THE IMMIGRANT REVIEW

Maryland Voters to Decide Immigrant Tuition Law

2011-07-08T14:01:00.002-04:00

Opponents of a new law that gives undocumented immigrants in-state tuition discounts at Maryland’s public colleges have gathered enough signatures to suspend the law and force a statewide referendum, election officials said Thursday.

Under the law, undocumented immigrants who can prove that they have attended Maryland high schools for at least three years and that their parents or guardians have begun paying taxes were to have been allowed to begin courses this fall at community colleges at in-state rates. The measure was approved in the closing hours of this year’s legislative session after years of failed attempts.

Read the article of The Washington Post here...

Record Low Migration From Mexico

2011-07-08T13:38:00.001-04:00

In what could be an historic event, the number of unauthorized immigrants coming from Mexico to the United States has fallen drastically in recent years—dropping from 525,000 annually in 2000-2004 to fewer than 100,000 in 2010. In fact, unauthorized immigration from Mexico has dropped to a net rate of zero—meaning that the number of new migrants entering the United States each year is roughly equal to the number who leave or die. That is one of the central conclusions to emerge from new research by the Mexican Migration Project (MMP) at Princeton University and the Universidad de Guadalajara.

The MMP also found that the vast majority of unauthorized Mexican immigrants already in the United States are not returning to Mexico. This calls into question the effectiveness of the “attrition through enforcement” strategy promoted by restrictionists, in which SB 1070-style laws are passed in an attempt to forcefully persuade unauthorized immigrants to “self-deport.” The findings of the MMP suggest that now might be an ideal time to implement immigration reform that includes a legalization program for unauthorized immigrants living in the United States. Read more here

Arizona’s Immigration Law Report Reveals Private Prison Industry Ties to Legislation

2010-10-28T16:29:00.005-04:00

An investigative report by National Public Radio today sheds light on the behind-the-scenes effort to help draft and pass Arizona’s immigration law SB1070 by the private prison industry. Private prison corporations like the Corrections Corporation of America, the Geo Group and Management and Training Corporation have funneled tens of thousands of dollars to the 30 legislative co-sponsors of SB 1070.

Think Progress also highlighted reports that the billion-dollar Corrections Corporation of America — the largest private prison company in the country has directed money to legislators sponsoring Arizona-like immigration bills across the country. Following is a statement by Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, a non-partisan, non-profit, pro-immigrant advocacy organization in Washington.

“Today’s revelations show that immigrant detention in America is not driven by justice but by the private prison industry looking to make a buck off the imprisonment of nannies and landscapers. Taxpayer money is being used to expand and establish a steady source of income for the prison industrial complex which is clearly benefiting from a broken immigration system that feeds immigrants into the detention system.

The true motives behind the controversial Arizona’s immigration law were not about increasing security or addressing Arizona’s immigration problems, the goal was to enhance the prison industry’s bottom line.

We cannot simply detain and deport our way out of our immigration problem. This report should sound the alarm bells over the urgent need to restore order, integrity and accountability to our immigration system.

More information in the article The Immigrant Review published here

Perspectives on Arizona

2010-06-04T15:42:00.002-04:00

From 2005 to 2007, Professor Roxanne Doty researched the anti-immigrant movement in Arizona. A new "Perspectives on Arizona" piece prepared for the Immigration Policy Center entitled The Anti-Immigrant Movement and the Politics of Exceptionalism is adapted from her recent book, The Law Into Their Own Hands-Immigration and the Politics of Exceptionalism (2009) University of Arizona Press.

Professor Doty explores the consequences related to the growing nativist, anti-immigrant movement in the U.S. She provides a look at contemporary, post-9/11 border vigilantism, and the dangerous and unproductive manner in which private citizens are drawing lines between who is worthy of inclusion in our society and who is not.

She also discusses exceptionalism in U.S. immigration policy and how the U.S.' long history of associating "the foreigner" with various threats to the well being of the U.S. populace has resulted in scapegoating and discriminatory policies such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.

She also notes that recent passage in the state of Arizona of what is arguably the most extreme anti-immigrant legislation in the country should put to rest any lingering doubts as to the ability of anti-immigrant factions to affect policy and the lives of immigrants as well as non-immigrants. Senator Russell Pearce (R-Mesa, Arizona), sponsor of the bill known as SB0170, was an enthusiastic supporter of the 2005 Minuteman Project border watch and is a well-known anti-immigrant activist.

To read this Perspective on Arizona see:

The Anti-Immigrant Movement and the Politics of Exceptionalism (IPC Perspectives on Arizona, June 4, 2010)

Q&A Guide to Arizona's New Immigration Law

2010-06-02T23:42:00.003-04:00

Today Arizona Governor Jan Brewer will meet with President Obama to discuss border security and Arizona's controversial new immigration law SB 1070. Barely a month after passage of SB 1070, both opponents and proponents are attempting to assess the impact the new law may have on residents of Arizona-citizens and immigrants alike. At the same time, approximately 22 states (at last count) are considering similar legislation. Multiple lawsuits have been filed challenging the constitutionality of the law, opponents are mounting a boycott, and numerous polls show that a majority of the public both supports the Arizona law and comprehensive immigration reform.

The Immigration Policy Center has developed a Q&A Guide to Arizona's New Immigration Law. This guide provides key answers to basic questions about Arizona's law - from the substance of the law and myths surrounding it to the legal and fiscal implications. As other states contemplate similar legislation, knowing the answers to basic questions about Arizona's law will prove to be critically important in furthering the discussion.

To view the guide in its entirety see:

Q&A Guide to Arizona's New Immigration Law

Obama will Send 1,200 Soldiers to the Border

2010-05-25T19:42:00.003-04:00

Today President Obama joined Senate Republicans at their weekly caucus lunch. Touching on a number of items in his legislative agenda, the administration sought the meeting with Senate Republicans in an attempt to forge better working relations with Republican Senators. Immediately following the meeting an administration official acknowledged that the White House plans to send 1,200 National Guardsmen to the southern border. The following is a statement from Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum.

"Two weeks ago, community groups and immigration advocates presented border security recommendations to the White House that would keep border communities safe and ensure integrity and accountability in border enforcement operations. Instead, the administration chose to parrot the stale "border security first" talking points hyped by opponents of comprehensive immigration reform and will send 1200 National Guardsmen to the border.

This unfortunate pandering is not based on facts and directly contradicts what the Obama Administration has said about border security. Secretary Napolitano, as well as Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Customs Enforcement John Morton and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Alan Bersin, testified before Congress as recently as last month that we have unprecedented resources at the southern border and that our border is 'as secure now as it has ever been.'

Deploying additional National Guard without a clear strategy is political posturing, not a solution and is a misuse of federal resources. The National Guard is not trained in law enforcement, and their effectiveness on the border will be limited. In fact, National Guard in Arizona testified to the state legislature in January 2010 that being deployed to the border would be bad for Guard morale.

Supplemental funds to improve ports of entry, better training for border patrol and enforcement agents, or an increase in effective technologies would be a smarter use of funds that would put quality border policy ahead of political convenience. Unfortunately, today's decision is quantity at the expense of quality.

Just as Arizona's discriminatory new law pretends to "solve" our dysfunctional immigration system, sending National Guard to our southern border masquerades as an effective response.

The truth is, a massive buildup of personnel, infrastructure and technology has been growing at the border for years. Over the past nine years, the number of Border Patrol agents has more than doubled and are supported by legions of federal law enforcement officials. DHS has constructed nearly 650 miles of fencing and a vast array of technological surveillance equipment our borders. What the border needs now is upgraded ports of entry with adequate staffing, and improved oversight and accountability from CBP, not military troops.

Calling in the National Guard will not fix what ails us. The real solution lies with comprehensive immigration reform which would decrease the pressure on the border, enhance the security of ports of entry, and provide a system for immigrants to go through instead of around. Without true immigration reform, billions more will be wasted on misguided border security measures. We need meaningful reform, not more of the same."

Immigration: Elected Officials Arrested in New York

2010-05-24T18:05:00.004-04:00

Assembly member Adriano Espaillat and City Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito were arrested today at an event organized by immigration reform advocates in New York. Also in attendance was immigration reform champion Congresswoman Yvette Clarke, who promised to redouble her effort to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation. Representative Luis Gutierrez, the author of the House's only introduced immigration legislation, was arrested earlier this month at a protest in front of the White House.

Protestors in New York want President Obama to immediately halt the deportations that tear apart families and to take action to prevent the implementation of Arizona's discriminatory new law. Today's civil disobedience in New York is one of several happening nationwide. Last week in Seattle, protestors stopped traffic and blocked the entrance to a federal building. Tomorrow in Chicago, a city alderman and labor leaders will risk arrest when they march from Federal Plaza to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility.

"We wish more members of Congress had the courage of Assembly member Adriano Espaillat, Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito, and the 35 other New Yorkers arrested today. They're leaders for immigrants and get the magnitude of the crisis facing our country," said Rich Stolz, campaign manager for Reform Immigration FOR America. "Congress must show the political courage to pass comprehensive immigration reform. The longer they delay and make excuses, the more families will be torn apart by our ruinous and cruel immigration system."

Hispanics, High School Dropouts and the GED

2010-05-19T13:26:00.004-04:00

Hispanic high school dropouts are much less likely than white or black high school dropouts to attain a General Educational Development (GED) credential, according to a new report from the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center. The GED is widely regarded as the best "second chance" pathway to college, vocational training and military service for adults who do not graduate high school.

Just one-in-ten Hispanic high school drop-outs has a GED credential. By contrast, two-in-ten black high school drop-outs and three-in-ten white high school drop-outs has a GED, according to an analysis of newly-available educational attainment data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The relatively low level of GED credentialing among Hispanic high school dropouts is especially notable because Hispanics have a much higher high school dropout rate than do blacks or whites. Some 41% of Hispanics ages 20 and older in the U.S. do not have a regular high school diploma, versus 23% of comparably aged blacks and 14% of whites.

Among Hispanics, there are significant differences between the foreign born and the native born in high school diploma attainment rates and GED credentialing rates. Some 52% of foreign-born Latino adults are high school dropouts, compared with 25% of the native born. And among Hispanic dropouts, some 21% of the native born have a GED, compared with just 5% of the foreign born.

The report also analyzes labor market outcomes of Hispanic adults based on whether they dropped out of high school and lack a GED; have a GED; or obtained at least a regular high school diploma. Among the key findings, in 2008, Hispanic adults with a GED had a higher unemployment rate than Hispanic adults with a high school diploma - 9% versus 7%. However, Hispanic full-time, full-year workers with a GED had about the same mean annual earnings ($33,504) as Hispanic full-time, full-year workers with a high school diploma ($32,972).

The report, "Hispanics, High School Dropouts and the GED", authored by Richard Fry, Senior Research Associate, Pew Hispanic Center, is available at the Pew Hispanic Center's website, www.pewhispanic.org.

The Fiscal Bottom Line on Immigration Reform

2010-05-15T15:30:00.003-04:00

The Immigration Policy Center released a fact check, The Fiscal Bottom Line of Immigration Reform, which finds that the federal government spends billions of taxpayer dollars on costly border and interior enforcement measures which ultimately hurt American families and communities and don't deter unauthorized immigrants.

Instead, IPC points to a different approach to addressing unauthorized immigrants - implementing a legalization program through comprehensive immigration reform - which would generate billions of dollars in additional tax revenue as newly legalized immigrants' wages and tax contributions increase over time. The IPC has also synthesized a number of state studies which assess the economic impact of immigration on state and local economies through federal and state taxes.

Highlights from the fact check include:

Since Fiscal Year (FY) 2004, the budgets of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) - the border-enforcement and interior-enforcement components of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) - have increased dramatically. CBP's budget grew from $6 billion in FY 2004 to $11.4 billion in FY 2010, while ICE's budget increased from $3.7 billion to $5.7 billion over the same period.

A January 2010 study by Dr. Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda, conducted for the Immigration Policy Center and the Center for American Progress, estimates that during the first three years after legalization, the higher earning power of newly legalized workers "would generate $4.5 to $5.4 billion in additional net tax revenue."

A January 2010 study from the University of Southern California estimates that because unauthorized immigrants earn less than they would if they had legal status, the California state government lost out on $310 million in income taxes in 2009, while the federal government missed out on $1.4 billion.

To read these fact checks in their entirety, see:

The Fiscal Bottom Line on Immigration Reform: The Costs of Enforcement-Only and the Benefits of Comprehensive Reform (IPC Fact Check, April 13, 2010)

Assessing the Economic Impact of Immigration at the State and Local Level (IPC Fact Check, April 13, 2010)

How will Washington Respond?

2010-05-15T15:07:00.003-04:00

As the constitutional and civil rights consequences of Arizona's punitive new immigration law become ever more apparent, proponents and opponents of the law seem to share only one area of agreement: America's immigration laws are broken and must be repaired. The proposed solutions however, are as different as night and day. Supporters of the law champion federal and state enforcement-only solutions premised on the belief that we must secure the borders before taking any other action to reform the system. Opponents of the law know that a border-first strategy is short-sighted, has failed in the past, and cannot provide a solution to the larger immigration problem. As these two forces mobilize for yet another immigration debate, the stakes grow ever higher and the need for accurate information grows more acute.

Although it may be politically popular to call for additional border and interior enforcement, the real solutions and the facts call for a comprehensive approach. In order to truly solve the problem we must address the root causes of illegal immigration: inadequate legal means for working and immigrating to the United States, a deportation-driven strategy that focuses on numbers rather than genuine threats to national security, and a failure to enact a consistent and balanced federal plan for regulating immigration.

Pouring billions of dollars more into border enforcement alone or venting frustration through questionable state laws will not solve the problem. Turning off the jobs magnet, expanding effective worker verification programs, providing a legal and regulated flow of workers, and getting millions of workers right with the law - paying taxes and contributing to our nation's recovery - is a recipe for reform. Throwing billions at enforcement-only has been the modus operandi in Washington for nearly two decades, and the results have been an increasingly dysfunctional system.

The Immigration Policy Center has developed fact sheets and reports that breakdown the problems and solutions to our broken immigration system, and provide a summary of the most recent proposal for immigration reform. These publications provide readers with a comprehensive overview of what's wrong with our immigration system and the steps we need to take in order to fix it. The Senate proposal is an important first step, but much work still must be done to turn these concepts and various other legislative proposals into a truly bi-partisan bill ready for debate.

AZ: Twelve States Considering Similar Laws

2010-05-07T10:03:00.006-04:00

Arizona's controversial new immigration law (SB 1070) is the latest in a long line of efforts to regulate immigration at the state level. Yet while the Grand Canyon State's foray into immigration law is one of the most extreme and punitive, other states have also attempted to enforce federal law through state-specific measures and sanctions.

Oklahoma and Georgia have recently passed measures, with mixed constitutional results, aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration through state enforcement. Legislators in 45 states introduced 1,180 bills and resolutions in the first quarter of 2010 alone, compared to 570 in all of 2006.

While some of the state laws are beneficial to immigrants, others, including Arizona SB 1070 are overreaching and misguided. Twelve states - Arkansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas and Utah - have introduced or are considering introducing similar legislation. This leap into federal enforcement, however, represents a disturbing trend fueled by the lack of comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level.

Metcalfe Introduces Arizona Police State Law in PA

2010-05-05T21:04:00.007-04:00

State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe has introduced legislation in Harrisburg, PA, mirroring Arizona's controversial immigration law creating a virtual police state. He was joined by a democrat Rep. Harry Readshaw in proposing laws enabling police to stop anyone without probable cause and demand to see their identity papers.

Metcalfe has offered a bill similar to Arizona's new immigration enforcement law that would give police in the state power to enforce immigration laws. Rep. Metcalfe said the state has an estimated 140,000 illegal aliens.

HB2479 would provide state and local law enforcement with full authority to apprehend Pennsylvania’s estimated 140,000 illegal aliens and several other sweeping reform measures, including:

Creating a new criminal offense for illegal aliens who violate federal law by either willfully failing to register as an alien or failing to possess proper proof of such registration when stopped for another primary offense such as a traffic violation.
Requiring law enforcement officers to attempt to verify the immigration status of suspected illegal aliens.
Creating a new criminal offense for persons who are unlawfully present in the United States and are an unauthorized alien applying for work.
Allowing law enforcement officers to arrest illegal aliens for any public offense which would warrant removal from the United States.
Creating a new felony offense for intentionally smuggling illegal aliens for profit; and authorizing law enforcement officers to impound any vehicle driven by an illegal alien, or used to transport illegal aliens.

“With the federal government currently AWOL in fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities to protect American lives, property and jobs against the clear and present dangers of illegal alien invaders, state lawmakers from Arizona to Oklahoma, Georgia to Utah and now Pennsylvania are left with no choice but to take individual action to address this critical economic and national security epidemic,” said Metcalfe. “The purpose of this legislation is to offer every illegal alien residing in Pennsylvania two options, leave immediately or go to jail. Whether you came to steal Pennsylvania jobs or to leech off of our state’s fraud-ridden, ‘close your eyes and verify’ welfare system, once this law is enacted there will be absolutely no economic incentives for you to remain here.”

The anti-immigrant movement in Pennsylvania fail to impose iligal lwas in that state sence 2007 when a federal judge struck down two anti-immigrant ordinances that were adopted by the city of Hazleton, Pennsylvania, in the fall of 2006. The Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance (IIRA) and the Tenant Registration Ordinance (RO) include provisions that would penalize businesses that employ “unauthorized aliens” by suspending their licenses, a “harboring” provision that prohibits renting housing to certain immigrants, and provisions requiring occupants of rental units to obtain an occupancy permit that, in turn, requires “proof of legal citizenship and/or residency.” The ruling was issued after a two-week trial that took place in March 2007.

In his decision striking down the ordinances, the judge delivered an understated but stinging rebuke to the city:

"Whatever frustrations officials of the City of Hazleton may feel about the current state of federal immigration, the nature of the political system in the United States prohibits the City from enacting ordinances that disrupt a carefully drawn federal statutory scheme. Even if federal law did not conflict with Hazleton’s measures, the City could not enact an ordinance that violates rights the Constitution guarantees to every person in the United States, whether legal resident or not. The genius of our Constitution is that it provides rights even to those who invoke the least sympathy from the general public. In that way, all in this nation can be confident of equal justice under its laws. Hazleton, in its zeal to control the presence of a group deemed undesirable, violated the rights of such people, as well as others within the community. Since the United States Constitution protects even the disfavored, the ordinances cannot be enforced".

But seems that now with the indifference of the White House and the Federal government to the immigration issues and the Arizona law about to be executed anti-immigrant in PA think that is a good time to impose their ideas.

Tanton Mastermind of the Anti-Immigrant Movement

2010-05-05T01:53:00.004-04:00

The anti-immigration 'movement' is almost entirely the handiwork of one man, Michigan activist John. H. Tanton." In June 2002, it listed thirteen groups that formed part of the "loose-knit Tanton network," according to Tolerance.org, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Today, Tanton stands in the center of a web of anti-immigrant and official English groups. As the founder and publisher of Social Contract Press, Tanton has published books that have helped shaped a nationalist ideology focused on the threat of immigrants to the white, English-speaking population. Social Contract books also stoke fears about immigrants taking over the United States, with research that highlights the rapid rise of Spanish-speaking residents and related socioeconomic problems, while ignoring research that points to the positive contributions of immigrants. In addition to FAIR, where he still is a board member, Tanton has been a central player in an array of anti-immigrant, nationalist groups and institutes, including Pro English, U.S. Inc., Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), U.S. English, and Numbers USA. Funding for these and other organizations in which Tanton is a key figure, often flows through the organization, U.S. Inc.

