About Me

My photo
Beverly Hills, California, United States
Eli Kantor is a labor, employment and immigration law attorney. He has been practicing labor, employment and immigration law for more than 36 years. He has been featured in articles about labor, employment and immigration law in the L.A. Times, Business Week.com and Daily Variety. He is a regular columnist for the Daily Journal. Telephone (310)274-8216; eli@elikantorlaw.com. For more information, visit beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com and and beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com

Translate

Thursday, September 03, 2015

How Iowa’s Population Mix Might Scramble its High-Stakes Caucuses

National Journal (Opinion)
By Ronald Brownstein
September 2, 2015


The gulf sep­ar­at­ing lib­er­als and con­ser­vat­ives on the volat­ile is­sue of im­mig­ra­tion some­how seemed even wider be­cause their dis­agree­ments were ex­pressed so po­litely dur­ing an af­ter­noon for­um on Sat­urday in this pic­tur­esque lake­front com­munity about two hours North­w­est of Des Moines.

Even without the in­flam­mat­ory rhet­or­ic about im­mig­ra­tion now roil­ing the pres­id­en­tial cam­paign rol­lick­ing through the state, the con­ver­sa­tion cap­tured the for­mid­able dis­tance between the per­spect­ives and pri­or­it­ies of the two sides in the de­bate.

Dur­ing a pan­el dis­cus­sion and sub­sequent con­ver­sa­tion with Mar­tin O’Mal­ley and Lin­coln Chafee, two second-tier Demo­crat­ic pres­id­en­tial hope­fuls, sup­port­ers made the case for leg­al­iz­ing un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rants be­hind ar­gu­ments of prac­tic­al­ity, eco­nom­ic be­ne­fit, and, above all, com­pas­sion. “What im­mig­ra­tion re­form means is pro­tect­ing dig­nity and re­spect,” said Mon­ica Reyes, a col­lege stu­dent brought to the United States il­leg­ally as a child by her fam­ily, just minutes in­to the ses­sion. “We have lived here for many, many years. This is our com­munity; this is our home.”

By con­trast, con­ser­vat­ive act­iv­ist Tamara Scott, the pan­el’s sole strong op­pon­ent of leg­al­iz­ing the un­doc­u­mented, re­peatedly stressed the im­port­ance of main­tain­ing or­der and up­hold­ing the law. “It comes back to we either have law or we don’t,” said Scott, Iowa state dir­ect­or for the con­ser­vat­ive group Con­cerned Wo­men for Amer­ica. “I find it a little iron­ic that people who now want leg­al pro­tec­tion ig­nored laws to get here.”

The for­um un­der­scored the un­ex­pec­tedly com­plex back­drop Iowa’s first-in-the na­tion caucuses in Feb­ru­ary may present for the im­mig­ra­tion de­bate rum­bling through the 2016 pres­id­en­tial race, par­tic­u­larly as Don­ald Trump has surged to the lead in the GOP con­test be­hind prom­ises of a harsh crack­down on un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rants.

Though im­mig­ra­tion has not been a cent­ral is­sue in loc­al Iowa polit­ics, at­ti­tudes about the grow­ing ra­cial di­versity re­cast­ing this once mono­lith­ic­ally white state could add an un­pre­dict­able new ele­ment to the pres­id­en­tial com­pet­i­tion here.

The for­um was part of the UniteIowa cam­paign launched by Kyle Mun­son, a Des Moines Re­gister colum­nist, to en­cour­age re­spect­ful dia­logue on is­sues fa­cing the state—par­tic­u­larly as cam­paign­ing heats up for the caucuses. Sat­urday’s ses­sion drew about 300 people to an aud­it­or­i­um at Buena Vista Uni­versity.

All of the state’s pop­u­la­tion growth has come among ra­cial minor­it­ies. Since 2000, Lati­nos have nearly doubled in num­ber to al­most 158,000. The num­ber of Asi­ans and Afric­an-Amer­ic­ans in the state has each in­creased by about half. The three groups now com­bine for nearly 11 per­cent of the state’s pop­u­la­tion, up from about 6 per­cent in 2000.

