State’s Immigrant Underclass

We shouldn’t be surprised at the abysmal education figures (“L.A. Workers Held Back by Low Education Rate,” Feb. 5) because the government’s immigration policies have created an underclass by design. “Family reunification” immigration sounds admirable; however, the real meaning is that no standards of employability are applied to legal immigrants using that provision, even basic literacy. About one-third of current legal immigrants have not graduated from high school--300,000 per year. That number doesn’t count those among illegal aliens, who total more than 8.7 million nationwide.

California’s economic success relies on high-tech jobs requiring a well-educated work force. However, the state already has too many unskilled workers, as shown by elevated unemployment in low-skilled jobs. It’s doubtful that California’s economy can survive the costs of supporting such a massive welfare state of imported poverty. For example, the UC regents just voted to provide in-state tuition to illegal alien students--a taxpayer subsidy of $11,000 per student per year, even though the state must borrow billions of dollars to pay its bills.

Skilled, successful people vote with their feet, as they leave the state looking for a place where their tax dollars are spent more wisely.

Brenda Walker

Berkeley

*

I am a teacher at an LAUSD “immigrant magnet school” and work with the children of recent immigrants. This article only solidified my belief that we are creating a continuing cycle of potential high school dropouts with our educational policies. I see eighth-graders who have trouble alphabetizing eight words in English. What can I say to the students other than “this is real important for you to learn”?

Are these students going to graduate from high school? Probably not. Will they end up like their parents in a low-skilled job? Probably so. Why don’t we put more emphasis on the basic skills or, heaven forbid, trade schools to teach these students a trade that they can make a living with? It works in Europe; why not here?

Mark Storhaug

Pacific Palisades

*

“Crowded Living in California’s Open Spaces” (Feb. 4) is yet another article about poverty and crowded living conditions for farm workers--as their advocates demand more governmental assistance. And once again, in what has become the politically correct euphemism, these people are described as “first-generation immigrants.” I ask you, how many of these people are here legally? When did it become politically incorrect to refer to an illegal alien as just that--illegal?

You state that “census figures show that crowding in rural areas continued to rise in the last decade, even as the government increased border surveillance.” Is anyone confused as to the reasons for this? Well-meaning citizens actually provide aid to illegal aliens as they sneak across the border on their way to health and dental benefits, jobs and subsidized education. Is there any wonder why parts of California are being described as having Third World conditions?

What’s next? Tax-subsidized housing in gated communities? When will we stop encouraging people who scoff at our laws? When will voters look beyond the convenience of having a cheap farm labor source and imagine a future when all Californians live in Third World conditions and our environment resembles the tragedy which is Mexico’s?

Pamela Wright

Pasadena

*

The emergence of shantytowns throughout California, populated by impoverished immigrants living in Third World conditions, surely calls for reexamination of America’s immigration policies. Corporations push for mass immigration of unskilled and impoverished workers because paying low wages to them leads to increased corporate profits.

Other results of such immigration policies, such as rising poverty rates and overcrowding, merit consideration as well in the immigration debate.

Christopher S. Edwards

New York City

*

Your article describes the wretched living conditions of Latino immigrants in rural California. Several families are described as living together in one small shack because none can afford to pay the rent alone.

One sentence stands out: “She remembers the time when even a farm worker’s salary was enough to pay the rent.”

The federal government doesn’t seem to understand the most basic rule of all. Wages are governed by the law of supply and demand. High immigration and frequent amnesties create a surplus of workers, so wages drop. This may be good for agribusiness, but it creates a huge, starving underclass. Why don’t legislators connect the dots?

Lorrie Hall

Duxbury, Mass.