Dying to Cross: ...Worst Immigrant Tragedy... (Book Review)

"Dying to Cross: The Worst Immigrant Tragedy in American History" (also published in Spanish as, "Morir en el Intento"). By Jorge Ramos, #006078945X , c2006, 208 pages.

This book grew out of the Univision Television program, "Viaje a la Muerte" (The Road to Death). It includes 8 pages of b&w photographs derived from this research. The author, Ramos, has been the anchorman for "Noticiero Univision" for 15 years, and has won a half-dozen or more Emmy Awards. He also writes a weekly column, printed in nearly 40 newspapers in the U.S. and Central America, and does radio news for several outfits. His other recent works include: "The Latino Wave" (La Ola Latina), "No Borders" (Atrevesando Fronteras), and, "The Other Face of America" (La Otra Cara de America) - all of which are available in English- and Spanish-language editions.

The book covers the immigrant tragedy of May, 2003, when a truck-trailer of at least 74 illegal immigrants (due to how the truck was abandoned, the true number involved is unknown and will probably remain so) was found near Victoria, Texas, bound for Houston (48 "customers" from Mexico, 16 from Honduras, 8 from El Salvador, 1 from Nicaragua, and at least 1 from the Dominican Republic). Nineteen people were dead. The story and images of the bodies piled one atop another was headline news for weeks, often described as a "human heap of desperation" - which it surely was. Much of the attention was focused on the 5-year old boy found among the dead. Ramos retraces some of the border-crossings made, interviews some survivors & the Mexican consul who handled the affairs that followed, as well as covers the legal proceedings that lead to the guilty pleas of several coyotes, including Honduran Karla Chavez who, according to U,S. authorities, was the ringleader of the operation, and the one ultimately responsible for the tragedy.

While Ramos is fluent in three languages, and his newspaper and radio work is usually without obvious fault, his books are often amateurish, and this one is no exception. He makes the same claims (sometimes the same exact sentence) several times in the book, apparently without realizing he has already made the statement. He contradicts himself several times, and in the closing section blames the U.S. government for vigorously enforcing its immigration laws, to the point where people are dying in the crossings, then also blames the U.S. government for not doing enough to enforce the immigration laws, and that is why so many people attempt the dangerous crossing in the first place. The old, "you-can't-have-it-both-ways" adage seems lost on him.

Ramos obviously cares about the people (his beliefs can more or less be inferred from his employer and previous book titles), though this might not be an asset when authoring this particular book. He seems incapable of not describing every detail of unimportant things. Worst of all, he makes the mistake of letting the survivors "speak for themselves". The problem is, they are not capable of carrying the story, and have little of interest to say. He does point out how easy it is to get to the U.S., and does a decent job outlining how there are several coyotes involved in almost any trip from Mexico to apartment and job in the U.S. (just the first one, across the border, can sometimes run 10x the cost of an air ticket from Central America to Miami, but that is not the end of the story).

Ramos blames Karla Chavez and the other Coyotes (and eventually the U.S. government). Apparently, it never occurs to him to consider an ounce of blame might be attributed to any of the deceased - in this case or any case of illegal aliens transfer. After all, if a man in Mexico assumes some very serious risk, engages in an illegal act, and fails (dies), and leaves his family without an income, is he immune from blame? Few would say, "yes". But, if that same man were to try to illegally enter the U.S. and dies in the process, the blame schematic changes completely, but why should it? Ramos doesn't bother which such details.

A not-so-small part of the problem is that Ramos seems incapable of viewing the immigration debate from the other side. He stops being a real journalist when the book most demands it. He never once asks an important follow-up question. Not once in 200+ pages. When some soon-to-be illegal aliens are detained on the midway point of their trip to the U.S., and Mexican police demand a $400 bribe, Ramos never asks where these people got this money. Better yet, where did they get the other $4k? Was what they did to get it not subject to any moral or legal analysis? He never bothers to ask. Since these people are said to earn less than $200 a month, and since it is continually pointed out that this is not enough to live on, then they obviously did not save the money prior to departure, so what did they do to secure it - and unless that act is immune from judgment like so many other things that happen on the non-U.S. side of the border, then why not ask a few questions?

