Local View, 8/7: Immigration issue may backfire
It is election time and political candidates are scrambling to find that wedge issue that will get them the most votes. Sadly, beating up on “illegal immigrants” seems to be a favored choice for several Nebraskans running in the next elections, despite their superficial understanding of such a complex issue.
They have latched on to single-minded cliches, such as “secure the borders first,” or “no amnesty” as a substitute for serious and sustainable immigration policy reform. Electoral sound bites such as “enforcement first” or “enforcement only” are an excuse to do little more than ride Homeland Security’s coattails, which, on its own, is already acting on many of these security measures.
They misguidedly attack Sen. Chuck Hagel for standing up, with enormous integrity and at his own political peril, to the most reckless approach to immigration since the 1924 quota law, when Italians, Greeks and Asians among others, were no longer welcome in this country or this state, and nativism rose its ugly head.
More often than not, those who stand against the supporters of comprehensive immigration reform are not doing so out of personal conviction. They are doing it because short-sighted campaign advisers are betting on two segments of disaffected, misinformed and utterly confused American voters to provide an edge in these highly contested races.
The first segment is made up of those suffering from high levels of racial anxiety about sharing the country, the state, the sidewalk or the Constitution with anyone who does not look or talk like them. You know the kind. You’ve seen them waving flags in the small anti-immigrant demonstrations. They write hateful letters to the editor trying to convince us that they are just against “illegal” immigration, a convenient code word for xenophobia and racism.
The second segment consists of a more educated, wealthier, but equally confused public whose views are increasingly contaminated by the strident anti-immigrant rhetoric coming from the candidates themselves — those purposely confusing voters by talking about undocumented workers, drugs, gangs and terrorism in the same breath.
These candidates’ inflammatory rhetoric has an immediate and devastating impact on immigrant communities, emboldening racists and contributing to a climate of generalized fear among hard-working Nebraska Latino families. Just the other day, South Omaha merchants were discussing how their businesses are suffering because many families fear they will be sent back under one proviso or another of these punitive legislative proposals and are saving their money in anticipation of yet another major life-disrupting event.
These struggling businesses are the same that open their doors and offer their tasty enchiladas to elected officials who come to talk about how much they are “a friend” of the Latino community. Only they return to Washington — or the city council or Lincoln for that matter — to cast votes that wreak havoc with that same community. The constant beating up on immigrants is also likely to leave deep scars among the children of immigrants, the majority of whom are U.S. citizens and a major part of the future of this state.
Is their strategy working? Candidates certainly are going across party lines in search of disaffected Americans. But their campaign managers may be guilty of at least two major miscalculations. One is the presence of an increasingly politicized and vigilant immigrant community for whom immigration, as polls are showing, has become a decisive electoral issue.
Latinos as a whole are no longer willing to forgive these unethical politicians in the privacy of the voting booth and are energized to vote in numbers that may surprise them.
The other is that the American public is not stupid and can see through all the posturing that often parades as serious policy-making. The larger share of this public wants to honor the true essence of this country’s political culture and the principles of democracy, equality and social justice upon which is built. They want true and comprehensive immigration reform and do not think immigrants are criminals but hard-working people they have gotten to know as neighbors, parents of their children’s classmates, bank officers or garbage collectors.
Most Nebraskans, Latinos included, are sure to ponder how some of these politicians could have Nebraska’s interests at heart when their irresponsible actions threaten to turn revitalized working class neighborhoods back into ghost towns … when Nebraska employers cannot survive without immigrant labor … when immigrants are creating jobs for all Nebraskans … when a whole generation of young American citizens may grow up to despise the country and state they should love because they will find it hard to forget what it was like when their hard-working parents were treated like criminals.
If recent polls are an indication, candidates who chose to beat up on immigrants during primary season may find their strategy backfiring during the next election cycles.
Lourdes Gouveia is director of the Office of Latino/Latin American Studies and Professor of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of Nebraska at Omaha.
They have latched on to single-minded cliches, such as “secure the borders first,” or “no amnesty” as a substitute for serious and sustainable immigration policy reform. Electoral sound bites such as “enforcement first” or “enforcement only” are an excuse to do little more than ride Homeland Security’s coattails, which, on its own, is already acting on many of these security measures.
They misguidedly attack Sen. Chuck Hagel for standing up, with enormous integrity and at his own political peril, to the most reckless approach to immigration since the 1924 quota law, when Italians, Greeks and Asians among others, were no longer welcome in this country or this state, and nativism rose its ugly head.
More often than not, those who stand against the supporters of comprehensive immigration reform are not doing so out of personal conviction. They are doing it because short-sighted campaign advisers are betting on two segments of disaffected, misinformed and utterly confused American voters to provide an edge in these highly contested races.
The first segment is made up of those suffering from high levels of racial anxiety about sharing the country, the state, the sidewalk or the Constitution with anyone who does not look or talk like them. You know the kind. You’ve seen them waving flags in the small anti-immigrant demonstrations. They write hateful letters to the editor trying to convince us that they are just against “illegal” immigration, a convenient code word for xenophobia and racism.
The second segment consists of a more educated, wealthier, but equally confused public whose views are increasingly contaminated by the strident anti-immigrant rhetoric coming from the candidates themselves — those purposely confusing voters by talking about undocumented workers, drugs, gangs and terrorism in the same breath.
These candidates’ inflammatory rhetoric has an immediate and devastating impact on immigrant communities, emboldening racists and contributing to a climate of generalized fear among hard-working Nebraska Latino families. Just the other day, South Omaha merchants were discussing how their businesses are suffering because many families fear they will be sent back under one proviso or another of these punitive legislative proposals and are saving their money in anticipation of yet another major life-disrupting event.
These struggling businesses are the same that open their doors and offer their tasty enchiladas to elected officials who come to talk about how much they are “a friend” of the Latino community. Only they return to Washington — or the city council or Lincoln for that matter — to cast votes that wreak havoc with that same community. The constant beating up on immigrants is also likely to leave deep scars among the children of immigrants, the majority of whom are U.S. citizens and a major part of the future of this state.
Is their strategy working? Candidates certainly are going across party lines in search of disaffected Americans. But their campaign managers may be guilty of at least two major miscalculations. One is the presence of an increasingly politicized and vigilant immigrant community for whom immigration, as polls are showing, has become a decisive electoral issue.
Latinos as a whole are no longer willing to forgive these unethical politicians in the privacy of the voting booth and are energized to vote in numbers that may surprise them.
The other is that the American public is not stupid and can see through all the posturing that often parades as serious policy-making. The larger share of this public wants to honor the true essence of this country’s political culture and the principles of democracy, equality and social justice upon which is built. They want true and comprehensive immigration reform and do not think immigrants are criminals but hard-working people they have gotten to know as neighbors, parents of their children’s classmates, bank officers or garbage collectors.
Most Nebraskans, Latinos included, are sure to ponder how some of these politicians could have Nebraska’s interests at heart when their irresponsible actions threaten to turn revitalized working class neighborhoods back into ghost towns … when Nebraska employers cannot survive without immigrant labor … when immigrants are creating jobs for all Nebraskans … when a whole generation of young American citizens may grow up to despise the country and state they should love because they will find it hard to forget what it was like when their hard-working parents were treated like criminals.
If recent polls are an indication, candidates who chose to beat up on immigrants during primary season may find their strategy backfiring during the next election cycles.
Lourdes Gouveia is director of the Office of Latino/Latin American Studies and Professor of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of Nebraska at Omaha.
Copyright © 2002-2008 Lincoln Journal Star. All rights reserved.