John Tanton is widely recognized as the leading figure in the anti-immigration and "official English" movements in the United States. Initially, Tanton's public policy advocacy work was driven by his commitment to zero population growth and environmental conservation. By the late 1970s, however, this concern about the environment and population growth evolved into a crusade against immigration flows into the United States, particularly from Latin American and Caribbean nations. At the time that the New Right, Christian Right, and neoconservative political tendencies were mobilizing new constituencies against center-left politics in the United States, Tanton played a central role in mobilizing backlash sentiment against immigrants. Tapping his base in environmental and population control organizations such as the Sierra Club, National Audubon Society, and Zero Population Growth, Tanton in 1979 cofounded what has become the most influential anti-immigrant policy institute in the nation: Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). In 1983, he also cofounded the most influential "official English" or English-only organization, U.S. English.

In 1988, shortly before a referendum in Arizona to make English the state's official language, a private memo written by Tanton was leaked to the media. In this memo, he expressed concerns about the potential political, cultural, environmental, and demographic impacts of continued high levels of Hispanic immigration into the U.S., especially if the Hispanic fertility rate remained higher than that of other ethnic groups. He ended by calling for limiting the flow of immigrants to a rate that would enable them to be assimilated.

However, several of his questions and statements were provocative, such as: "Will Latin American migrants bring with them the tradition of the mordida (bribe), the lack of involvement in public affairs, etc.?", "What are the differences in educability between Hispanics (with their 50% dropout rate) and Asiatics (with their excellent school records and long tradition of scholarship)?", and "On the demographic point: perhaps this is the first instance in which those with their pants up are going to get caught by those with their pants down!"

Under Tanton's leadership FAIR was criticized for taking funding for many years from the Pioneer Fund, a non-profit foundation dedicated to “improving the character of the American people” by, among other things, promoting the practice of eugenics, or selective breeding.

In 1997, comparing immigrants to bacteria said: "In the bacteriology lab, we have culture plates. You put a bug in there and it starts growing and gets bigger and bigger and bigger. And it grows until it finally fills the whole plate. And it crashes and dies."

A February 2009 report by Southern Poverty Law Center examined Tanton's written correspondence highlighted alleged connections between Tanton's immigration-reduction efforts and white supremacist, neo-Nazi and pro-eugenics leaders.

According to the report: "FAIR, CIS and NumbersUSA are all part of a network of restrictionist organizations conceived and created by John Tanton, the “puppeteer” of the nativist movement and a man with deep racist roots. As the first article in this report shows, Tanton has for decades been at the heart of the white nationalist scene. He has met with leading white supremacists, promoted anti-Semitic ideas, and associated closely with the leaders of a eugenicist foundation once described by a leading newspaper as a “neo-Nazi organization.” He has made a series of racist statements about Latinos and worried that they were outbreeding whites. At one point, he wrote candidly that to maintain American culture, “a European-American majority” is required".

A 2002 Southern Poverty Law Center report listed 13 immigration-restriction groups, which they claim were founded and/or funded by Tanton.

American Immigration Control Foundation - AICF, 1983, funded
American Patrol/Voice of Citizens Together - 1992, funded
California Coalition for Immigration Reform - CCIR, 1994, funded
Californians for Population Stabilization - 1996, funded (founded separately in 1986)
Center for Immigration Studies - CIS, 1985, founded and funded
Federation for American Immigration Reform - FAIR, 1979, founded and funded
NumbersUSA - 1996, founded and funded
Population-Environment Balance - 1973, joined board in 1980
ProEnglish - 1994, founded and funded
ProjectUSA - 1999, funded
The Social Contract Press - 1990, founded and funded
U.S. English - 1983, founded and funded
U.S. Inc. - 1982, founded and funded

The detention of Immigrants is a Booming Industry

2010-05-02T19:02:00.010-04:00

The detention of immigrants is viewed as a booming industry that counties can cash in on. With a state prison, death row facility, privately run contract immigration prison, ICE detention facility, and county jail, Florence, Arizona has become a modern-day penal colony. The county, undoubtedly realized it was missing out. In November 2005, local officials in Pinal County, Arizona, completed construction of a 1000-bed facility. The $42 million facility was constructed with the expectation of receiving $15 or $16 million dollars in annual revenue from a contract with ICE.

Federal immigration contracts generated about $95.2 million, or 8 percent, of Correction Corp.'s $1.19 billion in revenue last year, and about $30.6 million, or 5 percent, of Geo's $612 million total income.

The current zeal for immigrant detention has roots in social, economic, and political forces which are driven by dynamics that run to the very core of our social system. The expansion of immigrant detention capacity comes on the heels of an astonishing upward shift in the overall U.S. incarceration rate which has swept this country into the uncharted territory of mass incarceration. The sharp increase in recent months raises fundamental issues about the nature of our governmental system and the prospects for remaining an open, democratic society.

The developments described above in locations as diverse as Bergen County, New Jersey
and Pinal County, Arizona illustrate how – once created – a national “market” for prison bed contracts has penetrated the public sector with notions that expanding capacity of local lockups will generate “profit” for the public purse. And, in rural areas hard-hit by decades of economic decline, the immigrant detention boom is now being heralded as economic development – “jobs for our community.”

The United States government should end the policy of mandatory detention
and should re-examine whether use of detention is necessary and proportional. As long as the laws provide for the mandatory detention of immigrants without the right bond or bail, the country will continue to see the massive expansion of jails, prisons, and private contract facilities, increasingly fueled by the profit-making motives of both the private and public sectors, as much as by anti-immigrant hysteria.

More than Half a Million March on May 1

2010-05-01T19:53:00.004-04:00

Today at more than 80 events in 30 states across the country, more than half a million people prayed, rallied, marched, and protested to demand an immediate fix to our broken immigration system from the President and the United States Congress. The events represent a promised escalation of unrelenting pressure by the grassroots to fix the broken immigration system that divides families, tears apart communities, and burdens our economy.

In Los Angeles, 250,000 marched for immigration reform. In Chicago, 110,000 demanded federal action on the broken immigration system. In Milwaukee, 70,000; In Atlanta, 8,000; In Miami, another 4,000. In St Louis, MO supporters joined Nobel Peace Prize winner Rigoberta Menchú and others for a peaceful march and vigil in support of immigrant rights. Thousands joined marches in Dallas and New York. In cities big and small people marched to demand action from our government to address and fix this crisis once and for all. Any doubt about the size, scope, and magnitude of the immigration reform movement was erased today. All over the country, the grassroots was united in its call for urgency.

Marchers sent a message to the President and Senate Republicans. The time for empty promises, doubletalk, and Washington DC political games has run out. The passage of the harshest and most extreme anti-immigrant legislation in Arizona, and the consideration of it in at least seven other states, has triggered a national crisis that President Obama and the Republican Party can no longer ignore. Combined with the administration's enforcement-only approach to immigration that continues the worst excesses of the Bush administration, there is a moral, political, and civil rights disaster in America. On May 1st, the grassroots spoke loudly and clearly: Enough is enough!

In Washington D.C., national leaders of the immigration reform movement, including Congressman Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Ali Noorani, Chair of Reform Immigration FOR America, Deepak Bhargava, Executive Director of the Center for Community Change, Gustavo Torres, Executive Director of CASA de Maryland, and others were arrested at the White House today in protest of the administration's shameful inaction and in solidarity with the immigrant community.

Last week Senate Democrats unveiled their framework for comprehensive immigration reform with an open request to Republicans to sit down at the negotiating table. So far, Republican Senators have refused to accept the invitation and continue to talk out of both sides of their mouth. They say the federal government must fix the broken immigration system, and then say they won't do it. Republicans need to tell the American people where they stand. Do they stand with the extremist fringe within their party, or do they stand with the vast majority of the American people that want a serious fix to this problem? The time to choose is now.

The President must step up and do better than what to date has been inconsistent leadership on immigration reform. If the President was serious when he said his commitment to achieving reform was "unwavering" he should immediately convene a White House summit to address the crisis and bring leaders from both parties to the negotiating table. We can no longer afford to wait. Administration policies are tearing families apart and federal inaction has left the states to fill the void with bad policies.

The status quo is no longer tolerable. Reform Immigration FOR America will not rest until the President and the Congress keep their promise to reform the broken immigration system. Every day that federal government fails to act, we will ratchet up the political cost for continuing an unjust and broken system. Those on the sidelines will be asked to choose between practical reform and those who support the immoral policies of the status quo.

They Walked 1,500 Miles for The Reform

2010-05-01T00:00:00.010-04:00

Four Trail of Dreams students who have walked 1,500 miles arrive in Washington, D.C. to advocate for desperately needed immigration reforms. At the White House, they requested a meeting with President Obama and deliver a petition with more than 30,000 signatures. Afterward, they walked to the National Press Club to speak about their experiences and respond to questions. The Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center also released Unleash the DREAM: End the Colossal Waste of Young Immigrant Talent, a report that documents the significant economic and national-security benefits that the DREAM Act offers the nation as whole.

The need for the reform has never been more urgent, as Arizona's new anti-immigrant law sadly demonstrates. There are good recommendations, however, including the request by Sens. Richard Durbin, D-IL, and Lugar, R-IN, that DHS defer the deportation of individuals who would be eligible for relief under the DREAM Act. The DREAM Act would allow talented high school graduates to earn legal status and fully contribute their talent to the United States. The FIAC report calls for quick enactment of the DREAM Act as a part of comprehensive immigration reform.

The Trail of Dreams students are exceptional achievers. They are: Gaby Pacheco, 25; Felipe Matos, 24; Carlos Roa, 22; and Juan Rodriguez, 20. "The remarkable Trail of Dreams students have sacrificed so much to make a difference for all young immigrants held back by lack of status," Cheryl Little, FIAC executive director, said. "It's time to halt the drain of American talent and the waste of scarce DHS resources targeting such DREAM Act candidates."

Gaby Pacheco added: "Congress has failed our communities with the lack of initiative to pass legislation that will keep families safe and ensure a bright and promising future for all youth raised in this country. We ask President Obama to act now to stop the detention and deportation of students until there is a path to legalization."

Arizona's Punishing Law Doesn't Fit the Crime

2010-04-30T00:53:00.005-04:00

Supporters of Arizona's harsh new immigration law claim that it is, in part, a crime-fighting measure. However, people like Republican State Senator Russell Pearce of Mesa, the bill's author, overlook two salient points: crime rates have already been falling in Arizona for years despite the presence of unauthorized immigrants, and a century's worth of research has demonstrated that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be behind bars than the native-born. Furthermore, while much has been made about kidnappings in Arizona, law-enforcement officials indicate that most of these involve drug and human smugglers, as well as smuggled immigrants themselves - not the general population of the state.

The Immigration Policy Center releases a fact sheet which shows the decrease in Arizona crime rates over time. The fact sheet also indicates that states with high immigration have the lowest crime rates and that unauthorized immigration is not associated with higher crime rates.

Highlights include:

According to data from the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, violent crimes in Arizona fell from 512 per 100,000 people in 2005 to 447 per 100,000 people in 2008, the last year for which data is available.

According to a 2008 report from the conservative Americas Majority Foundation, crime rates are lowest in states with the highest immigration growth rates, such as Arizona. From 1999 to 2006, the total crime rate declined 13.6 percent in the 19 highest-immigration states (including Arizona), compared to a 7.1 percent decline in the other 32 states.

Although the unauthorized immigrant population doubled to about 12 million from 1994 to 2004, data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that the violent crime rate in the United States declined by 35.1 percent during this time and the property crime rate fell by 25.0 percent.

Combating crime related to human smuggling requires more trust between immigrants and the police, not less. Yet the undermining of trust between police and the community is precisely what Arizona's new law accomplishes. In the final analysis, immigration policy is not an effective means of addressing crime because the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals.

To read the fact check in its entirety, see:

Arizona's Punishment Doesn't Fit the Crime: Studies Show Decrease in Arizona Crime Rates Over Time (IPC Fact Check, April 28, 2010)

Dems Want Border Security Before Legalization

2010-04-28T17:25:00.008-04:00

Today, Representatives of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Asian and Pacific American Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Senator Menendez (D-NJ) and others joined together to condemn Arizona's harsh and extreme anti-immigrant law and to call for movement on comprehensive immigration reform in the U.S. Senate. Last weekend the eyes of the entire nation were focused on Arizona as it became the most dramatic example of the federal government's failure to fix our broken immigration system.

Members of Congress gathered to point out that the new law is fraught with legal, ethical, and moral issues, and has created an imperative for the federal government to act right away to fix the broken immigration system with comprehensive immigration reform. Without bold federal action, they said, the American people would be subjected to more band-aid patchwork fixes that are costly, strain law enforcement, tear apart communities.

"This law has turned Arizona into 1960's Alabama," said Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum and Chair of the Reform Immigration FOR America campaign. "Families will be under siege, parents will be afraid to send their children to school, and workers will be afraid to report to their jobs. In the United States of America, no one should have to be afraid to walk down the street because of the color of their skin. This misguided law is an attack on America's values. It has been condemned on the right and the left, and underscores how badly we need a permanent federal fix to the broken immigration system. The President and the Congress must act NOW."

Following the press conference today, the Associated Press and La Opinion reported on the release of an immigration reform draft proposal authored by Senators Reid (D-NV), Schumer (D-NY) and Menendez (D-NJ). The emerging immigration proposal calls for more federal enforcement agents and other border security-tightening benchmarks before illegal immigrants could become legal U.S. residents.

This framework is a clear step forward but it is not nearly enough. We call upon Republicans and Democrats to come together to introduce bipartisan legislation in he immediate future," said Ali Noorani. "Furthermore, we call upon the President to personally intervene to bring together Republicans and Democrats to forge bipartisan immigration reform legislation that addresses the moral crisis erupting across our nation. The crisis in Arizona today only shows what happens when the federal government fails to do its job. Unless and until the Obama Administration and Congress act, we will only have more empty promises, ineffective enforcement policies, chaos in our communities, and broken families."

Senate Debates Energy vs. Immigration Reform

2010-04-26T19:14:00.007-04:00

The political climate can't be worse. The Arizona fiasco has "mobilize" the congress too. So the Climate legislation that was set to be unveiled today in the U.S. Senate has been postponed (WashPost) for an indeterminate amount of time while key senators try to sort out a dispute involving a separate initiative on immigration reform.

Authors of the Senate's climate change bill Lindsey Graham (R-SC), John Kerry (D-MA), and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) have been working to reconcile differences between the business and environmental communities for months. But Graham expressed strong concerns during the weekend that the bill was losing steam after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) indicated immigration might move ahead of climate change on the Senate calendar. The bill's authors have been pushing for support among businesses, hoping those businesses would then pressure lawmakers to support the bill. Environmentalists criticized this strategy, which involved giving energy companies advantages that took funding from environmental protections.

Graham said Reid is putting personal gain ahead of the public good (Politico), since moving ahead on immigration reform would benefit him in midterm elections. But Reid countered that he is "committed to trying to enact comprehensive clean-energy legislation this session."

On theHill.com, Ian Swanson says jumping into immigration reform could cut both ways for Democrats, since Democratic lawmakers representing more conservative districts or states will want to avoid voting on such a divisive issue ahead of midterm elections.

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) in the middle of a critical battle to keep his job at the senate in this coming elections criticized President Barack Obama's condemnation of Arizona legislators for passing a tough law (NYT) on illegal immigration. McCain said Obama should put troops on the border (AzCentral) if he doesn't like the law.

Friends of John McCain

2010-04-24T20:49:00.005-04:00

Top right: J.T. Ready, a proud Nazi militant, and a Arizona republican activist, share ideas with senator Russell Pearce, author of the anti-immigrant Arizona law. Below: J.T. Ready, second from right in a nazi rally in Arizona. These are the infamous minds behind the racist law that John McCain called: "a step in the right direction".

Brewer shows a stunning lack of judgment

2010-04-23T17:54:00.003-04:00

Today Governor Jan Brewer signed SB1070 into law. It's the harshest and most extreme legislation to deal with the broken immigration system anywhere in the country. The new law enshrines racial profiling, prevents local law enforcement from doing their jobs effectively, and will be prohibitively expensive to implement. These problems are in addition to the serious constitutional and legal questions surrounding the new law, guaranteeing that costly legal action is an inevitable outcome on enacting such a proposal. The law is opposed by Arizona law enforcement, a diverse coalition of faith leaders, immigrants' advocates, civil rights leaders, and legal scholars.

Governor Brewer's politically expedient decision is likely to have implications for the immigration debate. Emboldened by the success of a harshly anti-immigrant measure in Arizona and a failure of the federal government to lead on immigration reform, anti-immigrant legislators all over the country will likely introduce new extreme measures in their own state legislatures.

This law is bad public policy and won't solve Arizona's problems. It's heat-of-the-moment legislation that gives Arizonans false hope in a state law designed to solve a much bigger federal problem. It will not end drug trafficking, it will not stop violent crime, and it takes the focus of law enforcement away from real criminals. Our broken immigration system is a serious national problem that requires a serious federal solution.

"Governor Brewer's decision shows a stunning lack of judgment and is an insult to our nation's constitution," said Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum and Chair of the Reform Immigration FOR America campaign. "This law only appeals to people's fear and their understandable anxiety about the economy, and does nothing to serve Arizona, much less our nation. Governor Brewer's failure to lead, however, rivals that of federal officials who have failed, year after year, to reform our immigration system and reassert federal control. In the absence of federal action, states have taken matters into their own hands - with increasingly disastrous results. This law is a wake up call to the Obama administration and Congress. The majority of Americans want President Obama and Congress to take immediate action on comprehensive immigration reform. Enough excuses, the time to act is now. The Republican Party needs to pick a side: the majority of Americans who want immigration reform or the extremists who want to profile anyone who looks or sounds like an immigrant.

Cease Deportations of DREAM Eligible Students

2010-04-23T00:52:00.006-04:00

Yesterday Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) sent a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano requesting that the agency exercise its prosecutorial discretion and refrain from deporting young people who would be eligible for the DREAM Act. According to their letter, "The DREAM Act would provide immigration relief to a select group of students who arrived in the U.S. when they were 15 or under, have lived in the U.S. for at least five years, have good moral character, are not inadmissible or removable under a number of specified grounds, have graduated from high school or obtained a GED, and attend college or serve in the military for two years."

This request is a welcome step, and we commend Senators Durbin and Lugar for their leadership. We urge the Obama Administration not only to act favorably on this request, but to step up their efforts to secure the enactment of comprehensive immigration reform, which would provide long-term relief to these deserving students. In the absence of legislative action, the Administration is under mounting pressure to address the many manifestations of the moral and political crisis brought about by our broken immigration system.

For example, recently:

The Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General released a scathing report on the mismanagement of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement 287 (g) program, which cedes some authority for immigration enforcement to local law enforcement agencies.

The New York Times reported that earthquake victims who had been evacuated from Haiti by U.S. Marines were jailed in immigration detention centers from the first day they arrived here - as if they were being punished instead of rescued.

The New York Times also lifted up a disturbing story of a new report on mentally ill detainees getting lost in the detention system, not receiving the mental care they need, and being forced to stand trial even though many of them are not mentally competent.

Obama immigration authorities had set arbitrary quotas for ICE agents, incentivizing them to deport non-criminal undocumented non-citizens - a position directly at odds with stated White House and Administration goals wisely focusing enforcement efforts primarily on those who have dangerous or violent criminal backgrounds.

On the political front, Latinos, who voted overwhelmingly for Obama in 2008, are questioning the Administration's enforcement policies and failure to advance comprehensive immigration reform as promised, and putting increasing pressure on the White House and Congress to deliver this year. As Congressman Luis Gutierrez said yesterday "Latino and immigrant voters are likely to stay home if their options are a Republican Party actively pushing them away and a Democratic Party doing little or nothing to draw them in. They don't need me to tell them to stay home and I haven't, but the very real problem exists for the President and my Party that Latino and immigrant voters remember the promises they heard and are tuned-in enough to see they haven't been kept."

"Congress must act immediately to fix the broken immigration system," said Ali Noorani. "But the President must act too. He can not continue to sit on the sidelines while immigration reform legislation languishes in the negotiations stage, because there will be consequences. This joint letter from a Democrat and Republican is just another sign of the increasing pressure on the President and Congress to restore sanity to our nation's immigration system. President Obama should act on the request from Senator Durbin and Senator Lugar for these students, who are American in nearly every aspect, and work with the Congress to pass real comprehensive immigration reform this year."

