Most members of Congress, from both parties, celebrate and at least pretend to respect diversity in America. We are, after all, a nation of immigrants, which helps us gain strength through a diversity of cultures, languages, and backgrounds.
Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) isn’t shy about admitting that he doesn’t see things this way.
First off, no one in Congress opposes immigration as much as Tancredo. He wears that distinction as a badge of honor, heading the House Immigration Reform Caucus in Congress. Tancredo, who insists the U.S. should place a moratorium on all immigration, recommends stationing troops along the border with Mexico to forcibly prevent immigrants from reaching American soil, among his more eccentric policy goals. The lawmaker has also called the immigration of non-Americans to the United States an “invasion” and refers to those who celebrate multiculturalism as a “cult.”
“I think massive immigration into this country combined with the cult of multiculturalism is perhaps the most dangerous thing I can think of,” Tancredo told The Hill this week.
Second, Tancredo has flirted with some of the most racist elements within American conservatism. Last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center discovered that the website for Tancredo’s Immigration Reform Caucus linked to xenophobic and racist anti-immigrant sites. Tancredo also spoke last year to a gathering of anti-immigrant activists with high-profile white supremacists in attendance.
(Keep in mind, Tancredo is a nut. When first elected to Congress in 1998, he refused to attend a reception for new members at the White House, saying Bill Clinton wasn’t a “real president.”)
Now Tancredo is launching another crusade: abolishing ethnic and racial caucuses in Congress.
Caucuses are groups formed when lawmakers want to cooperate on a common legislative goal and/or a specific policy matter, sharing ideas and crafting an agenda. These caucuses, which number in the dozens, span the policy spectrum, from the Rural Health Care Caucus, to the Wine Caucus, to the Congressional Fire Services Caucus.
There are also many caucuses relating to race and ethnicity. Indeed, some of the largest and most influential caucuses in Congress include the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. There are also caucuses for Asian Pacific-American, Native-American, and Irish-American lawmakers.
If Tancredo has his way, Congress will no longer recognize or sanction any of these caucuses. Issue-oriented caucuses can stay, he says, but race-oriented caucuses cannot.
For those who don’t know better, Tancredo’s proposal may sound like it has merit. Tancredo’s rhetoric focuses on ending “racial divisions” and “eliminating racial distinctions in our society.”
This is a classic example of how discrimination thrives in contemporary America. Tancredo is a white Christian male, serving in a federal government run by other white Christian males. He observes African-American lawmakers working together in the Congressional Black Caucus to address the needs of a community the country has long ignored, and what does he see? A problem to be eliminated. As those of you who know me personally already know, this literally disgusts me.
What Tancredo doesn’t appreciate, and what he is probably incapable of understanding, is that people like him make groups such as the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus even more necessary.
I don’t want to overstate the case. Chances are the overwhelming majority of lawmakers will want nothing to do with Tancredo’s proposal. Some Republicans, including House Administration Committee Chairman Bob Ney (R-Ohio), have already distanced themselves from Tancredo’s plan.
Whether it’s successful or not, Tancredo’s scheme is offensive and absurd. Lawmakers should not only distance themselves from it, they should forcibly denounce it.