Congressional Hearing Featuring Bloomberg and Murdoch
September 29, 2010
Washington D.C. - On thursday, the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law Membership will hold a hearing on the "Role of Immigration in Strengthening America's Economy," featuring New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Fox owner Rupert Murdoch (an immigrant himself). The two formed a new coalition earlier this year to press for immigration reform.
In anticipation of the event, the Immigration Policy Center wants to draw your attention to a resource page featuring a wide range of studies which analyze the economic impact of immigration on the U.S. The available data shows that legalizing undocumented workers would improve wages and working conditions for all workers, and increase tax revenues for cash-strapped federal, state, and local governments. The IPC has also synthesized a number of state studies which assess the economic impact of immigration on state and local economies.
To view the Economics Resource Page, see:
The Economics of Immigration Reform (Resource Page)
To view the State by State Economic Benefits of Immigration, see:
The Economic and Political Power of Immigrants, Latinos, and Asians in all 50 States (IPC State by State Fact Sheets)
The DREAM Act: Creating Economic Opportunities
September 20, 2010
Washington, D.C. - As the bipartisan call for passing the DREAM Act gets louder - from military, education, faith, and Republican leaders alike - some may overlook the economic benefits of granting legal status to eligible undocumented youth who want to attend college or join the military. There are currently 2.1 million undocumented youths living in the U.S. who, without the DREAM Act, are unlikely to go to college and cannot work legally in the U.S. The DREAM Act, however, would provide an opportunity for them to live up to their full potential as future doctors, nurses, teachers, and entrepreneurs and make greater contributions to the U.S. economy and society.
The DREAM Act would give beneficiaries the opportunity to increase their standard of living - and their tax contributions: If legalized, DREAM Act beneficiaries would have access to greater educational opportunities and better jobs, which in turn means more taxable income. According to a study from Arizona State University, an individual with a bachelor's degree earns approximately $750,000 more over the course of his/her lifetime than an individual with only a high-school diploma.
The DREAM Act would save taxpayers money: A RAND study from 1999 shows that raising the college graduation rate of Hispanics to that of non-Hispanic whites would increase spending on public education by 10 percent nationwide, but the costs would be more than offset by savings in public health and benefits, as well as by increased tax revenues resulting from higher incomes.
The DREAM Act keeps talented students in the United States: Letting the talent of DREAM Act students go to waste "imposes economic and emotional costs on undocumented students and on U.S. society as a whole." The DREAM Act would stop brain drain by allowing our most talented students to remain in the country.
While some in Congress continue to play politics with the DREAM Act, America and its taxpayers continue to lose. Without the DREAM Act, the United States is missing out on talented workers and entrepreneurs, and is losing vital tax revenues and other economic contributions.
To read IPC's Fact Check, see:
The DREAM Act: Creating Economic Opportunities
(IPC Fact Check, September 16, 2010)
For more information on the DREAM Act see:
The DREAM Act in Arizona: An Economic Perspective
(Arizona State University, September 17, 2010)
Essential to the Fight: Immigrants in the Military
(IPC Special Report, November, 2009)
IPC DREAM Act Resource Page
Washington, D.C. - As the bipartisan call for passing the DREAM Act gets louder - from military, education, faith, and Republican leaders alike - some may overlook the economic benefits of granting legal status to eligible undocumented youth who want to attend college or join the military. There are currently 2.1 million undocumented youths living in the U.S. who, without the DREAM Act, are unlikely to go to college and cannot work legally in the U.S. The DREAM Act, however, would provide an opportunity for them to live up to their full potential as future doctors, nurses, teachers, and entrepreneurs and make greater contributions to the U.S. economy and society.
The DREAM Act would give beneficiaries the opportunity to increase their standard of living - and their tax contributions: If legalized, DREAM Act beneficiaries would have access to greater educational opportunities and better jobs, which in turn means more taxable income. According to a study from Arizona State University, an individual with a bachelor's degree earns approximately $750,000 more over the course of his/her lifetime than an individual with only a high-school diploma.
The DREAM Act would save taxpayers money: A RAND study from 1999 shows that raising the college graduation rate of Hispanics to that of non-Hispanic whites would increase spending on public education by 10 percent nationwide, but the costs would be more than offset by savings in public health and benefits, as well as by increased tax revenues resulting from higher incomes.