How Much Will Arizona's Immigration Law Cost?

2010-04-21T18:47:00.004-04:00

Arizona's government now not only faces a economic boycott but the economic impact of the law, which would require police to check a person's immigration status if they suspect that person is in the United States illegally. This law will likely affect not only unauthorized immigrants, but all immigrants and Latinos in general. Given the vital role that immigrants and Latinos play in Arizona's economy, and considering Arizona's current budget deficit of $3 billion dollars, enacting SB 1070 could be a perilous move.

At a purely administrative level, Gov. Brewer should take into consideration the costs of implementation and defending the state against lawsuits. As the National Employment Law Project (NELP) points out in the case of other states that have passed harsh local immigration laws, Arizona would probably face a costly slew of lawsuits on behalf of legal immigrants and native-born Latinos who feel they have been unjustly targeted. This is in addition to the cost of implementation.

For instance, NELP observes that "in Riverside, New Jersey, the town of 8,000 had already spent $82,000 in legal fees defending its ordinance" by the time it was rescinded in September, 2007. Also in 2007, the county supervisors in Prince William County, Virginia were unwilling to move forward with the police enforcement portion of an immigration law after they found that the price tag would be a minimum of $14 million for five years.

More broadly, Gov. Brewer should keep in mind that, if significant numbers of immigrants and Latinos are actually persuaded to leave the state because of this new law, they will take their tax dollars, businesses, and purchasing power with them.

The University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy estimates that the total economic output attributable to Arizona's immigrant workers was $44 billion in 2004, which sustained roughly 400,000 full-time jobs. Furthermore, over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino-owned and had sales and receipts of $4.3 billion and employed 39,363 people in 2002 - the last year for which data is available.

The Perryman Group also estimates that if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time. Putting economic contributions of this magnitude at risk during a time of recession would not serve Arizona well.

With Arizona facing a budget deficit of more than $3 billion, Gov. Brewer might want to think twice about measures such as SB 1070 that would further imperil the state's economic future and try instead to find ways in which she can bring additional tax revenue to her state while pursuing smart enforcement that will actually protect Arizonans.

McCain Endorsed Anti-Immigrant Legislation

2010-04-19T23:57:00.001-04:00

Today Senator John McCain endorsed Arizona's SB 1070, a potential new law in Arizona that would subject Arizonans to racial profiling. The racist anti-immigrant legislation was passed by the Arizona House last week and is being finalized in the legislature.

Senator McCain's comments today on Arizona's law were reprehensible. What a stunning flip-flop from a man who dismissed the US House of Representatives 2005 proposal, the so-called Sensenbrenner bill, as "anti-Hispanic."

McCain said that this misguided, racist, and possibly unconstitutional bill is a "very important step forward." He is exactly wrong. This legislation would create a toxic atmosphere of fear and panic and subject innocent Arizonans to racial profiling. In the United States of America, no one should have to be afraid in their own home, to send their children to school, or to walk down the street.

McCain's comments may be good politics in a bruising 2010 Republican primary, but it's terrible long-term politics for the GOP. Just last week, Senator Jon Kyl promised to filibuster comprehensive immigration reform. Maybe Senator Kyl and Senator McCain think it's wise to pander to the extreme of their party by picking a fight with the nation's largest - and growing - minority group. Demographics, however, say otherwise. The GOP must ask itself what kind of party it wants to be - the kind of party that has a big tent and solves problems for America, or the kind of party that appeals to its worst elements.

Undocumented Immigrants Pay Taxes and Improve the Economy

2010-04-17T23:47:00.001-04:00

The Census Bureau’s mid-range estimates for 2050 asserting that the nation’s Latino population will grow by 63 million people and that Latinos will make up over 25 percent of the U.S. population. The Latino population is now so large, its trajectory of growth so rapid, and its contrast in age relative to that of the general population so stark, that it will not be possible for the United States to advance without substantial—and so far unrealized —gains for the nation's Latino community.

In this context, important politicians of this country who believe that it is crucial to end the isolation of Latino community, have been working for years to solve the problems of the undocumented worker, many of whom are Latinos. They know that this is one important step along with others like education, health, housing, etc. that is imperative to the process of integrating the community to the general population.

After the failure of the Bush administration to reform the broken immigration system President Obama has stated that his administration will pursue a comprehensive overhaul of the U.S. immigration system in 2010. Obama also said that there needs to be "a pathway to citizenship" for millions of illegal immigrants in the United States. The president also expects draft legislation and sponsors by 2010 because of more pressing issues, including energy legislation and financial regulatory changes.
However immigration is among the most controversial items on Obama's legislative agenda, with critics opposing what they call an amnesty for illegal workers and businesses concerned about reductions in their labor force.

Asked about the prospects for immigration legislation in view of the blows to his administration over health care and midterm elections next year, Obama dismissed the idea that the elections would play a role, saying he would not act "on short-term political calculations."

Maybe, but, the House and the Senate may not think so. What the conservatives have said is that this bill only helps people who are here “illegally;” if you want to fix the problem, just tell people to get to the back of the line.' This argument is flawed for several reasons. First, immigration reform doesn’t just help those who are here without documents—rather it creates order out of our immigration policy and treatment of immigrants that will help all Americans. Second, there is no “line” to get on to if you are from a poor country.

Comprehensive immigration reform is absolutely necessary to continue to keep this great country functioning. As things stand, there are 12 million undocumented immigrants in this country. While the legal system generally applies equally to everyone regardless of immigration status (e.g. minimum wage laws, criminal laws), undocumented immigrants live in constant fear of deportation. This fear makes them scared to use the police when they have been the victim of a crime or the courts when they have being exploited by an unscrupulous businessmen forcing them to work for half-minimum wage. With such a huge population being exploited on a daily basis, the quality of living is artificially low, i.e.,—failure to call the police in the face of crime makes our communities less safe; failure to report unscrupulous employers lowers the wage floor for everyone.

However the conservative slogan seems to be: “Send them all home”.

Why? Because: the "path to citizenship" is unpopular. But where does that leave the US economy? Living in fear, working for less than the minimum wage, having no healthcare, and not understanding the language spoken in a country are not the kinds things you do unless it is out of necessity. Undocumented immigrants are not here living high off the government. Undocumented immigrants are here to work and working they are. There can be no doubt about the effect on the economy. They work in construction, building houses; as migrant workers, as small business owners serving the local community. Consequently when you work, you pay taxes, regardless of your immigration status. In 2005, undocumented workers were contributing roughly $7 billion per year into the Social Security trust fund. Money that they will never get back. According to the 2008 report on Social Security, contributions from undocumented immigrants (who will never collect social security) reduce the fund’s long term deficit by 15%.

This data contradicts the all-too-often repeated argument that undocumented immigrants are here suckling the government teat and giving nothing back. Both parts of that argument are just plain untrue.
And of course, none of this is to speak of all of the things that this bill does for people who are here legally. Wage theft will be reduced, leading to higher wages for all workers; the economy will see an estimated boost of $1.5 trillion.

In a December 2007 report detailing the impact of undocumented immigrants on the budgets of local and state governments, Congressional Budget Office and the Social Security Administration, (CBO) found that "according to available estimates," there were about "12 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States" at the time and "those immigrants pay individual income, sales, and property taxes." CBO further reported that "the IRS estimates that about 6 million unauthorized immigrants file individual income tax returns each year. Other researchers estimate that between 50 percent and 75 percent of unauthorized immigrants pay federal, state, and local taxes."

According to The New York Times “Starting in the late 1980's, the Social Security Administration received a flood of W-2 earnings reports with incorrect - sometimes simply fictitious - Social Security numbers. It stashed them in what it calls the "earnings suspense file" in the hope that someday it would figure out whom they belonged to”.

The Times informed that: “The file has been mushrooming ever since: $189 billion worth of wages ended up recorded in the suspense file over the 1990's, two and a half times the amount of the 1980's”.

In the current decade, the file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year, generating $6 billion to $7 billion in Social Security tax revenue and about $1.5 billion in Medicare taxes.

In 2002 alone, the last year with figures released by the Social Security Administration, nine million W-2's with incorrect Social Security numbers landed in the suspense file, accounting for $56 billion in earnings, or about 1.5 percent of total reported wages. According to The Times.

And what about “this line” that we keep hearing about? People are supposed to get back on the line, aren’t they? Even Newt Gingrich understands that there is no sensible line to get on. It is really hard to get a green card, especially if you are from a poor country. Most recently, for worldwide immigration to the US, the statutorily capped at about 400,000 people per year. Total. That includes family members, people coming for a specific job, people in the green card lottery, etc… In 2006, it was estimated that somewhere around 1 million people per year were entering the US without authorization. That means that unauthorized entries are more than double the number of visas available each year. That smells like a problem—our numbers should meet the demand from businesses and workers.

Another issue that not be left out in this issue is the race. Many Latinos are in this country as citizens; some of these people don’t speak any English. We cannot and should not assume that dark skin plus limited English ability = “illegal.” It isn’t right morally and it isn’t correct legally.

Finally for those that lament the fact that there would ever be an “amnesty” that would allow a path to citizenship for people who are here without documents. I would ask them to Google “Tax Amnesty” and then re-ask the question as to whether it ever makes sense for the government to normalize relations with people who may have broken a law in the past. I think they may change there statement.

It is ironic that the conservatives republicans oppose the reform of the broken immigration system. Traditionally the republicans supported the immigrants because they represent the quintessence of the entrepreneur, which must be incorporated in a capitalist economy to compete and progress in a free society. On the contrary the Democrats were skeptical about immigrants because their political base was the unions witch traditionally saw the immigrant as a competitor. That’s why Ronald Regan did an amnesty that cleared the path for citizenship to millions of Latino workers in America. However that has change with time and now the Republicans oppose the reform of the immigration and the Democrats support it. It seems that at least some democrats recognize the support a political capital in the Latino community that will translate into votes in the near future.

Obama: Lets Fix our Broken Immigration System

2010-01-27T23:26:00.000-05:00

In the State of the Union Address this evening President Obama made clear his ongoing commitment to immigration reform noting "we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system - to secure our borders, enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation."

Some may continue to argue that immigration reform is too politically risky to move on this year and that we should focus instead on rebuilding our economy. However, comprehensive immigration reform is compatible with economic reform as it would generate needed economic growth, create jobs and increase tax contributions by ensuring that everyone working in the United States is doing so legally. In fact, immigration reform would allow us to take full advantage of the opportunities for economic growth that immigrants bring.

Immigration Yields Tremendous Economic Benefits to America

A 2007 report from the White House Council of Economic Advisers concluded that immigration as a whole increases the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by roughly $37 billion each year because immigrants increase the size of the total labor force, complement the native-born workforce in terms of skills and education, and stimulate capital investment by adding workers to the labor pool.
Immigrants do not compete with the majority of natives for the same jobs because they tend to have different levels of education and to work in different occupations. In fact, The roughly 90% of native-born workers with at least a high-school diploma experienced wage gains because of immigration between 1990 and 2004, ranging from 0.7% to 3.4% depending on their level of education, according to a 2006 study by Giovanni Peri, Associate Professor of Economics at the University of California-Davis.
Immigrant entrepreneurs are twice as likely as Americans to start business and immigrant inventors account for more than one quarter of all U.S. patents according the Kauffman Index of Entrepreneurial Activity, 2008.

If Comprehensive Immigration Reform is Enacted the Benefits Will Be Even Greater

According to a 2010 study by UCLA professor Raul Hinojosa, comprehensive immigration reform that includes a legalization plan for the unauthorized would contribute a cumulative $1.5 trillion to the Gross Domestic Product over ten years, as more tax revenues are collected, wages increase for U.S.-born and legalized workers, and immigrant workers spend more in our economy. The report also finds that wages for immigrant and native-born workers would rise in part because workers will have more bargaining power in the workplace.
The libertarian Cato Institute also reported that "legalization of low-skilled immigrant workers would yield significant income gains for American workers and households."

"Tonight the President paid tribute to those who struggle to build the American dream, even in the midst of economic uncertainty. His call for a revitalized domestic and foreign policy agenda based on American values and innovation included immigration reform because the White House recognizes the economic and moral necessity of fixing our broken immigration system," said Mary Giovagnoli, Director of the Immigration Policy Center. "We have a golden opportunity to enhance the gross domestic product, create and sustain new jobs and businesses, and maintain our competitive edge in the world if we create a system that legalizes current undocumented workers, provides for improved legal channels for families and new workers when they are needed in the future and adopts sensible policies to secure our border. Such measures will help to provide the framework for an economic recovery that will allow us all to pursue our American dreams."

REFORM IMMIGRATION FOR AMERICA LAUNCHES MASSIVE 2010 NATIONWIDE KICKOFF

2010-01-13T23:02:00.001-05:00

This week, the Reform Immigration FOR America campaign has begun a major escalation of its efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform in 2010 with more than 100 events in 28 states. Starting January 10th, Reform Immigration FOR America launched actions, town halls, marches, rallies, and vigils to demonstrate that the American people want comprehensive immigration reform this year. Americans all over the country want comprehensive reform that will protect workers and help with economic recovery, create millions of new taxpayers, keep families together, and protect the due process rights of all. This was confirmed by fresh polling data released this week from America's Voice, that showed that large majorities of Americans (2/3) want Congress to pass comprehensive reform, including 69% of Democrats, 67% of Independents, and 62% of Republicans. The enormous flurry of activity underscores the urgency of passing reform especially when we need to work together to fix our economy.

This week's mobilization occurred on the heels of major national developments for the immigration reform movement. Last Wednesday, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops urged the Obama administration to make immigration reform a priority to enhance national security and improve the struggling economy. The following Thursday, a major economic report from the Center for American Progress and Immigration Policy Center demonstrated that even during a recession, a path to legalization for immigrants would add $1.5 trillion to the U.S. economy, raise the wage floor of all U.S. workers, and generate up to $5.4 billion in new tax revenues. With so many Americans suffering during the economic downturn, fixing the economy should be Congress's top priority. Comprehensive immigration reform would put the economy on a more stable footing, provide a vital boost for recovery, and increase wages for all.

"Americans are serious about fixing our broken immigration system, and this nationwide escalation is a demonstration of the reform movement's strength all over the country," said Mehrdad Azemun, Field Director for Reform Immigration FOR America. "This is a huge nationwide coalition of communities in states all over the country that is telling Washington: We want you to put aside partisan game-playing, and solve our toughest problems. Our broken system is a bi-partisan problem that requires real leadership from our elected officials."

A small sampling of events:

Colorado: In Aurora/Denver, hundreds gathered with community faith leaders and immigrant advocates to call on Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Tonight in Denver, an immigration reform town hall with Senator Michael Bennett (D-CO) is expected to draw thousands. These are part of several dozen immigration reform events scattered throughout the Rocky Mountain West..

Michigan: In Grand Rapids, hundreds gathered with community faith leaders at Nueva Esperanza Church to call on their elected leaders to get a comprehensive immigration bill done this year. A separate event in Troy attracted hundreds. In Detroit later this week, thousands of Michiganders are expected at an interdenominational faith event for immigration reform.

New Mexico: Hundreds of immigration reform advocates are expected to march in Santa Fe for comprehensive immigration reform later this week. This will happen along with congressional visits and separate events in Roswell and Las Cruces to mobilize New Mexicans for reform.

Pennsylvania: Reform advocates are staging rallies and actions in each of the Congressional Districts in Southeast Pennsylvania, and will culminate their activities with a huge rally in Philadelphia later this week.

California: Partner organizations are hosting actions in all 53 California Congressional districts along with large rallies and Congressional office visits.

North Carolina: In Charlotte, overflow crowds gathered at a meeting of African American and Latino community leaders and immigration reform advocates. This will be followed later in the week in Raleigh and Durham where hundreds are expected to show and express their support for comprehensive immigration reform and to urge Senator Kay Hagan (D-NC) to be supportive.

Ohio: African American, Latino, Evangelical, Catholic, and business leaders will gather at a series of events in Columbus and Cleveland, culminating the week with a huge 1000+ rally in Cincinnati on January 15th.

Illinois: Advocates are staging a multi-city statewide bus tour that will culminate at a huge rally for comprehensive immigration reform in Chicago.

Arkansas: Nearly 1,000 gathered on a cold night in Little Rock at Mosaic church to urge Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) to support comprehensive immigration reform.

Florida: Hundreds are expected to gather from every Florida community at immigration reform events in Orlando, Tampa, Gainesville, West Palm Beach, Tallahassee and others to tell their Congressional leaders that they want reform. This is in addition to the immigrant student march to Washington that began in Miami earlier this month.

This week's events represent a major escalation for the immigration reform movement, and come on the heels of a whirlwind of organizing activity in 2009. Pro-reform advocates have assembled an enormous and unprecedented bi-partisan coalition of people of faith, business, labor, civil rights, and elected officials. More than 700 organizations have joined the Reform Immigration FOR America campaign and the campaign is partnering with Americans in nearly every state to make 2010 the year that Congress finally delivers comprehensive immigration reform for the American people.

Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform

2010-01-07T23:35:00.001-05:00

As the U.S. slowly pulls free from a deep recession, a groundbreaking new study concludes that comprehensive immigration reform would provide just the type of boost our economy needs. Today, the Center for American Progress (CAP) and Immigration Policy Center (IPC) released a joint report, Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which shows that legalizing the roughly 12 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. through comprehensive immigration reform, as well as making future flows more flexible, would grow the economy by $1.5 trillion over 10 years. The stark number cuts into the credibility of claims by immigration restrictionists that immigration reform during an economic recession is implausible.

According to research by Dr. Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda, founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles, creating a legalization process for unauthorized workers would, in the long term (10 years), yield $1.5 trillion to the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and in the short term (3 years) generate $4.5 to $5.4 billion in additional tax revenue and consumer spending sufficient to support 750,000 to 900,000 jobs.

Dr. Hinojosa ran several different economic scenarios and found that enacting a comprehensive immigration reform plan which creates a legalization process for unauthorized workers and sets a flexible visa program not only raises the wage floor for all American workers, but is an economic necessity. Conversely, the deportation prescription that is offered by immigration restrictionists would poison the already anemic U.S. economy by draining $2.5 trillion in GDP over 10 years, even before factoring in the costs of deporting 12 million people and permanently sealing the border.

"These are stark and significant numbers that lawmakers should commit to memory," said Angela M. Kelley, Vice President for Immigration Policy and Advocacy at CAP. "We have got an issue where we know we can improve the economy. It would be to their peril for lawmakers to be short-sighted and not pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation that will reverberate across the economy and help all Americans."

"This report underscores an important opportunity for positive input into an economy that needs it," said Benjamin Johnson, Executive Director of the American Immigration Council. "The report further highlights the need for immigration reform that is focused on what's good for the American economy and what's good for American workers."

As Dan Griswold, Director of Trade Policy Studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, noted during today's press conference, "Enforcement-only is a policy that has not only failed, but has imposed significant costs to Americans as taxpayers. If Congress and the President want to create better jobs and stimulate the economy, then comprehensive immigration reform should be very high on their agenda."

The Secure Communities Program

2009-11-24T00:00:00.000-05:00

As the Department of Homeland Security marks the one-year anniversary of its Secure Communities Program - the latest partnership between Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and local jails to identify and deport "criminal aliens"- the Immigration Policy Center is releasing a Special Report, The Secure Communities Program: Unanswered Questions and Continuing Concerns. The report asks key questions, raises serious concerns about the program, and provides recommendations for its improvement.

The Secure Communities program - currently active in Arizona, California, Florida, Texas, Massachusetts, North Carolina, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Virginia - seeks to remove dangerous criminals from the U.S. However, early evidence from Secure Communities, and experience with other ICE programs, suggests that there is reason to be concerned about whether Secure Communities is meeting that goal, and what impact the program has on local communities. There are questions concerning who is being targeted by the program and how ICE defines and prioritizes criminal immigrants. There are additional concerns regarding the role of local law-enforcement officers, and the potential for racial profiling and pretextual arrests. Finally, the new report raises questions about the management, data collection, and evaluation of the program.

