May 24, 2025

When we mark the third anniversary of the Uvalde school massacre, it is encouraging to know that we have taken concrete steps to reduce the carnage associated with mass shootings.

Company A is offering a window film to schools. The film purportedly reduces the impact of bullets aimed at destroying your loved ones.

Company B offers a line of allegedly bullet-proof school items, e.g., backpacks. Your child could perhaps wear their backpack throughout the day and be nonplussed about an armed intruder interrupting their history class.

Organization C has developed a training program entitled “Stop the Bleed.” Middle and high schoolers alike will learn how to apply tourniquets, a particularly useful skill set when classmates are spewing blood. (Uvalde’s survivor kids will be asked to take the training.)

Organization D: the Republican Women’s Committee in Uvalde invited a January 6 “protestor” to address its group. Attendees would learn the fine points about how to commit a crime, spend time in prison, get pardoned by a felon and thereafter be referred to as a “protestor.”

Executive Action E is a cogent reaction to the various gun reform measures enacted by the previous administration: cancel them. Moreover, the ATF Department (Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco) is being moved within the federal government and being implicitly told its watchdog activities relevant to guns are no longer needed.

Private enterprise (A&B), non-profits (C), and political groups (D), not the government (E), will be responsible for handling the philosophical nuances of, e.g., kids getting killed while doing math.

America’s world leadership in the category of classmates in pine boxes is not at risk.

 

The JOSE and MARIA DILEMMA: A Stepback Analysis

 

Similar to the challenge faced by every individual or organization which is in a helping mode:

does all the good work change lives, either from an offensive standpoint — moving forward, or a defensive standpoint — avoiding negative results, the question arises:

 

where are we with respect to Jose and Maria (JM)?

 

Assume JM attends a church which has received an Information Package (IP). What has the church done with the IP? On the assumption that they broadcast its availability, did JM get an IP? If so, did they use it to create a plan?

 

Copies of the IP were delivered to Hackettstown businesses, particularly restaurants. What did the recipient do as a result – make copies for staff, use it personally, discard it?

 

Assume JM submitted an Emergency Relief Fund (ERF) application. Did JM receive an IP?

There had not been thought given to simply handing JM an IP when the applicant came for the brief interview and receipt of money.

 

In reality, because of its connection to money, not to the IP, ERF quickly had become too popular for contemplation of strategy. And whether simultaneous issuance of an IP would have raised questions, in what was a highly informal setting (a table at a restaurant) that for whatever reason created a trusting situation, cannot be assessed. In any case, subsequently there was an attempt to get JM to come back for an IP, but that had mixed results.

 

At the ERF interview, these were the questions to JM: what country are you from, how long have you been here, what job do you have, are you married/have kids? The words “legal, immigration, and documentation” never were used. Interestingly, Ecuadorians, here on average a shorter period of time than Guatemalans or Hondurans, were more likely to return for an IP. Overall, if a more explicit phrase (e.g., come for immigration information) had been used in the text invitation to return for an IP, the response would have been greater.

 

**

On day one of our efforts, when the election results were known, there was a legitimate question: would a long-time undocumented JM step forward to get a lawyer to protect themselves against whatever the new administration had in mind. Given the long list of combinations and variations attached to status, and the vagaries of finding a lawyer, it did not seem likely that JM, functioning quietly for multiple years, would go public as it were.

 

Fast forward to today: if protected status means nothing, if sanctuaries are negated, if Alien Registration is a Hobson’s Choice, there seems even less reason why JM would step forward and request legal assistance. Instead they would hope and pray that, at the macro level, all the legal efforts by ACLU, the American Immigration Council, et al are successful, and, at the micro level, that ICE does not come for them.

 

The very nature of the IP is that it has a double personality. The IP, and the various knowledge bases added by the committee, is great material for assisting JM to get prepared for a what-if scenario. Simultaneously, it is material that one hopes never has to be used.

 

(As a side note, not pertinent to the aforementioned organizations, just when lawyers are needed to fight the excesses of executive actions, many of them have folded their ethical tents. Preservation of million dollar incomes has proven more important than any of their prior high standards. Rather like CEOs, but we have always known that with this group of individuals, there is no surprise when they wrap themselves around whatever policy connects to their bottom line. Khruschev’s comment many years back had more than a kernel of truth to it.)

 

**

The history of immigration reform efforts is discouraging, to say the least. There is little in the record that is instructive on how to best help JM. Stories of individual and organizational heroism abound but they become almost anecdotal when considered in the context of the big picture. The irony is that, at the end of the day, regardless of any legislation that could be enacted (not in the current environment obviously), if the economies and governing bodies south of the United States cannot provide sufficient jobs to keep people in their home country, JM will find a way to get here.

 

**

When the undersigned moved to Hackettstown in 2020, I asked respondents to point me to an Hispanic leader. The situation today is unchanged from the initial response: nobody fits the bill. The Hispanic Resouce Center (HRC) always has wanted to have a thought/action partner to myself; that quest has been unsuccessful.

 

Given that my entire life has been spent functioning independently, with just enough exposure to committees to make me shy away from them, the above set of characteristics (coupled with everything else going on in my life) has led HRC’s pattern to be one of standalone projects where outside skill sets are brought in as needed: the referral data base, a documentary on entrepreneurs, and its role at ERF. Soon to be released will be a streamlined, Spanish-centric version of the referral data base. In the creative thought stage is a documentary with the working title of “The Ecuadorian Exodus.” And there is a high likelihood of a new, more controlled ERF.

 

**

Immigration has been described as a “trilemma.” People want a legitimate border, companies want workers, and humanitarians want to save everybody.