The DREAM Act keeps talented students in the United States: Letting the talent of DREAM Act students go to waste "imposes economic and emotional costs on undocumented students and on U.S. society as a whole." The DREAM Act would stop brain drain by allowing our most talented students to remain in the country.
While some in Congress continue to play politics with the DREAM Act, America and its taxpayers continue to lose. Without the DREAM Act, the United States is missing out on talented workers and entrepreneurs, and is losing vital tax revenues and other economic contributions.
To read IPC's Fact Check, see:
The DREAM Act: Creating Economic Opportunities
(IPC Fact Check, September 16, 2010)
For more information on the DREAM Act see:
The DREAM Act in Arizona: An Economic Perspective
(Arizona State University, September 17, 2010)
Essential to the Fight: Immigrants in the Military
(IPC Special Report, November, 2009)
IPC DREAM Act Resource Page
DREAM Act Coming to the Senate Floor
Senator Reid to Attach Act to Defense Authorization Bill
September 15, 2010
Washington, D.C. - Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that he would attach the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act to the Department of Defense authorization bill expected to come before the Senate as early as next week. The vote will be an important test of whether Congress can transcend partisan politics and work together on crafting solutions to the broken immigration system that both Democrats and Republicans acknowledge is in desperate need of reform. That the proposal will be considered as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill is appropriate, given the Department of Defense's support for DREAM Act as a way to improve military readiness.
First introduced in 2001, the DREAM Act would address the plight of young immigrants who have been raised in the U.S. and managed to succeed despite the challenges of being brought to the U.S. without proper documentation. The proposal would offer a path to legal status to those who have graduated from high-school, have stayed out of trouble and plan to attend college or serve in the U.S. military for at least two years.
Each year, approximately 65,000 undocumented students graduate from high school, many at the top of their classes, but cannot go to college, join the military, work, or otherwise pursue their dreams. They belong to the 1.5 generation - any (first generation) immigrants brought to the United States at a young age who were largely raised in this country and therefore share much in common with second generation Americans. These students are culturally American, growing up here and often having little attachment to their country of birth. They tend to be bicultural and fluent in English.
Research has shown that providing a legal status for young people who have a proven record of success in the United States would be a boon to the economy and the U.S. workforce. University presidents and educational associations, as well as military recruiters, business and religious leaders have added their voice to those calling for passage of the bill. Foreign-born students represent a significant and growing percentage of the current student population. Unfortunately, immigration status and the associated barriers to higher education contribute to a higher-than-average high dropout rate, which costs taxpayers and the economy billions of dollars each year.
The DREAM Act would eliminate these barriers for many students, and the DREAM Act's high school graduation requirement would provide a powerful incentive for students who might otherwise drop out to stay in school and graduate. This will help boost the number of high skilled American-raised workers. As they take their place in the workplace as hard working, taxpaying Americans, they will contribute a lifetime of revenues at the local, state and federal level.
Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy, Bill Carr, supports the DREAM Act and stated that the law would be "good for readiness" and would help to recruit "cream of the crop" students. The DREAM Act is part of the Department of Defense's 2010-2012 Strategic Plan to assist the military in it's recruiting efforts.
For more information on the DREAM Act see:
The DREAM Act: Creating Opportunities for Immigrant Students and Supporting the U.S. Economy (IPC Fact Check, July 2010)
Essential to the Fight: Immigrants in the Military (IPC Special Report, November, 2009)
IPC DREAM Act Resource Page
September 15, 2010
Washington, D.C. - Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that he would attach the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act to the Department of Defense authorization bill expected to come before the Senate as early as next week. The vote will be an important test of whether Congress can transcend partisan politics and work together on crafting solutions to the broken immigration system that both Democrats and Republicans acknowledge is in desperate need of reform. That the proposal will be considered as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill is appropriate, given the Department of Defense's support for DREAM Act as a way to improve military readiness.
First introduced in 2001, the DREAM Act would address the plight of young immigrants who have been raised in the U.S. and managed to succeed despite the challenges of being brought to the U.S. without proper documentation. The proposal would offer a path to legal status to those who have graduated from high-school, have stayed out of trouble and plan to attend college or serve in the U.S. military for at least two years.
Each year, approximately 65,000 undocumented students graduate from high school, many at the top of their classes, but cannot go to college, join the military, work, or otherwise pursue their dreams. They belong to the 1.5 generation - any (first generation) immigrants brought to the United States at a young age who were largely raised in this country and therefore share much in common with second generation Americans. These students are culturally American, growing up here and often having little attachment to their country of birth. They tend to be bicultural and fluent in English.