The questions and concerns around Secure Communities provide yet more evidence that enforcement-only policies do not work, and that we need a comprehensive solution to our immigration problems. Attempts to enforce our way out of this problem alone have failed. In a well-functioning legal immigration system, our federal and local law-enforcement agencies could focus their scarce resources on dangerous criminals - immigrant and citizen alike - rather than chasing millions of unauthorized workers who pose no public safety threat.

To read the report in its entirety see:

The Secure Communities Program: Unanswered Questions and Continuing Concerns (IPC Special Report, November 23, 2009)

Effects of Broken Immigration Policy on Children

2009-11-20T23:39:00.001-05:00

The legacy of our broken immigration system extends far beyond our borders or the job market. The price paid by families caught within the system can be devastating, especially when we fail to pay attention to the importance of integrating newcomers into American life. A New York Times editorial this week follows a study that highlights the importance of integrating new Americans and their children.

Fellows at the Institute of Advanced Study at Princeton and co-directors of immigration studies at NYU, Professors Marcelo and Carola Suárez-Orozco have conducted more than 20 years of immigration research, specifically on the effects of dislocation and integration, and found that of the roughly 16 million children in immigrant families (roughly one in five children living in the U.S.), many are not being successfully integrated and experience devastating fallout effects.

After studying 400 children from China, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Central America and Mexico over a five year period, their data indicates that:

Nearly half of the children in their sample had at some point lost contact with one or both parents, either through migration, death or divorce

The absent parent was most often the father—often for long stretches or permanently

Children in separated families are more likely to show signs of depression, exhibiting accompanying symptoms such as isolation, poverty and a downward academic slide

The editorial goes on to demonstrate the need for stronger “policies and programs that support immigrants parents and children”—many of whom are U.S. citizens living in mixed status families—families where at least one parent is a legal U.S. citizen and the other susceptible to detainment or deportation. The number of U.S.-born children in mixed-status families has expanded rapidly in recent years, from 2.7 million in 2003 to 4 million in 2008, according to the Pew Research Center . Roughly 108,434 parents of said U.S.-citizen children were deported from 1998 to 2007, according to the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General.

According to the Urban Institute:

In 2007, about 16.4 million children, or more than one in five children in the United States, had at least one immigrant parent. This large demographic group deserves particular attention because its growth has important implications for federal, state, and local education, health, housing, and family policies. Children of immigrants are also likely to represent a large share of the nation’s future labor force. In addition, children of immigrants deserve special attention because they face many universal risk factors to children’s well-being, such as lower parental education and family incomes, but they are also adversely affected by factors unique to immigration, such as lack of parental citizenship and English proficiency.

Regardless of your take on immigration, children living in immigrant families or mixed-status homes deserve better—and the failure to invest in their education, health and over-all well-being not only runs counter to our American values system, but also to the economic future of this country. As Congress prepares for an overhaul of our immigration system, it is imperative that immigrant integration programs get the attention and funding they deserve.

60.000 Americans in 45 States Organize

2009-11-19T21:59:00.000-05:00

Tonight, more than 60,000 activists, families, friends, and neighbors gathered for a nationwide tele-town hall event that created even greater momentum for comprehensive immigration reform legislation in 2010. The national teleconference was put together by an enormous coalition of faith, law enforcement, labor, civil rights, and immigrant advocacy groups working together to pass comprehensive immigration reform this year. The breadth and size of the coalition was reflected in the massive numbers of people who joined the call. The Reform Immigration FOR America Campaign organized 1,009 house parties in 45 states and Puerto Rico. More than 60,000 called in, joined house parties, or listened to live radio broadcasts.

Last week, anti-immigrant "tea party" activists held rallies to protest the mere presence of immigrants in the United States. However, their numbers paled in comparison to those who assembled tonight. NumbersUSA, a vehemently anti-immigrant organization, hailed a meager 50 events in only 26 states that they acknowledged were "not drawing huge crowds." In contrast, 400 activists showed up to a single pro-reform house party in Silver Spring, Maryland.

The teleconference, hosted by the Reform Immigration FOR America Campaign and featuring Congressman Luis Gutierrez, Congressman Raul Grijalva, and Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez comes just days after White House Senior Advisor David Axelrod and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano indicated the White House is ready to push for comprehensive immigration reform in 2010. Tonight in schools, churches, and community centers all over the country Americans are organizing to push Congress to solve this problem once and for all.

Congressman Gutierrez outlined a progressive vision for immigration reform and told participants to continue organizing to hold their elected leaders accountable. "We need everyone on this call to take action with your churches, your families and your organizations so that we can deliver a strong message to President Obama and Congress that, hey, it has been a year…We want you to keep your promise to our families. We'll be watching on the State of the Union to make sure you keep your promise," said Gutierrez.

"In 2006 we marched, in 2008 we voted, and in 2009 and 2010 we're getting organized." said Congressman Grijalva.

Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez said that the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) and its allies were committed to making immigration reform happen. "The CHC and its allies are working to ensure that comprehensive immigration reform finally become a reality. We have a President who, I think, understands that. We have Democratic majorities in the Congress, and we have a few Republicans who want to work with us to get this done," said Velazquez

Tonight's demonstration of organizational might shows that Americans from every part of the country are committed to achieving immigration reform and ready to get to work.

Audio will be available later on the campaign website http://reformimmigrationforamerica.org/

Wishful Thinking on Immigration and Crime

2009-11-19T00:09:00.000-05:00

A new report from the restrictionist group, Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), Immigration and Crime: Assessing a Conflicted Issue, attempts to overturn a century's worth of research which has demonstrated repeatedly that immigrants are less likely than the native-born to commit violent crimes or end up behind bars. The CIS report focuses much of its attention on questioning the accuracy of the 2000 Census data used in two studies in particular: The Myth of Immigrant Criminality and the Paradox of Assimilation, published by the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) in 2007, and Crime, Corrections, and California: What Does Immigration Have to Do with It?, published by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) in 2008. However, CIS ignores not only the many other sources of data in these two studies, but the myriad studies from other researchers which have reached the same conclusion.

CIS's real agenda appears to be to promote the 287(g) and Secure Communities programs, which - while purporting to identify and capture "criminal aliens"- are actually identifying many individuals who are not criminals, or even immigrants. In fact, recent Secure Communities data shows over 4,000 U.S. citizens who received "hits" through the program. There are many problems with the data from both of these programs, which CIS cites extensively to make its case. Localities with 287(g)'s are a self-selected group, and their data is not representative of the entire country. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) testified in March 2009 that 287(g) has been poorly managed, and that the data which participating agencies are to track and report to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has not been defined. As a result, there is no consistency in the reporting of data. Secure Communities is an even smaller program with a similarly problematic data and reporting system.

Leaving aside the technical (and highly debatable) claims which CIS makes about the accuracy of 2000 Census data, the fact remains that the evidence demonstrating relatively low rates of criminality and incarceration among immigrants comes from far more sources than just the decennial census. It also comes from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), the Immigration and Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles (IIMMLA) survey, the Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS), the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), and in-depth community-based studies in cities such as Chicago, San Diego, El Paso, and Miami.

Moreover, it is not simply the IPC and PPIC which have drawn upon these many sources of data in concluding that immigration is not associated with higher rates of crime or imprisonment. Consider the following three recent examples:

Robert J. Sampson, Chair of the Sociology Department at Harvard University, writes in the Winter 2008 edition of the American Sociological Association's Contexts magazine, that "immigration-even if illegal-is associated with lower crime rates in most disadvantaged urban neighborhoods." Sampson draws in particular on his years of fieldwork in 180 Chicago neighborhoods, as well as police records, to conclude that "ﬁrst-generation immigrants (those born outside the United States) were 45 percent less likely to commit violence than third-generation Americans, adjusting for individual, family, and neighborhood background."

Rubén G. Rumbaut, Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Irvine, and co-author of the IPC study which CIS attempts to debunk, describes the many sources of data which dispel the myth of immigrant criminality. Writing in an April 2009 report from the Police Foundation, Rumbaut observes that "both contemporary and historical studies, including official crime statistics and victimization surveys since the early 1990s, data from the last three decennial censuses, national and regional surveys in areas of immigrant concentration, and investigations carried out by major government commissions over the past century, have shown instead that immigration is associated with lower crime rates and lower incarceration rates."

The July 6, 2009, edition of the conservative magazine Reason features an article entitled "The El Paso Miracle ," which notes that "by conventional wisdom, El Paso, Texas should be one of the scariest cities in America" given its poverty, its large population of less-educated immigrants (many of whom are unauthorized), and its location just across the border from the "super-violent" Mexican city Ciudad Juarez. Yet El Paso "is one of the safest big cities in America." The article observes that this "may not be an anomaly at all. Many criminologists say El Paso isn't safe despite its high proportion of immigrants, it's safe because of them."

In other words, numerous researchers drawing upon numerous sources of data have reached the same conclusion that the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform reached in its 1984 report - which also happens to be the conclusion reached by the Industrial Commission of 1901, the Dillingham Immigration Commission of 1911, and the Wickersham National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement of 1931: that immigration is not associated with higher crime.

New Americans in The Hoosie State

2009-11-16T23:39:00.002-05:00

The Immigration Policy Center has compiled research which shows that immigrants, Latinos, and Asians are an important part of Indiana's economy, labor force, and tax base. Immigrants and their children are a growing economic and political force as workers, consumers, taxpayers, and entrepreneurs. With the state working towards recovery, immigrants and their children will continue to play a key role in shaping the economic and political future of the Hoosier State.

Highlights from Indiana include:

Immigrants make up 4.2% of Indiana's total population.

While the margin of Latino voters in Indiana may seem small at 1.3% (or 36,000), their number was greater than the margin of victory by which the 2008 Presidential election was won in the state (28,391 votes).

More than 35% of immigrants in Indiana are naturalized U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote.

Immigrants in Indiana paid an estimated $2.3 billion in federal, state, and local taxes in 2007.

The purchasing power of Indiana's Latinos totaled $6.8 billion and Asians totaled $3.1 billion in 2008.

If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Indiana, the state would lose $2.8 billion in expenditures, $1.3 billion in economic output and approximately 16,700 jobs.

There is no denying the contributions immigrants, Latinos, and Asians make and the important role they will play in Indiana's political and economic future. For more data on their contributions to the Hoosier State, view the IPC fact sheet in its entirety.

Read more about immigrant contributions in other states:

New Americans in the Grand Canyon State (Arizona)
New Americans in the Natural State (Arkansas)
New Americans in the Golden State (California)
New Americans in the Centennial State (Colorado)
New Americans in the Sunshine State (Florida)
New Americans in the Peach State (Georgia)
New Americans in the Prairie State (Illinois)
New Americans in the Pelican State (Louisiana)
New Americans in the Pine Tree State (Maine)
New Americans in the Great Lakes State (Michigan)
New Americans in the North Star State (Minnesota)
New Americans in the Silver State (Nevada)
New Americans in the Empire State (New York)
New Americans in the Garden State (New Jersey)
New Americans in the Tar Heel State (North Carolina)
New Americans in the Buckeye State (Ohio)
New Americans in the Keystone State (Pennsylvania)
New Americans in the Palmetto State (South Carolina)
New Americans in the Volunteer State (Tennessee)
New Americans in the Old Dominion State (Virginia)

Dobbs is out: what's next?

2009-11-14T11:05:00.008-05:00

By now you’ve probably heard the news: CNN news anchor Lou Dobbs has stepped down from his post. This news is a victory for immigrants, for Latinos, and for America.

A few months back, organizations around the country decided to put a stop to Mr. Dobbs’ inflammatory rhetoric. They may have had different measures of success, but they were all determined to put an end to the hate and let CNN and Lou Dobbs know Enough is Enough!

But they’re just getting started.

What happend?

Dobb’s departure should be a wake-up alarm for all those who are infusing America’s much-needed health insurance and immigration reform debates with inflammatory propaganda. The Nativist enthusiasts can keep pressing snooze, but they are the only ones sleeping through the alarm. It is they who will be left behind.

According to The New York Times: "Months ago the president of CNN/U.S., Jonathan Klein, offered a choice to Lou Dobbs, the channel’s most outspoken anchor. Mr. Dobbs could vent his opinions on radio and anchor an objective newscast on television, or he could leave CNN". For a time, Dobbs did tone down his TV rhetoric but his show drew an average of 631,000 viewers in October, putting him in third place behind Fox News and MSNBC. His ratings have declined in recent months so obviously he was using hate and sensationalism to compete but he fail.

Dobbs evolved from being a sober business anchor to a commentator who labeled himself “Mr. Independent.” The issues at the top of his agenda — ones that he mentioned again on Wednesday in explaining his departure — include immigration policy, the growth of the country’s middle class, climate change, and the military involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq. He had saved his most ideological remarks for his afternoon radio show, which made its debut in March 2008. It is on the radio show that he talked repeatedly about the conspiracy theory claims that President Obama is not a United States citizen. When he mentioned the citizenship issue on CNN over the summer, he raised the ire of his bosses and provoked criticism from progressive groups.

Dobbs departure was related to an event hosted by FAIR, or Federation for American Immigration Reform, on September 15th and 16th. FAIR, according to the Dallas Morning News' Lynn Woolley, has been branded a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Apparently Dobbs was to and did appear on the "radio row" of at this event, which caught the attention of Media Matters boss Eric Burns, who blasted Dobbs in a letter to CNN President John Klein.

Dobbs not only appeared at the FAIR event but continued to hammer away at the birther issue, which is the issue to heart by right-wing extremists and racists.

More recently, his coverage of immigration provoked protests by Hispanic groups. On Wednesday Dobbs abruptly Quits CNN one of the groups, Presente.org, which had called on CNN to fire the anchor, declared a “victory.”

Roberto Lovato, a co-founder of the group, said, “We are thrilled that Dobbs no longer has this legitimate platform from which to incite fear and hate.” The rest rest is history.

The lesson here is that it shows how should be done. So : well, it certainly worked here lets do the same work with the senate and congress for the immigration reform. Lovato was wright this victory is historic for the Latino community.

Napolitano's First Speech on Immigration Reform

2009-11-13T18:24:00.000-05:00

Today, in her first speech on immigration reform, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano spoke in great detail about the security and enforcement measures that her agency has taken under her tenure to enforce current immigration laws, but she noted "the more work we do, the more it becomes clear that the laws themselves need to be reformed."

Speaking at the Center for American Progress, the Secretary laid out her belief that her agency has done its part to secure the border, a major concern for Congress and the public during the last round of immigration debates in 2007, but that enforcement without comprehensive reform was falling short. "While it's important to emphasize the need for immigration reform from an enforcement perspective, the need for reform stretches far beyond those reasons. We have to make sure the immigration system works to support American families, businesses and workers," said the Secretary.

DHS is also ready to implement reform according to the Secretary who noted "We've ended a year-long backlog for background checks on applicants for green cards and naturalization. We've expanded the opportunity for a widow to gain legal status here, despite the untimely death of her U.S. citizen spouse. We've launched a new interactive website that allows people to receive information about the status of their immigration cases by email or text message, and we have reduced the time it takes to process those cases."

The Secretary concluded "at the end of the day, when it comes to immigration, people need to be able to trust the system. Americans need to know that their government is committed to enforcing the law and securing the border - and that it takes this responsibility seriously. Law enforcement needs to have better legal tools and the necessary resources to deal with border-related and immigration-related crime. Businesses must be able find the workers they need here in America, rather than having to move overseas. Immigrants need to be able to plan their lives - they need to know that once we reform the laws, we're going to have a system that works, and that the contours of our immigration laws will last. And they need to know that they will have as many responsibilities as they do rights...This Administration does not shy away from taking on the big challenges of the 21st century, challenges that have been ignored too long and hurt our families and businesses."

Ben Johnson, Executive Director of the American Immigration Council attended the speech and noted, "Napolitano's speech today evidenced a real understanding by the Administration of the comprehensive policy prescriptions necessary to reform a broken system. Although she continues to express support for many enforcement policies - such as local enforcement of federal laws - that have proven to do more harm than good, she rightly acknowledged that it is time to move beyond the enforcement-only strategy of the past 10 years and begin the process of fixing the system. Her clear statement on the value of immigrants to our society and economy, and the important role that immigration reform can play in building a foundation for growth and prosperity is a welcome response to the angry, misinformed rhetoric that has otherwise clouded the debate on immigration."

Tripping Over Immigration Reform… Again

2009-01-27T19:01:00.000-05:00

We cannot afford to slow down every bill and allow every debate to devolve into an immigration food fight. The way to solve this is to have the immigration debate on its own merits, deal with it, and move on to other issues and to do it sooner rather than later.

Using the immigration issue as a partisan bludgeon should surprise no one. The leadership in both Houses of Congress is reacting to the dying vestiges of a strategy that uses immigration as a wedge issue. Instead, leadership should lead with an affirmative agenda to pass broad immigration reform and cut off these wasteful immigration amendment battles on unrelated topics. Without a plan, these distracting and painful skirmishes will flair up on every bill that moves.

President Barack Obama, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, and the rest of the Administration must exert some leadership so that a clear plan for immigration reform is articulated and every other item on the President’s agenda is not derailed or delayed.

The stimulus package should be the stimulus package and health care for children should be health care for children. Making either or both an immigration issue is simply a delay tactic, as well as a way of scuttling progress on issues that matter to the American people. Immigration is not a border wall to improving the health of our country and our people.

Every child ought to have health coverage without having to wait five years to become eligible. We know almost all of these children will live their entire lives in the United States and raise their children here, so delaying or denying them access to health care is shooting ourselves in the foot.

Our ailing economy needs help now. Delaying aid while we wait for businesses, local governments, hospitals, and contractors to sign up for what we know is a flawed worker verification system doesn’t make sense. E-Verify should be dealt with as part of a broader fix to our immigration system. Injecting it into the stimulus package just guarantees more gridlock and delay.

Immigrant and Latino voters turned out in record numbers in November and now expect this Congress and this President to deal with immigration rationally, humanely, and fully. The time has passed to let the tail wag the dog and have politicians get away with seeing our broken immigration system as an opportunity or a partisan tool. It’s time we stop using immigrants and immigration as a divisive issue in a game of partisan football and start seeing immigration as a problem with clear solutions that can be achieved.

America's "Toughest" Racist

2008-12-17T18:31:00.000-05:00

Just after Christmas, Fox Television will debut their new reality television show "America's Toughest Sheriff" starring none other than Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Criticisms are mounting of Sheriff Joe's tactics including a recently released report by the conservative Goldwater Institute entitled "Mission Unaccomplished" which provides a stinging critique of Arpaio's department. Additional voices include the Mesa police chief and Mayor of Phoenix who asked the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. There are also 2,700 lawsuits pending against Arpaio and a new video, by America's Voice, detailing his record along with a petition to the DOJ urging an investigation.

The Immigration Policy Center has prepared the following fact sheet to provide context into Sheriff Joe Arpaio's record and how he transformed his local law enforcement office into an immigration enforcement agency at the peril of his community. We are also providing additional links that highlight Sheriff Joe's record.

The High Price of Being America's Toughest Sheriff (IPC Fact Sheet, December 17, 2008) This report highlights two independent reports by the East Valley Tribune and Goldwater Institute on Sheriff Arpaio's Department.

Arpaio the Only One Smiling in Maricopa County (ImmigrationImpact.com Blog Post) Additional thoughts on Arpaio's tactics and new video.

Bush Issuing Unhelpful Regulations

2008-12-16T20:42:00.000-05:00

Before they leave town, the Bush Administration is hurrying to put their stamp on national immigration policy at the last minute. The latest are regulations that erode the rights of workers in the H2A agricultural “guest-worker” program, thereby threatening the rights and working conditions of all workers in U.S. agriculture and throughout the economy. Having failed to enact meaningful immigration reform, President Bush is on the verge of leaving to his successor an even more dysfunctional, unfair, and unrealistic immigration system than he himself inherited eight years ago.

