coastal Carolina. Frustrated employers have driven to Washington, D.C. to plead their case, according to the Pilot.

What’s interesting is that these workers, many from Mexico, are not the hated suspects often caricatured by Virginia’s Republican Party and others. These Latinos are not seen as messy, loud, unruly threats to national security as they seem to be in places such as Prince William, Loudoun and other wealthy counties in Virginia that are banding together to stem what is perceived as a flood of fearsome barbarians.

Just the opposite. In Columbia, N.C., a quaint spot just off the Albemarle Sound, Tara Foreman, general manager of Captain Neill’s Seafood, misses her 75 Mexican workers. She told the Pilot that some of the ladies have worked for her for 18 years. They became so close that when Foreman was engaged to be married, the Mexicans threw a shower for her and attended the wedding.

Zip up the coast a bit to Prince William County in Washington’s Virginia suburbs. On Sunday, The Washington Post had a story on its Metro section exploring just how controversial Supervisor Chairman Corey A. Stewart is becoming. Playing to middle and upper-middle class white fears of “illegal” immigrants, the Republican pushed a series of anti illegal immigrant measures. Stewart wants cops to check the immigration status of any foreigner (read: dark-skinned), they stop. The county must not provide any services to undocumented workers.

According to the Post, Stewart drew big fire when he scolded a police chief for having the audacity to meet with a consul from the Mexican Embassy. In most of the world, visits between foreign diplomats from friendly countries and local officials are considered a normal part of life. You get to exchange ideas. But in Prince William, it’s like meeting with a foreign spy.

Stewart's antics are prompting some local activists and politicians to urge him to get off his illegal immigration kick. It seems to be dampening the county's reputation as it looks for new businesses and residents.

Maybe the explanation is that Prince William is rich and mostly white and fearful -- in other words, GOP country. Little places like Swan Quarter and Columbia are made up of several races and have among the lowest per capita incomes of any localities in North Carolina. Poor though they may be, the folks there have a sense of humility and humanity that is rare these days. They have something to teach Virginia's well-to-do suburbanites.

Measure, Measure, Measure

As Prince William County starts checking on the immigration status of criminal suspects, a team of sociologists and criminologists from Virginia universities will be watching. As reported by the Washington Post, the team will ask, "How does a community change when its police officers start checking citizenship?"

The team will analyze everything from police records to public sentiment. But how do you measure such a policy's success? If large numbers of illegal immigrants leave the county, were they driven out by police actions, out of fear or because there are fewer jobs in a flagging economy? If reported crime goes down, does it mean that fewer people are breaking the law or that more people are afraid to call authorities?

The academic initiative has the support of local authorities, who want to make sure that police don't engage in racial profiling of Hispanics and to evaluate whether the program is cost effective. In the background: Municipal officials want to protect the county against discrimination lawsuits. Also, the board learned recently that the cost of the crackdown will be $6.4 million the first year, more than twice as much as earlier estimated.

County Supervisor Martin E. Nohe says the exercise will help ensure that the county's policy is "legal, just and reasonable. ... We had to not just avoid racial profiling. With this new focus on Prince William County, we had to also avoid the perception of racial profiling."

Without the evaluation, says Chairman Corey A. Stewart, the county would have only anecdotal evidence to judge whether the policy is achieving its purpose, and at what price.

Bacon's bottom line: This is a great idea. The knowledge that someone will be systematically tracking the data will, in itself, discourage police from engaging in racial profiling. At the same time, the compilation of comprehensive and objective data will make it difficult for partisans on either side of the illegal immigration debate to make sweeping claims based on anecdotes and isolated incidents.

Who knows, this initiative could provide a template for governance elsewhere in Virginia. All too often, elected officials make decisions on the basis of incomplete data. All too often, when it comes time to re-evaluate their decisions, they still have incomplete data. (That's why I've argued so strenuously for a component in Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's pre-K school initiative to track the impact of the early education on "at risk" children.) I can visualize a future in which state and local governments routinely partner with Virginia universities to measure the results of public policy initiatives.

Imagine that: Basing decisions on hard data, not anecdote and gut instinct! That would be the greatest revolution in Virginia governance since the overthrow of the monarchy!

The Big Lie?

Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell got headlines throughout the region Feb. 21 by showing he was tough on both immigration and sex offenders. Boasting that his cooperation with federal and state law enforcement authorities could be a model nationally, McDonnell said that more than 171 immigrant sex offenders had been identified and set up for deportation.

A closer reading (see my column, "The Big Lie?") shows that most of the foreign-born people on the sex offenders list weren’t here, had been deported or were about to be deported. That’s hardly a call to arms for ever tougher enforcement.

It doesn’t matter, though, because headlines boost McDonnell, GOP gubernatorial candidate in 2009, once again unfairly tainting newcomers for craven political purposes. Research can’t decide if immigrants are a bigger sex crime threat than native born Americans. But if right-wing politicians like McDonnell keep repeating a Big Lie, people will believe it.

