Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

x close
The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

OneAmerica Leader: Immigration is a Women’s Issue

Politics, The C is for Crank   July 6, 2010 at 12:46 pm Erica C. Barnett

Feminist swoon alert: Pramila Jayapal, the director of Seattle-based OneAmerica immigration reform group, cowrote a piece last month with Gloria Steinem making the case that immigration is a women’s issue. Noting that the vast majority of immigrants, documented and undocumented, are women, many of them fleeing domestic violence, brought here unwillingly through sex trafficking, or seeking to escape other human rights abuses—they write:

[T]he popular image of immigrants is so far from their reality that even immigrant groups and the women’s movement have yet to harness their collective power together. Imagine how much both movements would gain if they worked in a coordinated fashion to move comprehensive immigration reform?

The truth is that millions more Americans would be the natural allies of immigrants if they were presented with an accurate picture of who immigrants really are. That number of supporters would be increased still more by knowing how important a part of the economy female immigrants are.  While there are no statistics breaking out the economic contributions of women immigrants, economists estimate that giving them stability by passing immigration reform would increase the gross domestic product of the U.S. by $1.5 trillion over the next ten years — and women are a key part of that contribution.

Read Steinem and Jayapal’s whole piece here, and check out Bryce’s interview with Jayapal here.




  • http://twitter.com/fattailed fattailed

    Overall, they make a good case in the piece, but what's the value of junk economic statistics like this wildly conjured estimate of a $1.5 trillion GDP impact? Does that really help make a moral case about immigrant & women's rights?

    Even worse, it's actually a very small figure, relatively speaking: with the US economy at $14.26 trillion/year, there's a total economy of $142.6 trillion over 10 years. $1.5 trillion out of this is barely more than 1%. Noise.

  • Sparky

    I didn't find it believable that “the vast majority” of documented and undocumented immigrants are women, and in fact, the Steinem/Jayapal piece says that a “super majority” of all immigrants are women AND children. (I would venture to guess that a super majority of the overall US population also consists of women and children.)

    I wonder if more Americans will support immigration when they find out that most immigrants are women and children. Women typically and children always work less and use more social services than men do. People who criticize immigration on the grounds that it is a strain on our economy would thus not be persuaded to change their views. I don't think the focus on women affects the culture and rule of law arguments that many people put forth. On the other hand, if immigration skeptics are scared of immigrant men, or feel that the still-ubiquitous-even-in-this-post-feminist-era-conflation of “women and children” deserves more of our help, they may find this argument persuasive. And this is where I get frustrated. I'm pro immigration, but I think this argument is ineffective at best and damaging at worst.

    The women's movement absolutely needs to be more inclusive. Immigration is as much a women's issue as any other issue involving humanity. But many of the arguments in this piece perpetuate the idea of women and immigrants as victims, as needful of protection as children. The only argument about what women contribute to society is economic, and there isn't any evidence for it. Women contribute a lot, yet these authors weren't able or chose not to demonstrate their contributions. I don't think focusing on women's suffering is the way to win the debate. Many other things need to change to stop the suffering – immigration is not the cause of the problems faced by women as described in this piece (with the exception of having to wait years to have a family member join them). Immigration reform simply cannot solve all of these problems. It may protect the relatively few women who make it here from violence in their home countries, but it won't stop gender- and race-based discrimination or domestic violence or sex trafficking. That's why even though this argument may be lauded by some women's rights and immigrant rights advocates, it will be seen as a red herring by many immigration skeptics.

    Finally, if appealing to the sense of pity for victims is supposed to move the immigration debate forward, I'm sorry to say it is pushing the women's rights movement backward. I don't want to win protection because I'm a victim – I want to have rights because I'm human. In this case: People of good will deserve freedom. Allow freer immigration because it's part of our country's DNA, and because on balance – if we take action to allocate the costs and benefits more equitably – it makes our country better for everyone, economically and socially. Not because some poor women and children need our help.

  • Brittanicus

    Illegal Immigration has become a fiery defining issue across the country. Long before President Obama came to power the federal government has rigorously refused to enforce our immigration laws since 1986. However, it is only in the last 25 years that America has been under assault by a foreign force of illegal workers and families.

    The US Constitution text of Article IV, Section 4:

    “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on Application of the Legislature.
    But we have been invaded by 20 to 30 million foreign nationals, not the numbers of 12 million that has been as stated continuously by the overwhelming Liberal press. According to FAIR, Illegal Immigration expenditures are a $113 Billion annual Drain on U.S. Taxpayers.

    This new study released today by FAIR is the most comprehensive analysis of how much the estimated millions of illegal aliens and their U.S.-born children costs federal, state and local governments. Just think how much this huge amount of money would go towards cutting the U.S. deficit—that has climbed to 13 trillion dollars? You can read the report at (FAIR) Federation for American Immigration Reform. An extra $60 billion dollars are earned by illegal aliens in the U.S. each year. One of Mexico's largest revenue streams (after exports and oil sales) consists of money sent home by legal immigrants and illegal aliens working in America.

    It’s impossible to calculate or list the welfare programs, health treatment, education and prison incarceration where these billions of dollars are drained. Hundreds of other concealed programs have their costs that must include the U.S. Border Patrol and the pretense of the border fence. The 2006 Border fence was for two fences not ONE. Even the HMS Titanic could not survive this massive costly iceberg hidden beneath the fiscal sea.

    The state of Arizona is under attack by our own government in suing over the new policing law SB 1070. This is obviously a political ploy by the Liberal Czars in the administration to force through another devastating—AMNESTY. There will be progressive demise of anybody, who is flaunting a pro-amnesty philosophy by November. Political entities are on notice by the Tea Party and a very commanding group of voters in November.

    Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) will be ejected first, as he has carried out his power to weaken E-Verify, federal local detainment law 287(g. On a state level many Democratic Senators and representatives will be joining Reid in the American workers jobless line. City governors such as mayors should join the party as well. NumbersUSA has an immigration grading system showing who should not be reelected. Facts, figures and other statistics at Immigration Counters.

  • wadegraham

    Brittanicus – Citing FAIR for your spurious arguments is probably not such a hot idea. Their longstanding connections to questionable organizations (ie. Pioneer Fund) and the eugenics movement – as evidenced in Board Member John Tanton's writings and beliefs – should make them a fringe organization to avoid, not spread its frightening gospel. Yet FAIR, designated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, has the polished sheen of a well-marketed (and funded) non-profit and has its spokespeople continually appear in mainstream media, including KUOW here in Seattle. Beware FAIR. Facts and figures aren't their tools, fear is. And the goals are zero growth and zero immigration.

    More on John Tanton – http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2010/04/28/video…

    Excerpt from Tanton's “The Case for Passive Eugenics” – http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2010/05/01/tanto…

    Meanwhile, Arizona is not under attack by the Federal Gov't. It's being sued because it passed a law that violates the Constitution. Makes sense to me. And the 287g and Secure Communities programs are horrendous, making local communities less safe since they create mistrust within the community, and should be abolished.