The Issue of Immigration has been a topic of great debate since people can recall. In spite of this, Immigration did not always hold the negative connotation It transmits at the present time. Migration was used as a way to better ones lifestyle and America granted many that opportunity; however, history validates the idea that immigrants have become political scapegoats for financial recessions, unemployment, violence, diseases and the overall failure of America. As a result of these accusations, many fear the Idea of immigration and are the basis for why it possesses a disapproving taiga.
Throughout the last decade many laws and proposals have been designed to deal with the Immigration status, but none have ascended without causing a great dispute. For example, In November of 1994 California voters enacted proposition 187 also given the name “Save Our State”(SO), a measure that banned illegal immigrants from public services, such as non-emergency health care, and public education. Additionally, State workers would have been required to report anyone suspected of being an Illegal immigrant. While illegal Immigration is a problem that needs to be solved, Proposition 187 was not the solution.
Denying Illegal Immigrants basic services prevented children from attending school, and those in need of attention from getting professional medical assistance. What is more extreme is that state employees would have had to report anyone who was suspect of being illegal, the source for such suspicion proclaims racial discrimination. Proposition 187 is racist and discriminatory and therefore impermissible. The argument behind proposition 187 was that If the undocumented individuals were prohibited from using state resources and consequently deported, then Californians financial problems would sappier.
Although in reality the proposition would cause much more harm to California than saving it. For instance, they would have had to use money to come up with a way to verify ones legal status. Additionally denying individuals basic services such as health care services not only puts the individual at risk of catching diseases, but others at risk as well. More confusing, teachers and other state officials would become substitutes for the Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS). In Dalton to this, several states, Like Arizona, looked to Californians Proposition 187 as they try ND create their own anti-immigrant proposals.
As they say, history repeats itself and proposition 187 is the perfect model to prove this theory. Proposition 187 was in 1994, fast forward nineteen years later and it is 2013 and in the news we still see similar stories. For instance, Just recently Arizona offensive law ASSESS was ruled unconstitutional for the reason that it violated the first amendment, because It made “the arrest of [Immigrant] people who tried to look for work In public and those who tried to hire them. Arizona officials said it was simply a matter of public safety, but hat wasn’t true.
The whole point of the law, as stated in its first section, was “to make attrition through enforcement the public policy of all state and local government agencies in Arizona” -? in other words, curtailing the rights of the undocumented in order to drive them out of Arizona. ” (Downed). If people had learned from Californians proposition 187 they would not be wasting their time repeating old patterns. Issues by where laws and more laws have been enacted in order to “help” the immigration condition and end up getting rejected for being unconstitutional and racist.
Currently there are talks about the new immigration reform of 2013 coming out soon and “Whatever immigration deal might be claimed by labor and business, or by Democrats and Republicans, Seen. Marco Rubin of Florida is serving notice it has to go through him. ” (Werner). According to Rubin, they “have made substantial progress, and [he] believe[s] [they] will be able to agree on a legislative proposal that modernizes our legal immigration system, improves border security and enforcement and allows those here illegally to earn the chance to one day apply for permanent stridency contingent upon certain triggers being met. (Slamming). Rubric’s proposal does not sound like anything we have not heard before. The idea is to help the immigration argument; however, the way they go about it seems to always be in a way that is discriminatory. As we prepare for the likelihood of similar proposals to be considered, we have to keep in mind of histories experience with immigration. If Proposition 187 was another moment in the extensive history of immigrant discrimination, then what does not guarantee the fact those other propositions to come won’t fail like that one did.