NewWorld / toward immigration reform

Caring for Our Neighbor
In 2000, the US Census Bureau estimated that 8.7 million undocumented immigrants were residing in the United States; today, the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group, estimates that the number is somewhere between 11.5 million to 12 million. Pierre Georges Bonnefil, an attorney who specializes in immigration law, talks to Traces about ways to deal with this new reality. 
(This article is the third in a Traces series on issues at the center of the American Presidential Campaign.)

by Santiago Ramos

Such big numbers, however, tempt the mind into thinking in abstractions. The truth is that each of those 12 million or so immigrants is a person who, like the rest of us, is propelled by the desire for happiness and well-being, a desire which has led them to our country. The arrival of an other, an “alien,” is often taken as a threat, or as a cramping of our freedom; the truth is that a new person in our midst, who comes asking for help, provides an opportunity for discovering a genuinely new human experience, another human heart, and as a consequence enriches our own life. The solution is not to promote a program of either “assimilation” or “multiculturalism,” but to meet the immigrants exactly where they stand–helpless in front of the most basic needs in life. From them, we can be reminded of our own ultimate helpless with regards to the most important things in life.
The political purists and hardliners with clear demands (“Deportation for illegals,” etc.) are often seduced by abstraction, and thus promote unrealistic solutions to the immigration issue. A workable solution has to start from real premises.
 The first thing to know about Pierre Georges Bonnefil is that he is himself an immigrant. Born in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, he emigrated at age 7 with his parents and obtained a green card in the United States, spending time in Costa Rica, Iowa, and Puerto Rico. Before graduating from St. John’s University School of Law in 1988, he spent several years working for various refugee placement organizations, including a stint with Volunteers in Service to America and the US Catholic Conference (Americorps VISTA), resettling Cuban refugees. He has served as an Attorney General Honors Attorney with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and is currently a member of the Epstein, Becker & Green firm in New York City, where he represents clients in immigration court, before various offices of the USCIS, the Department of Labor, and the Department of State, and acts as Immigration Counsel for the French Consulate General in New York, among other tasks. His legal background, along with his personal experience, put him in a unique position to judge the realities of immigration and naturalization policies in the United States.

TRACES: The immigration issue takes a paradoxical shape in the United States–supporters of stricter immigration laws say that curbing immigration is crucial to conserving national identity and cultural heritage. Their opponents would object by claiming that the identity and cultural heritage of this country is that it is a nation of immigrants, for immigrants. What truth is there in either view?
Bonnefil: This country was built by the blood, sweat, and tears of immigrants, from the Mayflower on.
What makes this country so wonderful is the incredible number of people from all over the world that chose to live here. Look at someone like Colin Powell and his achievements–his family is from Jamaica. On the other hand, illegal immigration is a big challenge, and it will not just go away. It is causing a number of problems–taxing on the welfare system, hospitals, etc. At the same time, the beautiful part is that immigrants are also supporting our economy in many ways, as well as the economies of their home countries. I come from a strong social work background, but I was also a prosecutor. I have a perspective on both sides. I don’t see in my mind–and I’ve struggled with this–a simple solution. There will have to be a meeting of the minds of many different peoples, experts on the immigration field, to come up with some sort of program that legalizes the people who are here. We can’t put them all on airplanes and trains and send them back to their respective homes. Some of these people have been here for 30 years. They worship in our churches, send their kids to our schools... Many of them, unfortunately, don’t have Social Security numbers–there is a lot of money that they could be putting into our pot, and helping our Social Security crisis. Turning a blind eye on it will not make it go away.

We should probably make a clear distinction between the two sets of problems involved with illegal immigration: economic problems and cultural problems. First, what are the economic drawbacks?
First of all, undocumented immigrants most of the time don’t pay taxes. They go to our schools, but don’t pay taxes. They can’t get health insurance, so they go to the emergency room, which is also funded by taxpayers. The court system and the police system are being taxed. At the same time, a growing number of individuals, fearful of crackdowns, are going further underground. The current system of regulation does not give an incentive for undocumented immigrants to leave–if you are here in unlawful status for more than six months, you are barred from re-entering the country legally for three years, and if you’ve been here unlawfully for one year and one day, you are bared from reentering for ten years. So people are not leaving, or they are leaving and re-entering illegally. 

