Legislation has been approved in California to make illegal aliens ineligible for public social services, public health care services, and public school education at elementary, secondary, and post secondary levels. News of the passage of this legislation has been received with mixed feelings not only in California, but throughout the United States. Due to the unconstitutional nature of the California law, it is necessary that it be thrown out.
Generally, this initiative prohibits state and local government agencies from providing publicly funded education, health care, welfare benefits, or social services to any person that they do not verify as either a U.S. citizen or a person legally admitted to the Unites States. The measure also requires state and local agencies to report suspected illegal immigrants to the INS (Immigration and Naturalization services) and certain state officials. (Reno 1994)
The basic problem with proposition 187 is that it undermines the fact that humans have certain rights that cannot be taken away. In 1982, the Supreme Court ruled that education is guaranteed to all children in the United States and that denying public education to illegal immigrants is unconstitutional ( Time p.46). For someone to deny these rights to another human is racist. By enacting this proposition social tension will rise, crime will increase, and the economy of California will be crippled. If this proposition is implemented the nation will be divided by civil unrest. The problems from which California will suffer are not worth the money that it can save by implementing proposition 187Õs objectives.
Citizens advocating the proposition claim that illegal immi…
… middle of paper …
…Illegal Aliens, Ineligibility for public Services.Ó November 30,1994
URL:gopher://secstate.public.ca.gov/00/pub/ proposition- 187.arg.
“States and Illegal Immigration.” Wahington Post 17 Sep. 1994.
Stern, Gary ÒACLU Statement Denouncing Republican Task Force Bill on Illegal ImmigrationÓ. Feb. 10, 1994; URL:gopher://pipeline.com:6601/00/newsroom/02-10-94. Unz, Ron K. “Sinking Our State.” Reason Nov. 1994.
Verhovek, Sam. “Stop Benefits for Aliens? It Wouldn’t Be That Easy.” The New York Times 8 June 1994.
Whitehouse.Ò Personal Security: Crime, Illegal Immigration, and Drug Control.Ó, August, 1993; URL: /.gopher://cyfer.esuda.gov.oo/ace/hot.topic.links/budget 95.txt.
Wilson, Pete. “Washington Must Act Now On Immigrants.”
Washington Post 6 May 1994.
Young, Martin. “Immigration Damage Control.” The Fresno Bee 19ÊNov.1994, Home ed.
Foreign Aid Programs are a Great Investment
The United States has proven again and again that foreign aid can be a worthwhile venture. While donating less than one half of one percent of the federal budget towards economic and humanitarian assistance, the United States has been able to establish trading markets for the present as well as the future. Between 1990 and 1993 alone, U.S. exports to developing nations increased by $46 billion (“Ten Questions Commonly Asked About U.S. Foreign Assistance Programs”). This dramatic change would not have happened if it were not for foreign assistance programs. Trade opportunities do not simply materialize, the groundwork must first be put in place. Through business code reforms, the strengthening of commercial banks, and the setting of reasonable tax and tariff standards, USAID helps to create an environment that will attract American investment and trade. Take for instance, the example of South Korea. During the 1960s and 70s, South Korea was one of the United States’ prime targets for foreign assistance. The U.S. now exports more to South Korea in one year than was donated during both the 1960s and 70s. Because of this, the two have become extremely close allies, and are now two of the best trading partners in the world (“Ten Questions Commonly Asked About U.S. Foreign Assistance Programs”).
Likewise, financially aided agricultural research in developing countries has resulted in millions of dollars of improved yields for U.S. farmers (“USAID Research Helps U.S. Farmers” ). By 1992, two-thirds of the United States rice acreage was planted in varieties acquired through agricultural research funded through foreign assistance programs. With this technology, the United States is now the world’s second leading rice exporter (“Agricultural Research”). As another example, while in Latin America, USAID invested less than $5 million in the research of greenbug resistant hybrids. By 1989, economic gains to the United States had reached almost $400 million. Due to a recent breakthrough, U.S. foreign assistance research has lead to a rust free wheat crop. Kansas and Oklahoma alone are expected to save over $90 million in harvest costs (“Agricultural Research” ).
Furthermore, according to USAID at the International Development Conference on January 1995, 200,000 U.S. jobs were created through foreign aid programs. This was possible because USAID requires “nearly all foreign aid be spent on U.S.