Why some Latinos will boycott the 2010 Census
Rev. Miguel Ángel Rivera (Image by New America Media)
My new article, published today at New America Media, deals with a boycott of the 2010 Census promoted by a handful of Latino religious and immigrant leaders. They’re asking their constituents, and particularly undocumented immigrants, to refuse cooperation with the Census to pressure the White House and Congress to move forward on comprehensive immigration reform. As envisioned by the Obama White House, immigration reform would include a path to legal status for the nation’s 12 million undocumented immigrants.
Thus, the Census boycott’s motto– “Before you count us, legalize us.”
Most mainstream Latino leaders, however, are pleading for everyone to cooperate with the Census, arguing Latinos, as the nation’s fastest-growing demographic, have too much at stake, in terms of dollars and political clout, to exclude themselves. As for immigration reform– it’s better to lobby for it within the system and be patient, they say, than to stage a disruptive boycott.
Initially, the boycott, pushed in particular by Rev. Miguel Ángel Rivera, who heads the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders, received only passing attention from newspapers (the first major coverage of the boycott appears to have been an April 15 story in the USA Today).
But lately, the plan has gained momentum, particularly in Boston, where, as The Boston Globe reported earlier this month, the boycott movement has taken root in the large and too often overlooked Brazilian immigrant community. My story checks in with the Boston-area Brazilians, and points to other areas of the country where the boycott might catch on, such as Los Angeles, where veteran leftist activist Nativo Lopez has signed on.
Ironically, the boycott campaign, created by immigrant leaders, dovetails neatly with a longstanding goal of right-wing immigration hardliners– to exclude undocumented immigrants from the decennial Census. As Mark Krikorian, a well-known immigration restrictionist, points out at the National Review online, organizations working for tougher immigration laws have repeatedly and unsuccessfully mounted legal actions to exclude those who entered the country illegally from the Census.
For Krikorian, their inclusion unfairly inflates the power of districts with heavy Latino populations, since permanent residents and immigrants here illegally are counted in the apportionment of districts. On the other hand, others argue a failure to account for undocumented immigrants would result in inadequate federal resources for schools, as well as other state and local services.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Your post is admirably old-school objective. What’s your opinion?
I don’t have one.
I’ll give an uninformed Anglo opinion — this boycott sounds like the definition of shooting yourself in the foot. In theory, if the 2010 Census records another rapid increase in the number of Latinos, that will put more pressure on legislators to legalize undocumented immigrants, or do something other than build walls, as a matter of political course. Especially if, as in 2000, a lot of gains are made in areas that traditionally were not entry points for immigrants.
That’s the stance of the mainstream Latino orgs, such as National Council of La Raza, Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), etc. However, I would point out that the one weakness in the argument for working with the system is that since the last major immigration reform (under President Reagan) over twenty years ago, not even George W. Bush, who arguably should have been able to tame the right, has been able to push through a path to legalization for the undocumented, as he tried to do in his second term. (And this was after the Census had shown Latinos had become the most numerous minority group).
The Obama White House’s stated support for a path to legal status for the undocumented will get a shot in the arm if the Census documents a big Latino demographic explosion, but arguably, emerging Latino communities already helped him win the 2008 election (Colorado, Nevada, etc.), and still there has been no payback in terms of immigration, as promised.
So there is this frustration that immigration’s a politically risky policy issue everyone always punts on.
In response to another comment. See in context »This is interesting, all the facets of this story are. That’s about it. I do have opinions on other things, like cauliflower.
[...] From: TrueSlant.com [...]