SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
border
What is the Progressive Working-Class Policy on Immigration?
That we don't know the answer to this question is the first problem that must be addressed.
Dec 10, 2024
So what is the progressive working-class policy when it comes to immigration?
I don’t know the answer and neither does anyone else, because there isn’t one. Why is that?
To date there has been no serious effort to bring together the leaders of labor unions and immigrant workers centers to discuss common approaches to immigration that speak to the needs of all working people.
Further, and perhaps even more importantly, there has been no sustained educational dialogue at the local level that brings together immigrant and non-immigrant workers to discuss their hopes, fears, and desires.
To be sure there are widely shared negative positions: Opposition to separating immigrant families; opposition to creating mass detention centers; and opposition to forcibly expelling undocumented workers who are working hard and obeying the law. But there is no broad-based discussion, let alone agreement, on what a progressive working-class policy should include.
This is a disaster for progressive politics. For without addressing what is perceived widely as an immigration crisis, the field is left open to demagogues who want to divide and exploit workers for political gain.
Elements of a Progressive Working-Class Policy
There are several proactive and positive avenues to developing new progressive immigration policies. The first is the need to rebuild Latin American economies so that residents of those countries can find secure and sustainable employment near home. As one labor leader told me last week, we need an immediate multibillion-dollar Marshall Plan for these countries so that their people do not need to risk life and limb to come to the U.S. for incredibly low-wage jobs.
Unless a working-class approach to immigration is developed, progressive politics will become increasingly alienated from working people, and the right will make greater and greater inroads into the working class by promoting a politics of fear and resentment.
Making these changes is a tall order, but the root cause of the migrant crisis needs to be identified and discussed again and again. People are fleeing violence, dictatorships, and collapsing economies that U.S. financial assistance can help to rectify, and one could argue, that Wall Street’s wealth extraction and U.S. foreign policy maneuvers helped to create.
There is also reason to believe that non-immigrant workers increasingly support a path to citizenship for undocumented workers. In researching my book, Wall Street’s War on Workers, we uncovered a remarkable change in the attitudes of white members of the working class.
The Cooperative Elections Study, which has over one-half million respondents, asked the following highly charged question on immigration in 2010 and again in 2020:
“Do you favor or oppose granting legal status to all illegal immigrants who have held jobs and paid taxes for at least three years, and not been convicted of any felony crimes?”
In 2010, only 32.1 percent supported granting such legal status. By 2020, those who favored a pathway to legal status jumped to a remarkable 61.8 percent.
These working-class respondents, however, also want more enforcement on the border. In 2020, 72.6 percent were in favor of “increasing the number of border patrols on the U.S.- Mexican border.” This is a 5 percent increase compared to those who supported this statement in 2010.
Working people who are citizens want to see a fair and just path forward for the millions of law-abiding undocumented immigrants who are already here. But they don’t want open borders or mass unauthorized immigration.
This is not just a white worker phenomenon. Hispanic voters also seem to support a firmly policed border. That can be deduced from the enormous change in voting patterns in South Texas. Among 14 mostly Hispanic counties, Trump won 12. In 2016 he won only five. And Trump, to be sure, in the last campaign increased his focus on stopping the flow of immigrants even while threatening to deport all undocumented workers.
An Educational Model
In the 1990s, the Labor Institute—which I direct—conducted dozens of workshops that brought together environmentalists and oil and chemical workers to discuss climate change and the regulatory elimination of toxic substances. The workshops created an educational base in both groups for the idea of Just Transition, a set of policies to help workers and communities deal with the job dislocation that was likely to result from efforts to reduce toxic chemical production and the use of fossil fuels. It also led to new organizations that brought together workers and community members, such as the Just Transition Alliance and the BlueGreen Alliance.
A similar model should be created today bringing together immigrant and non-immigrant workers in joint workshops to share with each other their concerns and hopes, and to discuss joint policies on immigrant reform.
If ever there was a time to start an on-going dialogue, this is it.