Every new regulation issued by this Administration in its waning days is more work for the new President and Congress to undo through administrative changes, legislative initiative, or regulatory reform. We are optimistic that the past several years of inaction on immigration reform – or actions that make things worse – will come to a close with the New Year and the breeze of change blowing through Washington.

Today’s regulatory changes weaken wage and worker protections for participants in the already exploitative H2A agricultural temporary worker program and makes the program even harder to use by decent employers trying to play by the rules and treat workers fairly.

The new regulations come on top of sweeping Justice Department regulations that potentially require all immigrants in deportation proceedings to submit DNA samples to federal authorities – another gross erosion of privacy rights for which this Administration has shown so little respect. This rule comes on the heels of other recent troubling changes that saddle employers with unreliable worker verification programs like the E-Verify system and rules which implement the flawed SSA “no-match” program.

The Bush administration continues to ignore the need for meaningful, thoughtful immigration reform and the serious economic ramifications of regulations that undermine the rights of all workers. In an unstable economy, hard-working immigrant and native-born workers need steady leadership, so the New Year can not come soon enough.

A Good Start

2008-12-09T18:39:00.001-05:00

There’s a crying need for English-language instruction among immigrants. The 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy found that 11 million adults in the United States were not literate in English, and that state and local language programs were reaching only about 1 million of them.

The Web site, launched this month at www.usalearns.org , is not a perfect substitute for an abundance of amply funded, not-overcrowded English as a Second Language classes. But it’s a good start.

No Match Regulation Litigation

2008-12-09T18:15:00.000-05:00

A federal judge in San Francisco has denied a government request to quickly issue a final decision on whether the Bush Administration may implement its new Social Security Administration (SSA) "no match" rules. The lawsuit brought by labor unions and employers seeking to block the rule will move forward under a standard schedule, and a decision will not come until late February or March of 2009.

"We applaud Judge Breyer for not bowing to the Bush Administration's political pressure to rush a decision. There is too much at stake to hurry the process. By sticking to a standard court schedule the judge has ensured that he will take all evidence and arguments into careful consideration before issuing a decision that could have a harmful impact on millions of U.S. workers," stated Angela Kelley, Director of the Immigration Policy Center. "The Obama Administration will also have the opportunity to consider whether this is a practical and cost-effective program to pursue."

In October, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued an administrative rule setting new procedures for employers who receive "no match" letters from the SSA. If implemented, employers who do not follow the new rules could face increased penalties for hiring unauthorized workers. Ever since the rule was first issued in 2007, the courts have blocked its implementation.

Immigrant, business, and labor advocates have argued the new attempts to use the "no match" program--an SSA program used to help U.S. workers track earnings and receive benefits--as an immigration enforcement tool, is a purpose for which the program is ill equipped.

Implementation of the new rule would also have a potentially devastating impact on the economy. As unemployment numbers continue to rise, the "no match" rule could result in as many as 165,000 U.S. citizens and legal workers losing their jobs and could cost employers over $1 billion per year according to an April 2008 study commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

An Outstanding Choice

2008-11-21T18:11:00.002-05:00

The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) Director, Ben Johnson and Immigration Policy Center (IPC) Director, Angela Kelley issued the following joint statement in response to the recent selection of Governor Janet Napolitano (D-AZ) as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) nominee.

"Arizona Governor, Janet Napolitano is an outstanding choice to head the Department of Homeland Security. In choosing Napolitano, the incoming administration has tapped a leader with a deft combination of political saavy and policy know-how. As a border governor, Napolitano has been in the eye of the immigration storm and has shown that she understands that it is in our nation's interest to not only secure our borders, but also to provide for a realistic and practical immigration system that is in tune with our country's economic needs. Napolitano has been a leading voice for comprehensive immigration reform, including improved border security measures and a system to bring undocumented immigrants 'out of the economic shadows.' Her lifetime of public service is a testament to her incredible integrity, aptitude, and commitment to the American people."

Obama victory took root in Kennedy-inspired Immigration Act

2008-11-11T16:16:00.004-05:00

By Peter S. Canellos
Boston Globe 11-11-08

Barack Obama's victory last week triggered an immediate accounting of debts to be paid off in constructing his new administration. There were those who speculated that Obama would be building a White House staff of loyal old Chicago hands. Others foresaw a bevy of Clintonistas. And still others had a vision of a kind of Kennedy redux that wags quickly dubbed "Obamalot."

After all, Caroline Kennedy had emerged from her shell of shyness to head Obama's vice-presidential search team, after joining her Uncle Ted on a national barnstorming tour with Obama in the days leading up to Super Tuesday.

Her exertion not only signaled her enthusiasm for Obama, but also her willingness to be a greater presence in public life: Some now envision her as a possible UN ambassador.

Her cousin, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has spent decades developing credibility as a global environmental activist, and some people close to the Kennedy family feel he, too, is ready to emerge on the national stage, having overcome a troubled youth. They see him as a possible Environmental Protection Agency chief.

There is no question that Obama owes a debt to the Kennedys - but it may be far greater than he or they realize. Yes, Senator Edward M. Kennedy offered a crucial early endorsement, comparing the Obama of 2008 to the Jack Kennedy of 1960. And certainly Caroline and others in the Kennedy family worked hard on the campaign trail. But the greatest Kennedy legacy to Obama isn't Ted or Caroline or Bobby Jr., but rather the Immigration Act of 1965, which created the diverse country that is already being called Obama's America.

That act is rarely mentioned when recounting the high points of 1960s liberalism, but its impact arguably rivals the Voting Rights Act, the creation of Medicare, or other legislative landmarks of the era. It transformed a nation

85 percent white in 1965 into one that's one-third minority today, and on track for a nonwhite majority by 2042.

Before the act, immigration visas were apportioned based on the demographic breakdown that existed at the time of the 1920 Census - meaning that there were few if any limits on immigrants from Western and Northern Europe, but strict quotas on those from elsewhere.

The belief that the United States should remain a nation of European lineage was openly discussed when immigration laws were revisited in 1952. The resulting bill, the McCarran-Walter Act, was notorious for giving the State Department the right to exclude visitors for ideological reasons, meaning that a raft of left-wing artists and writers - including Chilean poet Pablo Neruda, British novelist Graham Greene - and scores of others were denied visas. But it also had the effect of maintaining the 1920s-era notion of the United States as a white nation. (Congress imposed the bill over President Truman's veto.)

A decade later, attitudes were changing, and President Kennedy proposed a new immigration structure that would no longer be based on national origins. After Kennedy's assassination, his brother Ted took up the fight, pushing the Johnson administration to go even further than it wanted in evening the playing field.

Though Lyndon Johnson, in signing the bill, tried to reassure opponents that it wouldn't do much to change the balance of immigration, its impact was dramatic.

In the 1950s, 53 percent of all immigrants were Europeans and just 6 percent were Asians; by the 1990s, just 16 percent were Europeans and 31 percent were Asians. The percentages of Latino and African immigrants also jumped significantly.

Simon Rosenberg, president of the liberal think tank NDN, formerly the New Democrat Network, calls the Immigration Act of 1965 "the most important piece of legislation that no one's ever heard of," and said it "set America on a very different demographic course than the previous 300 years."

By adding so many Asians, Latinos, and African immigrants, Rosenberg says, the act changed the racial narrative in America from one of oppression - the white-black divide dating to slavery - to one of diversity. That change was strongly echoed in the Obama campaign, which emphasized the candidate's mixed-race background as making him representative of a new generation of Americans.

That generation has its roots in the Immigration Act of 1965, and the act had its roots in the Kennedys. Obamalot may be the modern reflection of JFK's New Frontier, after all.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-mckenzie_11edi.State.Edition1.2982a18.html

Who Are the Soccer Moms and NASCAR Dads of the 2008 Election and Beyond?

2008-11-03T15:18:00.000-05:00

Late on Election Day, pundits will begin to identify the demographic groups who are responsible for swinging the results in key races around the nation. The Immigration Policy Center has released a groundbreaking report, entitled The New American Electorate: The Growing Political Power of Immigrants and Their Children, which examines, for the first time, the growing electoral clout of a previously unidentified yet pivotal group of voters in key states around the nation: New Americans-naturalized immigrants and the U.S.-born children of immigrants raised during the current era of immigration that began in 1965.

The report finds:

New Americans Were Nearly 9% of All Registered Voters in 2006.

The Number of New American Registered Voters Jumped Nearly 60% between 1996 and 2004.

New Americans' Share of Registered Voters Exceeded the 2004 Victory Margins in 16 States, including battlegrounds like Nevada, Florida, New Mexico and Pennsylvania.

State Snapshots:

Nevada
New Americans accounted for 14.8% of all registered voters in Nevada, while the margin of victory in the Presidential race in 2004 amounted to only 2.2% of registered voters.

New Mexico
New Americans accounted for 7.0% of all registered voters in New Mexico, while the margin of victory in the Presidential race in 2004 amounted to only 0.6% of registered voters.

Virginia
New Americans accounted for 6.2% of all registered voters in Virginia in 2006, while the margin of victory in the 2004 Presidential race amounted to only 7.6% of registered voters in the state.

What's to come?
2008 is expected to be a banner year for New American voters due to record-breaking naturalization rates (3 million more naturalized citizens are eligible to vote now than during the 2004 Presidential election); turbo-charged registration efforts by groups like the We Are America Alliance and "Ya es Hora, Ve y Vota;" and aggressive GOTV efforts in ethnic communities which will likely result in Latino turnout hitting record highs in 2008-surpassing the 7.6 million Latino voters who turned out in 2004.

Click here to view the report, as well as detailed supplemental tables for every Congressional district on the number of voting-age citizens who are naturalized immigrants, Latinos, and Asians.

DHS Undermines Economic Security

2008-10-23T22:47:00.000-04:00

Today, DHS issued a final administrative rule notifying employers that failure to take action upon receipt of Social Security Administration "no-match" letters will serve as constructive notice that an employer had hired an employee who was an undocumented immigrant. These "no-match" letters are in fact wage report letters issued by the Social Security Administration that are designed to identify possible record-keeping errors and other problems associated with matching wages to Social Security numbers. The following is a statement from Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum

While Congress holds hearings on Wall Street's financial crisis and the Bush administration's response, and the Department of Labor releases unemployment statistics confirming the pain of a slow down in the economy, the Department of Homeland Security continues to march to the beat of its own deportation-only drum. While the country focuses on a severe credit crisis, the lack of health insurance crisis and a looming recession, DHS’s action effectively pours salt onto a wound widening everyday. To burden good employers with mounds of enforcement-laden paperwork based on bad data stifles an economy struggling to survive.

Today’s release of a final administrative rule regarding “no-match” letters is opposed from all corners of our economy. The so called "no-match" rule turns an advisory letter issued by the Social Security Administration – designed to ensure that individuals paying into the Social Security system are properly credited for their work – into a tool for tracking down undocumented workers. While employers should certainly take steps to correct discrepancies, the no-match rule will not seriously address the problems of illegal immigration.

Inaccurate databases, human error, and failure to report name changes can all contribute to the "no-match" problem, but this new rule is likely to turn all no-match letters into scarlet letters, leading to unnecessary dismissals and possible discriminatory hiring practices. Given our country's rapidly unraveling economy, measures that further weaken businesses and threaten the economic security of our nation and of legitimate workers – native and immigrant worker alike - is bad public policy.

Hitting a Wall on Immigration

2008-10-20T22:35:00.002-04:00

By Thomas Wenski

As the presidential election heads into its final days, the issue of immigration remains largely unaddressed. It was not examined during the debates and is not high on either candidate's list of talking points. Congress has left the issue on the table. Sadly, this congressional reluctance has created a policy vacuum that has widened America's political divisions and left us with an inconsistent, ineffective and, in many cases, inhumane national policy.

The failure of comprehensive immigration reform last year, when Congress bowed to a vocal minority, unleashed a torrent of initiatives designed to demonstrate that the U.S. government can enforce our laws and secure our borders. In truth, intermittent work site raids, increased local law enforcement involvement and the creation of a wall along parts of our southern border, among other efforts, have done little to address the challenges presented by illegal immigration.

The most visible of these initiatives has been the work site raids in cities and towns across the nation. While these enforcement actions meet the political need to show government's law enforcement capabilities, they have had minimal effect on the number of undocumented workers in the United States.

Instead, they have caused dislocation and disruption in immigrant communities and victimized permanent U.S. residents and citizens, including children. The sweeping nature of these raids -- sometimes involving hundreds of law enforcement personnel with weapons -- has made it difficult for those arrested to secure basic due-process legal rights, including access to counsel. Some families have been split up indefinitely.

The involvement of local law enforcement in immigration enforcement, most prominently in Arizona and parts of the South, has greatly harmed the trust between immigrant neighborhoods and law enforcement and has diverted police from the work of apprehending criminals. The border wall and an unprecedented immigration enforcement buildup along our southern border have failed to deter new entrants to the United States and have discouraged immigrants from leaving.

Perhaps most damaging are the adverse, long-term effects these policies have had on immigrant communities. The overriding emotion many immigrants feel is fear. Not only do legal immigrants worry that a loved one may be swept away in a work site raid or after a knock at the door at home, they are fearful for their own futures -- and the futures of their children -- in the United States. This is not the way to encourage integration and responsible citizenship.

While some organizations that oppose immigration are delighted by this and hope such an atmosphere will lead to a mass exodus of illegal and legal immigrants, they are likely to be disappointed. What they do not acknowledge is that 70 percent of the undocumented have lived in this country for five years or longer and have no home to return to. These people identify themselves more as Americans than anything else and would rather live here in the shadows than take their U.S.-citizen children back to a place they do not know.

Opponents like to argue that our economy does not need the work of immigrants, now or in the future. Again, they are wrong. The Labor Department predicts that in the years ahead, despite the current economic slowdown, a shortage of low-skilled labor will exist in several important industries, for some beginning as early as 2010. As baby boomers begin retiring, immigrants will help support them by paying billions into the Social Security system.

To many elected officials, immigration has become the new "third rail" of American politics. Refraining from addressing this pressing domestic issue, however, will elevate tensions in states and localities, further alienate immigrants and their communities, and tacitly affirm the acceptance of a hidden and permanent underclass in our country.

The silver lining of this dark cloud upon our immigrant history is that it demonstrates that an enforcement-only approach to illegal immigration is ineffective and contrary to our national interests. A new administration and new Congress will be forced to act -- this time in a broad and balanced manner. Otherwise, the American people will be left pondering a wall and wondering why it is not working.

The writer is the Catholic bishop of Orlando and a consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Committee on Migration.

Published at The Washington Post.

American Immigration Law Foundation

2008-09-29T15:38:00.000-04:00

On Friday, September 26th, Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) proposed the "Protect Citizens and Residents from Unlawful Raids and Detention Act" (S.3594) to establish minimum standards of treatment for U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents and immigrants who are impacted by immigration enforcement operations. The following is a statement by Ben Johnson, Director of the American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF)-an immigration policy, litigation, and education organization in Washington, DC.

"The American Immigration Law Foundation applauds Senators Menendez and Kennedy's efforts to reintroduce the rule of law and the basic principles of fairness and humanity to the enforcement of our country's immigration laws with the Protect Citizens and Residents from Unlawful Raids and Detention Act. Due process and equal treatment under the law are fundamental rights that our country has stood for and are at the heart of the Menendez-Kennedy bill.

In recent months, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has dramatically stepped up interior enforcement efforts and it's no secret that hundreds of ICE detainees have been grossly denied not only due process protections, but also the fair treatment that every person, regardless of their immigration status, deserves. This failure to abide by the rule of law has resulted in utter chaos: U.S. citizens and lawful residents have been mistakenly detained; workers have been retaliated against for exercising their rights to organize in the workplace; and DHS officials have raided private homes without a warrant.

Immigration raids, detentions, and mass deportations terrorize workers and wreak havoc on families and entire communities with no real payoff. We can't expect to deport our way out of our immigration problem and we can't expect to improve wages and working conditions by simply removing a class of exploited workers. What we need is fair and practical comprehensive immigration reform that restores the rule of law through realistic regulation.

Yet in the meantime, we can't lose sight of who we are and what America stands for. As a country, we have always valued the need for fairness, due process, and the ability and freedom to have a voice in our judicial system. However, when it comes to immigration, our nation's noble legacy has been bluntly disregarded by federal officials. It's encouraging that members in Congress are prepared to challenge the current administration and reaffirm our uncompromising commitment to these principles."

Thousands to Become New American Citizens

2008-09-16T17:55:00.000-04:00

September 17 is Citizenship Day in the United States; a day to celebrate the Constitution and the meaning of U.S. citizenship. Among the activities marking Citizenship Day this week are massive naturalization ceremonies at Fenway Park in Boston (Wednesday), a thousand-person ceremony (this past Monday) in Las Vegas, a 900-person swearing-in in Orlando (also Monday), and another 600-person ceremony in Denver today, among many others. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reports that 700,000 new Americans have been sworn in this year. The following is a statement by Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, a non-partisan, pro-immigrant advocacy group in Washington.

Hundreds of thousands of new American citizens joining our country this year is a sure sign that our nation is strong and immigration remains a defining part of the American character. Embracing America, becoming a citizen, registering to vote, and voting are among the most telling indications that immigrants today are revitalizing our democracy, as they have done for more than two centuries.

This year, massive nationwide campaigns to help immigrants through the citizenship process and to register eligible citizens to vote will be reflected on Election Day. At all levels of government, new voters, including immigrants and their adult children, will be decisive factors in choosing who will lead us in the coming years.
We don’t make it easy for new citizens. We place so many barriers before immigrants, from lengthy bureaucratic backlogs to exorbitant fees to unrealistically restrictive legal immigration channels. For example, a permanent resident (green card holder) hoping to bring her son legally from Mexico would have had to have applied for a visa in May 2001 to have a visa for him today, assuming he hadn’t turned 18 or gotten married in the meantime. Another example is how many thousands of hopeful citizens who applied more than a year ago have been caught up in the citizenship backlog and will not be sworn in in time to vote this November.
Nevertheless, raising your right hand and pledging “to support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic” is every bit as meaningful today as it was for my parents, who chose to make their lives in America having grown up in Pakistan.

We welcome our new neighbors, fellow citizens, and future leaders and pledge to them that we will continue to welcome immigrants who strengthen and revitalize our communities, families, and economy. We also pledge to redouble our efforts to fix our dysfunctional legal immigration system and restore legality and orderliness to immigration, one of the most unique and powerful aspects of America’s continued strength and competitiveness.

Congressional Event Perpetuates Myth of Immigrant Criminality

2008-09-10T20:10:00.000-04:00

Republican members of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration are regrettably perpetuating the persistent myth of immigrant criminality with their forum on "The Toll of Illegal Alien Criminals on American Families." Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Steve King (R-Iowa) are spearheading tomorrow's conversation.

Numerous studies by independent researchers and government commissions over the past 100 years have consistently found that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than the native-born. This holds true for both legal immigrants and the undocumented, regardless of their country of origin or level of education.

It's not likely a coincidence that Smith and King's forum is happening during the same week that the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is lobbying Congress, demanding an impractical and hateful agenda of mass deportations, worksite raids, and other expensive and ultimately ineffective approaches as part of their "Hold Their Feet to the Fire" gathering. The Republican forum is even featuring some of the same witnesses who participated in FAIR's rally this afternoon.

It is disappointing to see law makers Smith and King--along with their fellow congressmen Darrell Issa (R-CA), Brian Bilbray (R-CA), and Duncan Hunter (R-CA) who attended FAIR's rally today--tarnish the Republican brand by supporting the agenda of FAIR, an organization designated a "hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center. It is especially troubling to see law-makers exploit the pain of the victims of these terrible crimes to promote their political motives. There is no doubt that dangerous criminals must be punished, and that immigrants who are dangerous criminals should not be allowed to enter the US or should be deported if they already are here. But exploiting the profound painful loss of crime victims to spread the myth that immigrants are criminals is irresponsible and disingenuous.