Among cultural problems, the ability to speak English is most pronounced.
When I came here, the first thing I wanted to do was learn English and to lose my Haitian accent. I sincerely believe that if you’re living here, you should learn English. What happens is that the undocumented status generates illegal cultures–life underground, little communities. People in these communities don’t venture out to learn English and to do what they have to do. They speak their own language all day long, and for them there is no need to learn English because everything they need can be obtained within their community. I think that to be a resident and citizen of this country, you need a basic command of the English language. I always push my clients to learn the English language.

How do we counteract the formation of these little communities, and promote integration?
A lot of these people have no choice. They are hiding. Where do you hide? You hide at home, with people you know, with people who look like you, talk like you. A Chinese immigrant will go to Chinatown instead of Westchester because of money and because of the comfort of their own language and culture. It is hard to counteract these communities because it is human nature to seek comfort. However, when they start making money, and obtain the requisite legal documentation, they will branch out to other areas and integrate with people from other walks of life. They will start living their American dream.

Some critics of immigration also claim that even legal immigration has grown too much, and that this will cause a very dramatic change in the demographics of the country. The US Census Bureau predicts that by 2050, Hispanics will number 98.2 million, or 24% of the total population. Are people right to be concerned?
You can’t change the demographics. They are what they are. It has a lot to do with the legal and illegal migration from Latin America in the past twenty or so years. We’ve already seen the creation of Hispanic media, magazines, television commercials, etc.–and don’t forget the vast importance of Hispanic voters in these elections. If this is a problem, you’re not going to solve it by putting these people in planes and buses and making them go away. That is never going to happen–it is not realistic. Are we to be concerned, why would we?

What are realistic solutions? Education? Amnesty?
We already provide free public education–that’s what the Supreme Court proclaimed in the Brown v. Topeka Board decision. The problem arises when an undocumented immigrant wants to study beyond high school. There, the situation is more complicated. Not too long ago, a young lady from Trinidad came to see me. She had overstayed her visitor’s visa and went through not only high school, but college and law school as well. She had taken the bar and passed it, and she’s a member of the New York Bar, but because she doesn’t have a social security number or any sort of work permit, she cannot work. She has done everything she possibly can do, and she came to me and said, “Pierre, please help me. What can you do for me?” I had to look her in the eyes and say, “I can’t do anything for you. Apart from maybe a private bill, there’s nothing that I can do.”

Did she return to her country of origin?
No, she’s been living here since she was 4 years old and she has nowhere else to go. She did not even know she was an undocumented alien until high school–a sad realization for many members of our society. The only home they know is this one, yet because of choices their parents/guardians made a number of years ago, they are in an unlawful status. They are forced to go underground in the only country they know–a country they call home.

What about amnesty?
This is a difficult issue. The amnesty in the 1980s did not work as well as it could have. Many people could have obtained permanent residence if the program was planned in a more thoughtful fashion. For instance the Special Agricultural Worker (SAW) program. Permanent residence was an a possibility for individuals who had been living in the States for a specified amount of time, within that period of time, could demonstrate that for 90 days they worked on a farm. You can imagine how many people came out of the woodwork, and lawyers and bankers came overseas to take advantage of this program. It created a black market of documents. A lot of cases were denied and a lot were granted; it was a real mess. People are obviously afraid of a new amnesty now for this reason. It is a very fine line. An argument can be made for both sides.

Most presidential candidates balk at using the word amnesty.
Whatever you want to call it, you will have to come up with a program. You’re going to need checks and balances, to say, “This is what we require; you must meet these criteria.” We need a valid document authentication and a screening system. I don’t have the exact solution, but it will have to be in-depth, studied, and with built-in checks and balances. Undocumented immigrants are not going anywhere. They will go further underground if they need to–it is called survival.

What is the highest value that lawmakers should keep in mind when crafting a policy on immigration?
They should surround themselves with people who are experts and know what they’re talking about–grassroots people, organizers, teachers, counselors–people who are on the same ground with these immigrants. Both sides are so diametrically opposed: build a fence, or let them stay. There will have to be a meeting halfway, with some amnesty allowed and some rules as well. There is no way we will be able to please everybody; it is a very divisive situation. The last thing we would  want is an abuse of amnesty, so we should set up a solid program while simultaneously curbing the flow of illegal immigration.