Kapitol Hill

An Allusion of Assimilation

The residue of the heated immigration debate that swept the country over the past few months has left a culture changing stain on American Society.  No, I am not talking about the guest-worker program or the complicated road to citizenship the Senate bill called for.  Those items actually make sense.  Nor am I talking about the House Bill which makes giving aide to an illegal immigrant -- including food, shelter or health care -- a crime.  That is too absurd an idea to even discuss. 

The one thing that will have a lasting impact on the country's culture, which passed on Capitol Hill was the amendment making English the official language of the United States.  While at first glance one would think this would be an example of why one would use the term "duh!" it echos a must hazardous tone.

The Senate first voted 63-34 to make English the national language after lawmakers who led the effort said it would promote national unity.

But opponents of that specific term argued the move would prevent limited English speakers from getting language assistance required by an executive order enacted under President Clinton. So in a second vote, the Senate voted 58-39 to make English the nation's "common and unifying language."  I suppose this terminology makes the bitter pill easier to swallow.

I say bitter because the motivation behind such a vote strikes at the heart of the negative feelings so many supporters of so-called border security measures harbor.  It seems to me, if one is to really have an honest debate over the fallacy of America's borders, we cannot leave out the poor --in fact poorer border conditions to our north.

While we do not know everything that the Intelligence Community has done to protect and defend Americans, we do know that at least three cases of terrorists with ties to Al Qaeda have been found plotting in Canada.  Perhaps it's easier for them to assimilate into the Muslim mosques of Toronto and Montreal than the Catholic Cathedrals of Mexico City?

Yet is is that term, assimilation, that some proponents of English cite for their vote.

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham said of why he voted, "We are trying to make an assimilation statement."

If  the vote was about assimilation and not aimed at targeting the fastest growing minority sect in America, then why was there no outrage during the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections when Bush, Gore and Kerry alike were going around the country peppering their speeches with Spanish terms?  I don't recall anyone saying what is the President of the United States doing by speaking another language to Americans other than English.  No, when it's time to vote its catering -- when its time to rev up the base of a party -- its casting off.

It seems assimilation is in the eye of the beholder.  If this were not true we would see more effort to assimilate more disadvantage Americans into our society.

Take for example a new study from a team of Princeton University sociology professors , which revealed that race and criminal history continue to play a role in gaining employment.

The study described how participants of the study went on 3500 entry level job interviews.  The researchers found men  who were given the same qualifications and experience, while criminal history was randomly assigned.
The most alarming conclusions  were that white males with criminal records were just as likely as blacks with no criminal history to find employment.  And, the study also found that a criminal record reduced
the number of positive responses from employers by 57% for black applicants but only by 35% for their white counterparts. Latinos also fared better than blacks.

Thus, making it harder for black men with criminal backgrounds to find jobs, urge a decent wage and yes, assimilate back into society.

One could take these numbers if no racial breakdown was given to mean its harder for ex-convicts to get jobs.  That would probably be a truism.  However, the mere fact that whites with criminal backgrounds fared better in gaining jobs than blacks with no criminal records smacks of the inherent injustice that continues to plague our society and makes it harder for anyone  who is disadvantaged and not able to benefit from white privilege to assimilate.

Before we start telling people they must speak English in order to make it in America, how about showing people of color they can succeed in this country if they are Americans. 

Without question English -- speaking English -- is a symptom of success.  It is, after all the language of commerce in this country.  But should ones color be a symptom of failure?

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary each week.  Feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for a new installment.

Si Se Puede!

On Monday President Bush will move the national debate over immigration reform into "Prime Time."  Mister Bush is expected to address the nation in a network carried live Oval Office speech.  Most political observers believe he will reiterate his passion for a so-called Guest Worker program and applaud the Senate for breaking the stalemate over its more consensus minded immigration bill, which includes a "path way to citizenship" for the approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants working and living here in the United States.

What one can find surprising about this speech is, it's not like we need one to generate a fiery debate or to invade the national conscience.  It would seem the hundreds of thousands of immigrant advocates and undocumented workers who have taken over city and small town streets every few weeks have done that all by themselves.

The most recent demonstrations, on May 1st were the biggest so far.  It is estimated a million people or more marched and chanted leading to standing traffic and ogling eyes wondering what the heck is going on.

What is going on is the invisible worker -- the restaurant busboys, the hotel housekeepers, the home construction worker, the farmland field hand, the nanny and the home health aides are coming out of the shadows to protest what they see as the disrespect they've received in the face of  their hard work.  They carry signs saying "humans are not illegal" and "it's not a crime to want the American Dream."  While these high moral cliches may ring faintly of truth, the fact of the matter is, for albeit legitimate reasons, millions have broken the law and by-passed hundreds of thousands of others, who are standing in line seeking their piece of the American Pie.

Does the fact that these undocumented workers are vital to American industry and the fragile economy give them right to cross our borders illegally?  Does the fact that they contribute to the tax system, hold higher moral and work ethical standards than many who were born here give them the right to by-pass America's laws?
Does the fact that until politicians saw immigration reform as a winning political issue they turned a blind eye to companies hiring and often abusing workers  give undocumented workers the courage to stand up and say give me the rights I illegally obtained?

