Trump Half Right on
Immigration, Hispanic Crime
Real estate billionaire Donald Trump put himself
in front of the Republican presidential pack right out of the starting gate
with his charge that Mexican immigrants to this country tend in a
disproportionate degree to be dangerous criminals. His popularity rose because he touched a
very sensitive nerve in the conservative voting public. It is an issue that has been simmering
for quite a long time, and it is one that divides the elite ruling
class—particularly the mainstream media—from a large part of the general
public.
The divide between the rulers and the ruled in
our putative democracy could hardly be on better display than in this passage
from the American Media
InstituteÕs report * on TrumpÕs choice to head up his
campaign in Virginia:
[Corey]
Stewart is no stranger to political events or controversy. He was elected to
the board of fast-growing Prince William County in 2003. He became chairman of
the Board of Supervisors in 2007, and turned his attention to county policies
regarding illegal immigration.
The result
was a county-wide crackdown on illegals suspected of
criminal activity. According to his campaign website, Stewart says:
"Prince William County law enforcement officers turned over more than
7,500 criminal illegal aliens to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) agency."
Riding the
wave of notoriety this effort brought him in Virginia and nationwide, Stewart
in 2012 became the first Republican to announce his candidacy
for lieutenant governor. He led the polls through much of the campaign but
finished third at the 2013 convention.
I would
imagine that most members of our out-of-touch media and those people who still
allow the media to do their thinking for them would read these three paragraphs
and see nothing amiss. But isnÕt
the writer crediting Stewart with a really acrobatic political feat, Òriding a
wave of notoriety?Ó And letÕs take a closer look at how
Stewart gained that supposed notoriety.
He simply encouraged the police in his jurisdiction to check on the
immigration status of people they arrested for crimes in the normal course of their
law-enforcement duties. If it turned out that those arrested were in the
country illegally the police were to turn their names over to federal
immigration authorities for possible deportation. That this is not routinely done
everywhere in the country already is probably a surprise to a lot of people.
For Stewart
to see to it that it be done in Prince William County contributed to the wave
of popularity, not notoriety, that he rode in statewide polling, but the
current Republican Party kingmakers proceeded to kneecap him at their
convention that they used this last time to choose the candidate. That candidate then proceeded to lose
the lieutenant governorÕs race to a Democrat, giving up a key position that their
man, Bill Bolling, had held. In cutting down Stewart the way that
they did they showed how disconnected they are with grassroots sentiment among
their natural conservative constituency.
As I write this, they are poised to go themselves one better by
requiring voters to sign a pledge to vote Republican in
the general election before they can vote in their upcoming presidential
primary.
The Washington PostÕs article on TrumpÕs choice of Prince WilliamÕs Stewart
is still more revealing:
Like
Trump, Stewart is a blunt and outspoken Republican advocate of cracking down on
illegal immigration. A local law he championed that allows county police to
check the immigration status of anyone they arrest made him a pariah to liberal
Democrats and advocacy groups, especially after Virginia officials approved a
statewide law with the same provisions a year later.
What that
sounds like to me is that Stewart has his finger on the pulse of the average
Republican voter, nay, the average American citizen. IsnÕt it a surefire political winner to
be in favor of something that makes so much common sense and only stirs up the
ire of Òliberal Democrats and advocacy groups?Ó They make up only a small part
of the general population, and that proportion might even be growing smaller as
reaction sets in against their Òpolitical correctnessÓ and Òsalad bowlÓ as
opposed to Òmelting potÓ notion of what the country should be. The
Post goes on to say:
StewartÕs
county is a presidential bellwether for Virginia, an increasingly purple state
that is considered a must-win for whoever will next occupy the White House. It
is home to a growing number of Latinos and Muslims who are rallying against
Trump, as well as a sizable number of white middle-class voters, a demographic
that has been drawn to the billionaire developerÕs pledge to fix the economy
and Òmake America great again.Ó
---
Although
unemployment in the county has steadily declined since 2010 (the current rate
is 4.2 percent), the median household income has stayed below $100,000, U.S.
Census Bureau estimates show — considerably less than in neighboring
Loudoun and Fairfax counties. The number of residents collecting food stamps
has increased by 41 percent since 2010.
Prince
William is also home to demographic changes that have unsettled longtime,
mostly white residents who say they are worried about terrorism and other
violent crime. Latinos make up about 21 percent of the countyÕs 430,000
residents, and Muslims are approaching 7 percent of the population.
