Summary of US-Mexico Parliamentary Exchange

12 Comments

by: Jared Polis

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

The meeting with the Mexican Senators and Representatives was very productive. We had four sessions, and during each we all had the opportunity to speak and listen. All three major Mexican parties were represented, with both Senators and Representatives from the PRI (center-left), PAN (center-right), and PRD (left) parties.

The first topic we discussed was border security. Drug and human smuggling from Mexico to the US, and arms smuggling from the US into Mexico, are rampant. Ninety percent of the guns used in drug-related killings in Mexico originated in the United States. The Mexican contingent expressed great frustration with our lack of gun control laws and found fault with that apparently there are gun fairs that operate just on our side of the border basically to cater to Mexican bandits. Our delegation patiently explained the importance of America’s second amendment and why our political constraints often prevent us from doing more to reduce arms-smuggling. Both sides aired their frustrations: Mexico’s main frustration is that the U.S. is the origin of the arms ,, and our main frustration is that several Mexican states have corrupt authorities that have been unwilling to crack down on the drug trade.

The next topic was immigration. We listened to their concerns about the treatment of Mexican nationals within our borders, and since our group was generally pro-immigration reform we encouraged them to speak out on the security risk that the status quo has created.

We discussed the urgent need for comprehensive immigration reform, including requiring all immigrants register to help fight crime and drug-smuggling. You’ll be hearing me speak out a lot on this issue in the weeks and months ahead, and I invite you all to join our rally for comprehensive immigration reform on Saturday, June 13th in Northglenn.

After immigration came trade. On this topic both sides were divided. I’d estimate that about two-thirds of the Mexican delegation (mostly PRI and PAN) were pro-NAFTA and one third (mostly PRD) was anti-NAFTA. Likewise, our delegation had diverse voices but was largely pro-NAFTA. Personally, I think we need to focus on the next phase of economic integration and look toward building an even stronger North American block to compete against Asia and Europe. A rising tide of workplace protection and safety will sweep our region. The European Economic Union pulled in economically diverse countries like Greece, Portugal, France, and Germany and built even stronger protections for workers than we enjoy in our country today. If they can do it, so can we.

The final topic was the environment. Mexico, like the United States, is undertaking several green initiatives to combat climate change. I encouraged the Mexican delegates to continue down the path of sustainable development and warned them that any attempts to take advantage of our new carbon-pricing regime will be short-sighted and backfire in the long-run. Mexico is an oil-producing nation, and understands that it must diversify its energy sector to continue energy leadership.

Just as importantly, I started to forge relationships with Mexican legislators, and will follow up on email with several who I hit it off with. One Senator skis in my district (Vail) and I hope to see him next winter. These parliamentary-level relationships can play a critical role in setting things back on the right track when the normal diplomatic channels suffer breakdowns, as well as allow us to work together on a collaborative vision for the future.

Congressman Jared Polis

12 thoughts on “Summary of US-Mexico Parliamentary Exchange”

Danny the Red (hair) says:

June 9, 2009 at 1:30 am

I really appreciate how much effort you have put in to communicating with your constituents (and the whole state for that matter). I can not express how refreshing it is to hear directly from a legislator on occasion rather than through press releases and spokespeople (though those are important as well).

On to the substance. I am a life long hunter and strong supporter of the 2nd amendment, but I think it is unfair and unrealistic to expect the Mexican government to address our issue at the border with drugs if we do nothing to address guns on our side. Perhaps the issue can be handled in a novel way, maybe the market can be employed by assigning liability to gun dealers for straw purchases? In any case we need to clean our backyard if we are going to ask our neighbors to clean up their backyard.

Log in to Reply
1. Jared Polis says:
  
  June 9, 2009 at 5:42 am
  
  While states like Colorado have closed the “gun show loophole,” Texas has not and there are apparently major gun fairs right on the border, and the gangs come over and buy whatever they need.
  
  I like your idea that rather than completely closing the gun show loophole, maybe Texas could consider assigning liability to vendors will make them think twice about who they are selling to and still allow legitimate collectors to purchase.
  
  Log in to Reply
Steve Harvey says:

June 9, 2009 at 2:14 am

As someone with intimate ties to Mexico, and as a former legal intern at Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network giving legal rights presentations to detainees at the Aurora detention facility, I was very much hoping to make it to your rally on June 13. Unfortunately, I forgetfully scheduled something else for the same time, and can’t make it after all. But thank you for raising consciousness about the need for enlightened (as opposed to blindly belligerent and mutually dysfunctional) immigration reform. Keep up the good work, on all fronts!