REPORT SHOWS SHOCKING DECLINE IN U.S. CITIZENSHIP APPLICATIONS

2008-09-10T14:49:00.001-04:00

Today, the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR) released a report that reveals a shocking decline in the number of U.S. citizenship applications in the last year. The report is called Priced Out: U.S. Citizenship, a privilege for the rich and well-educated? Exorbitant fees that had gone up by 610% in the last 10 years and the change in new citizenship test primarily impact legal immigrants of low-income and less-educated backgrounds, making U.S. citizenship a privilege for the rich and well educated.

“The Bush administration is making citizenship accessible only to the rich and well educated,” stated Flavia Jimenez, Director of the New Americans Initiative, a citizenship program administered by ICIRR. “This is contrary to the notion that playing by the rules and hard work is enough to become part of this great nation. Now, a person has to be wealthy, and with the change in test, have a much higher degree of education to become American. If the U.S. government was a credit card company, Citizenship is the gold card, only available to the elite.”

"Citizenship should not be auctioned for sale to the highest bidder," said Congressman Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL), "it should be available to all who qualify regardless of their income. The men and women who dream of taking the oath of citizenship are committed to the responsibilities of being American citizens and are equally prepared to pay the cost of processing the applications they submit to USCIS for courteous, timely and efficient services. However, the cost must be a fair price, and not burden the applicants of the future with budget shortfalls and agency inefficiencies of the past."

“I know about the privileges of becoming an American. I can sponsor my family to join me here in the U.S., can travel with a U.S. passport, and would love to be able to vote,” said Sunitha Doma, an eligible immigrant eager to gain full citizenship in the U.S. “I just do not have $675 available to send to immigration services.”

Results show affordability is the big obstacle for eligible immigrants like Sunitha to become citizens. In the past ten years, the federal minimum wage has only increased by 27%, while citizenship fees have increased to an unreasonable 610 %. A hard-working minimum-wage worker, must save an entire eight weeks worth of earnings –$ 262 per weekly paycheck – in order to pay the citizenship fees for a family of four. As immigrants face the mounting financial and education hurdles to apply for citizenship, becoming Americans implies less a matter by choice, but by chance.

Record 1,238 Latino students earned scores on Advanced Placement exams

2008-09-09T21:46:00.001-04:00

The Montgomery County Board of Education approved the observance of Hispanic Heritage Month from September 15 through October 15, 2008, in recognition of the significant contributions to the community of the Hispanic American and Latino community. The Board resolution noted that, in 2006–2007, a record 1,238 Hispanic American or Latino students earned scores on Advanced Placement exams that were high enough to qualify for college credit.

Obama has made no call to reverse the Bush Immigration Program

2008-08-30T19:41:00.003-04:00

More than 800 people joined a march supporting immigration rights this morning, culminating in a lunchtime, festival-like gathering at Lincoln Park.

The march began shortly after 9 a.m. at Rude Park and proceeded without any problems, police said.

"It's been a fantastic group. I think this went off without a hitch," said police Capt. Joseph Padilla. "They've all been cooperative."

A group calling itself "World Can't Wait" led the march.

"This is Germany in the 1930s all over again!" according to a press statement. "The past seven years of the Bush regime have seen a dramatic escalation of attacks on immigrants on many fronts."

But marchers say they don't believe there would be significant changes under a Barack Obama
Immigrant rights advocates marched on Denver on August 28, 2008.

"Obama has made no call to reverse this whole ugly program," the statement says. "Stop the attacks on Immigrants! Stop the ICE raids! Stop the Criminal Bush Program!"

Police monitored streets along the route after hearing reports that anti-immigration protesters might try to heckle the crowd, but they encountered no problems.

"We want to build bridges and not walls between our countries," march organizer Rudy Gonzales said. "We want pathways to citizenship. We want to decriminalize immigration."

March supporters included those with T-shirts that proclaim: "Immigrant rights are human rights."

Felipe Perez, 32, of Denver, said he is a first-generation citizen who lays tile for work, and that several members of his family were deported, including his aunt who was pregnant when one day she disappeared.

"We didn't know what happened to her. Something has to be done to open our borders. I still have family members who come here to make a better life," he said.

The Rev. Ron Stief, of Washington, D.C., helped organize the march. He said he has traveled the country visiting illegal immigrants held in detention centers.

"There is no issue more important than how we care for immigrants," he said. "The way that families cannot be united is a problem as well as the way people have been criminalized and end up in jail."

Aubrey Valencia, 32, of Aurora walked with her daughter, Jasmine, 6, to join the march.

"This is how she gets an education," said Valencia, who held her daughter home from school to march. "The goal is to teach history as it happens, about the democratic process, about social justice."

An older man watching the march commented, "I don't know how someone could stay home and watch Dr. Phil with all this going on, but they do."

The Other Operation Scheduled Departure

2008-08-26T21:01:00.003-04:00

In another large-scale workplace immigration crackdown, federal officials raided a factory here on Monday, detaining at least 350 workers they said were in the country illegally.

Numerous agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement descended on a factory belonging to Howard Industries Inc., which manufactures electrical transformers, among other products.

As of late Monday afternoon, no criminal charges had been filed, said Barbara Gonzalez, an agency spokeswoman, but she said that dozens of workers had been "identified, fingerprinted, interviewed, photographed and processed for removal from the U.S."

The raid follows a similar large-scale immigration operation at a meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa, in May when nearly 400 workers were detained. That raid was a significant escalation of the Bush administration's enforcement practices because those detained were not simply deported, as in previous raids, but were imprisoned for months on criminal charges of using false documents.

The mass rapid-fire hearings after the Postville raid took place in a temporary court facility on the grounds of the National Cattle Congress in Waterloo, Iowa. An interpreter was later sharply critical of the proceedings, saying the immigrants did not understand the charges against them.

An immigrant rights group in Jackson, Miss., the state capital, was critical of Monday's raid, saying families with children were involved.

"It's horrific what ICE is doing to these families and these communities," said Shuya Ohno, a spokesman for the Mississippi Immigrants Rights Alliance. "It's just hard to imagine that this is the United States of America."

In Laurel on Monday afternoon, several dozen family members of immigrants waited for news of their relatives at the Immaculate Conception Catholic Church. There were several small children. A priest at the church who identified himself only as Father Sergio refused to allow interviews with the families or answer any questions, saying only: "People are afraid. We need to calm them. There are mothers and children involved."

Entrances to the sprawling plant, in an industrial section south of town, had been blocked off by ICE. A nearby fast-food restaurant was full of the blue-shirted agents, one of whom would say only that a "little inspection" was under way at the facility.

A woman entering the church grounds with four small children said several of the youngsters' parents had been detained. The woman, Mary Troyer, said she was a translator for many of the families.

"I don't like this at all," Ms. Troyer said. "I don't understand it. They have come here to work. It's very sad."

The ICE spokeswoman, Ms. Gonzalez, said the workers would be taken to an ICE detention center to "await the outcome of their cases." She said 50 would be "released into the community" instead of being sent to the center, for "humanitarian reasons," including medical difficulties or the need to take care of children.

She said no lawyers were present while the workers were being interrogated. "Everyone will have due process under law," Ms. Gonzalez said.

Late Monday afternoon, the grim-faced workers, some of them handcuffed, were lined up near white and silver buses as the rain poured down.

In a statement issued after the raid, Howard Industries, one of the largest employers in the region, acknowledged that it was "visited" by immigration agents trying to determine if its employees were citizens or otherwise legally authorized to work in the country.

"Howard Industries runs every check allowed to ascertain the immigration status of all applicants for jobs," the statement said. "It is company policy that it hires only U.S. citizens and legal immigrants."

Bill Chandler, executive director of the Mississippi Immigrants Rights Alliance, called the Laurel raid a violation of human rights.

"We're very disturbed at what's happened," Mr. Chandler said. "It's a real contradiction between our proclaimed values of hard work and family in Mississippi and the actions of local law enforcement, and ICE. I think it's a real affront to our values. They're creating their own terrorism by going after workers."

After the Iowa raid, the federal interpreter said many of the immigrants did not understand the charges to which they pleaded guilty. But federal officials said the judges in the cases believed that the guilty pleas had been made freely and voluntarily.

Immigrants on the U.S. Olympic Team

2008-08-23T12:34:00.005-04:00

The presence of immigrants and the children of immigrants on the U.S. Olympic Team across a number of sports is front page story.

In the picture wrestling gold medalist Henry Cejudo’s parents were undocumented immigrants from Mexico; decathlon gold medalist Brian Clay’s mother is an immigrant from Japan, and there are many more examples.

Thirty-three American athletes are themselves immigrants, including flag bearer Lopez Lamong, beach volleyball player Phil Dalhausser, and gymnasts Nastia Liukin, and Alexander Artemev.

Some of our American athletes, like gymnast Raj Bhavsar, are also getting attention in the home countries of their parents.

Paul Waldman, a columnist for the American Prospect, wrote about his impressions of the diversity of the American team here, and the Center for American Progress wrote about immigrant American Olympians here.

CENSUS BUREAU PROJECTS DIVERSITY WILL BOOM

2008-08-16T11:21:00.000-04:00

According to new U.S. Census Bureau projections, by 2042 American minorities will grow to become a majority, adding to the ethnic and racial diversity that has historically defined our country. The genius of this country is demonstrated by the fact that so many nationalities and ethnicities find a home in the U.S. and are shaped by the U.S. experience while they simultaneously participate in building the U.S.

Hispanics, Asians, and Pacific Islanders are among groups identified as significantly contributing to the overall minority population growth. Some of this increased diversity is attributed to immigration to the U.S. and should be welcomed. As they have throughout U.S. history, immigrants continue to contribute to our economy and our culture. Yet it is the children and grandchildren of immigrants - born and raised in the U.S. - that will contribute most to the increase in minority populations.

While some fear that demographic shifts threaten American identity, research and experience has shown that today's immigrants integrate into American society just as generations of immigrants before them - they learn English, buy property, intermarry, become U.S. citizens, and otherwise weave into the fabric of this nation.

Just a few measures of integration include:

· More Immigrants Swearing Allegiance And Taking An Oath. Large and increasing numbers of immigrants are becoming citizens. Numbers of naturalizations have grown from an annual average of only 120,000 in the 1950-60s to 630,000 naturalization between 2000-2007. In fact, 1.4 million people applied for naturalization last year alone.
· English is Alive and Well. According to the U.S. Census, 92% of Americans "had no difficulty speaking English." In fact, immigrants in the US are learning English at impressive rates. The vast majority of Americans -- 82% -- speak only English at home. According to the U.S. Census, even most people who speak a language other than English also speak English "very well."
· There's Nothing More American Than A 30 Year Mortgage. Homeownership is often regarded as a key indicator of entry into the American middle class. Studies have shown that as the average length of settlement increases for the Latino foreign-born, average levels of homeownership can be expected to rise. Latinos who have been in the U.S. for over 30 years have a 64.4% homeownership rate in California, exceeding the average California homeownership rate of 57% ,

Americans should celebrate the new projections of increased diversity and look forward to a stronger, brighter future.

Child workers at Iowa meatpacking

2008-08-08T15:44:00.003-04:00

Luisa Lopez says no one asked about her age when she started working at the nation's largest kosher meatpacking plant. She was 17, and within days she was on a fast-moving poultry production line, wielding a long, sharp pair of scissors.

"They never told me how to use them," Lopez said in Spanish. "Things moved so fast and I was always worried I would cut myself."

Yesenia Cordero, whose round baby face makes her look even younger than her 16 years, also said age was never an issue at the Agriprocessors plant, which state officials allege employed dozens of underage workers in an "egregious" violation of labor laws.

"I never think about how young I am," Cordero said. "I never think I shouldn't be here. I just think I need to work."

Former underage workers at the northeast Iowa plant describe a perilous environment where teenagers were asked to perform the tasks of grown men and women, often with little guidance.

They said that although their age and lack of skills were common knowledge inside the plant, they were subjected to the same conditions as everyone else and were quickly immersed in an aggressive, fast-paced operation. Under Iowa law, no one under the age of 18 can work on a meatpacking plant floor.

Cordero said she quickly grew to loathe coming to work inside the dank, cold walls of the plant. But she had no choice.

"I was providing for my family," she said. "It was the only way."

She and Lopez were among 389 undocumented workers arrested May 12 in an immigration raid at the plant that set a record for most arrests in a single-site enforcement effort. Their cases are being processed, but they are among those illegal immigrants who have been released for reasons such as caring for relatives.

Cordero's 18-year-old boyfriend, Henry Lopez, remains in custody. She said he was 14 and not even a high school freshman when he first picked up a long, razor-sharp knife and went to work on the slaughter line.

Cordero said Henry Lopez learned on the fly how to manage the dangerous blade and make the series of cuts required on the chickens that came whipping by him.

"He was brave," she said. "He did his work. He never was told what to do, but he never hurt himself with the knife." She said he never let on if he was scared.

Agriprocessors has emphatically denied state allegations that it knowingly allowed underage workers into its plant. On Wednesday, Menachem Lubinsky, a spokesman for Agriprocessors, said the company has cooperated with state officials and "protests the issuance of a press release that has patently been motivated by a desire to ride the crest of the wave of current public opinion adverse to Agri(processors)."

Company officials have said no further comment is forthcoming.

Cordero said Henry Lopez hadn't wanted her to work at the plant, but when she became pregnant he agreed that she could work there after the baby was born.

Cordero began in February, working in the plant's quality control department. A typical work week was six days, with long hours — sometimes more than 12 a day, with only intermittent overtime pay.

"We were always tired," she said.

Cordero cleaned up messes on the floor and made sure departments had enough ice to cool their products. She did not like the work, but she was content, she said, because she was helping to eke out a living for her burgeoning family.

She and her boyfriend were working when the plant was raided. They haven't seen each other since but have talked on the phone, she said.

Luisa Lopez said she hadn't wanted to work at the plant, but quit school to do so because her family needed the money. She said she never quite grew used to blood and gore she walked past on the floor, or to a verbally abusive boss she had complained about to no avail.

Luisa Lopez and Cordero both describe working at the plant as depressing, particularly in the summer. Cordero said she would long for outdoor work, like an agricultural job in Iowa's vast cornfields.

"When you work many hours, many days in the cold and it is warm outside it is very hard," she said. "You get so sad and tired."

In Postville, where the May immigration raid has deeply rattled residents, some said that new revelations and openness about the working conditions inside of Agriprocessors were an unexpected benefit.

"Maybe the closest thing to a good that I've seen out of this has been that it revealed how badly people were treated at Agriprocessors," said the Rev. Lloyd Paul Ouderkirk of St. Bridget's Roman Catholic Church. "... It's like out of a ghost story, but it's true."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-slaughterhouse-child-labor,1,1990599.story

Minority Becoming the Majority in DC

2008-08-08T13:19:00.000-04:00

A surge in Hispanic immigration over the past decade has dramatically altered the racial and ethnic composition of the region's youngest residents, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures released today.

As with minorities in general, immigrants tend to be younger than non-Hispanic whites and still in their childbearing years. As a result, in five suburban Washington counties, more than half of children age 4 and younger were minorities when the annual Census Bureau survey was taken a year ago.

In three of the counties -- Prince William, Montgomery and Charles -- the share reached about 60 percent. And in Prince George's, where Hispanic immigration has supplemented an even larger African American population, more than 90 percent of these children are minorities.

The implications for governments and communities are wide-ranging, demographers said. As the current crop of youngsters reaches kindergarten age, school systems that would otherwise be losing students will continue to grow or remain stable. They will also need to accommodate an ever-larger number of students who were raised in immigrant households where English was not spoken.

In addition, although most Hispanic children younger than 5 are native-born U.S. citizens and therefore eligible for government health care and other benefits, research indicates that if their parents are not U.S. citizens, they will be less likely to claim assistance, said Michael Fix, director of studies at the Washington-based Migration Policy Institute.

"All of this really reinforces the importance for counties to increase their investment in early childhood development now," Fix said ."If you don't make that investment, one of the penalties you pay down the line is that you have kids in school who don't speak English well and whose overall performance lags behind."

Fix pointed to studies indicating that as many as 75 percent of elementary school children learning English as a second language were born in the United States.

"Even more worrisome is that over half of the English-as-a-second-language learners in high school were native born," Fix added.

As these minority children mature, counties that until fairly recently were dominated by non-Hispanic whites are likely to shift to majority-minority status, said William Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution.

"The bubbling up [of minorities] that we're now seeing at the younger ages will continue to move up through the age range, through the teenage years, the working-age years and then the housing-buying years," he said. "The child population is really a microcosm of the future."

Minorities had already grown to 47 percent of the population in Charles and 48 percent in Prince William in July 2007, up from about one-third in 2000. Montgomery, at 46 percent minority, is also getting close.

Demographers cautioned, however, that the extreme ethnic and socioeconomic diversity of area minorities makes it difficult to make broad predictions about the impact of the region's impending shift to majority-minority status.

In Prince George's, for instance, 62 percent of children younger than 5 are non-Hispanic blacks, and they include a substantial share born to affluent families.

Similarly, in Fairfax County, Asian children account for 17 percent of those younger than 5. Often born to upwardly mobile immigrant professionals who encourage them to supplement regular schoolwork with additional classes, Asian students are disproportionately represented among the county's top-performing students. And last month it was announced that for the first time Asian Americans will outnumber whites at the county's most prestigious public magnet school, Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology.

Nor can Hispanic immigrants, who hail from a wide range of nations, be easily categorized.

"You cannot necessarily predict that just because they'll become majority-minority, all these schools will become low-income," Fix said. "The Washington area has one of the most diverse foreign populations in the nation."

Adding to the complexity of the picture is that the Census Bureau collected its data through July 2007, before the current economic downturn and before Prince William and other counties adopted initiatives against illegal immigration.

In Prince William, the percentage of students enrolled in classes for English as a second language dropped nearly 5 percent from a record of 13,404 in September to 12,775 by the end of the school year. The impact of the downturn and immigration restrictions will be reflected in Census Bureau data to be released next year.

By N.C. Aizenman
Washington Post Staff Writer

What Happens When Local Cops Become Immigration Agents?

2008-08-06T21:37:00.000-04:00

Maricopa Country, Arizona and Sheriff Joe Arpaio's immigration enforcement activities have made national headlines. While some have praised the Sheriff's tough stance, others have criticized his draconian anti-immigrant tactics, claiming they have led to racial profiling, have emptied county coffers, and have detracted from investigating other serious crimes, all of which has created a toxic environment in the county.

A recent New York Times op-ed from Mesa, AZ Police Chief George Gascon presents a very different approach than that of Sheriff Joe. Gascon advocates a new national approach to solving the problem of illegal immigration, noting that the local police alone cannot resolve the issues underlying undocumented immigration and cannot be responsible for enforcing the broken system.

This week OnPoint highlights a new fact sheet summarizing the remarkable results of a recent East Valley Tribune investigation into Sheriff Arpaio's immigration enforcement activities.

What Happens When Local Cops Become Immigration Agents? Arizona Sheriff's Immigration-Enforcement Activities Impact Budget, Arrest Rates and Response Times (Immigration Policy Center, August 5, 2008).

Immigration OnPoint is a project coordinated by the Immigration Policy Center to create and maintain an online catalogue of short documents and fact sheets that provide quick answers to commonly asked questions about immigrants and immigration. Immigration is a notoriously complex issue area, and the current immigration debate is filled with myths, misinformation, fear, and emotion, making reasoned decision-making difficult. OnPoint documents are meant to confront myths and provide factual information about immigrants and immigration policy.

Documents on the OnPoint website are meant to be widely distributed to the public, press, policymakers, and others in order to inject factual information into the immigration debate. Many different organizations have contributed their time and expertise to create these documents. OnPoint will continue to grow and be updated throughout the year.