(Posted on behalf of Peter Galuszka.)

Illegal Immigrants Pay Taxes, Too

With all the consternation about how much illegal immigrants cost the taxpayers of Virginia, argue Michael Cassidy and Sara Okos with the Commonwealth Institute for Fiscal Analysis, it's important to remember that they pay taxes, too.

Virginia's undocumented population numbers between 250,000 and 300,000, they guesstimate in a new report, and it pays between $145 million and $174 million in state income taxes, sales and excise taxes, and property taxes. Further, undocumented immigrants working “on the books” pay an additional $114 million to $137 million in Social Security and Medicare taxes, a sum that their employers match.

There's a lot of guesswork in those estimates, as the authors readily admit, but the numbers are as reasonable as anyone else's. Let's assume they're accurate. Taking the high end of each set of estimates, that works out to about $580 in state and local taxes per illegal.

Bacon's bottom line: Big whoop. Nobody said that "undocumented workers" don't pay taxes. The problem is the perception that they pay significantly less than they and their families receive in services and the fact that, I know it's just a technicality, they are here illegally. Trouble is, we still don't have any reliable numbers on how much illegals cost, so we can't say for absolutely certain that they are a drain on the public fisc. Let's develop some credible numbers, compare them to the Cassidy/Okos numbers and see what we get.

Virginians on Illegal Aliens: Cut Public Services - but Not Emergency Room Treatment

More good stuff from CNU's Center for Public Policy polling: Virginians harbor ambivalent sentiments about illegal immigrants. When asked if they favored cutting public services to undocumented workers, even children, 53 percent said yes. And 55 percent agreed that police should have the authority to stop any driver they suspected of being an illegal alien to check their legal status.

But dig deep enough, and there are signs that Virginians have a heart: 75 percent opposed the idea of denying illegal immigrants access to emergency room care. And a solid majority -- 58 percent -- recoiled at the idea of deporting undocumented workers if it meant forcing them to leave U.S.-born citizen children behind. (That question was somewhat loaded: The Center might have gotten a different answer if it had asked whether people would favor deportation "even if it meant taking their U.S.-born children with them," as opposed to assuming that the family had to be split up.)

Who Owns Whom?

These General Assembly days, one can't get past any newspaper without another idiotic attempt to somehow disenfranchise foreigners or foreign-born Virginians. Some 100 laws are now proposed to "restrict" undocumented foreign residents. If successful, no "illegal" immigrant (and perhaps some legal ones) could go to a state school, get a drivers license, work for various cities or counties or get stopped by a cop without getting patted down.

You could get fired from your job for "not speaking English" or you could lose your business license if you knowingly or unknowingly hire foreign-born individuals (most likely dark-skinned") whose papers are not entirely in order with the State Department or Immigration and Customs Enforcement. According to State Sen. Richard Saslaw, some of the laws "are the most mean-spirited" proposed in recent memory.

So, it is indeed curious to read the left-hand leader in Sunday's New York Times. Foreigners, it seems, are buying or making huge investments in U.S. firms at a massive level. Kuwaitis, for instance are taking a $9 billion share of Dow Chemical, separate groups from United Arab Emirates and Singaporeans now have a a big chunk of Citigroup and Britain's AstraZeneca has a whopping $14.1 billion stake in Medimmune.

Last year, foreign investors poured $414 billion into U.S. firms, the Times reports. The reason? The stocks markets in the U.S. have taken deep dips in recent weeks over recession fears. There are plenty of bargains. The U.S. dollar is weaker than it has been in a long time. Although reeling from the mortgage meltdown and tight money, U.S. companies are still regarded as excellent investments.

To be sure, the foreign spending spree is likely to bring on protests by the more xenophobic "patriots" in the U.S. The same thing happened in the late 1980s when Japanese firms, just before their real estate bubble burst and their economy shrunk in a decade-long, deflationary implosion, were buying up New York landmark real estate properties with a vengeance. The outcries were huge. The same spirit forced one of China's biggest oil companies to back away from a major U.S. investment a few years ago.

Still, the investments are good news because they bring U.S. money back into the good ole U.S.A. The growing globalization of thw world economy may have its downside with shuttered manufacturing towns aroud in the Great Lakes or textile South, but the cross-investments are likely to create jobs, some of which might replace the ones lost.

If anything the trend towards cross-investment will continue. Foreign stock markets such as Euronext are merging with ones on Wall Street. The U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission, mindful of the convergence of trading, has made it easier for foreign firms to list their stocks in the U.S. and is working towards reconciling different corporate accounting systems. In fact, serious trends are underway that would dump the accounting system used by U.S. firms in favor of a more international one that was started in Europe and is used already by most countries in the world.