Research has shown that providing a legal status for young people who have a proven record of success in the United States would be a boon to the economy and the U.S. workforce. University presidents and educational associations, as well as military recruiters, business and religious leaders have added their voice to those calling for passage of the bill. Foreign-born students represent a significant and growing percentage of the current student population. Unfortunately, immigration status and the associated barriers to higher education contribute to a higher-than-average high dropout rate, which costs taxpayers and the economy billions of dollars each year.
The DREAM Act would eliminate these barriers for many students, and the DREAM Act's high school graduation requirement would provide a powerful incentive for students who might otherwise drop out to stay in school and graduate. This will help boost the number of high skilled American-raised workers. As they take their place in the workplace as hard working, taxpaying Americans, they will contribute a lifetime of revenues at the local, state and federal level.
Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy, Bill Carr, supports the DREAM Act and stated that the law would be "good for readiness" and would help to recruit "cream of the crop" students. The DREAM Act is part of the Department of Defense's 2010-2012 Strategic Plan to assist the military in it's recruiting efforts.
For more information on the DREAM Act see:
The DREAM Act: Creating Opportunities for Immigrant Students and Supporting the U.S. Economy (IPC Fact Check, July 2010)
Essential to the Fight: Immigrants in the Military (IPC Special Report, November, 2009)
IPC DREAM Act Resource Page
Immigration Enforcement in a Time of Recession
Explaining the Recent Decline in Unauthorized Migration
September 9, 2010
Washington, D.C. - Recent estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center indicate that the number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has declined by roughly one million since 2007-bringing the total size of the unauthorized population to approximately 11.1 million. Coming after the release of similar estimates by the Department of Homeland Security in January, these figures have provoked considerable speculation as to how much of the decline is attributable to the current recession, and how much is the result of heightened immigration enforcement.
Ultimately, it is impossible to disentangle the impact of the recession from that of enforcement with any degree of certainty. Nevertheless, the available research indicates that the recession is likely playing a major role in discouraging new unauthorized immigrants from entering the country due to the lack of jobs. After all, federal spending on immigration enforcement has been rising steadily since the early 1990s, while the size of the unauthorized population continued to increase until the current recession hit. Research also suggests that when the economy begins to improve again, unauthorized immigration is likely to increase as well - unless the broken immigration system which spurs unauthorized migration has been fixed by then.
To read IPC's Fact Check see:
September 9, 2010
Washington, D.C. - Recent estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center indicate that the number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has declined by roughly one million since 2007-bringing the total size of the unauthorized population to approximately 11.1 million. Coming after the release of similar estimates by the Department of Homeland Security in January, these figures have provoked considerable speculation as to how much of the decline is attributable to the current recession, and how much is the result of heightened immigration enforcement.
Ultimately, it is impossible to disentangle the impact of the recession from that of enforcement with any degree of certainty. Nevertheless, the available research indicates that the recession is likely playing a major role in discouraging new unauthorized immigrants from entering the country due to the lack of jobs. After all, federal spending on immigration enforcement has been rising steadily since the early 1990s, while the size of the unauthorized population continued to increase until the current recession hit. Research also suggests that when the economy begins to improve again, unauthorized immigration is likely to increase as well - unless the broken immigration system which spurs unauthorized migration has been fixed by then.
To read IPC's Fact Check see:
- Immigration Enforcement in a Time of Recession (IPC Fact Check, September 9, 2010)
U.S. sues controversial Arizona sheriff in civil-rights investigation
Justice Department officials say Maricopa County's Joe Arpaio failed to turn over documents in a probe of his agency's immigration enforcement operations. Among his tactics are 'sweeps' of immigrant-heavy neighborhoods.
By Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angeles Times
10:23 AM PDT, September 2, 2010
Reporting from Denver
The U.S. Department of Justice on Thursday announced it had sued Joe Arpaio, the controversial sheriff of Maricopa County in Arizona, for failing to turn over documents in a probe of whether his aggressive operations against illegal immigrants had violated civil rights.
The litigation came two months after a Justice Department lawsuit halted a tough new Arizona immigration law, which Arpaio strongly supported. The new lawsuit is unrelated to the immigration law and stems from an investigation into the sheriff's immigration enforcement operations. The department said it was the first time in 30 years a police agency had not cooperated in a civil-rights probe.
"The actions of the sheriff's office are unprecedented. It is unfortunate that the department was forced to resort to litigation to gain access to public documents and facilities," said Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the civil-rights division, in a statement.
Arpaio's attorney said he could not comment on the lawsuit until he had time to review it.
For more than three years, Arpaio has attracted praise as well as condemnation for using his deputies to track down illegal immigrants. The most high-profile example is his so-called "sweeps," during which deputies flood immigrant-heavy neighborhoods, stop people for minor infractions such as driving with a broken taillight and check their immigration status. The tactics have made Arpaio popular in Arizona, the main gateway for illegal immigrants into the United States, but also have drawn widespread complaints that he unfairly targets Latinos.
Last year, the Obama administration withdrew from part of an agreement that had allowed Arpaio's deputies to enforce federal immigration laws. The move made little difference —the Sheriff says he can use state laws against illegal immigrants and has continued his operations. He has also touted the fact that federal civil rights investigators have yet to charge him with anything, while simultaneously announcing he was not cooperating with them and barring them from his facilities.
In the lawsuit, the Department of Justice said it asked for 51 different sets of documents in March 2009, shortly after launching the probe. Arpaio's office provided only 11 pages and had not handed over any others. His office also would not let investigators tour the county jail or other sheriff's facilities. Arpaio previously said he had no legal obligation to give the Justice Department other material and dismissed the probe as politically motivated.
Arpaio's agency also has been sued by a coalition of private civil-rights lawyers who have complained that it has not provided them with documents. A federal judge earlier this year found the sheriff's department had destroyed documents on the sweeps that the plaintiff's attorneys were legally entitled to review and sanctioned the agency.
Arpaio is also under investigation by a federal grand jury for alleged abuse of power in a separate probe. He has denied those allegations.
nicholas.riccardi@latimes.com
By Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angeles Times
10:23 AM PDT, September 2, 2010
Reporting from Denver
The U.S. Department of Justice on Thursday announced it had sued Joe Arpaio, the controversial sheriff of Maricopa County in Arizona, for failing to turn over documents in a probe of whether his aggressive operations against illegal immigrants had violated civil rights.
The litigation came two months after a Justice Department lawsuit halted a tough new Arizona immigration law, which Arpaio strongly supported. The new lawsuit is unrelated to the immigration law and stems from an investigation into the sheriff's immigration enforcement operations. The department said it was the first time in 30 years a police agency had not cooperated in a civil-rights probe.
"The actions of the sheriff's office are unprecedented. It is unfortunate that the department was forced to resort to litigation to gain access to public documents and facilities," said Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the civil-rights division, in a statement.
Arpaio's attorney said he could not comment on the lawsuit until he had time to review it.
For more than three years, Arpaio has attracted praise as well as condemnation for using his deputies to track down illegal immigrants. The most high-profile example is his so-called "sweeps," during which deputies flood immigrant-heavy neighborhoods, stop people for minor infractions such as driving with a broken taillight and check their immigration status. The tactics have made Arpaio popular in Arizona, the main gateway for illegal immigrants into the United States, but also have drawn widespread complaints that he unfairly targets Latinos.
Last year, the Obama administration withdrew from part of an agreement that had allowed Arpaio's deputies to enforce federal immigration laws. The move made little difference —the Sheriff says he can use state laws against illegal immigrants and has continued his operations. He has also touted the fact that federal civil rights investigators have yet to charge him with anything, while simultaneously announcing he was not cooperating with them and barring them from his facilities.
In the lawsuit, the Department of Justice said it asked for 51 different sets of documents in March 2009, shortly after launching the probe. Arpaio's office provided only 11 pages and had not handed over any others. His office also would not let investigators tour the county jail or other sheriff's facilities. Arpaio previously said he had no legal obligation to give the Justice Department other material and dismissed the probe as politically motivated.
Arpaio's agency also has been sued by a coalition of private civil-rights lawyers who have complained that it has not provided them with documents. A federal judge earlier this year found the sheriff's department had destroyed documents on the sweeps that the plaintiff's attorneys were legally entitled to review and sanctioned the agency.
Arpaio is also under investigation by a federal grand jury for alleged abuse of power in a separate probe. He has denied those allegations.
nicholas.riccardi@latimes.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)