OnPoint documents are organized by topic. Check back frequently to see if any new items have been added!

OnPoint subject areas include:

Immigrants and the U.S. Economy -- What is the impact of immigration on the U.S. economy? This section includes information on immigrants and public benefits usage, tax payments, the U.S. labor market, and more.

Coming to the U.S. through Legal Channels -- How does the U.S. immigration system operate? What options are available to immigrants looking to come to the U.S. legally? Are immigrants choosing to remain here illegally? This section seeks to demystify U.S. immigration law and policy.

Immigrants in our Communities -- Who are today's immigrants? How do they impact the communities we live in? This section addresses immigrant integration, examines foreign-born crime rates, and a host of other issues.

Federal, State, and Local Policy Debates -- What is the federal government doing to address immigration issues? How are state and local governments responding to their specific immigration challenges? This section includes information on legislation being considered in Congress, as well as in state and local legislatures.

Facts on the Restrictionists -- This section includes information on restrictionist groups and anti-immigrant activities. It also contains information about discrimination and hate crimes targeting immigrant communities.

Faith-Based Perspectives -- How do different faith communities view immigration? How can we respond to immigration debates from a faith-based perspective? This section provides materials and perspectives from the faith community on immigration and related topics.

Politics and the Immigration Debate -- How is the immigration debate affecting politics and the elections? This section includes information on the immigrant vote, elections, and the public's view on the immigration debate.

Signs of Life on Immigration Reform

2008-08-06T15:42:00.001-04:00

Congress leaves Washington today for about a month of vacation, campaigning, and conventions. But before they left, a little progress was made on fixing discrete parts of our broken immigration system that is worth highlighting.

A five year reauthorization of the E-Verify electronic employment verification system overwhelming passed the House (407 to 2; H.R. 6033) on Thursday. Importantly, the bill included further study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to assess the impact of E-Verify’s data errors on small businesses and individuals. The bill also included critical protections for the Social Security Administration, so that E-Verify does not adversely affect its ability to accomplish its important mission. And finally, efforts to exponentially expand the unreliable E-Verify system to all workers and all employers in the United States have been rejected, so far.

By reauthorizing E-Verify for only five years, the House sent a clear message that it was not ready to whole-heartedly embrace the program. As hearing after hearing showed during the spring and summer, the consequences of a mandatory electronic employment verification system for all American workers could be devastating. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), who, like us, is skeptical of E-Verify in the absence of data error safeguards and broader immigration reform, had it just right when she told Congressional Quarterly, “Sometimes, you do the best you can with the cards you’ve been dealt…We were running out of time. E-Verify was due to expire. I wanted to make some adjustments to the program . . . and just because we reauthorized it for five years doesn’t mean we can’t start working it immediately (July 31, 2008).”

This is a very encouraging sign.

Another encouraging sign comes from the House Immigration Subcommittee, Chaired by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA). Her Subcommittee overwhelmingly passed a bill to recapture unused family and employment visas that would normally expire each year under current law. The bill (H.R. 5882) passed the Subcommittee 8 to 1, which demonstrates there is bipartisan support for discrete measures aimed at achieving improvements in our immigration system.

For the hundreds of thousands of people waiting years and often decades for a visa, this is a very good first step. Rep. Lofgren, the Subcommittee members, and the coalition of immigration, family, faith, and business advocates who have gotten this measure this far have done tremendous work.

The House Immigration Subcommittee also reported out a military families immigration bill (H.R. 6020) by a vote of 6 to 3 and the Emergency Nursing Supply Relief Act (H.R. 5924) by a vote of 7 to 2.

This is modest progress, but it gives us a dose of hope that when the House returns in September, Members might seriously address bipartisan, achievable immigration measures in the short run.

Over on the Senate side, Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) was joined by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Patty Murray (D-WA), and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) in introducing the Visa Efficiency and E-Verify Extension Act (S. 3414). This measure would reauthorize a number of immigration programs expiring this year, including reauthorizing E-Verify for a limited time. The bill would also recapture unused visas for close family members and employers from year to year, require studies of the problems with E-Verify, and include measures to protect Social Security against drains caused by E-Verify.

In addition, the Senate passed legislation to extend the time period that elderly and disabled refugees, asylum seekers, and certain other immigrants can receive benefits under the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. The time limit was extended from seven to nine years. The measure goes back to the House for what we hope will be quick approval.

Taken together, these modest proposals demonstrate that the 110^th Congress has the power to lay the groundwork for genuine immigration reform in the 111^th Congress. Diverse communities of interest – faith groups, labor, business, and the pro-immigrant community – are beginning to see that working together, they can bring about small changes today, and bigger changes tomorrow. While these measures fall short of the systematic, top-to-bottom fixes we all know our immigration system needs, they are signs of progress that should be celebrated.

We hope our elected leaders return to Washington rested and ready to make even more progress on these and other helpful immigration measures.

The following wa a statement by Mary Giovagnoli, Policy and Advocacy Director for the National Immigration Forum, a non-partisan, pro-immigrant advocacy organization

Immigrants Deported, by U.S. Hospitals

2008-08-03T10:33:00.002-04:00

Eight years ago, Mr. Jiménez, 35, an illegal immigrant working as a gardener in Stuart, Fla., suffered devastating injuries in a car crash with a drunken Floridian. A community hospital saved his life, twice, and, after failing to find a rehabilitation center willing to accept an uninsured patient, kept him as a ward for years at a cost of $1.5 million.

What happened next set the stage for a continuing legal battle with nationwide repercussions: Mr. Jiménez was deported — not by the federal government but by the hospital, Martin Memorial. After winning a state court order that would later be declared invalid, Martin Memorial leased an air ambulance for $30,000 and “forcibly returned him to his home country,” as one hospital administrator described it.

Since being hoisted in his wheelchair up a steep slope to his remote home, Mr. Jiménez, who sustained a severe traumatic brain injury, has received no medical care or medication — just Alka-Seltzer and prayer, his 72-year-old mother said. Over the last year, his condition has deteriorated with routine violent seizures, each characterized by a fall, protracted convulsions, a loud gurgling, the vomiting of blood and, finally, a collapse into unconsciousness.

(Ready the story at The New York Times)

Why Texas Still Holds 'Em

2008-07-27T19:09:00.002-04:00

Forget oil and gold. In the Lone Star state, the boomtown business is locking up immigrants.

In 1997, with the private prison business booming, the Corrections Corporation of America picked a 64-acre plot near Austin, Texas, for its newest lockup. A medium-security prison, it was named after the company's cofounder and designed for some 500 federal inmates. But the anticipated stream of prisoners never arrived: By the time the T. Don Hutto Correctional Center opened, a glut of private prison beds, along with cca's own poor track record, had left the company nearly bankrupt. Its stock, which once traded at around $45 a share, bottomed out at 18 cents. Several of its facilities were shuttered or sat empty for years, including the Hutto prison, which cca moved to close in 2004.
But Hutto, like cca itself, has risen from the ashes thanks to a sudden source of new business: the Bush administration's crackdown on immigrants. (follow this link)

Chicken Little in the Voting Booth

2008-07-24T20:28:00.000-04:00

the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties held a hearing on "Lessons Learned from the 2004 Presidential Election" at which Hans von Spakovsky provided testimony. The following is a statement by Angela Kelley, Director of the Immigration Policy Center, an immigration research organization in Washington.

"In the world of elections and politics, there isn't very much room for unanimous agreement. Yet, when it comes to modern-day voter fraud, most election experts agree that it's an extremely rare and outright irrational occurrence. A recent report published by the Heritage Foundation, entitled, The Threat of Non-Citizen Voting, written by Hans von Spakovsky, challenges sound research with unsubstantiated evidence and sheer innuendo to make the empirically outrageous claim that non-citizens are subverting the electoral process.

The rigorous research of both the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law and Project Vote has shown that voter fraud in the U.S. is almost non-existent. The simple act of voting is simply not worth the cost and likelihood of getting caught. Virtually ignoring fact and evidence, the Heritage Foundation's report consists of a rambling "legal memorandum" claiming that an unknowable yet large number of non-citizens are voting illegally and subverting the electoral process.

Allegations of fraud are commonly used for partisan political purposes to justify measures that would disenfranchise legitimate voters. Research finds that most allegations of voter fraud by non-citizens stem from faulty records, partisan politics, and commonplace error.

Rather than acknowledge von Spakovksy's largely discredited, false, and flashy alarms that translate into only a handful of fraudulent voters over the past couple of years, Congress should react to the growing numbers of would-be citizens who are being deprived of the right to vote because U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) fails to process naturalization applications in a timely fashion. Disenfranchisement, not fraud, is the greatest offense that plagues our electoral process."

Immigrants and Hurricanes: what Will the Border Patrol Do?

2008-07-23T14:46:00.000-04:00

At this hour, Hurricane Dolly does not appear to be a powerful storm that will cause major damage or trigger evacuations. However, the potential path of the storm – towards the border of the Texas Gulf Coast and Mexico – underscores an issue that has been brewing for several months. What will the Border Patrol do in event of an evacuation in Texas or elsewhere with regards to identity checkpoints?

On May 16, the San Antonio Express-News reported that the Border Patrol would maintain identity checkpoints in the Rio Grande Valley:

Ending years of speculation about the fate of the Rio Grande Valley's unauthorized immigrants during a hurricane evacuation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has confirmed it will check the citizenship of people boarding buses to leave the Valley and arriving at inland traffic checkpoints.

Those determined to be in the country illegally will be taken to detention centers away from the hurricane's path and later processed for deportation.

“It's business as usual at the checkpoints,” said Dan Doty, spokesman for CBP's Rio Grande Valley sector. “We'll still check everybody.” – “ID Still Required In Valley Disaster,” San Antonio Express-News, May 16, 2008

But the article indicates the CBP may be more lax in the event of an evacuation so as not to risk the lives of immigrants and non-immigrants alike. However, the article also notes that the Border Patrol won’t say that they will be lax in public so that they do not appear to be soft or open to an influx of immigrants during a disaster.

At a recent discussion with reporters, Hidalgo County Judge J.D. Salinas said he didn't expect the Border Patrol to publicize a policy on the checkpoints for fear of inviting a free-for-all for unauthorized traffic. The unofficial word, he said, was that agents recognized they'd have to be more lax amid a disaster.

But Tuesday, a reporter photographing a mock evacuation for the Rio Grande Guardian Web site saw Border Patrol agents rehearsing citizenship document checks of people boarding buses. CBP's Doty confirmed this was the planned procedure and said those determined to be unauthorized immigrants would be taken to separate shelters, likely detention centers in Laredo or San Antonio. He said the highway checkpoints would stay open. -- “ID Still Required In Valley Disaster,” San Antonio Express-News, May 16, 2008

Just last week, the Texas Civil Rights Review published a Q&A on a lawsuit filed to force the Border Patrol to publicly articulate their policy. First published in the Mid-Valley Town Crier of McAllen, Texas, Nick Braune interviewed Texas Civil Rights Project attorney Corinna Spencer-Scheurich.

Nick Braune: The Monitor reported that a number of groups, including LUPE and Brownsville’s Proyecto Digna, have filed a suit to find out evacuation procedures and policies. One lawyer was quoted as saying that the Border Patrol is being "reckless" and that they would be "creating a danger for everyone" if they start asking people for identification during an evacuation. Are those comments too strong?

Corinna Spencer-Scheurich: No, I don't think they are too strong. Border Patrol is being reckless because the most important thing in advance of a disaster is to have a plan that everyone knows. We saw what happened when Houston residents tried to evacuate before Hurricane Rita. It took more than 24 hours for people to reach Dallas. Only half of the residents ended up evacuating. Luckily the main force of Rita did not hit Houston. What is clear is that in the event of a hurricane evacuation, everyone needs to be prepared and we have to get people to safety as quickly as possible.

Can you imagine the additional hold up at the Falfurrias checkpoint if Border Patrol is checking IDs? Holiday weekends are bad enough! And some people will not evacuate, risking harm, because they know they might run out of gas because of the gridlock or because they might have other problems. People who might have trouble proving their immigration status or have family members with that problem are also not going to flee. This is a humanitarian disaster waiting to happen. – “Forcing the Border Patrol to Answer a Question,” Texas Civil Right Review, July 17, 2008

Recall that many immigrant families include a mix of “legal” and “illegal” members, so if the Border Patrol does not articulate their policy to the community, what are people to do. Flee a natural disaster and risk my family or don’t flee a natural disaster and risk my family? What would you do?

Dolly may not trigger such dire decision making, but as we move to some of the predicted 15 named storms this season, other storms might.

"Operation Jump Start"

2008-07-07T14:01:00.000-04:00

June 2008 simultaneously marks the two-year anniversary and the end of Operation Jump Start, a joint program by the Border Patrol and Department of Defense. Under the operation, roughly 6,000 National Guard troops were temporarily deployed to the U.S.-Mexico border to assist the Border Patrol with surveillance operations and the construction of fences and vehicle barriers. The last National Guard troops are due to leave by late July, and the Border Patrol is meanwhile attempting to hire thousands of agents to permanently take their place

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff recently declared that the $1.4 billion operation "has succeeded." However, if the persistence of undocumented immigration is any indicator, Jump Start is anything but a success. Instead, it has been a costly and ineffective approach to border control that was incorporated into a larger, self-defeating strategy of enforcement-without-reform.

Josiah Heyman, Chair of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of Texas-El Paso, told the Chicago Tribune that the National Guard's presence "makes for good symbolic politics," but "doesn't seem to have had a big impact on border security." Similarly, Wayne Cornelius, Director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California-San Diego, informed the Tribune that border enforcement hasn't lessened the ability of undocumented immigrants to cross the border, but has motivated more of them to hire people smugglers to make the journey ("As Guard wraps up, debate revs up on border," Chicago Tribune, June 22, 2008).

According to the findings of a research team led by Dr. Cornelius, fewer than half of undocumented immigrants who come to the border are apprehended even once by the Border Patrol. The research, which coincided with Operation Jump Start, found that the vast majority of those attempting to cross the border--between 92 and 98 percent--eventually get through. Border experts have also pointed out that much of Chertoff's proclaimed victory can be explained by smugglers charging more for their increasingly creative services. If immigrants don't succeed in crossing on the first try, they almost certainly do on their second or third (Controlling Unauthorized Immigration from Mexico: The Failure of "Prevention through Deterrence" and the Need for Comprehensive Reform

Enforcement-without-Reform: Success or Failure?

2008-05-21T22:19:00.001-04:00

On Thursday, May 22, the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border, Maritime, and Global Counterterrorism will hold a hearing on "The Border Security Challenge: Recent Developments and Legislative Proposals." As lawmakers evaluate the border-enforcement initiatives that have already been implemented by the Bush administration, and the various enforcement proposals now on the table in Congress, they would do well to keep in mind that an enforcement-only approach to border security has been tried - and failed - for more than two decades. In two new fact sheets, Money for Nothing: Immigration Enforcement Without Immigration Reform Doesn't Work and The Politics of Contradiction: Immigration Enforcement vs. Economic Integration, the IPC analyzes the escalating costs and fatal flaws of the enforcement-without-reform approach to border security. The reports point out that the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically at the very same time the federal government has poured billions upon billions of dollars into border enforcement. Many U.S. taxpayers question the use of their tax dollars on failed deportation-only efforts, and are calling for fair and practical immigration reform.

Money Ill Spent: Since 1993, when the current border-enforcement buildup began, the annual budget of the U.S. Border Patrol has increased by 332 percent, to $1.6 billion, while the number of Border Patrol agents has grown by 276 percent, to 15,000. What has resulted from that build-up? The undocumented population has tripled in size over the past decade and a half, from roughly 3.5 million in 1990 to 12 million in 2006.

Border-Enforcement Backfire: U.S. border-enforcement efforts have accomplished the exact opposite of what they were supposed to achieve. Immigrants who in the past might have returned home to build a house or start a business after a few years of work in the United States are settling permanently and bringing their families with them. In fact, the Pew Hispanic Center estimates that approximately one-third of undocumented immigrants have lived in the United States for 10 years or more, 1.8 million undocumented immigrants are children, and another 3.1 million U.S.-citizen children have at least one undocumented parent.

Control Through Immigration Reform: The United States needs a legal immigration system for the 21st century that meets the needs of the U.S. economy and is consistent with U.S. values. The most practical and realistic way to dramatically reduce undocumented immigration is to bring U.S. immigration policy in line with economic and social realities. Only with comprehensive reform can the U.S. government effectively control, regulate, and monitor its borders

Christian Immigrants Seek Refuge At St. Bridget's

2008-05-20T13:19:00.001-04:00

Juan Crow in Georgia

2008-05-14T17:09:00.005-04:00

Justeen Mancha's dream of becoming a psychologist was born of the tropical heat and exploitation that have shaped farmworker life around Reidsville, Georgia, for centuries. The wiry, freckle-faced 17-year-old high school junior has toiled in drought-dry onion fields to help her mother, Maria Christina Martinez. But early one September morning in 2006, Mancha's dream was abruptly deferred.

From the living room of the battered trailer she and her mother call home, Mancha described what happened when she came out of the shower that morning. "My mother went out, and I was alone," she said. "I was getting ready for school, getting dressed, when I heard this noise. I thought it was my mother coming back." She went on in the Tex-Mex Spanish-inflected Georgia accent now heard throughout Dixie: "Some people were slamming car doors outside the trailer. I heard footsteps and then a loud boom and then somebody screaming, asking if we were 'illegals,' 'Mexicans.' These big men were standing in my living room holding guns. One man blocked my doorway. Another guy grabbed a gun on his side. I freaked out. 'Oh, my God!' I yelled."

As more than twenty Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents surrounded the trailer, said Mancha, agents inside interrogated her. They asked her where her mother was; they wanted to know if her mother was "Mexican" and whether she had "papers" or a green card. They told her they were looking for "illegals."

After about five minutes of interrogation, the agents--who, according to the women's lawyer, Mary Bauer of the Southern Poverty Law Center, showed no warrants and had neither probable cause nor consent to enter the home--simply left. They left in all likelihood because Mancha and her mother didn't fit the profile of the workers at the nearby Crider poultry plant, who had been targeted by the raid in nearby Stilwell. They were the wrong kind of "Mexicans"; they were US citizens.

Read the complete article at: The Nation

The S.S. No-Match Program:Inefficient, Ineffective, and Costly

2008-05-09T10:22:00.000-04:00

The Immigration Policy Center unveils a new report entitled The Social Security Administration No-Match Program: Inefficient, Ineffective, and Costly. Co-authored by Marielena Hincapié and Tyler Moran of the National Immigration Law Center and Michele Waslin of IPC, this new paper provides the most comprehensive analysis of the no-match program and the Administration's new proposed regulations to use the program as an immigration enforcement mechanism. The new report is "one-stop shopping" for the most up-to-date research and data, including government reports and Congressional testimony, real-life examples of how no-match letters have been utilized in the past, and analysis of the impact the new regulations would have on business, workers, and the Social Security Administration (SSA). The authors conclude that the no-match program is not the most efficient way to achieve its original objective, much less serve as an effective immigration enforcement tool.

SSA no-match letters are sent to workers and employers in an attempt to correct discrepancies in SSA's records that prevent workers from receiving credit for their earnings. They were not designed to be an immigration-enforcement tool, and historically they have never been used for immigration-enforcement purposes. In fact, for years, SSA has made it clear that no-match letters are not an indication of immigration status, and that there are many legitimate reasons why a worker or employer might receive a no-match letter. Yet, in March 2008, the Administration unveiled new proposed regulations to which would allow the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to commandeer the program for immigration enforcement purposes.