Ratcheting our focus down to the Virginia level, you would think it is still the 1950s, when old-style, white-run corporations and governments held sway with their traditional and peculiar ways and mores. Those dark-skinned guys working the lawns and flower beds had better stop speaking Spanish or whatever the immigrant "underclasses" use. And if Virginia lawmakers have their way, they'd all better have all paperwork signed and sealed with all the "Ts" crossed, even though ICE is many months behind in procesing legitimate attempts by foreigners workers here to get themselves squared away.

Ironically, the lawmakers leading the charge tend to be from Northern Virginia, which is the most internationalized part of the Old Dominion. Once again, as I have written before, this state seems to be a kind of parallel universe where what happens elsewhere is irrelevant.

Globalization won't be irrelevant forever. I can't wait for the day when one of thse yea-hoo, xenophobic, would-be American patriots and lawmakers confronts his boss for not speaking English and is promptly fired.

Peter Galuszka

Business Lobby Has Defensive Agenda for 2008 Session

Virginia's major business lobbies appear to have modest legislative agendas as the 2008 General Assembly nears, and most items at the top of their lists are defensive.

Businesses are bracing for a rash of legislation relating to illegal immigration, reports Greg Edwards with the Times-Dispatch. The big three associations -- the Virginia Chamber of Commerce, the Virginia Manufacturers Association and the Virginia Retail Merchants Association -- are united in opposing efforts by lawmakers to solve the illegal immigration problem at the state or local level.

Immigration, they contend, is an issue that properly falls within the scope of the federal government. A patchwork of local and state immigration laws -- some penalizing businesses who hire illegals -- would lead to headaches. Said Brett Vassey, president of the VMA: "We don't need employers to become [immigration] agents."

Other business-related issues expected to arise in the 2008 session:

• Indoor smoking restrictions -- the clean lung people will be active again this year, and business will be on the butt end of their initiatives.
• Workforce training -- the business lobby is responding favorably to Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's plan to consolidated diverse and fragmented training programs under the Virginia Community College System.
• Transportation -- while most legislators are exhausted with the subject, a handful are proposing additional tax increases. Business still would like to see sustainable, long-term funding for new construction.

Nyah, Nyah! Our Illegal Immigrants Are Smarter Than Yours!

Illegal immigrants in the Mid-Atlantic states (Maryland and Virginia) are different from illegals in other states -- they tend to be better educated, they make more money, and they're less likely to have slipped across the border illegally, maintains the Center for Immigration Studies. Summarizes the Washington Post:

The average household income for illegal immigrants is $45,748 nationally. In Maryland, it's $58,061; in Virginia, $61,112. The findings may reflect the greater overall wealth of the two states: The average household income for native residents is $83,964 in Maryland and $79,524 in Virginia, compared with $66,952 nationwide.

The study suggests that a greater share of illegal immigrants in the Washington region are people who overstayed their entry visas rather than sneaked across the border, says Steven A. Camarota, who wrote the report. "People who overstay are more likely to be foreign students and guest workers who are more educated. People who cross the border illegally tend to be the least educated."

That conforms with my personal experience. Some of the immigrants that I know personally entered the country legally, overstayed their visas illegally and melted into the population. Some have since obtained green cards. One married a U.S. citizen, thus becoming a U.S. citizen herself. Of course, the individuals I know best are of Brazilian or Caribbean origin. It's difficult to "sneak across the border" when you arrive by airplane.

You can view the study here.

At Least Virginians Don't Discriminate against Fat Immigrants

You thought Virginians were tough when it comes to illegal immigration? New Zealanders are even tougher with would-be legal immigrants, especially those that might impose an extra burden on the social safety net.

New Zealand has just nixed an immigration request by a Welsh woman on the grounds that she is too fat. Welchman Richie Trezise, a submarine cable specialist, managed to lose enough weight to gain permission from the health-conscious Kiwis to enter the country. But his wife Rowan didn't make the cut. If he wants to take the job, he'll have to go to New Zealand without her.

The (London) Telegraph quotes Robyn Toomath, an endocrinologist and spokesman for Fight the Obesity Epidemic, as saying she opposes the stigmatizing of obese people. "However, the immigration department’s focus is different. It cannot afford to import people into the country who are going to be a significant drain on our health resources. You can see the logic in assessing if there is a significant health cost associated with this individual and that would be a reason for them not coming in."

A "significant drain on our health resources"... Where have we heard that before?

Zapata's Legacy

What on earth does Emiliano Zapata, a leader of the 1917 Mexican Revolution, have to do with illegal immigration in the United States today?

Alvaro Vargas Llosa has a fascinating take on the social forces driving poor Mexicans to the United States in search of work. He tells the tale through the eyes of Emiliano Zapata, a poor landless laborer who is the grandson of the famous revolutionary. The original Zapata fought for redistribution of land to Mexico's peasants, but the reform was corrupted by the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI. Writes Llosa:

What has been the consequence of a century of collectivization of the land? In the 1990s, when trade policies became more liberal, Mexico’s rural population found itself caught up in an extremely inefficient system that was undercapitalized, making it very difficult for Mexican peasants to compete with the outside world. When the government finally allowed the villagers to sell the ejidos, something they had been prevented from doing since 1917, many of them put their land on the market and left for Mexico’s cities. When the urban areas did not offer improved conditions, they migrated to the United States. “If my grandfather came back,” ponders Emiliano, “he would die of sadness.”

And such are the ways that the histories of foreign lands intertwine with ours. There's no escaping it, it's one world, baby. (Photo credit: Wikipedia.)

The 70 percent solution

Gooze Views
Peter Galuszka

The devil is certainly in the details. One week ago, I wrote an opinion piece, questioning the figures used in a report by Chesterfield County trying to justify a claim that the county spent more than $2.1 million annually on illegal aliens. The report is a run-up to a hearing Nov. 14 on illegal immigration and whether the county should crack down. Curiously, the report gave no estimate of how many illegal aliens are actually in Chesterfield – the sine qua non for estimating costs on county services.

The report bugged me and a lot of others. Not only did my column generate more than four dozen responses, I got a call from Deputy County Administrator Rebecca Dickson (whose name I had badly misspelled). The county had directed me to her for more detailed explanation of where data in the Aug. 16 report by County Administrator James J.L. Steigmaier came from. I had tried and failed to reach Ms. Dickson, who now wanted to set me straight.

Before getting into specifics, let me say that Ms. Dickson is obviously a public servant trying to do a tough job fairly. She impressed upon me that the county staff is well aware of how racially loaded the issue of illegal immigration is. Counties such as Prince William have adopted strident anti “illegal” measures, but the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors (just shaken up in elections) hasn’t done anything yet.

After reviewing her explanation and tapping other sources, nonetheless, I have come to a few conclusions. First, Chesterfield’s figures are too suspect to justify any kind of crackdown at all. The grand harrumph about illegals is based on bad data, guesses and lots of anecdotes. The more I studied the Chesterfield report and did my own research, I came up with figures and views completely opposite or certainly nowhere as profound.

But that doesn’t solve the massive problems in Stegmaier’s report. For starters, officials in Chesterfield, population about 300,000, estimate that from 17,500 to 21,000 illegal aliens – all of them Hispanics -- live in the county. This revelation came during an interview with Dickson and has never been made public, perhaps because the estimate is so flimsy.

The number is important because it is the basis of the $2.1 million cost estimate of the County’s total budget of $336 million. Ms. Dickson says that the cost numbers hold despite the uncertainty as to the total numbers of illegal aliens. To me, that defies logic.

In coming up with its alien guess, the County looked only at Hispanics and no other immigrant group. (Racial profiling, anyone?) The latest 2000 U.S. Census reported that 15,000 county residents checked the box “Hispanic” beside their names. Mind you, these people could be here legally or illegally. All they did was check a box on a chart. To this, Chesterfield officials add another 10,000 to 15,000 Hispanics. This was the brainchild of a “Hispanic cross functional team” that worked in the county two or three years ago, Dickson says. So, we are up to levels of 25,000 to 30,000 of Hispanics who are in the county legally or illegally, by the County’s count.

How do we know how many are here illegally? In Chesterfield, we guess and we come up with a whopping 70 percent, equating to about 17,500 to 20,000 illegals in all. Why 70 percent? According to Ms. Dickson: “Essentially this (aforementioned) team, indicated that anecdotally, they believed that about 70 percent of the Hispanic population was here illegally. That is how we got 70 percent.” The County did a second estimate based on massaging census figures another way and got a lower illegal population of 13,150.

“Ridiculous” is the reaction of Communication Director Jesus Moreno of the Falls Church-based advocacy group, The Hispanic Committee of Virginia. Moreno’s group uses figures from the nationally known Pew Research outfit, which estimates that of the 40 million Hispanics in the U.S., from 10 to 11 million are undocumented. If that ratio is common everywhere, then Chesterfield’s population of illegal Hispanics, assuming the totals are correct, is more like 4,000, or about one fifth of Chesterfield’s guess. Says Moreno: “I guess they knocked on the doors of 10 Hispanics and figured that seven people were illegal.”

To back the county’s methodology, Ms. Dickson directed me to a report by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, which does studies for the General Assembly. In 2004, JLARC published a report on how “foreign-born” Virginians were faring. “Foreign born” could mean illegal but also could mean naturalized U.S. citizens or ones here with proper documents.

When I checked the report, I couldn’t find much to back Chesterfield’s estimates. In fact, I found just the opposite.

While the number of foreign-born residents increased statewide 83 percent from 1990 to 2000, the total amounted to about 570,279 or a small fraction of the total state population. Most, 41.3 percent, were from Asia with 33.3 percent from Latin America. This is interesting because Chesterfield chose only to study Hispanics, not Koreans, Indians, or Chinese for potential illegal status. And, the JLARC report cited only about 13,523 “foreign born” – legal or illegal of all backgrounds -- residents in Chesterfield, which is hard to square with Dickson’s numbers. Even the county’s illegal Hispanic figures are way higher than these. However, from 1990 to 2000, Chesterfield’s “foreign-born” population did double.

