A Misconceived Border

Three thousand, two hundred kilometers, two thosand miles: that is the length of the United States-Mexico border, an already politically-charged stretch of terrain that could soon be fortified with a 698-mile, two-layered fence if House Bill 4437 becomes law. To the common U.S. citizen, it may seem like this “wall” will alleviate domestic immigration tensions, preventing undocumented workers from entering U.S. soil. In reality, this frail three-foot high metal fence, a product of popular misconceptions about immigration, is unlikely to significantly reduce undocumented immigration and merely serves as a symbol of xenophobia and ignorance.

Most Mexicans do not view crossing the border as a right—if Mexicans believed this, they would be crossing conspicuously, in broad daylight rather than digging tunnels or hiring “coyotes” to smuggle them across the border. Mexicans are well aware that it is the U.S.’s sovereign right to enforce its laws; these immigrants continue to cross only because they have no other choice.

Nevertheless, undocumented Mexican immigrants violate U.S. laws. For an immigrant who just wants to provide for his family, however, violating border regulations is the least of his concerns; it is a matter of survival. When humans find themselves unable to feed their families or to provide them with a dignified life, neither a physical barrier nor the philosophical principles of sovereignty are effective deterrents.

Indeed, for many immigrants that live near the U.S.-Mexico border, life is binational. They often cross the border to work, visit family, and travel. Likewise, legal U.S. citizens near the border also experience this binationalism; many Americans make daily visits to Mexico for various reasons such as purchasing medication and leisure. Binationalism does not mean that people believe they have the right to violate border regulations; rather, it is an acknowledgement of the shared lives and history of the people on both sides of the border.

When these immigrants cross the border, they often face hostile communities characterized by racial profiling and sporadic immigration raids, among other pressures. While some have family members here, most find themselves alone and homeless, unable to work legally and prone to exploitation, constantly in fear of being trapped by immigration officials or groups such as the infamous Minutemen. Even those who seek to obtain their permanent residency in the United States inevitably face a burdensome amount of resistance from the Department of Homeland Security, facing a procedure that spans an average of 14 years.

Because they were not born in the U.S., undocumented immigrants are denied the rights and privileges of U.S. citizens. Immigrants, however, are a part of the U.S. and participate in the country’s social contract. Once here, immigrants constantly interact with American citizens, contribute to the national GDP, and fulfill jobs most Americans do not want but that are nonetheless critical for maintaining our way of life. The labor of undocumented workers has even become crucial in rebuilding areas affected by Hurricane Katrina. Most importantly, immigrants are human beings and are thus entitled to basic human rights.

But let us abandon these philosophical arguments and look at the economic facts. Although immigrants send important remittances to Mexico, this figure adds up to roughly 0.3 percent of America’s GDP (which includes remittances to all of Latin America). This is unlikely to have a significant impact on the American economy. On the other hand, these remittances increase the standard of living in Mexico, which, in the long run, reduces immigration.

Moreover, undocumented workers pay sales and property taxes just like American citizens. In addition to paying federal taxes, most undocumented immigrants also contribute billions of dollars to Social Security—a benefit they often cannot later claim due to their lack of appropriate documentation. In short, while immigrants are a fiscal drain in states with large undocumented immigrant populations, they are also net contributors to the federal treasury.

Many believe that this “wall” will halt the flow of undocumented Mexicans into the US—but they are wrong. A fence already exists along much of the border, and, despite being increasingly militarized since 1993, there has been no observable decrease in the flow of undocumented workers.

Because the fence will not stop the flow of undocumented immigrants, its construction is purely symbolic. By erecting this fence, the U.S. distances itself from Latin America, shunning and disassociating itself from its neighbors. The fence translates into a slap in the face to all Latin Americans and is a setback to the rapprochement the U.S. and Mexico have experienced in recent years. This symbolic barrier signifies nothing less than xenophobia and ignorance about the socio-cultural history of the U.S. and its Latin American immigrants.

In order to effectively combat undocumented immigration, the U.S. should examine the situation of emigrants within their home countries. America needs to look outside its boundaries and analyze what is forcing people away from their home countries and drawing them here, instead of trying to solve the issue by merely constructing another fence and hoping the problem will go away.



Glenda M. Aldana ’07 is the vice president emeritus of Harvard-Radcliffe RAZA. Marisol Pineda ’08 is the Latinas Unidas education chair. Beatrice Viramontes ’08 is the president of Harvard-Radcliffe RAZA.