If you listen to the chants in the streets the answer is a resounding, "Si Se Puede" -- Yes I can.

But what about those who don't have the marching support?  Those who are stigmatized by the very event that has sparked the House of Representatives to feel emboldened to criminalize organizations like churches, which assist illegal immigrants.  If we are going to be outraged at the fact millions cross our border illegally and cry for citizenship then we should be even more enraged at the fact thousands who are obeying the law are being denied merely because they happen to be Muslim.

At least ten men have said they have had enough.   The men are  considered permanent legal residents who claim they should have been sworn in as citizens within three months of meeting all the requirements. Instead,  they've been kept waiting for more than a year.

To make their case they have filed a class action lawsuit against the Department of Justice, the FBI and other government agencies.   The plaintiffs allege the delays discriminate against them on the basis of their gender and religious beliefs. They are seeking a court order that they be sworn in as citizens, along with unspecified money damages and attorney fees.

One Muslim advocacy group says there are possibly thousands of Muslim men in the same boat and say if they were not Muslim they would've been sworn in long time ago.

Could our embedded prejudices against Arabs and Muslims because of September 11th be the reason? 

Perhaps.  But what are we to make of that?  Are we truly living up to the high American standard if we are going to selectively decide who  meets the muster of being  an American citizen?   And how can we  spend months and network airtime discussing the possibility of  rewarding millions  who actually broke the law, and ignore those who crossed their t's and dotted their i's?

If we can see the value in allowing undocumented workers to pledge their allegiance to America, can't we also see the value of  ensuring those who actually are documented and dedicated to America's cause get their slice, as well?

The answer has to be a thunderous, Si Se Puede -- Yes I Can!

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for the next column

Nothing Like Saying I'm Sorry

Nothing seems to make those who commit atrocities feel better than saying I'm sorry well after the fact.  Due to a number of local ordinances, companies here in the United States have to research their financial backgrounds to conclude whether they benefited from Slavery.  Not surprisingly many of them find that they have and in an act of  empathy often set up scholarship funds at Histocially Black Colleges or pledge to assist an entire class of elementary school students pay for their higher educations.  It is their feeble attempt to make up for 400 years of oppression which directly attributed to them being successful companies today.  In otherwords, I'm sorry for making money off a people's back and often the people's lives.

Now it's France's turn to apologize for slavery.  On May 10th the European country will mark the event.  To announce the ocassion, Junior Minister for Cooperation Brigitte Girardin said, "Together we must reflect, with courage and clarity, on the past -- yes, France, as well as other European countries, definitely profited from the trade in humans."

The Minister made those remarks while standing on the shores of the Goree Island, Senegal.  Those who know their history will note Goree Island is the symbol of the African Slave Trade.  Over the course of three centuries until 1848, thousands of African slaves passed through Goree Island's "Gate of No Return", just off the former French colony's capital, Dakar, to board slaving ships, mostly headed to the Americas.  In all, estimates suggest between 11 million and 12 million slaves were shipped from Africa by European slavers.

Should those who are now the decendants of those kidnapped people now feel good about this public omission of guilt and sympathy?  Hardly, especially when saying I'm Sorry does little to devoid society of the institutional flaws, which continue to hinder those people from the full invitation to live free and equal.

Secondly, it seems far too easy to apologize when what is needed is evidence of lessons learned and an active attempt to not allow those same mistakes to occur again.  While we can be assured the institution of slavery on that grand scale will never exist again, what about other events the world has apologized for.

It was less than 10 years ago that the world stood on their moral high ground and apologized for allowing nearly a million Rwandans to be killed and millions of others to be displaced, raped, tortured and dehumanized.  Yes, the world leaders said they were sorry and pledged to never allow such a thing to happen again.

So what do we now say about the crisis -- America has called it similar to genocide -- in Darfur?

Tens of thousands of Sudanese have been killed and nearly a million more have been displaced, raped, tortured and dehumanized.  The problem at the heart of the matter is simply an unsympatheic Arab Muslim government allowing weapon carrying, government funded militias to ravage the countryside in an organized plan to rid the country of its native African Muslims.

A glimpse of lessons being learned was seen at the United Nations recently where a resolution to send peacekeeping troops into the region to keep the peace is being debated and supported.  A fragile cease-fire agreement between the government and rebel African Muslim forces has sparked the action at the U.N. and most of us who have shaken our heads at previous inaction can only say, "well, it's about time."

Whether the world action will solve the problem and re-stabilize the nation of Sudan and Chad (now being negatively impacted by the thousands of refugees) is still in question.  But without hesitation, what isn't in doubt somewhere down the line the World will find the courage to apologize for the slow moving action on this crisis as well.

It's not enough to say I'm sorry, what we need is results.  While its true one's words speaks volumes, but one's
deeds saves lives.

Kapitol Hill publishes a new commentary every week.  Please feel free to leave a comment and don't forget to check back next week for the next column.