Log in to Reply
1. Jared Polis says:
  
  June 9, 2009 at 5:43 am
  
  Hopefully there will be someone there from the blog community to blog about it.
  
  Log in to Reply
Thorntondem says:

June 9, 2009 at 3:39 am

We must find a way to streamline the current process to allow good people who are hard workers that can contribute to our society a way to legally become documented workers and then put them on a path to citizenship. We appreciate your leadership on this issue.

Also, thank you to our delegation for articulating “the importance of America’s second amendment”, and, at the same time being understanding to Mexican concerns about arms coming from the U.S. I really appreciate your thoughtful, reasonable approach to representing us in CD2.

sustainable development! yes

P.S. Love the yellow walls. You are breaking the mold of Washington Politicians! Keep being yourself. Your doing a great job representing my political values: equality for all, labor friendly, energy and development sustainability, civil liberties, individual rights and collective community responsibilities. Keep up the good work.

ThorntonDem

Log in to Reply
1. Jared Polis says:
  
  June 9, 2009 at 5:43 am
  
  Hope you can join us at our event next Sat., If not, see you around soon! 😉
  
  Log in to Reply
DavidThi808 says:

June 9, 2009 at 5:55 am

This country goes bat-shit crazy over immigration every 16 years or so. Last year was one of those times. And historicly, a year later, we then tend to pass good legislation.

One thing I would like to see is that we encourage those that come her to become citizens. Everyone from migrant unskiller labot to Phd candidates at University. Across the board they are above average in work ethic and motivation and we are better off if we keep them.

Log in to Reply
1. Jared Polis says:
  
  June 9, 2009 at 8:18 am
  
  I agree that we want these folks as citizens and that they add a lot to our country. This is one of the big fault lines in the debate. Many on the other side support increasing worker-permits but don’t want them to be on a track to ever become a citizen (e.g, they have to return home after 2 years or 5 years and not come back to the US).
  
  I think that their old country’s loss is our gain and that frequently, immigrants make the very best Americans.
  
  Log in to Reply
2. JO says:
  
  June 9, 2009 at 6:21 pm
  
  Two realities: first, the U.S. is a labor market that (outside of downturns) offers relatively good wages; and second, we have grown dependent on workers, most especially in agriculture, from Mexico.
  
  Where in this picture does formal citizenship come? Agricultural workers pay taxes–at least taxes are withheld–and should be credited with social security payments. But as an economic proposition, it’s unclear to me why citizenship is especially important.
  
  What is much more important (IMHO) is that we recognize our mutual dependence, and that we put a halt right now to the unconscionable exploitation of agricultural workers, whether citizens or not, whether from Mexico or some other country, or from the USA. These two issues are entirely disconnected. As ordinary people shopping in the grocery store (which shields us from knowing too much about how our food got there) we actively participate in this system of exploitation (to say nothing of the dubious practices of food processing from the health viewpoint).
  
  Initiatives like Jared’s are a good start; much more remains to be done, and it depends on the moral imperatives felt by leftists to make it happen. See, there it is again: that word empathy.
  
  Rightists often worry out loud about the country being “overrun” or somesuch. Reality is that when jobs are scarce, as they are now, immigrants go back to Mexico. They came here to find work and to earn money to support their families, not to vote; there’s nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is facilitating their exploitation under the guise of enforcing immigration rules.
  
  You may not be a foie gras fan, but Bob Herbert in today’s NYT puts some specifics to my general claims of exploitation: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06… Comments of some employers might almost be comical…but they aren’t. [And kindly avoid going off on a tangent about foie gras! Thanks in advance….]
  
  Log in to Reply
DavidThi808 says:

June 9, 2009 at 5:58 am

This is not central to immigration from Mexico but another issue is that H1-B visas are presently tied to your job. So someone here on an H1-B visa needs to do whatever is required to keep their job, and can’t go elsewhere.

Letting people on H1-B visas job hop will remove this indentured servitude. And that will remove a big chunk of the jobs filled with H1-B candidates where the primary incentive was employees who can’t quit or demand raises.

Log in to Reply
1. Barron X says:
  
  June 9, 2009 at 10:02 am
  
  .
  
  They don’t talk back, they accept unpaid overtime, they’re just a pleasure to deal with from the management perspective.
  
  Meanwhile, qualified Americans go without a job.
  
  .
  
  Log in to Reply
2. Danny the Red (hair) says:
  
  June 9, 2009 at 5:41 pm
  
  There are seminars on how to advertise for a job in such a way as to meet the legal requirement but in a way that will attract no qualified citizens.
  
  We need to look at the whole H1-B process.
  
  Log in to Reply