Many of those in the room worked for re­li­gious, pub­lic-health, or so­cial-wel­fare or­gan­iz­a­tions re­spond­ing to the demo­graph­ic trans­ition stead­ily re­shap­ing the state. Census Bur­eau fig­ures show that since 2000, non-His­pan­ic Whites have de­clined from about 93 per­cent of Iowa’s pop­u­la­tion to 88 per­cent. Over that time, the ab­so­lute num­ber of Whites liv­ing in Iowa has ac­tu­ally fallen by about 8,000.

As in most places, the change has come even faster among the young, which points to­ward com­pound­ing change in the fu­ture. Since 2000, the num­ber of Iowa Whites young­er than 20 has de­clined by over 88,000, ac­cord­ing to cal­cu­la­tions by demo­graph­er Wil­li­am Frey, a seni­or fel­low at the Brook­ings In­sti­tu­tion’s Met­ro­pol­it­an Policy Pro­gram. Over the same peri­od, the state has ad­ded nearly 77,000 chil­dren of col­or young­er than 20. Non-White stu­dents now com­prise a ma­jor­ity in the pub­lic schools in Des Moines, the state’s largest city.

The change has also been mag­ni­fied in con­cen­trated pock­ets of the state, where em­ploy­ers have at­trac­ted im­mig­rant work­ers to fill loc­al em­ploy­ment needs, of­ten in the phys­ic­ally de­mand­ing meat­pack­ing in­dustry. Storm Lake is one of those places.

Once vir­tu­ally all White, it has been trans­formed by waves of im­mig­rants from South­east Asia (be­gin­ning in the 1970s) and Mex­ico (start­ing in the 1990s), drawn to em­ploy­ment in the area’s two meat­pack­ing and one egg-pro­cessing plants. Just since 2000, non-Latino Whites have fallen from more than four-fifths to just over three-fifths of the pop­u­la­tion in Buena Vista County (which in­cludes Storm Lake), while Lati­nos (mostly from Mex­ico) have doubled from about one-in-eight to one-in-four res­id­ents. Kids of col­or now rep­res­ent the clear ma­jor­ity of the loc­al school sys­tem.

At times, this trans­ition has ig­nited ten­sions.

Patrick J. Buchanan held a rally in Storm Lake in 1996, dur­ing a pres­id­en­tial bid that struck many of the same con­ser­vat­ive pop­u­list and anti-im­mig­rant themes as Trump today. And a massive fed­er­al raid against un­doc­u­mented work­ers at one of the loc­al meat­pack­ing plants later that year split the com­munity.

But in con­ver­sa­tions at the for­um, sev­er­al Storm Lake res­id­ents said they felt it had largely out­grown any earli­er fric­tion. “As the kids have grown up to­geth­er in the school sys­tem and the par­ents have worked to­geth­er … I think the ma­jor­ity of people have been re­spect­ful of every­body and in­clus­ive,” said Pam Bogue, the Buena Vista County ad­min­is­trat­or for pub­lic health, as she stood out­side a booth for SA­LUD, an or­gan­iz­a­tion that ad­dresses health con­cerns for im­mig­rant fam­il­ies.

Emil­ia Mar­roquin, a nat­ur­al­ized cit­izen from El Sal­vador also at the SA­LUD booth, con­curred. She moved to the area 15 years ago from Los Angeles, which she said she left after her hus­band wit­nessed a shoot­ing. “At the time, it was a shock,” said Mar­roquin, a com­munity li­ais­on for the loc­al Head Start pro­gram. “But every­body was very wel­com­ing.” Mar­roquin has two chil­dren in the loc­al high schools, and says edu­cat­ors have sup­por­ted their mul­ti­cul­tur­al back­ground. “They en­cour­age the kids to speak Span­ish at home,” she said. “They really sup­port that be­ing bi­lin­gual is a plus.” Now Mar­roquin is plan­ning to seek elec­tion this fall as the first Latino mem­ber of the loc­al school board.