To be sure, I called Phil Leone, executive director of JLARC. His group’s 2004 report could not find much negative impact from foreign born Virginians and noted that the report didn’t specifically look at illegals. “There wasn’t a great demand on services,” he said. Rather, he said, “the foreign born contribute immensely to the state economy.” Told of Chesterfield’s estimates of illegal Hispanics, he said, “They didn’t get that from our report. They may have read our report and made their own assumptions.”

Indeed, assumptions are not facts, but they sure play a role in politics. The illegal alien invasion has been an ugly rallying cry by state Republicans as they tried to make up for various failings in the Nov. 6 election. They were only partly successful, losing the Senate to the Democrats. In Northern Virginia, a key battleground, the GOP’s tactic may have worked in outer suburbs of Loudoun and Prince William, but failed in the inner suburbs of Arlington and Fairfax, which are much more diverse and have larger immigrant populations, The Washington Post notes.

Chesterfield is an outer, Republican suburb like Loudoun where many residents in the white majority are not used to diversity. Some are quick to scream “illegal” when confronted with non-English speaking, dark-skinned people.

Unfortunately, come the Nov. 14 hearing, many will probably vent their fears and their ignorance as they have been primed to do by their local GOP leaders. Fanning the flames will be Chesterfield’s badly flawed report. No doubt it will be cited as the Gospel truth by other Virginia localities as they form vigilante squads to fight the supposed alien invasion.

-- November 12, 2007

The White Man’s Burden

Some estimated Chesterfield expenses for illegal immigrants:

-- Juvenile Court. $3,048 annually handling an estimated 5 Juvenile Court. $3,048 annually handling an estimated 5 cent of all cases that involve illegal immigrant

-- Circuit Court. $16,935 annually handling about 80 hours per week handling illegal immigrant cases.

-- General District Court: 20 to 25 cases per week involving illegal immigrants totaling $64,300 annually, plus Spanish language services.

-- $230,00 annually handling an average of six illegal immigrants in jail. Daily jail population can reach 400.

Data: Chesterfield County.

Peter Galuszka is a veteran journalist living in Chesterfield County.

(Photo credit: Maria Galuszka.)

© Copyright 2007 Bacon's Rebellion. All rights reserved.

No Excuse for Intimidating Hispanic Citizens

As part of the ongoing dialogue on Bacon's Rebellion about illegal immigration, I am perfectly willing to highlight facts and incidents that don't conform to my "narrative" of the controversy. In past posts and comments, I have objected to those who stereotype the foes of illegal immigration (including myself, on occasion) as motivated by racial/ethnic prejudice, a tactic that I regard as a way to shut down the debate without even discussing the issues. I have asked commentators to show concrete examples of racist or prejudicial behavior, not simply assert it on the basis that the contras (if I'm allowed to use a Spanish word for an Anglo group) are white, middle-class suburbanites. If such behavior could be documented, I promised, I would condemn it.

In that spirit, I now bring to the attention of Bacon's Rebellion readers an example of what may be indefensible behavior: intimidation of Hispanics, whom we have no reason to assume are not citizens, at the voting booth. Here's what the Manassas Journal-Messenger reports this morning:

State police are investigating possible voter intimidation of some Hispanic residents that occurred outside a polling place in Gainesville.

Prince William County Registrar Betty Weimer said members of a group outside Stonewall Middle School were threatening to call the police Tuesday on Hispanics entering the polling place.

"There was a group of people out there with a camera yelling at our Hispanic voters that if they were illegal, they were going to be deported," Weimer said.

In a separate incident, protesters allegedly objected to being given English-language assistance at the voting booth. It is important to remember, of course, that these cases are under investigation, and there are two sides to every story. There is no guarantee the incidents panned out as reported. However, if this report is accurate, the behavior is indefensible. Hispanic citizens have the same rights as every American, and that includes the right to vote free of intimidation. If the story is accurate, Prince William County needs to protect the rights of its Hispanic citizens.

Furthermore, anti-illegal activists should understand that they're doing their cause no favors. The phenomenon of illegal immigration raises legitimate issues, but it doesn't help anyone to create an environment of fear. Stereotyping Hispanics on the presumption that they might be illegal only gives ammunition to those who would sweep the illegal-immigration issue under the rug. Stick to the facts, guys. Obey the law. Don't confirm your foes' worst suspicions. I, for one, am not going to cover for you.