This report provides an overview of SSA's no-match letter program, a summary of DHS's new supplemental proposed rule regarding no-match letters, and an overview of the unintended consequences of no-match letters that are sent to employers. While the new no-match rule will not, and cannot, solve the problem of undocumented immigration, experience with the no-match program over the last few years indicates that turning no-match letters into an immigration-enforcement mechanism will:

Cause the firing of employment-authorized workers and U.S. citizens at a time when our economy is highly fragile;

Impose additional costs on employers;

Result in increased discrimination and abuses against U.S. workers; and

Overwhelm SSA by diverting resources away from its primary mission of administering benefits.

Campaign Against Human Trafficking in Washington, D.C.

2008-05-09T10:14:00.000-04:00

The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), Ricky Martin Foundation, the non-governmental organization Ayuda and the DC Mayor’s Office on Latino Affairs have partnered to launch Call and Live in Washington DC, a campaign that promotes an anti-trafficking hotline for prevention and victim protection. Other local partners of the initiative include Telemundo, Univisión, Washington Hispanic and Radio Viva 900.

The campaign aims to reach 100,000 Latinos in the D.C. area with prevention messages about human trafficking and provide access to legal and social services for victims through a Spanish-language hotline. Call and Live has been implemented in Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Peru and Nicaragua, where it has triggered more than 55.000 relevant calls to the national hotlines, 60 police investigations, and the rescue of at least a dozen victims.

The IDB is launching this initiative in Washington D.C. as part of its local corporate responsibility efforts. The Bank’s IDB-DC Solidarity Program builds strategic partnerships with local community-based organizations to promote development initiatives aimed largely at Hispanic and Caribbean communities in the District of Columbia.

The Ricky Martin Foundation is a non-profit organization that advocates for children’s rights and condemns the exploitation of this most vulnerable population.

Ayuda is a community-based, nonprofit organization which is recognized as the leading source of multi-lingual legal and social services for low-income immigrants in DC, Maryland, and Virginia.

On the Eve of an EVVS Hearing: What Should We Be Listening For?

2008-05-06T21:47:00.001-04:00

This week, the House Ways and Means Committee will hold a hearing on electronic employment verification systems (EEVS) -- Washington's latest magic potion for dealing with the nation's broken immigration system. Several bills, including the Shuler-Tancredo "SAVE Act" (HR 4088) and the Johnson "New Employee Verification Act of 2008" (HR 5515), would create a nationwide mandatory EEVS that would require all American workers, foreign- and native-born alike, to get the government's stamp of approval in order to work. Scores of organizations, including most recently the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), have asked that these proposals be slowed or shelved out of concern for their impact on Americans. As more hearings are expected in the coming weeks in other committees, including Homeland Security and Judiciary, what questions should the American public want to hear be thoroughly asked and answered?

EEVS' Price Tag: EEVS is expensive, and coupled with its reliability weaknesses, the problems outweigh the perceived benefits. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that the SAVE Act would decrease federal revenues by $17.3 billion from 2009-2018 because it would result in an increase in the number of people working in the underground cash economy, outside the tax system. At the same time, it would increase spending by over $23 billion, resulting in a whopping price tag of over $40 billion over the next 10 years. CBO also estimated that SAVE would cost U.S. employers over $136 million to comply in at least one of the first five years the mandates are in effect.

EEVS' Reliability: The Social Security Administration (SSA) database errors would result in 1 in 25 new hires being erroneously flagged as ineligible to work. Mandatory EEVS will mean large error rates, the probability that U.S. citizens will be denied work, huge new burdens on DHS and SSA, and retired and disabled Americans waiting longer to receive Social Security benefits from an overburdened agency.

EEVS in Arizona: EEVS bills build upon the E-Verify program, a small pilot program that taps SSA and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) databases to make determinations about employment authorization. Arizona recently made use of E-Verify mandatory, and while fewer than 15 percent of employers are using the system, Arizona has suffered from database errors resulting in U.S. citizens being flagged as unauthorized to work, labor shortages, and loss of revenue from employers choosing not to do business in the state.

Congress must decide whether to fall prey to pressure to pass deportation-only immigration legislation that will be harmful to American workers, or set the stage for thoughtful, realistic, and practical immigration reform.

For more information, see IPC's Immigration OnPoint webpage on EEVS and its impact on U.S. workers, the SSA, and the U.S. economy.

New Numbers for the ELECTION 2008: North Carolina

2008-05-01T23:51:00.000-04:00

In anticipation of the North Carolina primary on March 6, 2008, the Immigration Policy Center presents ELECTION 2008: North Carolina. The Importance of Latinos and Immigrants to the Economy and Electorate of the 'Tar Heel State.' This fact sheet provides useful information on the immigrant population and Latino electorate of a state with one of the fastest growing immigrant populations in the U.S. With Latinos making up nearly 7 percent of the population, and a significant share of its foreign-born population being naturalized citizens and eligible to vote this year, Latino and immigrant voters are likely to play a key role in North Carolina's elections. The fact sheet also includes information about the contributions that Latinos make to the state of North Carolina, including nearly $300 million annually in taxes.

Across America, Immigration Raids Greet Pope

2008-04-17T21:18:00.002-04:00

At the same moment that Pope Benedict XVI was admonishing President Bush that the U.S. must treat immigrants with dignity and humanity, the Bush Administration was rounding up immigrant workers in raids in at least five states across the country. What a black eye for the President and for the United States.

These raids will continue to tear apart families and disrupt communities because Congress has failed to enact serious immigration reform. Too many Members of Congress are held hostage by the narrow sliver of activists who see mass deportation as the one and only approach to immigration reform.

We will never deport our way to legality and control over immigration. We should be working towards reforms that get immigrants into the system, working above board, and restore the rule of law. We should put this shameful chapter of mass deportation and police state intrusions behind us.

It's Tax Time! Immigrants and Taxes:

2008-04-14T22:42:00.000-04:00

Tax Day would seem to be an appropriate time to inject some bottom-line reality into the long-running debate over whether or not immigrants in the United States "pay their own way" as taxpayers. As with nearly all aspects of the immigration debate, the controversy over how immigrants impact the public treasury is far too often dominated by emotionally charged rhetoric rather than hard facts. Many of these much-needed facts are provided in a forthcoming report from the Immigration Policy Center by Stephen Moore, Senior Economics Writer at the Wall Street Journal and former director of Fiscal Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, and Richard Vedder, Distinguished Professor of Economics at Ohio University. Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2005 Current Population Survey and other sources, Moore and Vedder find that immigrants not only pay their own way in taxes, but play a hefty role in shoring up the teetering Social Security system, and provide a fiscal windfall to U.S. taxpayers by tending to come to the United States during their prime working years--after the costs of their education and upbringing have been borne by their home countries.

Among the report's findings:

Ø Immigrant Households and Businesses Generate Billions: In 2005, immigrant households and businesses paid approximately $300 billion in federal, state, and local taxes: $165 billion in federal income taxes, $85 billion in state and local income taxes, and $50 billion in business taxes.

Ø Immigrants Pay More in Taxes Than They Use in Services Over Their Lifetimes: Depending on skills and level of education, each immigrant pays, on average, between $20,000 and $80,000 more in taxes than he or she consumes in public benefits.

Ø Immigrants' Relative Youth Contributes To Social Security's Health: Current levels of immigration will provide a net benefit to the Social Security system of nearly $450 billion in taxes paid over benefits received during the 2006-2030 period-and almost $4.4 trillion during the 2006-2080 period. This is because 75 percent of immigrants arrive in the United States when they are in their prime working years (age 18 to 65). But the share of native-born citizens in their prime working years now stands at only 60 percent, and will decline rapidly over the coming decades as the Baby Boomers retire.

Ø Immigrants Educated on Home Country's Tab: The roughly 26 million immigrants now in the United States who arrived when they were over the age of 18-after their upbringing and basic education were paid for in their home countries-represent a windfall to American taxpayers of roughly $2.8 trillion. The United States receives all of the tax payments made by these immigrants, while bearing almost none of the costs of raising and educating them.

Several recent studies of the economic impact that immigration has at the state level have yielded similar findings:

Ø ARIZONA: A 2007 study by the University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy concluded that "the total state tax revenue attributable to immigrant workers was an estimated $2.4 billion (about $860 million for naturalized citizens plus about $1.5 billion for non-citizens). Balanced against estimated fiscal costs of $1.4 billion (for education, health care, and law enforcement), the net 2004 fiscal impact of immigrants in Arizona was positive by about $940 million." Moreover, the "2004 total economic output attributable to immigrant workers was about $44 billion ($15 billion for naturalized citizens and $29 billion for non-citizens). This output included $20 billion in labor and other income and resulted in approximately 400,000 full-time-equivalent jobs."[i]

Ø ARKANSAS: A 2007 study by the Urban Institute found that "Arkansas immigrants had an estimated total after-tax income of $2.7 billion in 2004. Approximately 20 percent of this was sent home to families abroad, saved, or used for interest payments. The remaining spending had a total impact on the state of $2.9 billion." In addition, "without immigrant labor, the output of the state's manufacturing industry would likely be lowered by about $1.4 billion-or about 8 percent of the industry's $16.2 billion total contribution to the gross state product in 2004."[ii]

Ø FLORIDA: A 2007 study released by Florida International University found that the state's "immigrant workers paid an estimated annual average of $10.49 billion in federal taxes and $4.5 billion in state and local taxes from 2002 to 2004." The study concluded that "comparing taxes paid to assistance received shows that immigrants in Florida contribute nearly $1,500 per year more than they receive" in Social Security, Supplemental Security Income, disability income, veterans' benefits, unemployment compensation, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, food stamps, housing subsidies, energy assistance, Medicare, and Medicaid.[iii]

Ø NEVADA: A 2007 report from the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada found that Hispanic immigrants in Nevada paid roughly $2.6 billion in federal taxes and $1.6 billion in state and local taxes (including $500 million in sales taxes) in 2005. According to the report, "the money that immigrants earn and spend in Nevada accounts for about 25% of the State's Gross State Product" and "Hispanic immigrant employment, income and spending results in the creation of 108,380 jobs in Nevada."[iv]

Ø NEW YORK: A 2007 study by the Fiscal Policy Institute concludes that "New York's immigrants are responsible for $229 billion in economic output in New York State. That's 22.4 percent of the total New York State GDP, a share slightly larger than immigrants' share of population, and slightly smaller than their share of the workforce." Moreover, "immigrants in New YorkState are entrepreneurs, managers, and workers in jobs at all levels of the economy, from the lowest-paid day laborers to the highest-paid investment bankers."[v]

Ø WASHINGTON, DC: A 2006 study by the Urban Institute found that immigrant households in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area "paid $9.8 billion or 17.7 percent of total taxes paid by metropolitan-area residents in 1999-2000 ($55.2 billion) virtually the same as their share of the total population (17.4 percent)." Approximately 72 percent of these tax payments went to the federal government.[vi]

The Immigration Policy Center also has published a survey of local- and state-level studies that examine the costs and contributions of immigrants in communities throughout the United States.

Editorials: Taking O’Fence

2008-04-07T21:34:00.000-04:00

Editorial pages are alight with the news that the Department of Homeland Security will exercise a provision of border security legislation which allows it to waive all laws and treaties – national, state, local, and international – in order to build the border fence walling off Mexico. Nowhere is the denunciation of the waiver law and the fence itself more prominent than in the President’s home state of Texas. But other states, some far from the border, are getting in on the act. Even papers with extremely conservative editorial pages are speaking out against the fence, laughing at the fence, or saying it isn’t going to help much in the absence of immigration reform. Here are some examples:

Arizona Republic: Rep. Raul Grijalva’s response to Michael Chertoff’s decision to waive the legal process to build the border fence: "With the stroke of his pen, he overturns 36 laws - some of which have been protecting our resources and our health for more than a century - in an area stretching from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean." He's right. The fence, which won't stop illegal immigration, is a high-cost PR stunt that makes defense contractors salivate. – “The border fence is a PR stunt, not impediment to migration, April 2, 2008

Austin American-Statesman: Constructing a fence with its open-ended costs - the price of initial construction plus eternal upkeep - is no substitute for adopting true immigration reform, but then elected officials happy with show over substance must figure it’s close enough for government work. Congress has been unable to muster the will to adopt immigration reform, despite repeated posturing over the severity of the problem. It’s a severe problem, all right, just not severe enough for Congress to find a solution. – “Border fence stretching boundaries of federal arrogance,” April 4, 2008

Boston Globe: The southern border fence intended to keep out illegal immigrants is no longer just wasteful and stupid. Now it is harmful as well. – “Immigration: A bad policy gets worse,” April 7, 2008

Colorado Springs Gazette: Immigrants will pour into this country, with or without a fence, and it has little to do with their own wants and needs. They'll come here because we pay them to. Period. When we no longer need them - and no longer pay them to fix roofs and pick grapes - they'll stay home. A fence is no match against economic demand and human will. The fence will hold out immigrants like a dam of chewed gum would hold back Lake Pontchartrain. The symbolic fence will embarrass the United States, because we pay immigrants far more than minimum wage to work here. It's like a pricey ski village erecting a fence, giving the finger to workers who travel from trailer parks to run the ski lifts. Smart conservatives will view the fence as a simplistic symbol of animosity. They'll embrace the fact that immigrant workers, in a free market, are assets. They provide labor and therefore prosperity. – “Immigrant Wall: Shrine Of Shame,” April 3, 2008

Dallas Morning News: Anyone looking at a map of the fence, especially in Texas, can see that most of the border will remain open. And the land chosen for the federal right-of-way is provoking additional skepticism. The fence will divide the University of Texas campus in Brownsville, for example, but it bypasses border property owned by individuals with close White House ties. – “Border fence’s partial solution,” April 4, 2008

El Paso Times: It's bad enough that the Bush administration, through its surrogate, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, has chosen to circumvent United States law in its obsessive drive to have 670 miles of border fencing in place by the end of the year. But on top of that, Chertoff waived a law that required a final report on the impact the fence would have on the U.S.-Mexico border environment. That means even if the feds find that there would be some catastrophic impact from the border fence, they wouldn't be required to tell anyone. That is both absurd and dangerous. – “Trampling the law: Chertoff waves waivers at border residents,” April 4, 2008

Houston Chronicle: The waiver was initially promoted by congressional supporters as a limited exception designed to give federal officials flexibility in speeding the completion of a segment of fencing across environmentally sensitive wetlands near San Diego. Unfortunately, as with so many other instances in which the Bush administration has asserted the right to ignore laws it found inconvenient, the waiver now is being used as an all-purpose bludgeon to flatten dozens of environmental and property rights statutes. – “Bulldozing the laws,” April 4, 2008

Lompoc Record (CA): Here's what it means to be the 800-pound gorilla in the room: Last Tuesday - April Fool's Day - U.S. Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff announced the federal government would be flexing its considerable musculature to waive the rules with regard to protecting the environment, so the government could complete its 670-mile anti-immigrant fence along the U.S./Mexico border… So, our federal government decides to thumb its nose at local rules and laws, essentially telling states and private property owners that, no, they really don't have any rights when it comes to government expediency. – “Big Brother in full flex,” April 6, 2008

Lufkin Daily News (TX): The government's willingness to run roughshod over its own laws in order to address a panic stirred more by hyperbolic demagogues than by facts is another example of the ways that Americans are allowing hard-fought gains in everything from personal privacy to environmental protection to be eroded by fear. – “Above the Law? Border fence builders riding the waivers,” April 4, 2008

New York Times: Will this stop or slow illegal immigration? No. Long experience has shown that billions of barricade-building dollars will simply shift some of the flow to more remote parts of the 2,000-mile southern border. And no amount of border fence will keep out the 40 percent of illegal immigrants who enter legally then stay too long. – “Michael Chertoff’s Insult,” April 3, 2008

San Antonio Express-News: Border security is important, but it is hard to imagine a fence shutting out those wanting to enter our country, terrorists or immigrants. Whatever the efficacy of the fence itself, the structure shouldn't trump concerns about the environment or the historical integrity of the region. Border mayors, however, should not be surprised by the latest move; federal officials have shown a monumental arrogance toward the pleas of border communities. – “Border fence waivers show feds' arrogance,” April 4, 2008

San Diego Union-Tribune: To recap, we're doing all this to defend our territorial sovereignty and illustrate that rules are to be followed. So naturally, the first chance it gets, the government tramples the sovereignty of individuals who oppose fencing on their property and brushes aside the rules. – “Simple solutions,” April 3, 2008

Seattle Post-Intelligencer: The spokesman for the Sierra Club in Texas responded that the waivers “pulled the carpet out from under the community participation.” We can't help but feel that that was precisely the point of these waivers: Back off, America. This land ain't your land. – “U.S.-Mexico Border: Building it anyway,” April 6, 2008

Tucson Citizen: Archaeological treasures, ancient Indian graves, clean drinking water and fragile lands clearly don't matter to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. Such sensitive, federally protected features of our borderlands must not delay completion of a 700-mile border fence, he insisted Tuesday. Chertoff's decision to waive 36 federal laws is an outrage, as is his callous disregard of entire communities in southern Arizona and elsewhere along the border. Congress gave him permission in 2005 to waive federal laws, and Congress now needs to revoke that atrociously flawed authority. – “The futile fence,” April 4, 2008

Waco Tribune: If Congress fixed the nation’s broken-down immigration service so foreign workers matched with U.S. employers could enter the United States legally and employers could be punished for breaking hiring laws, there would be no need for partial fences or an order to ignore the antiquities act, the farmland protection act, the clean water act, the noise control act and a host of laws…Let’s hope the upcoming presidential election puts a stop to the border fence fiasco. – “Waivers for border fence unjustified,” April 7, 2008

Watertown Daily Times (NY): The waivers allow construction to go ahead before the assessments are completed. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the agency will continue to seek public input on the potential impact of the construction. By then, though, irreparable damage may be done for a project that has met intense opposition and the value of which remains questionable. – “Fence waivers,” April 4, 2008

Winston-Salem Journal (NC): But the issue of this fence goes beyond environmental concerns. The University of Texas at Brownsville will have the fence cut through campus. Landowners in the area say the fence will intrude on their private property and interfere with their access to water for their herds. Chertoff is wrong to be pushing through these waivers at this time, which is not to say that the fence is not needed. Security along the southern border is needed, but so is common sense and a willingness to work with people. – “Silly fence,” April 4, 2008

Yuma Sun (AZ): It is an old story. Congress doesn't mind making other citizens comply with its rules, as long as the government itself can get a pass. It shows a basic disrespect for the rights of the people… Dare we hope lawmakers will see their own dishonesty and also free Americans of the environmental quagmire? Nope. What is good for them isn't good for us. The arrogance is palpable. – “Skirting of rules shows hypocrisy of government,” April 4, 2008

The Consequences of Federal Failure: Raids' Impact on Families

2008-04-04T16:40:00.002-04:00

Last summer's failure by the federal government to reform the nation's broken immigration system has had strong and lasting repercussions. The Administration's stepped up raids and door-to-door operations while not denting the overall size of the undocumented population is causing tremendous upheaval on the families and communities caught up in raids. At the same time, anti-immigrant extremists, white supremacists, and far-right-wing media pundits have hijacked the immigration debate for their own purposes, stoking extremist attitudes and action in an attempt to move into the mainstream. Latinos, regardless of immigration status, are feeling the impact of the extremist rhetoric and report increased discrimination and anxiety, while experts have documented an increase in hate crimes and extremist behavior. Both of these disturbing trends provide additional evidence of the need for a solution to our ongoing immigration policy problems. The U.S. needs a national immigration policy for the 21st century that ends undocumented immigration as we know it, meets the needs of our economy, and is consistent with our traditional American values.

Immigration Enforcement and Its Unintended Consequences: The Impact on America's Children (Immigration Policy Center - March 2008) - Drawing from a longer, more in-depth study, this document covers immigration raids' effects on children and short-term recommendations on how to minimize their impact.

Extremists Hijack Immigration Debate: Increased Reports of Hate Crimes and Discrimination Aimed at U.S.- and Foreign-Born Latinos (Immigration Policy Center - Updated March 2008) Information and examples on how the immigration debate has spurred discrimination, hate, and violence.