 

Consistent with the self-description above, my focus is on helping Jose and Maria. Everything is measured against the metric of whether this is being accomplished. Much work to be done.

 

Bob Howitt                                        4-15-25

IN MY SHOES                   

 

Why are there two police cars with flashing lights outside the restaurant where the Hispanic Resource Center (HRC) is interacting with people applying for assistance from its Emergency Relief Fund (ERF)?  Are they interested locally or are they coordinating with ICE? The latter was in town two days before, at a laundromat and adjacent convenience store. Fortunately, they are not curious about the group directly visible inside the location, a gathering so large as to block the entrance.  It is probably only a coincidence that a young boy, waiting with his family in line for an ERF decision, throws up at the same time as he sees the police.

 

The ERF process took place at two restaurants in a farming community about 55 miles from New York City and 25 miles from the Delaware Water Gap. However, this mileage is basically irrelevant. It is the distance from “home” that in an adversarial political environment produces a need to stay close, to find kindred spirits if extended family is not available. There is no true security, even when one is equipped with “know your rights” cards outlining what to do if there is a knock on the door.

 

The restaurants are of modest size, 25 seats in one instance and 40 in the other. On both occasions, they were virtually full, almost entirely by people seeking ERF.  Only a few had taken a seat to eat the delicious food available.

 

The majority, it is learned, live within walking distance. They have been here for two months or twenty years, or any length in between. Countries of origin are: Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela. There were no questions asked about the path they took to get here, whether it was through the Darien Gap or a similarly “scenic” route.

When they arrive to this country, they have a phone number, maybe a name – friend or family — who has come to this distant area with a growing Hispanic population.

 

At times, it is evident that some struggle to read a simple document written in Spanish. A few have their offspring provide translation. There is no algorithm that connects number of years here with proficiency in English. At times, handwriting is indecipherable. Familiarity with checks is sometimes not high. The check-cashing services made serious money from this ERF endeavor.

 

There are many single mothers, aka fatherless children. There could be a dozen reasons; no questions were asked. With the handful of kids who have come with their parents, a little game is played by HRC: Messi or Ronaldo, math or science, school or soccer, sancocho or cheeseburger.

 

The jobs represented are primarily construction, cleaning, landscaping, factories, restaurants. The characteristics of such work are physical capabilities and specific skills, plus a willingness to labor for any amount of money (often cash). Essentially they are powerless to negotiate. And adverse weather conditions can mean the loss of a day’s pay.

 

The home front is analogously less than clear. An apartment previously occupied by four may now have five, to accommodate a new arrival. If it had two wage-earners previously, now there may be an inconsistent three. When the landlord is aware, the rent gets boosted. The rent itself may not be paid directly to a landlord but to the person whose name is on the rental agreement. And the whole arrangement quite likely will be transacted in cash.

 

Similar to many millions of Americans born here, budgets are presumptively tight, zero to negative amounts at the end of the day.  The absence of a day’s pay looms large in that context, particularly since rent is a fixed obligation, whereas other costs can be adjusted, even the heating and electric bills when financial necessity overrides comfort.

 

It is no surprise then, when the daily newsfeed is of negative events impacting the community, that financial assistance is an integral part of reacting to the mess that is politics. In-depth documents outlining what a potentially affected person/family should be doing to be prepared for various what-if scenarios are on-point. For those standing in line for ERF, however, that is more an exercise for people accustomed to reading through multiple pages of information and advice; the former’s need is emergency money to pay bills, rent and food being the lead categories.

 

Definitions of what constitutes an “emergency” vary of course. The ERF was not set up to handle large legal or medical bills. It was not staffed to drill down on the information provided by the applicant. Is it likely that truth was shaded in a percentage of instances, yes, but all money-based programs have built-in assumptions concerning accuracy of information. Suffice it to say that the perfect is a negative pursuit if it prevents good from being accomplished.

 

Addendum One:

 

Effectively, what took place above was a one-time, unscripted, only quietly announced, unanalyzed, narrowly focused, modified UBI, although unlike the model, funds per person had to be adjusted on the fly, based on the number seeking ERF and the total dollars available.

 

What then is UBI? Universal Basic Income is an idea that – in the full version — every person should receive a monthly check with no strings attached. In practice, the experiments being run in several dozen cities across the country have various rules about eligibility but the money itself, typically about $500 a month, has no restrictions on how it can be spent. ERF money, a fraction of this amount per recipient, similarly had no restrictions.

 

The same set of economic variables which can make payment of rent and the purchase of adequate food a struggle for the individuals and the families of those being assisted by ERF are obviously true regardless of ethnicity or arrival date in the USA.  Having said that, in this instance, those awaiting ERF decisions are not a diverse group.

 

Addendum Two:

 

The opposite imagery from what took place at the restaurants could be the following: an imperious desk spatially removed from the beseeching people; the sole occupant of the desk would be a person whose demeanor is equally imperious and whose sole purpose is to sign checks to people he literally looks down upon.

 

His assistant, numbed by years of dispensing welfare checks and tearing apart bogus stories, barely looks up as she thrusts a pile of forms to each supplicant. Her instruction to fill them out completely and accurately is accompanied with a threat: one blank answer equals no money.

 

This is admittedly extreme in its implied description of the existing welfare system, but how many regard our current approach as one built on respect and understanding. Partly because of irritation and partly because of the level of poverty in this country, there has been more discussion of UBI, but it has not gone deep on what would happen to existing welfare programs. Many would argue that UBI should never be discussed without simultaneously talking about how to improve education, reduce the cost of healthcare and daycare, and make sense out of drug laws and the impact of felony convictions.

 

That analysis is for another day. ERF is a requirement now.

 

3/1/25