Fox at the Forum

Former Mexican President Vincente Fox opened his address to the Richmond Forum last night with an encomium to the Juans, the Marias, the Joses and all the other brave Mexicans who have immigrated to the United States to work hard and build a better life for themselves and their families. It was a heart-felt and effective gesture (and one that he probably has used all over the United States, wherever he has plugged his book, "Revolution of Hope: The Life, Faith and Dreams of a Mexican President.") Though speaking in English and not his native language, Fox was engaging and charismatic. It was easy to see how he became the first Mexican politican to break the political monopoly of the Institutional Revolutionary Party.

For Americans, Fox is an especially effective advocate for the Marios and Marias in the United States because, unlike many Latin politicians, he loves the U.S. and he holds this country up to its own ideals. His grandfather was an Irish-German who sought his fortune in Mexico during the second half of the 19th century, worked hard and became a large landowner before a revolutionary government expropriated 90 percent of his property. A successful corporate executive who rose to the head of Coca-Cola Mexico before his entry into politics, Fox also is an unabashed champion of free markets and free trade, which he regards as the tonic to the authoritarianism and economic nationalism that prevented Latin America from sharing in global economic progress for most of the 20th century.

Fox speaks of the "American Dream," which is shared by all peoples of the Americas, not just the United States of America. "Immigrants are people that come here to work, come here to contribute to this economy and to this great nation. Immigrants are loyal to the land that opened their arms to them," he said, as reported by the Times-Dispatch. (Bizarrely, the T-D devoted its lede and half the article to the fact that Fox thinks the U.S. should pull out of Iraq, a point that was utterly tangential to his discussion of free trade and immigration.)

Far from throwing up walls between Mexico and the U.S., Fox wants to see the two countries grow closer together. He would like to build upon the North American Free Trade Agreement by negotiating common customs agreements between Mexico, the U.S., and Canada, much as the European Union has done. He would like to see all North Americans share a common passport. Ultimately, he suggests, they could share a common currency.

Mexico has made tremendous economic progress since a massive devaluation of the peso in the 1990s caused massive economic suffering, Fox said. The key has been a stable currency and open borders that ended the country's economic isolation and forced Mexican enterprises to adapt to global competition. Mexican standards of living have risen dramatically since then, he said.

Fox acknowledges that the United States has a legitimate issue with people who enter the country illegally, but he says the answer isn't building walls. Congress needs to develop mechanisms, like guest worker programs, that allow Mexicans (and other Hispanics) to work and reside legally in the U.S., and then return home.

In sum, Fox appealed to the best part of the (U.S.) American character in asking for more sympathy for his fellow countrymen. He did not label the anti-illegal movement as xenophobic or racist. As such, he was a far more effective ambassador for his people than he would have been had he embraced the hostile, don't-give-an-inch rhetoric so widespread in the pro-illegal movement.

I have a question for those who profess so much concern for the plight of Hispanics: Why don't they support an extension of the NAFTA free trade agreements to Central America, the Caribbean and Latin America, as Fox advocates? Why shouldn't the United States help other countries to follow the path of Mexico, reform their economies and create a sustainable prosperity -- so people don't have to leave their homelands in the first place?

Don't white, liberal elites feel compassion toward Hispanics when they're stuck in their home countries, victims of self-defeating government policies and U.S. trade barriers? Or is it only when Hispanics come to the United States, where they can be herded onto the liberal plantation and help Democrats lock up electoral dominance for the next 50 years, that they are worthy of sympathy?

You Say Illegal Immigrant, I Say Illegal Alien

Members of the Coalition on Illegal Immigration agreed that illegal immigration is a big problem, but they didn't agree on much else.

The group, represented by a dozen or more municipalities, assembled in Culpeper yesterday to explore issues, exchange information and possibly press for legislation. But they even quibbled over the proper term for calling illegal immigrants. Reports Donnie Johnson with the Free Lance-Star:

"Illegal alien is the proper term," said Herndon Town Councilman Dave Kirby. "There's no such thing as an illegal immigrant according to the IRS because all immigrants are eventually issued a green card. An alien enters this country illegally and is deportable."

The lack of easy consensus is probably a good thing: We don't want any lynch mobs forming. There are no simple solutions for illegal immigrants/aliens. Indeed, some purported remedies might be worse than the problem. The general tenor of the gathering seemed temperate and responsible, according to accounts in the Free Lance-Star and Times-Dispatch. The coalition may have something positive to contribute to the illegal immigration/alien debate.

Global Warming and Illegal Immigration: At Last, Tying It All Together!

Thinking that it has caught Gov. Timothy M. Kaine in a "gotcha" moment, the House Republican leadership has made an issue of the governor's "selective sense of urgency" in addressing global warming and illegal immigration. Stated a press release issued yesterday by House Speaker's office:

In today’s Richmond Times-Dispatch, Governor Kaine declares about his proposal concerning global warming, “While climate change should be addressed at the national level, I think most governors are just tired of waiting. We can’t wait for the federal government to do it.”

Conversely, on the issue of criminal illegal aliens, the Governor has castigated the federal government for failing to take action -- but has discouraged state and municipal governments from stepping in.

