
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: WEDNESDAY, May 3, 1995                   TAG: 9505050023
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-10   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

NEW WAVE

AS CONGRESS prepares to cut social spending by slashing it from the hands of legal immigrants, it is enlightening to take a fresh look at the "huddled masses yearning to breathe free" who were the forebears of so many of us.

They came not seeking handouts, but to work and to be free, according to Rep. Bill Archer of Texas. Most Americans share this vision of their family history (except, of course, Native Americans, who already were breathing with unrestrained abandon when the others arrived, and most African-Americans, whose ancestors came to work, but not to be free).

Which makes it interesting is to note how far from reality the "up-by-their-bootstraps" image is in some cases. Many immigrants, including children, did work in sweatshops and live in crowded tenements. Many also were seen then, as now, as a drain on the nation's finances.

A recent Wall Street Journal review of documents from around the turn of the century indicates that, nationwide, immigrant families accounted for more than half the people who received public welfare in 1909, making them three times more likely than natives - that is, folks whose families had immigrated long enough before that, by 1909, they were considered natives - to be on the dole. In contrast, 9 percent of immigrant households received welfare, as of the 1990 census, while 7.4 percent of native households did.

This is not to suggest that immigrants collecting welfare today aren't costing federal taxpayers a pile of money - $5 billion annually. While there was some public assistance in the early 1900s, benefits were far short of what is available today.

But besides the fact that many of the earlier immigrants were our relatives, the Journal suggests that the rosy glow we attach to their coming probably can be explained by changes in the law, which cut off your basic influx of "tired," "poor" and "wretched refuse" in the 1920s, and required new arrivals to have some money and education.

Today, as economists note worriedly, millions of low-skilled immigrants once again are arriving, while the economy is demanding a workforce more highly skilled than ever. Perhaps natives are right to worry - that the backlash against immigrants will leave them with less help to get established.

After all, far more "huddled masses" needing help squeezed in than members of European elite. A few of us natives will have to admit that, while we share no genes with Einstein, one of our great-great-uncles might have been one of those "blind, idiotic, crippled, epileptic, lunatic ... infirm paupers, incapable of supporting themselves" shipped over here from Europe and denounced bitterly by the New York State Board of Charities. Back in 1880.

And most of us have done all right.

by CNB