The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Conventional opinion holds that our economy and entire industries could not survive without low-wage foreign labor, both legal and illegal. Looking at the work force that picks our fruits and vegetables, it seems like common sense.
But it is no more logical to argue that the American economy cannot survive without a steady supply of cheap foreign labor in the 21st century than it was to argue that the economy of the antebellum South could not survive without slaves. When slavery was not an option, the economy of the South and the technology for producing cotton had to change. The economy organized itself in response to the values that we chose for ourselves as a nation.
Now we must decide whether we are a nation that requires a continual flood of hardworking, low-wage peasants, or whether we plan to build a nation in which all workers have livable wages that enable them to purchase homes and live in dignity without taxpayer assistance.
In the debate regarding the recent Bush announcement to legalize illegal workers, we confront a basic question: Do we really need these workers?
Employers obviously want cheap foreign labor, and many of them have built businesses that have grown dependent on it. But this is not the same thing as saying that America needs this cheap labor.
It is critical in this debate that journalists and the public are perfectly clear about who is answering this question, what their credentials are, and whether they have a political or economic incentive for their answer.
I have seen many articles in which it is reported, as if it were a well-established fact, that we need these workers, and the proof is in their continual arrival. But neither legal nor illegal immigration is connected to the economy. Even during recession and high unemployment, the number of immigrants coming has remained unchanged.
Advocacy groups such as La Raza and the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund are major proponents of this myth. These organizations are lavishly funded by corporate money, and they do excellent work on behalf of our Hispanic population. But it is also quite likely that they represent the financial interest of their donors, who want to import more low-wage workers and new consumers. They are neither objective nor informed authorities on whether we really need these workers.
The same can be said about the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Civil Liberties Union, or any of the organizations representing immigration lawyers. Immigration lawyers have a huge financial stake in continuing the present policies of mass immigration. Although often quoted, none of them is unbiased about whether we need these workers.
Posted by Suzanne at February 17, 2004