“Suggesting Virginia should take a proactive role on global warming – an issue he concedes is federal in nature – while failing to take action on the growing negative effects of criminal illegal aliens is misguided and insulting to Virginians’ common sense."

The Republicans stumbled onto a legitimate point, but they played it wrong. They tried to stick Kaine with a charge of hypocrisy, which the media predictably ignored, tossing it off as cheap and meaningless campaign rhetoric. But if handled properly, the Global Warming angle could change the tenor of the illegal immigration debate: Illegal immigrants contribute to global warming.

Seriously. I'm not making that up.

According to prevailing Global Warming theory, manmade global warming is the result of the increase in greenhouse gases, predominantly carbon dioxide, in the atmosphere. The rising level of CO2 can be attributed primarily, though not exclusively, to increasing consumption of fossil fuels. Until renewable energy can kick in on a large scale, fossil fuel consumption is a function of two things: the number of people and the level of material prosperity. In other words, the more people there are who consume more stuff, the more greenhouse gases they'll generate.

So, what happens when a poor worker from Mexico (2006 per capita income, about $11,000) moves to the United States (per capita income, about $43,000)? He'll wind up earning four times as much money, consuming four times more stuff and generating four times the volume of greenhouse gases. Bottom line: the massive influx of illegal immigration into Virginia contributes to this country's rapid population growth and surging resource consumption. If Gov. Kaine wants to hold down greenhouse gas emissions, he needs to stem the tide of illegal population growth.

Now, a lot of people won't buy this line of logic. But it seems fully consistent with Gov. Kaine's worldview -- and that of many environmentalists, who believe there are just too darn many people on the planet consuming too much stuff. Given Kaine's missionary work in Honduras as a young man and his sentimental attitude toward Hispanics, I doubt that he will change his position. But other environmentalists and conservationists may be looking for ways to curb population growth any way they can.

Instead of going for the easy "gotcha" moment, worth at best a one-paragraph quote buried deep in a one-day news story, the Republicans should be holding serious discussions with leaders of the environmental/conservation movement to see if they can find common ground.

More Nuanced (Confused?) Thoughts on the Illegal Immigration Issue

Hmm... Seems that xenophobic racists on the right wing of the political spectrum aren't the only ones who have a problem with the behavior of illegal immigrants. Even enlightened lovers of diversity and openness are drawing the line with Rosita Lim Ong Chang.

The 66-year-old woman was arrested Friday and sent to jail for contempt of court, according to Amy Gardner with the Washington Post. She had been cited for illegally boarding tenants in her single-family home near George Mason University, and had failed to comply with court orders to move an illegal kitchen in her basement and notify the county when she leased a room to a new tenant. County officials said she had carved up her four-bedroom home into as many as seven bedrooms, charging up to $800 per month each.

Gerald E. Connolly, chairman of the Board of Supervisors, announced the arrest at a board meeting. Observed Gardner in her story: "Connolly, who is seeking reelection next month, has come under fire for not taking a tougher stand against illegal immigrants." Please note: Connolly is a Democrat. Please note also: His Fairfax County constituents are not poor, ignorant, xenophobic, snake-handlers and know-nothings -- they have about the highest level of education anywhere in the country.

I'm of two minds on this issue. On the one hand, I'm sympathetic to the neighbors, who have complained about noise, upkeep and the number of cars parked out front. I would not like a noisy, unkempt house with cars parked all over located next door to me, not in my quiet, well-tended neighborhood. These are not frivolous nuisances -- unlike the flap-doodle here in Henrico County, where Jimmy and Alicia Fox have been convicted of a misdemeanor for using an old metal bathtub as a back-yard flower planter. (See Bart Hinkle's column skewering the county for trampling on property rights.)

On the other hand, why shouldn't an elderly woman be allowed to take in boarders to supplement her income? What right does Fairfax County have to tell Ms. Chang, whose property taxes have probably escalated way beyond the point where she could pay for them otherwise, to confiscate her income-generating potential?

As the blogger Freedom Works, who brought this article to my attention, notes: "Every American should be outraged at this assault on private property rights and the dignity of the working poor. We have now officially criminalized providing housing for poor people."

Yeah, I kind of agree with that. While I don't think illegal immigrants ought to be here in the first place, that doesn't mean we should abuse them while they're here. Illegals need somewhere to live, and it's not easy finding a place in Fairfax County when you're working for $10 an hour.

To sum up the theme of previous posts: The issues surrounding illegal immigration are complex and cut many ways. People concerned about illegal immigration cross the political spectrum. Not everyone is a racist or xenophobe. Maybe we should update the old joke, "The definition of a conservative is a liberal who's just been mugged" to "the definition of a conservative is a liberal whose next-door neighbor opened a boarding house for illegal immigrants."