If you add
in the immigrants from other areas, particularly East Asia, that claim of the
anti-Trump protestor at his Manassas rally that we mentioned in a previous article that forty percent of
the residents of Prince William County speak a language other than English at
home begins to look pretty close to the mark.
As I said in
that previous article, I live near Manassas, where Trump had his rally on
December 2. My walking route to the
nearest supermarket takes me through an apartment complex that was not there
when we moved here in 1983. It is a
rare thing, indeed, when I ever see anyone there who appears to be a native-born
American, either white or black.
Even when I do, they might well turn out to be from Eastern Europe or
from Africa. One can only wonder
who owns the two cars sporting the ÒTrump for PresidentÓ license plate holders
that I have encountered there in recent weeks.
Donald Trump
is the first serious national contender to make the flood of immigration to
this country an issue since Patrick Buchanan in 1996. Buchanan, after winning the New
Hampshire primary over Bob Dole, then proved himself not to be a serious
candidate by not registering any public outrage over the obvious theft of the Arizona primary
by those counting the votes. At
that point the die was cast. If Buchanan could not ride the
anti-immigration issue to victory in Arizona, of all places, and he would not
protest such an obvious vote theft, his political goose was essentially cooked.
But now the immigration
problem has gotten much worse and from the reaction that he is getting from the
mainstream press there is every indication that Trump, the new anti-immigration
candidate, is serious. On the immigration question, he is best
known for that claim that Mexican immigrants are particularly prone to crime
and for his promise that he would have a wall built along the entire border
with Mexico to keep illegal immigrants from that country out.
The charge
and the proposal are both good as attention getters and as an indicator that
Trump, unlike any national candidate since Buchanan, recognizes that we have an
immigration problem. However, he
needs to improve his focus. The
national mainstream media, who all seem to endorse a
more-the-merrier approach to the immigration question, were quick to point out
that, overall, Mexican immigrants have somewhat lower crime rates than the
national average. The main reason
for that, though, is that the inner city crime rate,
particular among young black males, is so high. One of the reasons for that is that
their economic opportunities, both to obtain jobs or to obtain jobs that pay a
living wage, have been foreshortened by competition with desperate immigrants,
many of them Mexican.
That overall
comparison also overlooks the fact that there are two types of serious crimes that are particularly prevalent in the Hispanic immigrant
community, child rape and drunk driving.
An organization in my native state of North Carolina, which has the
fastest growing immigrant population in the country, North Carolinians for
Immigration Reform and Enforcement (NCFIRE), has been particularly good at
documenting the former type of crime in the Tar Heel State. You can see it on their
web site.
The actual
number of sexual assaults on minors is probably greatly understated because of
reluctance on the part of the immigrant Hispanic community to involve U.S. law
enforcement officials in their lives. Inter-family vigilante-style justice is
the preferred way of dealing with such offenses. One may surmise that more such
assaults go unreported than those that do.
There is a certain irony that as a general rule the same people who
champion womenÕs rights also celebrate the greater ÒdiversityÓ in our culture
that immigration brings when, in fact, a big feature of that diversity in the
immigrant Hispanic community is the abuse of women, particularly the newly
nubile ones.
The fact
that the victims of such crimes are also primarily within the Hispanic
community causes them to be overlooked by the general public. That most non-immigrants should hardly
care about it is understandable. If
they or their loved ones arenÕt threatened by it, why should they care? ThereÕs enough going on in the world to
get worked up about. Both the
victims and the perpetrators might just as well still be in Mexico for all they
care.
The
Hispanic Drunk-Driving Danger
Drunk
driving, on the other hand, is a horse of an entirely different color. That problem is barely hinted at on the
NCFIRE page with a little click-on down at the bottom called ÒN.C. Victims
Killed by Illegal Aliens.Ó I began to become aware of the problem from horror
stories I heard from friends in North Carolina about pedestrians and other automobile
drivers and passengers killed or injured by Hispanic drunk drivers. Then some years ago during the Christmas
holiday season I happened into a McDonaldÕs off I-95 just south of Washington,
DC. It was in either Prince William
or the next county down, Stafford.
There on the door of the restaurant was a taped-on sign announcing the
availability of a free ride home for people too inebriated to drive. The notice was entirely in Spanish.
