For Immediate Release
June 5, 2010 - Washington D.C. - 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)
###
For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at 202-507-7524 or wsefsaf@immcouncil.org
Join Our Mailing List
Follow us on:
The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational national conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.
A division of the American Immigration Council.
Visit our website at www.immigrationpolicy.org.
Immigrants entering the United States are faced not only with the complexities of learning a new culture and language, but also with the intricate legalities of immigration within a foreign legal system, sparking an increasing trend of “notarios” or individuals exploiting these vulnerable immigrants. More and more, these unauthorized practitioners of law prey on unsuspecting immigrants who are trying to follow the rules and correctly apply for immigration status. Promises of green cards, visas and other status adjustments come with a high price tag and zero results, leaving many immigrants hiding in the shadows, un- certain of their status and financially destroyed.
As a result, it is important for immigrants to consider obtaining advice and guidance through an attorney experienced in immigration matters.
Finding a qualified immigration attorney, however, may require a little more legwork and fact checking than you think. These tips can help immigrants safeguard their future and find a quality attorney:
• Ask a qualified professional. Before you fill out forms or begin your immigration process, consult an experienced attorney. The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is a good place to start. Visit www.aila.org for more information.
• Check Licensure. Verify your attorney’s licensure on the State Bar Association Web site. Also, simple tasks such as verifying that your professional has an office or looking for diplomas and licenses are good habits.
• Understand your case. Understand and be knowledgeable about what type of application is being filed on your behalf and the requirements that go along with that application.
• Get a second opinion. If your attorney or any other professional recommends you file any of the following applications, get a second opinion because these applications are most commonly associated with fraudulent practices: amnesty or late amnesty, political asylum, the length of time you have been in the United States, suspension or cancellation of deportation, employment if you have been in the United States illegally, children under the age of 21 born in the United States or paying the $1,000 fine.
• Speak out. If you believe you have been a victim of an immigration scam, contact your state’s Consumer Affairs office, law enforcement or an attorney. Additionally, the local AILA chapter may be able to assist you and give you more information.
author: Barbara K. Strickland
AILA Doc. No. 08031242
For Immediate Release
May 26, 2010 - Washington, D.C. - This week, the Senate is considering amendments to the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill that would add thousands of additional personnel along the border (including the National Guard), as well as provide millions of dollars for detention beds, technology, and resources. Yesterday, bowing to pressure, President Obama announced that he would send 1,200 National Guard troops to the border and request $500 million for additional resources. Some senators are upping the ante, proposing up to $2 billion for this effort. All of this attention on resources for the border, however, continues to ignore the fact that border enforcement alone has never been enough. Throwing money at this problem as the sole means of solving it is not only fiscally irresponsible, but history teaches us it is ineffective.
For more than two decades, the U.S. government has tried without success to stamp out unauthorized immigration through enforcement efforts at the border and in the interior of the country without fundamentally reforming the broken immigration system that spurs unauthorized immigration in the first place. Ironically, while billions upon billions of dollars have been poured into enforcement, the number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically.
- The annual budget of the U.S. Border Patrol stood at $3.0 billion in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 - a nine-fold increase since FY 1992. The number of Border Patrol agents stationed along the southwest border with Mexico grew to 16,974 in FY 2009 - a nearly five-fold increase since FY 1992.
- Yet, the unauthorized-immigrant population of the United States has tripled in size, from roughly 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008
The enforcement-only approach to our immigration problems is clearly not yielding the results needed. It is time for Congress and the President to propose comprehensive solutions to the complex problem of our broken immigration system.
For more detailed data on the costs of enforcement:
Throwing Good Money After Bad (IPC Fact Check, May 26, 2010)
###
For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at 202-507-7524 or wsefsaf@immcouncil.org
Join Our Mailing List
Follow us on:
The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational national conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.
A division of the American Immigration Council.
Visit our website at www.immigrationpolicy.org.