Lawsuit Filed Against Prince William Seeking Recission of Immigration Resolution

Today saw the filing of the first of what will likely be many lawsuits challenging poorly conceived and largely unconstitutional local and state immigration policies being urged on cowed politicians by an increasingly vehement minority whose demands will impose significant legal and other costs on their fellow citizens without meaningful corresponding benefit.

Here's the press release describing today's actions:

Latinos in Prince William County and the Woodbridge Workers' Committee filed a lawsuit against Prince William County, its Board of Supervisors, the County Executive and the Police Chief seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to halt its implementation and enforcement of its recently passed anti- immigrant resolution, Resolution 07-609.

The lawsuit was filed by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF), Howrey LLP, and the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs.

On July 10, 2007, the Prince William County Board of Supervisors passed Resolution 07-609 which grants local police broad authority to inquire into the immigration status of individuals, authorizes county-level employees to gather, maintain and share information regarding the immigration status of individuals seeking public
benefits, and may limit county services that immigrants receive.

The lawsuit, filed today in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, claims violations of the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and the laws of Virginia and requests declaratory and injunctive relief to halt its implementation and enforcement. The complaint was brought on behalf of 16 individuals and their minor children as well as the Woodbridge Workers' Committee. The complaint alleges that the Resolution is an unconstitutional attempt to circumvent the federal government's authority to regulate immigration and that it enacts a discriminatory scheme in violation of the Equal Protection Clause to the United States Constitution.

"This ordinance, which expresses the worst instincts of a few in the county, is destroying the basic fabric of community life," said Cesar Perales, PRLDEF President and General Counsel. "Latino children should be taught to trust police. Not to fear they might take their parents away."

Howrey LLP is one of Washington, DC's top firms noted for its strong litigation practice. Partners John Nields, former President of the DC Bar and Christina Guerola Sarchio, incoming Vice President for External Affairs of the Hispanic National Bar Association and immediate Past President of the DC Hispanic Bar, will lead the effort.

Commenting on the case, Sarchio said, "the governing body of Prince William County has taken it upon itself to devise a way to handle immigrants in their community in a way that goes against the U.S. Constitution and federal law. It infringes upon Congress' power to regulate immigration, a power unquestionably reserved to the Federal government. Putting aside the fact that all of our ancestors were immigrants at one point, the action the PWC Board of Supervisors has taken here is discriminatory and illegal."

"This Resolution demonstrates a disturbing animus toward immigrants that contradicts what America is, a nation of immigrants,," said Laura E. Varela, Director of the Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project at the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs. "The Resolution promotes racial profiling and is causing a great deal of fear and unrest among both U.S. citizens and immigrant residents who live in Prince William County."

The Washington Lawyers' Committee, which joins Howrey in the suit, has for more than 35 years provided legal services to address issues of discrimination in the areas of equal employment, fair housing, public accommodations, public education, asylum and refugee rights, and disability rights. The Committee often teams with Howrey on community matters.

PRLDEF has previously brought legal challenges to such legislative acts and ordinances based on violations of the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, and, long-standing federal preemption principles.

Almost every lawsuit brought to date challenging such local ordinances and resolutions has ended in a decision against the locality (or a settlement) that cost tax payers substantial sums in legal fees.

All of these localities,including Prince William, would have done better to put money spent on lawyers into lobbying Congress for meaningful immigration reform and hiring additional staff to increase code enforcement for housing violations, increase culturally competent community policing and other actions designed actually to address the problems identified by some of their local citizens as adversely affecting their quality of life.

Instead, they've embarked on a course which is nothing more than a lawyers' full employment policy and a prescription for community division that has done little more than earn them a reputation for ethnic hostility that will haunt them for decades to come in our increasingly diverse 21st century America.

Holy Toledo! Did Tim Kaine Really Appoint This Guy?

Dr. Esam Omeish is the leader of the Muslim American Society, a front group for the radical Muslim Brotherhood. Timothy M. Kaine has appointed him to the Virginia Commission on Immigration.

Del. Todd Gilbert, R-Woodstock, has asked Kaine to reconsider the appointment, reports Garren Shipley with the Northern Virginia Daily.

"It is unfortunate that the Governor would choose the leader of an organization such as this to represent many the freedom-loving Muslim citizens of Virginia on this important commission," Gilbert wrote. "While the Muslim American Society claims to be the innocent face of peaceful Islam in America, their history and teachings tell a much different story. Unfortunately, it is a story about which all Americans have become much too familiar -- that of the promotion of a global Islamic state."

Don't believe Gilbert. Click on the Youtube video, listen to what Omeish has to say about Israel and Palestine. Is this really a guy Kaine wishes to legitimize? He couldn't have found someone else to represent the perspective of tens of thousands of Muslims living in Virginia?

Update: The Gates of Vienna blog has more detail about Omeish and the internal wranglings of the Virginia Commission on Immigration. (Referring to this blog post, Dymphna wisecracked, "I guess when the Ummah arrives he [Bacon] will have to change his name real quick.")