Growing up in the mining town of Miami, Arizona, gave Roberto Reveles, president of Somos America, a view of blue-collar life. While in high school, a mining accident claimed the life of his step-father. The event helped shape him.
Somos America, a coalition of Latino groups, legal and illegal immigrants and those sympathetic to the desert-crossing masses, is not Mr. Reveles’ first venture into politics and activism. Before helping to organize marches for immigrants’ rights in Phoenix — in tandem with similar marches in major American cities — he spent 24 years serving several congressmen, most notably Arizona legend Morris Udall.
His first foray into civil rights issues came in 1963 after an assassin gunned down President John F. Kennedy. Lyndon Baines Johnson picked up his slain predecessor’s civil rights agenda and soon Mr. Reveles was lobbying to make sure the protections to be granted to blacks by the Civil Rights Act were extended to Hispanics.
It passed and Mr. Reveles held deep respect for Mr. Johnson, who in his eyes had bravely and skillfully used residual emotion from President Kennedy’s assassination to overcome Southern opposition to the groundbreaking legislation.
Mr. Reveles left work at the U.S. House of Representatives in 1980. He went on to serve as a liaison for a San Francisco mining company for 12 years.
Since his 1992 retirement, the Gold Canyon resident has kept occupied bysculpting, mentoring young amateur boxers and volunteering at a Guadalupe high school. He has also helped serve water to parched immigrants braving the Sonoran Desert in hopes of reaching El Norte at a Humane Borders water station.
Spurred on by what he sees as “anti-Latino legislation” coming from the Arizona Legislature and the failure of older generations of Latinos to teach their young the importance of the contributions of figures like Cesar Chavez, Mr. Reveles has taken a front-line role in the immigration debate. The march on April 10 he helped organize flooded the Capitol and downtown Phoenix with approximately 100,000 people in support of immigration reform.
He recently sat down with the Arizona Capitol Times to discuss in detail today’s topics surrounding the immigration debate — speaking English, amnesty, labor, boycotts and the Minutemen.
What is the purpose of Somos America?
It is essentially to give form to the various organizations that are Latino serving in our community and that have had an interest in doing something about immigration problems. We’re attempting through that organization to allow them a positive outlet.
What is the best outcome that you could imagine?
The best outcome would be to create a viable coalition of organizations that can work beyond the issue of immigration reform and empower people at the local level to deal with public policy issues of all sorts — getting into education, health care and the like.
What is the worst outcome?
The worst outcome would be that people would feel unfulfilled, that it’s not worth doing, that it can’t be done, that a long-term coalition isn’t possible to put together.
Are the marches that have been put together by Somos America the first in a series?
They’re the first of what we felt were necessary but we’re not anticipating, don’t have a long-term plan for marches as such. But certainly to create opportunities for people to remain engaged in public policy debates, the marches have served to coalesce the community groups and to call the public’s attention to the major concerns we have with the ongoing bankrupt immigration policy.
What would you like to see happen with immigration policy?
Well, I’d like to see the immigration policy designed to first of all, recognize the existence of the 11 or 12 million people that are here and who are here for a good purpose — not to do harm to our country — to legalize their status to avoid the disruption of family life, the division of family units and to provide a lawful and safe way for immigrants, willing workers to come to a legal port of entry and avoid risking their lives crossing illegally through the desert.
You were quoted in reference to the first march in Phoenix, “What occurred on March 24 is a consequence of the people being tired of the treatment we are receiving.” What should Americans understand about illegal immigration and those coming across the border?
I think what they should understand is that they are coming because of need. Need on their side for need of a sustainable wage and need on our side for a dependable source of labor. I think that it is a useful accommodation that will meet those needs if we can come together with a comprehensive reform package that covers the issues as I have previously described them.
The Mexican government has been very vocal — they have opposed building a wall between the two countries and even threatened lawsuits if the National Guard detains undocumented people illegally crossing into the United States. Does their participation help your cause or harm it?
I think any discussion helps, whether it’s the belligerent voice of a bigoted person hiding behind the mask of the Minutemen, or whether it is an enlightened legislator or foreign official. I think open discussion is good. I’d much rather be talking with an opponent of mine than having that opponent working in the shadows against my better interest. I think that people need to talk whether they agree or disagree and start to build a basis of confidence so that hopefully we can break down the walls of what I see as prejudice, quite frankly.
The boycott was scheduled on May 1, the international workers’ day, a day associated with socialist or Marxist connotations.
That’s correct.
Why was this done on this day?
Because it is also the day of Saint Joseph, the patron saint of the worker. And to us Latinos, St. Joseph is a model worker and that was his day, May 1. While recognized universally, with the exception of United States possibly, May 1 has been celebrated both in the socialist and non-socialist countries.
Is your movement affiliated or involved with American labor unions?
We have had American labor unions that have helped us, yes. So affiliation to the extent that they are helping us, yes. And I welcome them.
In what capacity are they helping?
They have helped by allowing us to use their meeting halls, for example. They have also personally participated as individuals, and again, we welcome them.
The immigration movement, as reported by many media sources, was torn between support for the May 1st boycott, you supported it. How come?
Because like I said, it was a day to honor the workers and to honor them by helping them do what they wanted to do. We had many workers who expressed an interest in sacrificing a day’s wages and to stay away from their places of employment. We urged them to try to work out an agreement with their employers by trying to make up the time by working extra or on the weekends, but to try to do it with recognizing that the employer’s well-being also reflects on the well-being of the worker. If an employer makes money, the worker shares in that successful business. So, yes, we agreed to work with our immigrant community to say, ‘yes, we want to stay away from work to demonstrate our increasing interest in letting the public and the Congress know that we desperately need reform of the immigration law.’
Do you think the marches are going to politically help the undocumented community or harden attitudes against them?
Undoubtedly there will be a hardening of people who are looking for an excuse to oppose immigration reform anyway. But I think that it was a useful demonstration in more ways than one. For example, this is a community that had been on the receiving end of a campaign of vilification as far as I’m concerned. As Latinos we’re all being painted with the brush of criminality and lack of civic pride. Well I think the demonstrations demonstrated that despite the historically large numbers, there was absolutely no violence, no arrests and we cleaned up after ourselves. I think that is a pretty good way to refute the allegations that have been thrown around very loosely at our community.
Do private citizens of the U.S. have the right to patrol the deserts if they believe their governments have failed to protect the border?
I think private citizens have the right to travel freely wherever they go so long as it’s within safe conditions. I would not want to travel to Barry Goldwater Bombing Range for example, but I think American people have the right to freely travel within our country, including the border.
And the Minutemen?
Yes, they’re U.S. citizens. They have every right to do so.
It’s estimated that 40 percent of Mexican Americans in Arizona voted for Prop. 200, which requires that legal identification be required to apply for public benefits among the issues. How does your group view Mexican Americans that are not on board with the agenda of Somos America?
Our community is not a monolithic community. It’s very much like any other community. We have differences of opinion as we find in any other ethnic group. I have personally talked with groups that have admitted that they voted for Prop. 200 because they had not anticipated what the consequences would be — that it would be a way of further burdening the Latino community and the immigrant community.
Should English be the official language?
I think English is, in fact, accepted as the language of choice for all of us. I think what is interesting about that issue is that you talk to any Latino who is wishing to succeed here; they are looking for adult classes. And yet we have a Legislature that says, ‘learn to speak English, but, by the way, you will not be eligible to go to adult English classes and we will not fund them’— which is what the latest so-called comprehensive bill by (Rep.) Russell Pearce, (R-18), would do.
What would you like legislators crafting immigration bills to keep in mind?
I think there should be recognition that this is a federal issue and that the federal government should not abrogate its responsibilities to put together and administer a fair immigration policy. At the state level, we clearly have problems but the legislators should look at what it is that’s within the state’s jurisdiction, and to do it with a point of view that recognizes these people are coming not to do harm, but to provide for their families and to fill a role that our economy desperately needs. We’re almost at full employment actually in this country and there is a growing need for an influx of workers. These are people that have a work ethic that is unbeatable. I think the state legislators ought to lower the heat of their rhetoric and focus on how to accommodate our need for workers with the supply of willing workers.
Do you think the supply of workers is exceeding the demand?
Thus far, I think the fact that you see ads for workers as you go through construction sites and see help wanted signs. I don’t think the supply is exceeding the demand. Unfortunately, I think that the bankrupt immigration policy we have right now throws obstacles in the way of the willing employer from hooking up with willing workers.
Many people have difficulty discerning the difference between comprehensive immigration reform and amnesty. To you, what’s the difference?
Amnesty is you’ve done something wrong and you’re totally forgiven without any penalties attached. What we are talking about in terms of comprehensive immigration reform requires the payment of back taxes, the payment of fines, the learning of English and several other requirements, so I don’t see that (as amnesty). It doesn’t help the debate to throw out terms that don’t reflect reality. If we want to resolve the issue let’s recognize they need to pay a fine, pay back taxes and get to the back of the line of those who did file lawfully. To me, that does not represent amnesty.
How would they get to the back of the line if they are already here?
Well, when they are legalized, in the process, their number starts after those who filed previous to them in a lawful way. They get to the back of the line, behind the people who have lawfully applied for admission.
Thank you very much.
You’re welcome.