For Immediate Release
When is Enough, Enough?
Meeting on Comprehensive Immigration Reform Ends with Call for More Enforcement
May 25, 2010
Washington, D.C. - Following a meeting to discuss comprehensive immigration reform with Senate Republicans, President Obama announced that he would send 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border and would request $500 million for additional border personnel and technology as part of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill.
As we have seen time and time again, efforts to overhaul the entire immigration system have taken a back seat to the political expediency of pouring more money into border enforcement. While it is clear that border violence must be addressed, it is also clear that ((enforcement alone is not a solution to our country's immigration problems)).
Over the last two decades, the United States has spent billions of dollars on border enforcement. Since 1992, the annual budget of the U.S. Border Patrol has increased by 714 percent. At the same time, the number of Border Patrol agents stationed along the southwest border has grown by 390 percent. Interior enforcement has expanded as well, and detentions and deportations are at record levels. However, during the same time period, the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has roughly tripled from 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008, close family members of American families continue to wait in visa backlogs that routinely last 5 to 7 years, and Americas competitiveness in the global market place is challenged by difficulties recruiting and retaining exceptional foreign workers.
The President stated that the goal of the additional resources is to quell the violence along the border. While many are frustrated by the continued funding of border enforcement activity to the exclusion of other issues, the only bright side is that this approach seems to acknowledge that the real sources of violence and crime along the border are not immigrants but drug cartels and gun trafficking.
"Those Members of Congress who have insisted on 'border enforcement first' for years must now acknowledge that we are pouring ample resources into enforcement and must be prepared to move on to step two-comprehensive immigration reform," stated Benjamin Johnson, Executive Director of the American Immigration Council. "We need to address the root causes of illegal immigration and create a functional legal immigration system for the 21st century. The American people are hungry for real reform. We can no longer wait for politicians to squeeze every last political point out of this issue; we need real leadership that is focused on solutions, not headlines."
###
For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at 202-507-7524 or wsefsaf@immcouncil.org
Join Our Mailing List
Follow us on:
The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational national conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.
A division of the American Immigration Council.
Visit our website at www.immigrationpolicy.org.
For Immediate Release
U.S. Border Enforcement Prioritizes Non-Violent Migrants over Dangerous Criminals
Data on Federal Court Prosecutions Reveal Non-Violent Immigration
Prosecutions Up, Organized Crime, Drugs and Weapons Charges Down May 20, 2010 Washington D.C. - The Mexican President's visit to the United States allowed both he and President Obama to address the important issues of immigration, border control and crime. Both Presidents made the important point that we address and not conflate these serious issues.
This approach stands in stark contrast to the drafters of Arizona law SB1070 and those members of Congress, including Senators Kyl and McCain, who continue to equate dangerous criminals and migrant workers. These legislators share either a misguided understanding of who is really perpetrating violence at the border or a willingness to do anything to win an election.
The horrific violence which currently afflicts our southern neighbor is a complex problem that requires a multi-faceted solution. This violence is driven by the flow of guns, drugs and money across the borders. Yesterday, the President reaffirmed his administration's commitment "to stem the southbound flow of American guns and money" and to develop "new approaches to reducing the demand for drugs in our country," pledging to keep up law-enforcement pressure on the criminal gangs that "traffic in drugs, guns, and people."
In practice, however, the Justice Department seems to have given in to the political rhetoric behind laws like SB1070. Obama's pledge to focus on these serious criminal enterprises should mean that law enforcement resources are also focused there, rather than on rounding up non-criminal border crossers. However, that's simply not the case according to recent reports that show Department of Justice prosecutions of drug and weapons violations are down while low level immigration violators are being prosecuted at record levels.