Mun­son, the Re­gister colum­nist who or­gan­ized the for­um, said the story of Iowa’s re­ac­tion to its im­mig­rant in­flux and demo­graph­ic change has largely fol­lowed the same tra­ject­ory, from con­cern to pre­dom­in­ant ac­cept­ance. “There was more anxi­ety 10-to-15 years ago,” he said. “Now the con­ver­sa­tion has gen­er­ally shif­ted. Now the broad story is say­ing that rur­al com­munit­ies are dy­ing, and … new waves of Iow­ans [im­mig­rants] are re­viv­ing those towns.”

Not every­one in Iowa shares that per­spect­ive, as evid­enced by the loc­al pop­ular­ity of Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Steve King, per­haps the most im­plac­able im­mig­ra­tion crit­ic in Con­gress, whose West­ern Iowa dis­trict en­com­passes Storm Lake. But un­til the pres­id­en­tial cam­paign, im­mig­ra­tion had not played a large role in the state’s polit­ics, and many Iowa GOP lead­ers have pur­sued a more mod­er­ate ap­proach than many of their coun­ter­parts else­where.

Long-time gov­ernor Terry Bran­stad, for in­stance, was one of the few GOP gov­ernors who did not join the Texas-led law­suit that has blocked Obama’s ex­ec­ut­ive ac­tion to provide leg­al status to mil­lions of un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rants. In a sur­vey this spring by the Re­pub­lic­an polling firm Burn­ing Glass Con­sult­ing for a pro-im­mig­ra­tion group, just 29 per­cent of Iowa Re­pub­lic­ans said the un­doc­u­mented should be de­por­ted, while nearly two-thirds said that after meet­ing re­quire­ments and pay­ing fines they should be al­lowed to ob­tain either cit­izen­ship or leg­al status.

But those at­ti­tudes among Iowa Re­pub­lic­ans may be shift­ing, amid a pres­id­en­tial cam­paign in which Trump and rivals—in­clud­ing Rick San­tor­um, Scott Walk­er, Ben Car­son, and Mike Hucka­bee—are all prom­ising a crack­down against not only un­doc­u­mented, but in sev­er­al cases, leg­al im­mig­ra­tion as well. In a late Ju­ly NBC/Mar­ist Poll, 56 per­cent of prob­able Re­pub­lic­an Iowa caucus-go­ers said they were less likely to sup­port a can­did­ate who sup­por­ted cit­izen­ship for the un­doc­u­mented; about one-in-four Iowa Re­pub­lic­ans picked im­mig­ra­tion as their top or second-highest is­sue con­cern in the race (com­pared to just one-in-eight Demo­crats).

At the UniteIowa for­um, Scott ar­tic­u­lated many of the ar­gu­ments en­er­giz­ing con­ser­vat­ives. When im­mig­ra­tion at­tor­ney Kim Hunter ar­gued that new mi­grants eco­nom­ic­ally be­nefited the U.S. by al­low­ing our labor force to re­main young­er than many in­ter­na­tion­al com­pet­it­ors, Scott fired back: “There are a lot of Amer­ic­ans look­ing for work.” And when most pan­el­ists dis­missed Trump’s call for re­vok­ing birth­right cit­izen­ship to the chil­dren of un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rants born in the U.S., Scott in­sisted, “It’s a dis­cus­sion we have to have.”

Gen­er­ally, the ses­sion avoided overt ref­er­ences to the pres­id­en­tial race. But O’Mal­ley, the former Mary­land gov­ernor strug­gling to build sup­port in the Demo­crat­ic pres­id­en­tial con­test, took a clear shot at Trump when he de­clared: “At all times when people are ap­pre­hens­ive about their eco­nom­ic fu­ture, it is easy for char­lat­ans to scape­goat the ‘oth­er.’” After the pan­el, Scott de­fen­ded the GOP can­did­ate, say­ing, “Don­ald Trump would not be res­on­at­ing with in­de­pend­ents, Demo­crats and Re­pub­lic­ans…if there wer­en’t ques­tions that people want answered.”

Like it or not, Iowa in the com­ing months seems destined to be a stage where those ques­tions and an­swers will be hotly de­bated.

For more information, go to:  www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com

No comments: