U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs

Remarks at the Arizona-Mexico Commission
Mary A. Ryan
Tucson, Arizona
June 29, 2001

It is a great pleasure and an honor to have been invited to speak with you today. I am especially pleased to have the opportunity to share with you my views about the current state of U.S./Mexico relations.

Let me begin by saying that I firmly believe that this particular point in time is one that holds great promise for deepening our already strong bilateral relationship.

I have to admit, however, that I am also feeling a bit like a Ph.D. candidate defending her thesis in front of a board of seasoned professors. Although I have served in Mexico, co-chaired the Migration and Consular Affairs Working Group of the U.S./Mexico Binational Commission for the last 8 years and am now integrally involved in the U.S./Mexico migration talks, you all have an expertise in this field that my professional credentials alone could never afford me.

Nowhere along the border is this statement truer than here with the members of this Commission. Since it's founding in 1959, the Arizona Mexico Commission has shown great vision in promoting social and cultural exchanges and economic development between our two nations. This Commission has time and again proven to be a great leader in cross-border cooperation.

You have a better appreciation than most in the United States of the truly symbiotic nature of the U.S./Mexico relationship. The fact of the matter is that since the North American Free Trade Agreement came into effect in 1994, our two economies have become inextricably intertwined. Trade between the U.S. and Mexico is now valued at over 250 billion dollars per year, making Mexico our nation's second largest trading partner. Only Canada enjoys more trade with the U.S.

No matter how extensive my qualifications and experience, each of you has a perspective on our bilateral relationship that is more profound than anyone can gain through solely professional or academic avenues. You live these issues constantly - in every interaction you undertake, whether at work, while dealing with government agencies or even among family and friends. And as a result, you are among the most genuine of experts on the current state of U.S./Mexico relations.

Your experiences and impressions serve as a bellwether for the relationship between our two nations. You all saw and felt the effects of NAFTA first, you directly benefit from the ever-increasing amounts of cross border trade, and you would also be the first to take note of an economic downturn based on the actions of those same indicators. But you also see the high personal risks - in too many cases literally life and death risks - that people are willing to take in order to come to the U.S. either to work or to join their families.

It is for these reasons that I would say that the truest and most current measure of the real U.S./Mexico relationship can be taken right here in this room, right now. From what I have seen so far and from what I have read of your Commission's work, my earlier statement on the current state of our relationship with Mexico is accurate - the relationship, already strong, is only getting stronger.

I suspect, though, that, even if you are somewhat unwilling to admit it in front of me, over the years you have felt as if the parts of our two countries not along the border - and perhaps particularly some of us in Washington, DC and Mexico City - have not had the same material understanding of the economic and social integration between our two nations, nor of the interlocking nature of our labor markets.

And I would venture to agree with you. As with many issues in America, this lack of popular appreciation for the mutual benefits derived from our bilateral relationship leads to a certain ambivalence about the issues that surround it.

Similarly, and for many of the same reasons, ambivalence is probably the predominant characteristic of our nation's attitude toward immigration matters, as well.

Because migration is such an integral part of our bilateral relationship with Mexico, this dual ambivalence has for years translated into inaction, if not ignorance - while we may have sought to resolve or advance migration issues, we may have only exacerbated the problem.

As an example, I would point to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.

By nature, Americans respect laws and we want members of our society to conform to our laws. So it is easy to understand why our lawmakers enacted legislation with serious penalties for those who do not adhere to our immigration laws.

The 1996 act imposed harsh penalties on those who had overstayed their visas - including a ban from re-entering the United States legally for up to ten years. As a result, many who are here without proper status had to make a difficult choice - remain here without status or risk a long period of exclusion from the U.S. by crossing the border to process their immigrant visas.

As a result, the unintended consequence of that legislation was to worsen our illegal residency problems: in effect, the provisions for exclusion from the U.S. for individuals who had overstayed their visas did little more than trap those already here illegally, further limiting the few available options they had for legalizing their status.

But at this point in time, I believe that a truer appreciation of both immigration and of new possibilities for our bilateral relationship with Mexico are beginning to enter America's collective conscience.

The Legal Immigration and Family Equity Act, or LIFE Act, which was passed with little prior discussion or publicity last December, was the first such indication of potential changes in the wind. That legislation did two very important things for potential immigrants:

First, it established for certain family members of legal permanent residents a category of non-immigrant visa that will allow them to wait for their immigrant visas in the United States, with their families. Many of the beneficiaries of this new visa categories would normally wait years to join their sponsors in the U.S. due to statutory limitations on the number of immigrants permitted to enter the U.S. each year

And second, it reinstated section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act for a four-month period. This provision allows certain categories of individuals to apply to regularize their status without leaving the U.S., and thus without being subject to the mandatory bar from the United States that I mentioned earlier, should they be out of status at the time of the application.

This legislation, which was written by Members of Congress themselves rather than by their staffs and passed very quickly, can be interpreted as an indication that Congress is once again open to considering immigration legislation in a more positive light. The House recently passed an extension of 245(i), and I believe that the Senate will also do so, thanks especially to the President's strong support.

I mentioned, too, that our relationship with Mexico was becoming more important to Americans beyond the border area. For proof of this, you needn't look farther than your nearest newsstand or your own television set.

Just a couple of weeks ago, Time magazine devoted almost half of an issue to the border area. Many network news programs are running serial stories on the interdependency of our two economies and on migration patterns between certain areas of Mexico and the U.S., and many major metropolitan newspapers located far beyond the border region are covering in depth both Mexico and our shared interests with Mexico.

Media attention to these issues has become, for lack of a better word, fashionable. While there are many factors that contribute to this trend, chief among them are the convergence of three recent, but independent, developments: the recently published results of the 2000 U.S. census, interest in Mexico's new President and his ideas about a more open border, and the change of our own administration.

Let's begin with the 2000 census. Its results graphically demonstrate why these issues matter now. More than half a decade before many experts predicted, the census showed that Hispanics have surpassed African-Americans as the largest minority population in the U.S.

Reading the issue of Time that I mentioned earlier will tell you that, because of these gains, Hispanics will become the predominant ethnic group in at least 15 additional congressional districts, and every state set to gain seats in the House of Representatives will do so because of increases in their Hispanic populations.

One of the most telling facts, however, is that of the congressional districts that saw the biggest increases in their Latino populations, none was in a border state. Although most experts agree that our Latino population has yet to demonstrate its political might, issues of direct interest to this group can no longer be glossed over or ignored.

Key for what we are discussing today, however, is the fact that more than half of the Hispanics identified in the latest census trace their roots to Mexico. Therefore, Mexico and all things Mexican are emerging as issues of interest far beyond the reaches of the border.

And I think few of you will argue with the statement that this is a fascinating time to watch or be involved with Mexico. The historic election of President Fox, who not only swept out seven decades of rule by the PRI but also brought with him a new vision for Mexico, augurs well not only for a new chapter in that country's history, but for a new chapter in U.S./Mexico relations.

President Fox is in many ways an ideal leader for a new Mexico and perhaps the quintessential individual to develop a more profound connection with the United States. Much of his professional life was spent as an executive with Coca- Cola in Mexico and that experience has given him a skill set unlike any previous Mexican president. His career has afforded him a fundamental grounding not only in knowing how to negotiate and deal with Americans, but also in American values and business practices.

President Fox has already stated that one of his biggest commitments will be to develop policies aimed at job creation in parts of Mexico that have been traditional sources of migration to the United States.

We know that most migration from Mexico is fueled by a combination of economics and demographics, and Mexicans will continue to come to the U.S. to work until the Mexican economy is strong enough to allow them to support their families.

For now, however, the wages offered here - even for those who are paid relatively low wages - are substantially higher than could be earned in Mexico, and simple "home economics," if you will, will continue to pull Mexicans to the U.S.

In addition to the pull of the dollar, Mexican citizens are also getting a "push" north. Current projections indicate that more Mexican will enter their labor market than jobs will be created for at least another decade. The combination of demographics and economics are impossible to fight currently, but if Mexico's economic development plans are successful, that could change.

President Fox's ideas seek to capitalize on the circulatory patterns of Mexican migration. By focusing economic development in regions to where workers with skills acquired in the United States will return, the plan will not only take advantage of a more seasoned and skilled workforce, but also create greater economic opportunities in zones that have traditionally exported labor. In addition, Mexico can multiply what has been learned in the U.S. by having returned workers train those who could now choose to remain in these areas.

The idea is extremely interesting for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that indications are that most Mexicans would prefer to stay home if there were adequate economic opportunities for them in Mexico.

At nearly the same time that President Fox was inaugurated in Mexico, George W. Bush was elected as our President. As a former governor of Texas, President Bush has a deep understanding of the complexity and full extent of America's relationship and interconnectivity with Mexico. His political experience is infused with an appreciation for the importance of this relationship as well.

The convergence of these two leaders onto the scene sets up a time of unprecedented opportunity for our two countries to redefine and enhance our mutual agenda. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the recent set of meetings our two governments have undertaken on border safety and migration issues.

At their first meeting in Guanajauato in February, Presidents Fox and Bush agreed to form a high-level working group on migration. The heads of the U.S. working group are Secretary of State Powell and Attorney General Ashcroft, and together with Mexican Foreign Minister Castaneda and Mexican Interior Minister Creel, they had their first meeting in Washington in early April. Subgroups of this working group met again in June, and we are all participating in an open and frank exchange of ideas.

For the first time, the government of Mexico is seeking to enter a true partnership with us to promote safety on the border. This shift is a fundamental one, and I am optimistic about other doors that this change can potentially open for us on other matters.

This new spirit of cooperation has led our two governments to discuss, among many other things, the following national and binational border safety initiatives:

We will work together to develop a comprehensive set of binational programs to eliminate risks to migrants, with particular attention paid to the deserts in western Arizona, the all American Canal and the Rio Grande. The senseless deaths last month of 14 migrants in the Arizona desert underscore the urgency of this issue.

The Mexicans have committed to strengthening public safety campaigns to alert potential migrants of the imminent dangers of crossing the border through high-risk areas.

Our two countries will seek to develop and implement specific operational plans for the search and rescue of migrants in dangerous areas along the border. We will also reinforce training programs on safety and migrant search and rescue operations.

In addition, our governments have agreed to work together to strengthen binational coordination among law enforcement agencies to fight smugglers and traffickers in persons on both sides of the border, and we will soon embark on an unprecedented binational effort to combat and dismantle alien smuggling, trafficking and criminal organizations.

As you can see from the list of things I have mentioned, which is only part of all that we are discussing, the spirit of cooperation that has developed during this round of meetings between our governments is very encouraging.

While we have long had a warm and mutually beneficial relationship with the government of Mexico, I cannot help but feel that we are truly entering an era of new possibility for an even deeper relationship.

One of these possibilities that I know you all have a special interest in is a temporary worker program. The white paper that your Commission produced on "labor shortages and illegal immigration" is both timely and informative, and the questions posed therein are many of the ones that we are actively grappling with.

Of course any undertaking of this nature is extremely complex. Because such a program would not only have significant foreign policy implications, but also considerable domestic policy ramifications, we must ensure that all interested U.S. government agencies participate.

For this reason, the United States delegation to the Working Group meetings consist of representatives from the Department of State, the Department of Justice, including INS, and the Department of Labor.

We are also engaging in consultations with Congress, as well as discussions with other interested and knowledgeable parties, including labor unions, non-governmental organizations and academics, to ensure that any program that we contemplate would be informed by a wide variety of perspectives. One of my biggest concerns in undertaking any discussion of a migration programs is that we end up with a workable framework and that we learn from the shortcomings of the programs that came before this one.

While it is still very early in the process, we are examining various proposals that would allow us to adequately safeguard the American workforce without overburdening American businesses, while also providing appropriate protections and benefits for foreign workers.

We plan on working closely with the U.S. Congress, including the Texas and Arizona delegations who have already expressed interest in these issues, throughout the process, and of course they have the ultimate authority to pass any new legislation governing immigration policy. I am hopeful that we will be able to build on the momentum started by Presidents Bush and Fox in their February meeting. We plan to have recommendations ready for the two presidents to discuss at their next planned meeting in September.

At this point in time, conditions at the border dictate that we try something new and different, beyond the border safety initiatives I mentioned earlier. The perils that migrants currently face crossing the border between Mexico and the U.S. must be addressed, and we need to do it as quickly as possible.

Just last week I heard of two incidents on the Mexico side of the border in which large groups of migrants died. The first group was discovered when a truck hauling a refrigerated trailer was pulled over for speeding. When the rear of the truck was opened, the bodies of thirty would-be migrants bound for the U.S. were found.

The next day, I learned of a flatbed truck that had been built with a secret compartment under the platform and into which fourteen migrants were sealed. When the earth-moving equipment loaded on top of the truck bed could not pass under a bridge over the road, the driver simply walked away from the truck, sealing the fates of the unfortunate fourteen locked in the trailer.

Incidents like these, which generally don't make the U.S. papers, as well as the incidents that do, like the tragic deaths of the 14 Mexicans in the desert here in Arizona in may, graphically illustrate not only the draw that the U.S. has for Mexican workers, but also the tremendous risks that those individuals are willing to take in order to get here.

They continue to come despite stepped up interdiction at the border because for the economic and demographic reasons I cited earlier. I firmly believe that we can no longer rely solely on enforcement, but we must augment those efforts by providing a way to allow more workers to come legally.

In the past decade, our economy has also experienced unprecedented growth, leading to nearly full employment in the U.S. Many migrants found our job market wide open, in any number of sectors of the economy and some have even stated that low-wage migrant workers fueled that sustained growth by providing their much needed labor and keeping inflation down.

We can no longer ignore the contributions this labor has made to our economy, and we should seek to find ways to legally incorporate these individuals into our society.

Everything that I am seeing right now - from both of our countries' new leaders to the spirit of cooperation we enjoy across the table in the working group meetings - says to me that we are at a point in history where such things may be possible.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that this is the golden age of U.S./Mexico relations. Presidents Bush and Fox, as well as some in the Senate and the House, have all indicated that now is the time to explore migration programs, and contemplate creative solutions for those currently here without status, as well as potential temporary workers who are not yet here.

I hope from what I have shared with you here today that you see that we in the Administration are working hard on issues of border safety, temporary worker programs, and the important but delicate issues of regularizing the status of those currently here without the proper legal authorization.

Thank you once again for your kind invitation to speak to you today, and I wish you great success for the rest of your plenary session.

END