Proposition 187's Ugly Legacy

For all intents and purposes, Proposition 187, the magnum opus of the xenophobic crusade against Hispanic illegal immigrants, is dead, slowly wasting away in the California court system. What has happened since the time this heinous document was thrust into the face of all Latinos, whether they are citizens or not? Surprisingly, very little. Despite the outright fear and racism inherent in Proposition 187's rhetoric, Hispanics as a whole have been slow to react to it. This silence has allowed Proposition 187 to spawn continued support of its message in its brief and tumultuous life, most recently in the form of the affirmative action debate in both Texas and California, and in a more national sense, in terms of the passive acceptance of Proposition 187's ideals in the shape of California Governor Pete Wilson's failed presidential bid. It is not that Proposition 187's ideals are being glorified, but that the eerie silence with which it is being met can only spell more trouble in the coming years for Latinos in this country. What must be done, especially in this presidential election year, is to reflect on Proposition 187's genesis and legacy and use the polls as a platform to end this silence once and for all.

On the surface, Proposition 187 is merely a piece of literature that restates obvious laws already documented. Illegal immigrants, since they are not citizens, are already not entitled to federal monies and programs. Thus, Proposition 187 appears to be pretty harmless. The proposition itself, however, is alarming. Section 5 states that so-called "suspected" persons should be denied social services such as food stamps and Aid to Families with Dependent Children unless they provide adequate verification of their status in the state, in the form of a visa, green card or social security card. Section 6, which deals with public health, and section 7, which denies education to "suspected" illegal immigrants, contains similar language. The use of the word "suspected" borders a very fine line. To put it another way, in a California with Proposition 187, I would be forced to carry my so-called "papers" in my pocket at all times to prove my status. I, a Mexican-American U.S. citizen, would have to literally subject myself to constant verification of my "status," while other law-abiding citizens would go about their daily business unscathed. I would risk the misfortune of becoming "suspected," not because I'm un-American, mind you, but because of the color of my skin. It would be naive to think otherwise. If this isn't racism, I don't know what is.

Most critics would argue that Proposition 187 is old news, and I would agree. Its legacy, however, continues in a variety of ways. Many other states, including predominantly Hispanic ones such as Arizona and Florida, have contacted California in an effort to emulate Proposition 187. It has also fueled the current debate over affirmative action, with many states stripping away long-existing and beneficial affirmative action laws. Proposition 209, the legislation aimed at doing away with affirmative action in California, and the recent Hopwood vs. Texas case, which struck down the University of Texas Law School's affirmative action program, are only two instances.

Most recently, an e-mail arrived in my inbox, bringing to my attention something very little known. Deeply embedded within House Resolution Four, the welfare reform bill passed this summer, is a stipulation that cuts federal student aid to legal immigrants by grossly inflating their income. Using a device called "alien sponsor deeming," sponsors' assets (which immigrants need in some cases to gain legal entrance to the United States) are added to the immigrant's finances to create an overinflated income. According to the e-mail, projections show that under the welfare bill, $21 million in Pell Grants and $31 million in loans will be lost for legal immigrants in the California university system alone. In California, 32.6 percent of all Pell Grant recipients are legal immigrants. In Florida, 16.6 percent are. Oddly enough, the Senate version of the bill (S.269) restricts even more aid to legal immigrants. This could spell big trouble for legal Hispanic immigrants in college.

This is not to say that these instances are totally directed at the Hispanic population, but considering the negative effects that these measures would have on the Hispanic community, the very fact that they are even mentioned suggests a contempt for the Hispanic population. Surprisingly, little is being said about this contempt. Unfortunately, little will probably be done.

Why are these things happening to the Latino community? To answer that question, one should ask "Why is the Latino community letting this happen?" In this presidential year, the candidates are paying very little attention to Hispanic issues. Other than Wilson and Pat Buchanan, both also-rans, no presidential candidate has tried to address the issues inherent in Proposition 187 and its aftermath. The reason why the candidates have successfully skirted the issue lies in one simple fact: Hispanic, on the whole, do not vote. Despite being a considerable minority (and in some states,such as California, the largest minority), Latinos do not go to the polls in large numbers. Of the number of Hispanics eligible to vote, only a paltry 35 percent registered to do so in 1992 and only 30 percent did so in 1994, according to statistics compiled by the U.S. Department of Labor. This is in comparison to a national average of 68.2 percent in 1992 and 62.0 percent in 1994. The number that actually voted is even smaller. In 1992, a presidential election year, only 28.9 percent of Hispanics eligible to vote did so. In 1994, the year we saw a Republican Congress for the first time in 40 years, only 19.1 percent of eligible Hispanic voters actually did. Clearly, the pain inflicted on the Latino community is much its own doing.

Since the election is next week, and it is a time to reflect, I ask all the Latinos and everyone else to greatly consider their role in this. As Latinos here at Harvard, we are in a situation that affords us both the means to see the atrocities being thrown at us and the platform to persuade our hermanos to take action. By all means, encourage your family and your friends not only to vote, but to vote intelligently. Call your Mom, your Dad, your Abuelita, anybody at home and also here to consider the issues before us and let them Know about the repercussions of our silence. I also ask that you become more vocal to the despicable acts happening to us, and alert not just our friends and family, but also everyone else, that we are not going to take this lying down. Also, since this is not just the responsibility of Hispanics, I ask everyone to become better educated about these issues, to find out how your officials running for office feel about these issues and to vote accordingly. These issues are not singular to Hispanics. If such an unhealthy attitude towards policy continues, who knows what, or who, is next? If you are eligible, vote and let our officials know that this cannot continue any longer. We have weathered Proposition 187. Can we afford to weather its aftermath?

Sergio J. Campos is a first-year living in Matthews Hall.