There’s no guarantee that such an educational model will, on its own, produce progressive working-class immigration policies. But it is highly doubtful that a new common direction can be built without listening to rank-and-file immigrant and non-immigrant workers. Workshops can provide a safe and productive space to frankly consider and evaluate alternatives.
One thing is certain. Unless a working-class approach to immigration is developed, progressive politics will become increasingly alienated from working people, and the right will make greater and greater inroads into the working class by promoting a politics of fear and resentment.
If ever there was a time to start an on-going dialogue, this is it. Not doing so would be just another sign that progressives are writing off the working class.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In 'Massive Escalation', Texas Sues to Shut Down Faith-Based Shelter for Helping Migrants
"If the work that Annunciation House conducts is illegal—so too is the work of our local hospitals, schools, and food banks," said the nonprofit organization.
Feb 21, 2024
A faith-based migrant aid organization that's operated in El Paso, Texas for nearly five decades said Wednesday that Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton ordered it to turn over documents about its work earlier this month—but that a lawsuit filed by Paxton has now made clear that his true goal is to shut down the group's network of shelters.
Annunciation House, which provides food and housing for refugees and undocumented immigrants, received an order from the Consumer Protection Division of Paxton's office on February 7, demanding that it turn over documents including legal service referrals, identifying information about asylum-seekers and migrants the group helped, and applications for federal funding. The organization was given one day to turn over the documents, and Paxton provided no explanation for the demand.
A request for an extension was denied by the state, and Annunciation House asked a court for a restraining order to grant it more time, as well as requesting that the court rule on which documents it had to hand over.
On Tuesday, Paxton announced he was suing Annunciation House, saying that given the group's "flagrant failure" to turn over the documents, his office "may terminate the business's right to operate in Texas."
"The [Office of the Attorney General] lawsuit seeks to revoke Annunciation House's authorization to do business in Texas and asks the court to appoint a receiver to liquidate their assets," said Paxton.
Annunciation House said that Paxton's statement made clear that his "real goal is not records but to shut down the organization," adding that the attorney general's office "has stated that it considers it a crime for a Catholic organization to provide shelter to refugees."
The group noted that "there is nothing illegal about asking a court to decide a person's rights," as it did following the February 7 request, and pointed out that public services across the country also provide aid to migrants and refugees.
"The attorney general's illegal, immoral and anti-faith position to shut down Annunciation House is unfounded," said the group. "Annunciation House has provided hospitality to hundreds of thousands of refugees for over 46 years... Annunciation House's response to the stranger is no different from that of the schools who enroll children of refugees, the clinics and hospitals who care for the needs of refugees, and the churches, synagogues, and mosques who welcome families to join in worship."
"If the work that Annunciation House conducts is illegal—so too is the work of our local hospitals, schools, and food banks," said the group.
Despite the organization's well-established record of helping to ensure refugees have temporary housing—work that it said "helps serve our local businesses, our city, and immigration officials" as well as Annunciation House's guests themselves, Paxton suggested the group's officials are "worsening illegal immigration" and facilitating human smuggling.
"The Office of the Attorney General (OAG) reviewed significant public record information strongly suggesting Annunciation House is engaged in legal violations such as facilitating illegal entry to the United States, alien harboring, human smuggling, and operating a stash house," Paxton claimed.
Jerome Wesevich, a lawyer with Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, which is representing Annunciation House, expressed shock at the "aggressive" tone of Paxton's rhetoric about the nonprofit.
"These are church ladies," Wesevich toldThe Texas Tribune of the volunteers who help run Annunciation House's shelters. "He's using documents as an excuse to shut down a religious organization he doesn't agree with."
Paxton's lawsuit and threat to shut down the group follow the Texas government's attempt to circumvent federal immigration law by erecting a razor wire fence to keep migrants from crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. The state government has accused the Biden administration of perpetuating chaos and "lawlessness" at the border.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy director of the American Immigration Council, called Paxton's lawsuit "a massive escalation in Texas' war on the federal government and on people of faith who feel called by God to support the stranger."
"There are people of faith around the country, who believe that they are putting the teachings of the Bible (or other religious books) practice by providing services to migrants," said Reichlin-Melnick. "Paxton's lawsuit should send a shiver down the spine of every faith-based nonprofit in the state."