Consider the case of Mexican Enrique Ortega, a former laborer from Tecomatlan, who had previously worked for less than $50 per week. Enrique, Ramos informs readers, could make that 7-day income in a single day in Houston. So, Ramos asks, "Who could possibly tell Enrique he was wrong to try and leave Mexico?". Ramos, apparently, doesn't see how bizarre the question would seem to anyone who does not accept his notion of open borders. The people who could, possibly, tell Enrique not to break the law, and not to illegally enter the U.S., and not commit identity fraud are, well, a measurable part of the North American population. This receives zero consideration in the book.

What follows is yet another example of Ramos not doing his job as a journalist. The illegal immigrants left to help their families back home. Enrique proceeds to tell his story: "I come from a poor family. There are no good job opportunities for us in Mexico...And here [the U.S.] we can get work, we can support ourselves ... and even help out our family a little [in Mexico]". But, for Enrique and the others helping out the family is the reason given for leaving them in the first place, yet it is quickly almost an afterthought. How much money will he send? What happens if he stops sending it? Hard to say, since Ramos never asks or analyzes. Ramos just claims the tragedy was completely unnecessary. It is most unfortunate, but "unnecessary"? Unless there are open borders (the U.S. stops any and all border enforcement), what else could make it unnecessary? He doesn't bother to explain.

Ramos covers the investigation and legal proceedings. He does a remarkably bad job analyzing these, too, and he again never raises a single important question, though to his credit he does point out that all the survivors got temporary work visas (not out of compassion or such, but so that they could be located and hopefully serve as witnesses for the prosecution, etc.). He also covers the quest for the 14 people the U.S. prosecutor sought, that 4 of the 14 were eventually found in Mexico, and they would not be extradited unless the death penalty was removed from the Federal Prosecution plan, etc.

Ramos, apparently, does not find it all so odd that both the U.S. and Mexican governments dumped all the blame on coyotes and an uneducated 25-year-old Honduran (Karla Chavez), reserving none of it for their own failures, political and otherwise, or the people Chavez worked for and with. Once one assumes the only moral position is open borders, it is easy to ignore every relevant political question.

Ramos is not the only one bent on demonizing a handful of people for the failures of many (or entire countries). The review of his book from Library Journal claimed, "This excellent account of modern-day murder is highly recommended". Murder? Who was the murderer? Do the people at Library Journal even know the legal or moral definition of "murder"? Not to be outdone, the U.S. Federal Prosecutor, following the guilty plea being entered by Karla Chavez, claimed, rather remarkably, that "...in contemporary history we haven't seen anything worse". Really? Haven't seen anything worse than a woman who paid a guy to deliver illegal aliens, and the guy forgot to turn on the AC in the truck trailer, and panicked when he realized at least a few people were dying or had died? That is the worst person he has seen in modern history? Hard to believe.

Arguably, the most honest (and accurate) person in this short work in Lastenia Pineda, then Consul General of Honduras (Houston Office), who also appears to have been the only appointed figure to flat-out admit that political failures at home are the cause of illegal immigration to the U.S. According to Pineda: "The truth is, she's [Karla Chavez is] an awfully young woman to have been the ringleader. She would have had to be a genius to control such a large network of operations. Personally, as Consul and as a human being, I think she would have had to have been a genius, and I don't believe it. I don't think she's that competent. I have interviewed her two, three times, and she's just a girl. She is a young woman who -and I am not defending her when I say this- I just don't think had the capacity [to organize and do all of this]". Pineda is quite right, and it is hard to believe Chavez's guilty plea -if it can even be called that- is an acknowledgement of guilt (she stood there denying responsibility for the acts). It is hard to believe Chavez was something other than a scapegoat. It is beyond the concern of Ramos, but the goal of the book should be to not only focus on the lives lost, but also on some sense of justice for what happened, and Ramos skips over the second part since he is not acting as an investigative journalist. His view of the world only makes sense if the deceased Latin Americans are viewed from some vacuum - but the unfortunate ones in that truck trailer were not born into a vacuum, nor did they die in one. It is unfortunate that this is the most widely read book on the tragedy, as there is another story to tell.