« Bored on the Fourth of July? Try 7-7-7 | Main | What We're Blogging About on Independence Day »
July 04, 2007
Red, White and...No, Just “Red” and White
Pulling back the sheets on the anti-immigration reform outcry
After my last column on immigration ran, I was taken to task, mostly notably by a Pat Buchanan enthusiast, for insinuating that the loudest voices speaking out about illegal immigration belonged to xenophobic, bigoted, uneducated people from rural areas.
Funny, then, that after the latest reform bill was denied a vote in the U.S. Senate, thus leaving us with no solution whatsoever for the next while, the nation’s two leading newspapers published profiles of the folks who jammed Senate phone lines and sent innumerable faxes and E-mails against the measure — and, wouldn’t you know it, they were largely xenophobic, bigoted, uneducated people from rural areas, who were goaded to action by talk radio blabbermouths.
Now, I’m still not saying that everyone who opposed the immigration reform bill fits this description, by any means. You and I both know that neither of Tennessee’s senators does. It seems odd, even, that these wealthy and informed gentlemen would vote against a bill that would have ensured a steady supply of cheap labor to their big business donors. Actually, if you think about it, their Nay votes got them a win-win: they pandered to the activists, and, by killing the proposed reforms, ensured that the unabated flow of cheap labor continues.
The right-wing bloggers and radio personalities are a different sort of animal than is the average person who becomes involved at their invitation. They write and speak in inflammatory tones, but it is unlikely that they themselves hold racist views. (In some cases, the jury’s still out, but I’ll wager that the line is crossed for ratings’ sake, and not due to ideology.) However, one can (and does) stumble upon an astounding number of conversations among average residents of any small town (or, for that matter, a metro area this exact size) where one quickly realizes that latent bigotry is all around, and that it only takes a few incitements by “authoritative” bobble-heads to stir it into a frenzy.
I encourage the continuation of debate on this point, because if I’m right, then only by removing the covering from the ugly disease that seems to linger among us can we begin to heal it; and if I’m wrong, then that’s an even better ending to the story. Just know that I’ll be listening as I continue to research.
When Freedoms Collide
In the past, I have joined politicians as diverse as Ralph Nader and George Voinovich in stating that the democratic community as a whole suffers when campaign fundraising a) effectively excludes many from the process, since large donors are so preferred, and b) uses so many resources that the candidate cannot fully function if in a current elected role (as is almost always the case). Usually the counter-argument brings up the point that (as currently held by the Supreme Court) political contributions equal speech, and thus cannot be forbidden in light of the Bill of Rights.
Bipartisan legislation has been introduced in Congress that would create full public financing of federal elections, and thus eliminate the time constraints and plutocratic effects of the current system. The best part of the proposal, known as the Fair Elections Now Act, is that, like similar measures adopted in a couple of states (Maine being the example that comes to mind), the process is entirely voluntary. That means that candidates can, by first demonstrating a modicum of support by way of small donations, opt for full public funding; or, if they deem large donors more worthy of the First Amendment than the rest of us, they can forego the public funds and make their own way.
Don’t Feed the Homeless; Feed the Meter
Oh, I get it now. It’s unlawful to actually bring food to a downtown public space for the purpose of providing a hot meal to those who can’t afford it, but it’s okay to charge taxpayers to put up old parking meters so that same taxpayers can slip coins into them that will then go to the homeless so they can buy food (or, if unsupervised, support whatever habit that afflicts them). Last I checked, a warm stew was more filling, not to mention tasted better, than a pocketful of coins or a drag off a half-pint or crack pipe.
If only we could form another committee about the homeless problem. It’s the one complaint I have about City Council member Leamon Pierce’s citizen task force: this committee included among its recommendations the forming of yet another committee. Never fear; such a committee has been formed. We can only hope that this one will actually get something done.
[Cross-posted from The Pulse, July 4, 2007]
Pulsations | By joe lance | 09:02 AM