WASHINGTONBecause of the debate over immigration reform, the word Hispanic became a stigma in the eyes of many Americans over the last two years. How ironic then that 10 million Hispanic voters played such a crucial role in last weeks presidential election. They voted for Barack Obama by a 2-1 margin, giving him a decisive push in four statesFlorida, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexicothat he wrested back from the GOP.
Hispanics have tended to side with the Democrats, but never by this large of a margin. According to 2004 exit polls, President Bush obtained 44 percent of the Hispanic vote in his re-election bid. One would think that by almost any measureupward social mobility, church attendance, marriage patternsHispanics would be a dream electoral target for a party that champions enterprise, self-reliance and family values.
But the GOP this year did not seem interested. Even in the wake of the immigration debate, Latinos hardly organized in any meaningful way to fight backexcept for those May Day demonstrations in 2006 and 2007. There was nothing predetermined in their support of Obamaas the Democratic primaries clearly showed. And yet, even accounting for the fact that Hispanics, like many other demographic groups, wanted to punish the current administration and were eventually seduced by the candidate who courted them intensely, the shift in their vote is astounding. It is as if the relentless anti-immigration voice on the right managed to turn millions of Hispanics who were not illegal immigrants into a community-conscious force acting in fear of a perceived threat. This fear even produced the irony of California Hispanics voting for the center-left of the political spectrum in the general election while siding with the right on social issues, as shown by their vote against Proposition 8the anti-gay marriage initiative.
Politicians will now begin to look closely at some important trends among Hispanics. I dont mean the obvious fact that they represent 15 percent of the population and by the year 2050 will probably make up one-quarter of the nation. Almost 4 million Hispanicsnearly one in 10are financially well-off, according to the U.S. Census, and about 40 percent are middle class. This is a not a small achievement for people whose beginnings are, for the most part, quite humble. Treating them as alien to the mainstream American experience and culture is an act of political suicide.
This past year took care of some of the myths that emerged during the immigration debate. The number of illegal immigrants coming into the U.S. has dropped by about half, in no small measure due to market conditions -- which is the way immigrant flows usually work. When they are in high demand, they come in flocks. When demand goes downas has been the case in agriculture, construction and other industriesthey stay home. If the welfare statefree public education, access to health carewere the main attraction, the flow would not change so dramatically from one year to the next. Which is not to say that migrants who want to live off the rest of society are not imposing an unacceptable toll on it. But that is ultimately a case for profoundly revising the welfare state, not for stigmatizing all immigrants.
In the last four decades, the anti-immigration cause has gone from being championed by the left to being mostly championed by the right. There used to be a guest-worker program called bracero in the United States. It was instituted in 1942 but killed in the 1960s because of labor union objections. That is quite fitting, since unions tend to act as protectionist guilds that fear competition and people whom they do not control. Cesar Chavez, the famed Hispanic union leader, himself opposed that guest-worker program.
It is time to move beyond hysteria and start to look at Hispanics with a more open mind. In a radio address given in 1977, Ronald Reagan mocked the illegal alien fuss, asking himself: Are great numbers of our unemployed really victims of the illegal alien invasion, or are those illegal tourists actually doing work our own people wont do? If only in the interest of political survival, those who claim to idolize the Gipperthe same guy who in 1986 legalized almost 3 million Hispanics, many of whom were driven by fear to vote for Obamashould think again.
|Alvaro Vargas Llosa is Senior Fellow at The Center on Global Prosperity at the Independent Institute. He is a native of Peru and received his B.Sc. in international history from the London School of Economics. His Independent Institute books include Global Crossings: Immigration, Civilization, and America, Lessons From the Poor: Triumph of the Entrepreneurial Spirit, The Che Guevara Myth and the Future of Liberty, and Liberty for Latin America.|
(c) 2008, The Washington Post Writers Group
The erosion of national boundariesand even the idea of the nation stateis already underway as people become ever more inter-connected across borders. A jungle of myth, falsehood and misrepresentation dominates the debate over immigration. The reality is that the economic contributions of immigration far outweigh the costs.