A January 2010 Warren Institute report highlights the impact of Operation Streamline (a program that focuses on prosecuting border crossers) on immigration enforcement and how increased attention on nonviolent border crossers has taken resources away from investigating smuggling operations. An additional report from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) shows that federal immigration prosecutions rose to record levels during fiscal year 2009, and that a shift in priorities has created the largest number of federal immigration prosecutions of non-violent border crossers ever. Thus, while the federal government spends billions of dollars prosecuting non-violent immigration violators, more serious criminals involved in drugs, weapons, and organized crime face a lower probability of prosecution. Data shows: ·
The federal government is focusing on low level immigration crimes, while prosecutions of smugglers and drug traffickers are way down. Immigration prosecutions now account for over one half of all federal prosecutions, while federal prosecutions of non immigration-related crimes have decreased. The majority of these immigration prosecutions are for low-level crimes, mainly first time illegal entry. In contrast, smuggling and drug trafficking charges were brought less frequently. Drug prosecutions currently represent approximately 16% of the total number of federal prosecutions. Between 2003 and 2008, weapons prosecutions decreased 19% and drug prosecutions declined by 20%.
· Border prosecutions of first time crossers take resources away from prosecuting serious violent crimes. A May 2010 study by the Warren Institute at the University of California, Berkeley Law School found that increased federal criminal prosecution of first time illegal border crossers has channeled law enforcement resources away from prosecuting more serious crimes, such as drug crimes. The Warren Institute also looked at districts that focus on more serious border crimes. In the Southern District of California, the U.S. Attorney's Office has decided to target the border crossers who have already been deported or who have substantial criminal records. This approach ensures that U.S. attorneys have the time and resources to prosecute other crimes along the border.
As a result, the district leads the nation in prosecutions of alien smuggling and importing controlled substances. Disentangling the role of immigration from these serious crimes is important, not only because we have limited resources but because confusing the issues helps to ensure that neither set of problems are solved. Immigrants will continue to be scapegoated and lumped together with dangerous criminals as long as we fail to challenge the assumptions that are reflected in programs such as Operation Streamline. Getting things right along the border won't happen solely by focusing on immigration or by focusing on crime alone, but by looking realistically at where the problems are and targeting resources accordingly. The President may need Congress in order to reach a full comprehensive solution to the broken immigration system, but bold action to disentangle immigration from crime is within his power. He has said the right words and we look forward to actions that match. To read the IPC fact sheet highlighting data from these reports see:
###
For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at 202-507-7524 or wsefsaf@immcoun
For Immediate Release
Re-Living Our Immigrant Past
From Hazleton to Arizona and Back Again
May 21, 2010
Washington, D.C. - Arizona's immigration law (SB 1070) has garnered the lion's share of media attention in recent weeks - from boycotts to demonstrations and legal challenges. While the spotlight has been on Arizona, however, copycat legislation has been brewing in at least 16 (at last count) other states. What supporters of similar state "attrition through enforcement" immigration legislation might not realize, however, is that we've been here more than once before.
Hazleton, Pennsylvania, provides an opportunity to put anti-immigrant sentiment in context. In the late 1800s, German, Irish, Italian and eastern European migrant workers faced discrimination and anti-immigrant rhetoric. In more recent years, the immigrants living in Hazleton, although from different parts of the world, experienced the same discrimination and rhetoric. For example, in 2006, the Hazleton City Council attempted to make English the official city language, impose fines on landlords for renting to illegal immigrants, and revoke business permits of employers who hired them. These patterns are found throughout the U.S. and over the entire course of U.S. history.
In IPC's latest Perspectives on Immigration, journalist and author Jeffrey Kaye finds that present-day patterns of economic opportunity, ensuing migration, and the reactions to the influx of newcomers are recycled versions of old stories. Kaye juxtaposes the heated rhetoric surrounding Hazleton's 2006 immigration laws with those following Hazleton's immigrant influx in the late 1800s. While migrant workers' countries of origins might differ, the anti-immigrant arguments are just the same.