A couple of recent
fatal car crashes on the Maryland side of the District have brought the problem
further into focus. First, in
Prince GeorgeÕs County a drunk Hispanic man collided with a church
van and killed four people while he was attempting to flee from the scene of a
previous accident. A few days later
in Montgomery County another drunk Hispanic
man hit
and killed a young police officer on the side of the road who
had just given a summons to another driver and was returning to his cruiser.
As my former
professorial colleagues might say, this is nothing but anecdotal evidence. It doesnÕt prove anything. Well, as they say on the informercials on TV, ÒWait, thereÕs more.Ó These first two paragraphs from an
article on the Alcoholism Rehab web
site
say it all:
A perplexing federal study says among the Hispanic population,
car accidents are the third leading cause of fatalities – a trend likely
attributed to drunk driving, substance abuse and social factors to maintain an overly-masculine attitude. In fact, the report also showed
that in comparison to other races, Hispanic drivers represented a higher number
of arrests and crashes for driving under the influence. Even more alarming, the
study reported that car accidents are the chief cause of death for Hispanic
young adults.
Issued
by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the report was published
in 1995. At that time, only 9 percent of drivers across the nation were
Hispanic – but overall, 21 percent of arrests for driving under the
influence were Hispanic drivers. Furthermore, Hispanic drivers were part of
automobile accidents more often than black or Caucasian populations. While car
crashes represented the third primary cause of fatalities across the entire
Hispanic population, they were also the second most common cause of death among
Hispanics aged 24-44 years old and the primary cause of fatalities for those in
the younger category of 17 to 24 years old.
The
article goes on to say, ÒOther research statistics show that many Hispanics
arrested for drunk driving may be illegal aliens; many others have been
arrested previously for driving while intoxicated.Ó That is to say, the federal study,
done 20 years ago but never publicized, confirms what those of us who donÕt let
the mainstream media do our thinking for us have noticed. They want us to fear the threat of
terrorism, but the fact is that if we get near a highway almost anywhere in
this country we are many thousands of times more endangered by a drunk Hispanic
motorist, even an illegal—excuse me—undocumented Hispanic immigrant
than we are by any terrorist.
The
articleÕs conclusion would make a good rallying cry for TrumpÕs campaign: ÒOverall,
the Hispanic population represents the fastest growing segment of the U.S.
population, making the study findings extremely important in considering steps
to help save lives and prevent injuries. Study results could also influence
immigration and deportation laws.Ó
One
can only say, ÒLetÕs hope so.Ó But
our fine news media apparently didnÕt find the studyÕs findings to be all that
important. ItÕs just not the sort
of thing that they like to publicize. It wasnÕt from a mainstream publication
that I learned of the most revealing facts in a 2010 National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) report on Hispanic drunk driving, but from a law
firmÕs web site. Their article is
titled ÒLatinos and Hispanics at
Greater Risk of DUI Related Incidents.Ó HereÕs a revealing passage:
The
report cites a 2002 study by Ferguson, Burns, Fiorentino,
William, and Garcia where Latino male drivers from Long Beach, CA were surveyed
to determine if the overrepresentation of DUI related incidents was the result
of lack of knowledge of DUIs and DUI laws or a disregard for them. The results
showed that Mexican-American DUI offenders Òvastly overestimated the number of
drinks required to make them unsafe drivers (8 to 10 drinks).Ó The study also
found that Òfewer than half of Mexican-Americans were aware of the legal BAC
(blood alcohol content) limit in California (.08g/dL)
compared with between 60 percent and 78 percent of Whites.Ó
It takes no
more than a fairly well cultivated sense of self-preservation to feel a sense
of uneasiness over the fact that this is the Òfastest growing segment of the
population.Ó
In fairness,
some members of the mainstream press have taken note of this tendency of
Hispanics to drive drunk. This is
from USA Today:
According
to the University of North Carolina's Highway Safety Research Center, 7.04% of
Hispanic drivers involved in crashes in the state in 2005 were suspected of
driving while intoxicated. That compares with 2.82% of whites in crashes and
2.29% of African-Americans, according to Eric Rodgman,
a researcher at the center.
That rate of
drunk driving connected to accidents of over three times as great for Hispanics
as for either whites or blacks is completely in accord with what my friends had
observed.
