As the big media rages on about the body county and the concept of a war being unpopular when they give their tailored account of Iraq, a chaotic situation is brewing south of our border. The political unrest and social changes that are occurring will have only stoked the coals of illegal immigration. If those who cross the border without proper documentation, many taking an advantage of our abundant social programs is such an issue, then why isn’t the media machine reporting on this story? Your author does not have answer. His best guess is that the media is incapable to suggest a likely scenario for the future that will impact our political landscape.
The events unfolding have to do with the recent Presidential election in Mexico and the following aftermath. In fact the conditions in Mexico only exasperate an already hot issue. Current President Vicente Fox is unable to seek reelection, having served the maximum number of terms. Fox was seen as a market and fiscal reformer. Fox was ushered in December 2000 on a wave of political anomaly. Fox had campaigned on the National Action Party (PAN). For seventy years Mexico’s volatile and often corrupt government had been dominated by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI). The PRI leans hard to the left in the spectrum of ideas while the NAP was considered center to right.
During the 1990s with the ratification of NAFTA in 1994, a trade pact between Mexico, US and Canada; Mexico was perceived to have the opportunity to become an emerging market. Many in the States cried that the US would become poor while Mexico would grow rich, which became the mantra of H. Ross Perot’s failed Presidential campaign in 1992. Perot’s vision did not materialize. US companies that set up operations in Mexico, which was actually occurring prior to the passage of NAFTA, had already left for Asian countries by the end of the decade.
By the close of the 1990s Mexico’s economic potential had all but evaporated. The country’s peso currency, which has historically been seen as weak, was losing value. Population estimates for Mexico range between 103-104 million with 40% of them living in poverty. Each year it is estimated that there are only 1.2 million new jobs available in the country. With these surroundings and the possibility to send back US dollars, many began to look north.
What has resulted is an estimated 20 million illegal immigrants. Many are believed to be from Mexico and others from Central and South America. If President Fox, the NAP and NAFTA could not put it together then who would? To make matters worse this critical issue was on the heels of a Presidential election. In 2006 the citizenry had two frontrunners to choose from, which consisted of the left-leaning Mexico City mayor Andres Obrador, candidate for the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PDR). The PDR is a hodgepodge of minority parties consisting of socialists and communists. His opposition was Fox endorsed Felipe Calderon of the PAN party.
A tight race would ensue. The Obrador camp claimed voter fraud and ballot tampering following a narrow victory (.58% margin) for Calderon in September of this year. A recount was ordered by Mexico’s Federal Electoral Institute and ruled in Calderon’s favor. Reminding your author of the 2000 Bush-Gore fiasco, Obrador and his supporters refused to recognize the new President. A. month later Obrador established his own Cabinet to counter future decisions and actions taken by Calderon and his staff. There were several incidences of civil disobedience, which in Mexico could prove fatal, following the declaration of Calderon as the new President. Additionally the PAN party was only able to capture 40% of the seats in Mexico’s Congress, which will only guarantee that Calderon will have an uphill battle.
With the supposed reformed Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega winning Nicaragua’s Presidential election just weeks ago, Hugo Chavez holding onto the pilot’s seat in Venezuela, Socialist Evo Morales getting comfortable as Bolivia’s leader and Brazilian President Luiz Lula of the Workers Party winning his spot, no one in the big US media machine is connecting the dots. Hugo Chavez has all but declared himself the incarnation of Fidel Castro and the Latin left’s leader. He sent an international message that stated his displeasure in Mexico’s election results. Unlike Castro, Chavez has something to offer and hold over at least America’s head that being oil. In the case of Morales his country sits upon one of the newest discoveries of natural gas. Both have already or are in the process of nationalizing these industries.
All of these countries cited will prove as potential landmines in years to come. Nicaragua flirted with the Sandinistas before, which produced a floodgate of their citizenry to flee to US. This was followed after the Sandinistas were kicked out and many of those that had exited ushered back in. Now they are expected to return. If that isn’t proof that these government ideologies can’t produce what your author suggesting then the reader must be blind.
Forget the questions surrounding Castro’s health and expected death, whether or not his brother Raul will engage the US in talks, just south of us is the critical issue. Cuba will take millions of dollars and many years to rebuild should they even attempt to pull an about face from the past fifty or so years. Our country continues to fail in addressing illegal immigration. Whether the reader would like to see a wall erected or an attempt to rewrite current immigration laws ala Senators John McCain and Ted Kennedy; no one is addressing the big picture and what is brewing just south of us. Your author envisions waves of illegal immigrants fleeing these countries in years to come. It is true that on the current demand line the need for labor is vertically sloped and the supply isn’t there. This is a valid economic argument and the US was founded on immigration. However in this day and age of national security in the wake of terrorism our borders must be secured and take precedence over any other argument. Unfortunately your author isn’t hearing the concern from others in higher office or of influence.
