Death Trap Compromise

The immigration deal reached between the White House and a bipartisan group of senators on Thursday that goes to the floor of the Senate this week will exacerbate an immoral enforcement approach at the border that has been in place for more than a decade. On its face, some casual observers might think the compromise is fair to immigrants, with a path to citizenship for 12 million undocumented immigrants and a guest worker program. In fact, the deal cuts back on family immigration, the legalization plan is flawed, the guest worker provision reinvents the bracero program, the point system is stupid (more on that later today) and none of the so-called “pro-immigrant” provisions are triggered until border enforcement is redoubled, including construction of 200 miles of vehicle barriers and 370 miles of fencing. The problem is that the fence and barrier idea has been tried; it won’t work, and the result will be countless more unnecessary deaths.

Beginning in 1994, the Clinton administration implemented Operation Gatekeeper, a strategy of “control through deterrence” that involved constructing fences and militarizing the parts of the southern border that were the most easily traversed. Instead of deterring migrants, their entry choices were shifted to treacherous terrain—the deserts and mountains. The number of entries and apprehensions were not at all decreased, and the number of deaths due to dehydration and sunstroke in the summer or freezing in the winter dramatically surged. In 1994, fewer than 30 migrants died along the border; by 1998 the number was 147, in 2001, 387 deaths were counted, and the past fiscal year 451 died.

Given the risks, why do migrants continue the harrowing trek? The attraction of the United States is obvious. The strong economy pays Mexican workers, for example, eight to nine times more than what they can earn in Mexico. For many, it’s a matter of economic desperation, and some observers think that migrants would continue to come even if we mined the border. In a sense, they do not have a choice. Besides, jobs are plentiful here, because a variety of industries rely on low-wage migrant workers. The migrants may know the risks, but figure that the risks are outweighed by the benefits of crossing.

Motivations for continued migration call into question the likely effectiveness of the expansion of Operation Gatekeeper if the goal is to discourage border-crossers. Beyond the economic situation in Mexico, a socio-economic phenomenon is at play. The phenomenon is the long, historical travel patterns between Mexico and the U.S., coupled with the interdependency of the two regions. Migration from Mexico is the manifestation of these economic problems and social phenomena. The militarization of the border does nothing to address these phenomena. Instead, it is killing individuals who are caught up in the phenomena.

Understanding the economic and social situations in Mexico and the United States and the nature of their relationship enables us to formulate better approaches to border crossings and migrations. A real solution would address push-pull factors and the economic needs of both countries. As a nation, the United States ought to do the right thing, especially when it comes to Mexican migrants given our long historical ties with Mexico. We have demonized the undocumented, rather than see them for what they are: human beings entering for a better life who have been manipulated by globalization, regional economies, and social structures that have operated for decades. The right thing to do is immediately to develop a system to facilitate the flow of Mexican migrants to the United States who are seeking employment opportunities. Given the economic imbalance between the two nations, we know that the flow will continue—legally or otherwise. By regularizing the flow, we ease pressures at the border (thus freeing up personnel to concentrate on the serious challenge of looking for terrorists and drug smugglers), address the labor needs of employers, bring the undocumented out of the shadows, and end unnecessary, immoral border deaths that have resulted from current enforcement strategies. But we have to do this in a manner that provides the workers with respect from other Americans and hope for membership. Thus, an immediate path toward earning permanent residence after a period of time and paying a financial penalty for entering illegally become critical ingredients of a fair, humane approach.

Our nation has a choice between the militarized death trap or a path to enfranchisement for these individuals on whom we have depended upon for generations. Our economic, social, and national security interests demand that we pursue the moral choice.

bh