Even some
decidedly liberal news organs have acknowledged the problem, but check out the
spin that National Public Radio puts on its report, ÒDrinking and Driving
Plagues Latino Immigrants.Ó
The
influx of Hispanic immigrants to some parts of the U.S. has led to a problem on
the highways. In many states, Hispanics account for a disproportionate number
of drunk driving deaths. In North Carolina where the Latino population has
grown by more than a third in this decade, alcohol-related crashes have become
a leading killer of Latinos. And as NPR's Adam Hochberg reports, community
groups are trying to reverse that trend.
YouÕd think
that they were all out on the highway by themselves. How about the rest of us? One must wonder if Renee Montagne could
have brought herself to mouth those lines if one of her loved ones had been one
of those victims.
The Huffington Post was even worse than
NPR. Here is the title that it put
on its article about that 2010 NHTSA report: ÒLatinos at Greater Risk
of Dying from Driving While Intoxicated.Ó One can also learn from the government report
that they are also more likely to kill someone else, Latino or otherwise, with
their drunk driving, but this fact would appear to be of no concern to the Huffington Post folks. Is it any wonder that TrumpÕs attacks on
the media draw even bigger applause than his talk of building a wall to keep
illegal immigrants from Mexico out?
About that
Wall
As we have
said, Donald TrumpÕs talk of building a very substantial wall on the Mexican
border might be good for its symbolic value, but let us hope that he has a
somewhat deeper understanding of the immigration problem. Such a wall could be built and it would
not surprise me at all if it didnÕt make any more than a small dent in illegal
immigration. That is because a
substantial percentage—which would only grow higher with the construction
of the wall—of the illegal immigrants arrive in the country as legal
immigrants and then become illegal when they stay in the country after the
period of their visa has expired. Probably
the main form of such visa abuse is through the government-sanctioned
guest-worker program that goes by the labels H-1 and H-2.
As widely
abused as a means to swell the illegal immigrant population as these programs
have been, they still enjoy the promotion and protection of the mainstream
American press. We can see that in
the series of articles that I have written on the subject, most recently ÒWrist Slap for Top Alien Smuggler?Ó The press support for these programs,
and their blacking out of the news of their abuses, shows that as a means of
circumventing legal restrictions on immigration they have the full support of
the nationÕs power elite.
So
intentionally poor has national news coverage been of this scandal that it
would not surprise me if Trump were not even aware of it. He has in all likelihood used H-2B
foreign workers in various hotels and resorts that he owns without even knowing
how badly the program has been abused as a means to swell the number of illegal
immigrants in the country.
Up to now,
Trump may be given the benefit of the doubt for not talking about cleaning up
the H-2 mess as part of his immigration message, but that excuse may have
reached its expiration date. Just
two days ago, the growing online publication BuzzFeed broke the wall of
silence on the subject with a powerful article called ÒThe Coyote.Ó The lead writer of
the article, Ken Bensinger, formerly worked for The Los
Angeles Times. It is very hard
to believe that he would have been permitted to write such an article by that
newspaper or by The New York Times or
The Washington Post.
Let us hope
that this BuzzFeed article is the signal of the dawning of
a new day in American journalism, but IÕm not getting my hopes up quite
yet. From the national news media
perspective, it may be no more than a #14 in the Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression, a Òbump and run.Ó My
guess is, unfortunately, that the rest of the press will ignore these
revelations and that we may well have heard the last of the subject from BuzzFeed itself.
As for
Trump, we might begin to judge him as a serious leader and not just a demagogue
when and if he begins to talk about truly serious and effective ways to deal
with the illegal immigration problem such as cleaning up the guest-worker mess. He would make a step in the right
direction by issuing a ringing endorsement for the sort of simple policy
changes that his own Virginia campaign manager has instituted in Prince William
County.
David
Martin
December
31, 2015
* Knowing
how unpopular the American ruling establishment has become, the folks at the
AMI claim not to speak for
it, but
their writings give them away:
The American Media
Institute was founded by veterans of the The
Wall Street Journal and ReaderÕs Digest. Our driving principle is the fearless pursuit of the truly
important stories that you can be the first to break. Our reporters hale from
some of the most trusted news outlets in the country, including: The New
York Times, The Washington Post, Time Magazine, The Los Angeles Times and
others. Our writers and editors earned their stripes in the Establishment
powerhouses—without ever joining the Establishment mindset.
They could have fooled me. And their notion of Òmost trustedÓ
certainly differs from mine.
Home Page Column Column 5 Archive Contact