Two days ago, I posted about a city contract that was up for renewal, that funds a day-labor pick-up site on the East End.
There were a number of comments to that post from folks who felt Polimom was being judgmental, or even sloppy with the post — accusations I don’t often hear. One local blogger even wrote:
I first found this story via a link from a local blogger [he means Polimom] under the headline “Is Houston helping support illegal immigration?” which struck me as careless at best and inflammatory at worst. (I am thinking best-case scenario here based on the blogger in question is a very reasonable person.)
Polimom agrees that the title for the post was careless, and quite likely inflammatory — though not deliberately so, because it wasn’t meant to agitate, but question (as I often do). I felt (and still feel) that if a government activity supports or increases the wider problem of illegal immigrants, particularly in this political climate, it’s hypocritical. Polimom thinks that we’re in the situation we’re in largely because of governmental schizophrenia toward this economic puzzle.
Ultimately, though, Polimom was uncomfortable about what I knew of the organization itself, how the funding is used, and what, exactly, the site does…. and said so.
So this morning (after a protracted game of phone-tag), I talked to the organization itself. Specifically, I talked to the person quoted in the KHOU.com piece: Marc Levinson at Neighborhood Centers, Inc. (Their website is being rebuilt, but this link gives some description.)
Turns out that Houston put out an RFP (Request for Proposal) to attempt to deal with several problems, primarily relating to traffic and safety hazards that were cropping up in the neighborhood. Neighborhood Centers, Inc. was awarded the contract largely because they are already deeply involved in the neighborhood and community, and the proposed East End Worker Development Center fit neatly into the existing, comprehensive neighborhood model.
Yesterday, the Houston Chronicle’s report mentioned that the contract funds are federal — part of Houston’s CDBGs, and according to Mr. Levinson, the money is all spent on the building’s lease and staffing.
Workers / laborers sign in, and wait inside, with AC, coffee… off the street corner. Potential employers come in and tell the staff-person what type of skill-set they need for their job, and the staff person facilitates the interaction and negotiations. (And FYI – if an employer does what we often read about, and doesn’t pay the worker what was agreed, the Center will intercede, saving the police time and money that would otherwise be spent on a complaint.)
So — that’s where the money goes, and that’s how the program came into being.
There was something else, though, that came out of the conversation for Polimom. As regular readers here know, I was recently a juror in a case involving an illegal immigrant. Part of the problem with the alibis and explanations was that there was absolutely nothing to prove (or disprove) where this individual worked, what he did, how he did it… nothing. Had there been such a center in Rosenberg, however, this man would have been far more credible, because there would have been documentation supporting his work (or even presence) at a particular location. There would have been support (or not) for his explanation for carrying his knife (as a common work tool).
He might not have gone to prison. (Yes, obviously, he might still have, but Polimom would have been happier with more information.)
Last thing (at least from me): I asked point blank whether, if a magic wand were waved and suddenly everyone had legal status, Mr. Levinson felt there would still be a need for such a center, and his answer was yes, because the need to hook up people with work on one-off (or even longer) jobs wouldn’t suddenly go away. Not only that, but the larger effort of this organization — including senior and children services, a charter school, and (more recently) assistance for Katrina evacuees serves the entire community.
So — do I still think this is a lousy political climate for this contract renewal? Yup. Do I think they are increasing the illegal immigration problems? No — because they did not create the situation, nor its associated problems. They, with help from the city, are relieving them.
This is a bit of an improvement. Your last post was needlessly provocative and uncharacteristic of you. I think you’re missing the point with the whole “political climate” thing. The problem isn’t government schizophrenia. The problem is that government is hampered from taking realistic stances on many issues because of extremists. So that’s why we have a stupid, pointless embargo on Cuba, dumb drug laws, no health insurance and all this ridiculous panic over immigration. Meanwhile, nothing gets fixed and we are more vulnerable to terrorism than ever. I’m afraid that the way you dealt with this issue just added to the problem and I was very disappointed.
Holls,
I wish I could agree with you that the government is being hampered by the extremist positions, but (imho) that’s much too forgiving of them.
I’ve long seen their problem (the gov’t) as this worsening tendency to pander to the various conflicting interests. I think the gov’t has actually encouraged this dangerously divided country with its continual knee-jerking to positions that change daily, depending upon who is screaming loudest at the moment. We have myriad, self-defeating programs and policies at every level as a result of this see-saw, and it has compiled over time.
Yes, I agree that we’re going at things like “The War On Drugs” in the wrong way, and while it hasn’t been a topic here much, I expect that if we were exploring it at the moment, there would be a lot of discussion and disagreement. That’s a good thing… as long as we keep the channels open.
There is such enormous heat surrounding the illegal immigration situation, it’s getting harder (from my perspective) to write about it. People are polarized, and as it gets worse, sensitivity about issues increases.
I spent much of yesterday evening moderating some extremely hostile comments on a different post (from the national language angle) that I put up at the Chronicle, too. I was naive, racist, or plain dumb, depending… but those are (for the most part) strangers to me who obviously were venting without even reading what I wrote.
Here on this blog, though, people are typically thinking and discussing (as opposed to screaming, as sometimes happens over at the chron). You’re going to disagree sometimes — no two ways about it. Everybody does (except AC, who drinks in what I say undiluted… so I’m much more careful than you may realize… lol….).
I have an interesting readership here, politically — typically, moderate folks from both sides of the current political divide. Sometimes, nobody likes what I’m thinking or saying, and when that happens, I count on them saying so.
That’s awesome for us all — not only because we are able to explore where we may diverge, but also because others who are thinking about things can see why a differing opinion is held, and how it came to be.
When (as in this case) it looks to y’all as if I’ve lost my mind — a mind you hitherto thought I had, btw — I hope you’ll always ask me where I’m coming from. You may still disagree at the end of a discussion, but the journey almost always yields something of value.