###
For more information contact
Wendy Sefsaf at 202-507-7524 or
wsefsaf@immcouncil.org
The claim that increased border security would eliminate undocumented immigration is blathered on talk radio and asserted by policymakers all of the time. But, the truth is, we've been increasing border security for decades without success! Before throwing your hands up in frustration and defeat when you hear this myth, consider responding with these quick mythbusting facts!
FACT: Increased border security and the construction of border fences have done little to curb the flow of immigrants across the United States border. Instead, these policies have only succeeded in pushing border crossers into dangerous and less-patrolled regions, and increased the undocumented population by creating an incentive for immigrants not to leave.
FACT: Building a wall along the entire 2000-mile southern U.S. border would be prohibitively expensive. According to a study by the Cato Institute, rather than acting as a deterrent to those attempting to cross the border, increased enforcement has only succeeded in pushing immigration flows into more remote, less patrolled regions, resulting in a tripling of the death rate at the border and decreased apprehensions, and creating a dramatic increase in taxpayer money spent on making arrests along the border (from $300 per arrest in 1992 to $1,200 per arrest in 2002).
FACT: Most experts agree that the decline in the number of unauthorized immigrants is closely linked to the US recession and not to border security programs. Studies have found that historically, recessions affect unauthorized workers disproportionately, as they are more likely to work in industries that are sensitive to business cycles, such as construction, manufacturing, and hospitality. Additionally, statistics show that in 2009, there were 50% less apprehensions at the border than in 2006, a sign that there is less incentive for people to come to the US during recession. More mythbusting facts on this issue can be found in Immigration Myths and Facts, a report from the The ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project.
This article was published with the permission of AILA (American Immigration Lawyers Association) AILA Doc. No. 10050530.
For more information on immigration policies, visit www.aila.org.
New York - May 17, 2010 -- America’s economy is flailing, and 78 million baby boomers are nearing retirement, at which point they will leave the workforce to receive massive amounts of Social Security Administration (SSA) benefits. In a time of major economic downturn, the unlikely “saving grace” is the immigrant population, which pays into the Social Security system without collecting benefits.
Undocumented immigrants in the U.S. comprise approximately 5 percent of the workforce. Contrary to popular belief, between one-half and three-quarters of undocumented immigrants pay federal and state income taxes, Social Security and Medicare taxes – in addition to sales and property taxes. As of October 2005, the SSA concluded that undocumented immigrants contributed an estimated $520 billion to the Social Security system – a figure that would increase exponentially if all of these immigrants were required to earn their legal status and contribute their share.
Despite the absence of progressive immigration policy reform, the tax contributions of immigrants are very evident. Even at the state level, undocumented immigrants still pay more in taxes than they use in public services.
- The Texas State Comptroller determined in a 2006 study that undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues, exceeding the $1.16 billion they received in state services.
- The Oregon Center for Public Policy in 2007 estimated that undocumented immigrants pay state income, excise, property taxes, federal Social Security and Medicare taxes totaling between “$134 million to $187 million annually.” Meanwhile, Oregon employers paid an estimated $97 million to $136 million annually on behalf of their undocumented workers.
- The Iowa Policy Project determined that “undocumented immigrants pay an estimated aggregate amount of $40 million to $62 million in state taxes each year.” Immigrants also make tax contributions through their enormous purchasing power. In a 2002 study by the Center for Urban Economic Development at the University of Chicago, researchers found that undocumented immigrants in the Chicago metro area spent $2.81 billion in 2001 – spending which “sustained 31,908 jobs in the local economy.”
As the baby boomers creep towards retirement and begin to strain the SSA, immigrants will be subsidizing Social Security benefits, making retirement possible for millions of Americans. By requiring the undocumented to come out of the shadows and earn legal status, immigrants will not only contribute by paying taxes, but will play a hefty role in shoring up the teetering Social Security system, and provide a fiscal windfall to U.S. taxpayers.
This article was published with the permission of AILA (American Immigration Lawyers Association) AILA Doc. No. 08071666.
For more information on immigration policies, visit www.aila.org.