Before shelters like Annunciation House began working in conjunction with the federal government in 2020, he added, the Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement "would just dump migrants off at the bus station after they were released from custody. It was a chaotic mess."
"I was in El Paso in 2018 and at Annunciation House itself, and saw the Border Patrol dropping off migrants there to ensure they had a place to sleep for the night," he added. "If even [the Department of Homeland Security] under the Trump administration thought they were a valuable partner, that tells you how far off base Paxton is."
A hearing on both Annunciation House's request for clarification about what documents it needs to turn over and about Paxton's call for Texas to revoke the nonprofit's registration in the state is set to take place "at some point before March 7," Wesevich toldThe Texas Tribune.
"Within a badly broken immigration system, the humanitarian assistance provided by Annunciation House is one of the few things that works well," said former U.S. Rep. Beto O'Rourke, a Democrat. "We in El Paso stand with the faith leaders and volunteers who lead this work and make us proud to call this border community our home."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A New Low': House Republicans Impeach Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas
"When you have no record of accomplishment to run on... this is what you do," said one Texas Democrat. "You put on a circus."
Feb 13, 2024
In what congressional Democrats blasted as yet another example of right-wingers in the U.S. House of Representatives creating "chaos" because they "simply can't govern," 214 Republicans voted Tuesday to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
Three Republicans—Reps. Ken Buck (Colo.), Mike Gallagher (Wis.), and Tom McClintock (Calif.)—joined all 210 Democrats present in voting against impeaching Mayorkas for his handling of immigration at the southern U.S. border. Two members of each party did not vote.
Democratic President Joe Biden, who is seeking reelection in November, said in a lengthy statement after the vote that "history will not look kindly on House Republicans for their blatant act of unconstitutional partisanship that has targeted an honorable public servant in order to play petty political games."
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) declared that "the 'do-nothing' Republican Party continues to waste time and resources that could be spent working for the American people on baseless, partisan attacks of Biden administration officials as they take up this sham impeachment vote of Secretary Mayorkas."
Jayapal noted that Tuesday's vote came after a failed attempt last week, when only House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) was absent and Rep. Blake Moore (R-Utah) voted with the three Republicans and 212 Democrats who opposed impeaching Mayorkas.
"There is no question that the immigration system is broken—and what the American people want and deserve is an orderly and humane system that properly processes people and modernizes an outdated immigration system that has not been updated in over 30 years to reflect for the needs of our American economy, communities, and families," she said.
As The New York Timessummarized earlier this month:
The first article of impeachment accuses Mr. Mayorkas of refusing to enforce a law that mandates the detention of migrants who lack authorization to enter the United States, and of exceeding his authority to parole those people into the country, allowing them to live and work temporarily while they wait for their immigration claims to be processed.
The second article accuses the secretary of breaching the public trust by misrepresenting the state of the border to lawmakers and hampering the Republican-led investigation into his conduct.
Congressman Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) took to the House floor to condemn the impeachment as a "sham."
"When you have no record of accomplishment to run on... this is what you do," he said. "You put on a circus."
The only other Cabinet member to ever be impeached was William Belknap, who resigned as secretary of war just before the vote in 1876. According to Time, "The Senate went forward with the trial anyway, but fell short of the two-thirds majority needed to convict."
In 2024, the Senate is narrowly controlled by Democrats, and as The Associated Pressnoted Tuesday, "neither Democratic nor Republican senators have shown interest in the matter and it may be indefinitely shelved to a committee."
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement that Mayorkas' impeachment is an attempt by House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) "to further appease" former President Donald Trump—the GOP presidential front-runner who has pressured congressional Republicans to abandon their battle for new border policies so he can campaign on limiting immigration.
"This sham impeachment effort is another embarrassment for House Republicans," said Schumer. "House Republicans failed to produce any evidence that Secretary Mayorkas has committed any crime. House Republicans failed to show he has violated the Constitution."
"House Republicans failed to present any evidence of anything resembling an impeachable offense," he added. "This is a new low for House Republicans."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular