IPC Problems & Solutions Series Released to Provide Details for Senate Framework
March 24, 2010
Washington D.C. - Today, the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) releases its final problem and solutions series which outline the key challenges in our current immigration system and provide an overview of the various areas that must be addressed in a legislative immigration reform package. Last week, Senators Schumer and Graham released an outline for reform, advancing the process one more step. However, the details that will fill-in their outline are critical and can make the difference between solving our immigration problems and maintaining the status quo.
To read the papers in their entirety see:
Focusing on the Solutions: Key Principals of Comprehensive Immigration Reform
(IPC Special Report, March 23, 2010)
Breaking Down the Problems: What's Wrong With our Current Immigration System
(IPC Special Report, October 21, 2009)
Also see the Problems & Solutions PowerPoint Presentation based on these reports.
The Right Way to Mend Immigration
By Charles E. Schumer and Lindsey O. Graham
Friday, March 19, 2010
Our immigration system is badly broken. Although our borders have become far more secure in recent years, too many people seeking illegal entry get through. We have no way to track whether the millions who enter the United States on valid visas each year leave when they are supposed to. And employers are burdened by a complicated system for verifying workers' immigration status.
Last week we met with President Obama to discuss our draft framework for action on immigration. We expressed our belief that America's security and economic well-being depend on enacting sensible immigration policies.
The answer is simple: Americans overwhelmingly oppose illegal immigration and support legal immigration. Throughout our history, immigrants have contributed to making this country more vibrant and economically dynamic. Once it is clear that in 20 years our nation will not again confront the specter of another 11 million people coming here illegally, Americans will embrace more welcoming immigration policies.
Our plan has four pillars: requiring biometric Social Security cards to ensure that illegal workers cannot get jobs; fulfilling and strengthening our commitments on border security and interior enforcement; creating a process for admitting temporary workers; and implementing a tough but fair path to legalization for those already here.
Besides border security, ending illegal immigration will also require an effective employment verification system that holds employers accountable for hiring illegal workers. A tamper-proof ID system would dramatically decrease illegal immigration, experts have said, and would reduce the government revenue lost when employers and workers here illegally fail to pay taxes.
We would require all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants who want jobs to obtain a high-tech, fraud-proof Social Security card. Each card's unique biometric identifier would be stored only on the card; no government database would house everyone's information. The cards would not contain any private information, medical information, nor tracking devices. The card will be a high-tech version of the Social Security card that citizens already have.
Prospective employers would be responsible for swiping the cards through a machine to confirm a person's identity and immigration status. Employers who refused to swipe the card or who otherwise knowingly hired unauthorized workers would face stiff fines and, for repeat offenses, prison sentences.
We propose a zero-tolerance policy for gang members, smugglers, terrorists and those who commit other felonies after coming here illegally. We would bolster recent efforts to secure our borders by increasing the Border Patrol's staffing and funding for infrastructure and technology. More personnel would be deployed to the border immediately to fill gaps in apprehension capabilities.
Other steps include expanding domestic enforcement to better apprehend and deport those who commit crimes and completing an entry-exit system that tracks people who enter the United States on legal visas and reports those who overstay their visas to law enforcement databases.
Ending illegal immigration, however, cannot be the sole objective of reform. Developing a rational legal immigration system is essential to ensuring America's future economic prosperity.
Ensuring economic prosperity requires attracting the world's best and brightest. Our legislation would award green cards to immigrants who receive a PhD or master's degree in science, technology, engineering or math from a U.S. university. It makes no sense to educate the world's future inventors and entrepreneurs and then force them to leave when they are able to contribute to our economy.
Our blueprint also creates a rational system for admitting lower-skilled workers. Our current system prohibits lower-skilled immigrants from coming here to earn money and then returning home. Our framework would facilitate this desired circular migration by allowing employers to hire immigrants if they can show they were unsuccessful in recruiting an American to fill an open position; allowing more lower-skilled immigrants to come here when our economy is creating jobs and fewer in a recession; and permitting workers who have succeeded in the workplace, and contributed to their communities over many years, the chance to earn a green card.
For the 11 million immigrants already in this country illegally, we would provide a tough but fair path forward. They would be required to admit they broke the law and to pay their debt to society by performing community service and paying fines and back taxes. These people would be required to pass background checks and be proficient in English before going to the back of the line of prospective immigrants to earn the opportunity to work toward lawful permanent residence.
The American people deserve more than empty rhetoric and impractical calls for mass deportation. We urge the public and our colleagues to join our bipartisan efforts in enacting these reforms.
Charles E. Schumer is a Democratic senator from New York. Lindsey O. Graham is a Republican senator from South Carolina.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Our immigration system is badly broken. Although our borders have become far more secure in recent years, too many people seeking illegal entry get through. We have no way to track whether the millions who enter the United States on valid visas each year leave when they are supposed to. And employers are burdened by a complicated system for verifying workers' immigration status.
Last week we met with President Obama to discuss our draft framework for action on immigration. We expressed our belief that America's security and economic well-being depend on enacting sensible immigration policies.
The answer is simple: Americans overwhelmingly oppose illegal immigration and support legal immigration. Throughout our history, immigrants have contributed to making this country more vibrant and economically dynamic. Once it is clear that in 20 years our nation will not again confront the specter of another 11 million people coming here illegally, Americans will embrace more welcoming immigration policies.
Our plan has four pillars: requiring biometric Social Security cards to ensure that illegal workers cannot get jobs; fulfilling and strengthening our commitments on border security and interior enforcement; creating a process for admitting temporary workers; and implementing a tough but fair path to legalization for those already here.
Besides border security, ending illegal immigration will also require an effective employment verification system that holds employers accountable for hiring illegal workers. A tamper-proof ID system would dramatically decrease illegal immigration, experts have said, and would reduce the government revenue lost when employers and workers here illegally fail to pay taxes.
We would require all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants who want jobs to obtain a high-tech, fraud-proof Social Security card. Each card's unique biometric identifier would be stored only on the card; no government database would house everyone's information. The cards would not contain any private information, medical information, nor tracking devices. The card will be a high-tech version of the Social Security card that citizens already have.
Prospective employers would be responsible for swiping the cards through a machine to confirm a person's identity and immigration status. Employers who refused to swipe the card or who otherwise knowingly hired unauthorized workers would face stiff fines and, for repeat offenses, prison sentences.
We propose a zero-tolerance policy for gang members, smugglers, terrorists and those who commit other felonies after coming here illegally. We would bolster recent efforts to secure our borders by increasing the Border Patrol's staffing and funding for infrastructure and technology. More personnel would be deployed to the border immediately to fill gaps in apprehension capabilities.
Other steps include expanding domestic enforcement to better apprehend and deport those who commit crimes and completing an entry-exit system that tracks people who enter the United States on legal visas and reports those who overstay their visas to law enforcement databases.
Ending illegal immigration, however, cannot be the sole objective of reform. Developing a rational legal immigration system is essential to ensuring America's future economic prosperity.
Ensuring economic prosperity requires attracting the world's best and brightest. Our legislation would award green cards to immigrants who receive a PhD or master's degree in science, technology, engineering or math from a U.S. university. It makes no sense to educate the world's future inventors and entrepreneurs and then force them to leave when they are able to contribute to our economy.
Our blueprint also creates a rational system for admitting lower-skilled workers. Our current system prohibits lower-skilled immigrants from coming here to earn money and then returning home. Our framework would facilitate this desired circular migration by allowing employers to hire immigrants if they can show they were unsuccessful in recruiting an American to fill an open position; allowing more lower-skilled immigrants to come here when our economy is creating jobs and fewer in a recession; and permitting workers who have succeeded in the workplace, and contributed to their communities over many years, the chance to earn a green card.
For the 11 million immigrants already in this country illegally, we would provide a tough but fair path forward. They would be required to admit they broke the law and to pay their debt to society by performing community service and paying fines and back taxes. These people would be required to pass background checks and be proficient in English before going to the back of the line of prospective immigrants to earn the opportunity to work toward lawful permanent residence.
The American people deserve more than empty rhetoric and impractical calls for mass deportation. We urge the public and our colleagues to join our bipartisan efforts in enacting these reforms.
Charles E. Schumer is a Democratic senator from New York. Lindsey O. Graham is a Republican senator from South Carolina.
The First Year of Immigration Policy Under the Obama Administration
Struggling to Turn Principles Into Practice
March 2, 2010
Washington D.C. - The month of March marks the seventh anniversary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is home to the nation's three immigration agencies. It also marks the end of a sweeping internal review ordered by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano - a review which has not been made public. Therefore, in order to assess the first year of immigration policy under the Obama Administration, the Immigration Policy Center releases DHS Progress Report: The Challenge of Reform.
The report compares DHS's record to the "Transition Blueprint," a document delivered to the Obama transition team by immigration policy experts and advocates which focused on administrative improvements to the immigration system.
IPC's overall analysis finds that while DHS struggles towards reform it has failed to meet some key expectations in many of the blueprint areas. The department has engaged thoughtfully and strategically on some issues and has made some fundamental changes in how it conducts its immigration business. However, turning principles into practice has fallen short, and the practical realities for individuals caught up in the system have not necessarily changed for the better.
Ultimately, this first year was both promising and frustrating, a year in which the promise of reform seemed to conflict daily with the dynamics of an entrenched, enforcement-driven culture. For every two steps forward, it seems that the Department takes one step back, inching its way toward a more humane and just system. There is clearly much more that can and should be done at an administrative level. However, without Congressional action on immigration reform, there are limits to how much the system can be changed.
To read the report in its entirety see:
DHS Progress Report: The Challenge of Reform
March 2, 2010
Washington D.C. - The month of March marks the seventh anniversary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is home to the nation's three immigration agencies. It also marks the end of a sweeping internal review ordered by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano - a review which has not been made public. Therefore, in order to assess the first year of immigration policy under the Obama Administration, the Immigration Policy Center releases DHS Progress Report: The Challenge of Reform.
The report compares DHS's record to the "Transition Blueprint," a document delivered to the Obama transition team by immigration policy experts and advocates which focused on administrative improvements to the immigration system.
IPC's overall analysis finds that while DHS struggles towards reform it has failed to meet some key expectations in many of the blueprint areas. The department has engaged thoughtfully and strategically on some issues and has made some fundamental changes in how it conducts its immigration business. However, turning principles into practice has fallen short, and the practical realities for individuals caught up in the system have not necessarily changed for the better.
Ultimately, this first year was both promising and frustrating, a year in which the promise of reform seemed to conflict daily with the dynamics of an entrenched, enforcement-driven culture. For every two steps forward, it seems that the Department takes one step back, inching its way toward a more humane and just system. There is clearly much more that can and should be done at an administrative level. However, without Congressional action on immigration reform, there are limits to how much the system can be changed.
To read the report in its entirety see:
DHS Progress Report: The Challenge of Reform
(IPC Special Report, March 2, 2010)
Our overloaded immigration courts
The result of the government's get-tough policies has been imperfect justice at best.
Los Angeles Times
February 22, 2010
It sounds counterintuitive, but since the failure of comprehensive immigration reform in 2007, the prevailing wisdom in Washington has been that the way to earn public support for allowing this country's approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship is for the federal government to vigorously prosecute violations of immigration law. Tough enforcement, in other words, will convince Americans that reform is warranted.
To that end, the Obama administration picked up where its predecessor left off -- adding miles of new fencing and hundreds of new agents to the border and deporting undocumented immigrants at a record-breaking pace. The volume is all the more notable given that fewer migrants are coming in illegally and that almost 1 million left voluntarily last year.
The result of the increased enforcement is a mountainous caseload overwhelming the nation's immigration courts. (They are not courts in the usual sense, and do not belong to the judicial branch of government. Rather, judges are employees of the attorney general.) In 2008, for example, 231 judges completed an average of 1,200 proceedings each, and the numbers keep climbing. The work is "like holding death penalty cases in traffic court," Dana L. Marks, an immigration judge in San Francisco and the president of the National Assn. of Immigration Judges, told the New York Times.
A recent report by the American Bar Assn. calls for making the court system independent of the Justice Department to reduce "public skepticism" and increase respect, and paints a harrowing picture in which final decisions are rushed, haphazard and inconsistent. At times the outcome of removal proceedings depends less on the facts of an immigrant's case than on which judge hears the case, the report says. It calls for hiring 100 additional immigration judges as soon as possible, adding new training and requiring more written, reasoned decisions from judges.
Many of the recommendations in the report would require congressional approval. Others should be afforded careful consideration by the Department of Homeland Security. The ABA, for example, calls on DHS personnel to use prosecutorial discretion and stop clogging the system by hauling noncitizens into court needlessly even if they are entitled to remain and claim legal permanent resident status, and litigating cases after the facts make removal unlikely.
A comprehensive overhaul of the nation's immigration laws is now securely on Washington's back burner. That's lamentable because the best way to ease the burden on the court system would be to see reform accomplished. But as the ABA's report demonstrates, there are plenty of changes that should be made in the meantime.
Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times
Los Angeles Times
February 22, 2010
It sounds counterintuitive, but since the failure of comprehensive immigration reform in 2007, the prevailing wisdom in Washington has been that the way to earn public support for allowing this country's approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship is for the federal government to vigorously prosecute violations of immigration law. Tough enforcement, in other words, will convince Americans that reform is warranted.
To that end, the Obama administration picked up where its predecessor left off -- adding miles of new fencing and hundreds of new agents to the border and deporting undocumented immigrants at a record-breaking pace. The volume is all the more notable given that fewer migrants are coming in illegally and that almost 1 million left voluntarily last year.
The result of the increased enforcement is a mountainous caseload overwhelming the nation's immigration courts. (They are not courts in the usual sense, and do not belong to the judicial branch of government. Rather, judges are employees of the attorney general.) In 2008, for example, 231 judges completed an average of 1,200 proceedings each, and the numbers keep climbing. The work is "like holding death penalty cases in traffic court," Dana L. Marks, an immigration judge in San Francisco and the president of the National Assn. of Immigration Judges, told the New York Times.
A recent report by the American Bar Assn. calls for making the court system independent of the Justice Department to reduce "public skepticism" and increase respect, and paints a harrowing picture in which final decisions are rushed, haphazard and inconsistent. At times the outcome of removal proceedings depends less on the facts of an immigrant's case than on which judge hears the case, the report says. It calls for hiring 100 additional immigration judges as soon as possible, adding new training and requiring more written, reasoned decisions from judges.
Many of the recommendations in the report would require congressional approval. Others should be afforded careful consideration by the Department of Homeland Security. The ABA, for example, calls on DHS personnel to use prosecutorial discretion and stop clogging the system by hauling noncitizens into court needlessly even if they are entitled to remain and claim legal permanent resident status, and litigating cases after the facts make removal unlikely.
A comprehensive overhaul of the nation's immigration laws is now securely on Washington's back burner. That's lamentable because the best way to ease the burden on the court system would be to see reform accomplished. But as the ABA's report demonstrates, there are plenty of changes that should be made in the meantime.
Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times
The Criminal Alien Program
ICE's Biggest and Least Understood Enforcement Program
February 17, 2010
Washington, D.C.- The Criminal Alien Program (CAP)--a program administered by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)--is designed to screen inmates in prisons and jails, identify deportable non-citizens, and place them into deportation proceedings. However, in the years 
since CAP was initiated, there have been concerns about whether or not ICE is actually targeting immigrants with serious criminal records.
Today, the IPC releases a new Special Report, The Criminal Alien Program: Immigration Enforcement in Travis County Texas by Andrea Guttin, Esq., which provides a history and analysis of ICE's problematic enforcement program, as well as a case study of CAP implementation in Travis County, Texas.
While ICE claims that CAP's focus is "dangerous criminal aliens," the data show that legal as well as unauthorized immigrants with a wide range of criminal history--or no criminal history at all--are being identified for deportation. Other concerns surrounding the CAP include racial profiling, pre-textual arrests, immigrant distrust of local police, underreporting of domestic violence and finally, misuse of immigrant detainers--which are being used by CAP and other immigration enforcement programs (such as Secure Communities).
The CAP report shows that:
CAP is the program responsible 48% of all deportable immigrants identified by ICE in FY 2009-more than the 287(g) program, Fugitive Operations, and the Office of Field Operations combined.
A large percentage of immigrants apprehended under CAP are not criminals at all. An October 2009 DHS report found that 57 percent of immigrants identified through the CAP program in FY 2009 had no criminal convictions, up from 53 percent in FY 2008.
In Travis County, a majority of immigrants placed under detainer were arrested for a misdemeanor as their most serious charge. In 2008, 58 percent of the detainers were placed on those charged with misdemeanors-up from 38 percent in 2007 and 34 percent in 2006.
To read the report and additional resources in their entirety, see:
The Criminal Alien Program: Immigration Enforcement in Travis County, Texas (IPC Special Report, February 17, 2010)
The Criminal Alien Program: Immigration Enforcement in Prisons and Jails (IPC Summary, February 17, 2010)
Immigration Detainers: A Comprehensive Look (IPC Fact Check, February 17, 2010)
Many Happy Returns: Remittances and Their Impact
Money Sent Home by Migrant Workers Helps American Economy Too
February 10, 2010
Washington D.C. - Today, the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) released a report, Many Happy Returns: Remittances and Their Impact by Kristin Johnson, Ph.D. which analyzes remittances and their effect on the economies of both the U.S. and receiving countries. Remittances - the transfer of money by workers back to home countries - can constitute one of the top financial inflows to many developing countries, in some cases exceeding international aid. Mexico and the Philippines are the top receiving countries from the U.S. and are also large consumers of U.S. goods. In addtion, in the wake of Haiti's overwhelming humanitarian crisis, remittances will assume a central role in providing critical resources to the population. Some critics argue that remittances are a loss to the U.S. economy, however, the latest IPC report shows that remittances are actually used to buy goods from U.S. companies, showing that remittances actually benefit both the sending and receiving countries.
From the report:
"Remittance outflows likely provide long term benefits to the U.S. economy. Remittances boost the consumption of U.S. exports, resulting in expansion of U.S. business and trade competitiveness. Ultimately, sending money abroad expands the consumer base able to purchase U.S. goods, a critical facet in maintaining a strong U.S. economy."
The IPC also released a Fact Check on the key role remittances will play in Haitian recovery efforts and how that will in turn help U.S. exports which notes:
"Over half of Haiti's imports originate in the U.S., and the states with the most Haitian immigrants also have large export markets in Haiti. In this way, the remittances that immigrants in the U.S send abroad have a positive impact on the U.S. economy and trade."
To read the report and fact check in their entirety see:
• Many Happy Returns: Remittances and Their Impact (IPC Special Report, February 10, 2010)
• Remittances Will be Critical to Haitians: The U.S. Benefits from Remittances As Well (IPC Fact Check, February 10, 2010)
February 10, 2010
Washington D.C. - Today, the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) released a report, Many Happy Returns: Remittances and Their Impact by Kristin Johnson, Ph.D. which analyzes remittances and their effect on the economies of both the U.S. and receiving countries. Remittances - the transfer of money by workers back to home countries - can constitute one of the top financial inflows to many developing countries, in some cases exceeding international aid. Mexico and the Philippines are the top receiving countries from the U.S. and are also large consumers of U.S. goods. In addtion, in the wake of Haiti's overwhelming humanitarian crisis, remittances will assume a central role in providing critical resources to the population. Some critics argue that remittances are a loss to the U.S. economy, however, the latest IPC report shows that remittances are actually used to buy goods from U.S. companies, showing that remittances actually benefit both the sending and receiving countries.
From the report:
"Remittance outflows likely provide long term benefits to the U.S. economy. Remittances boost the consumption of U.S. exports, resulting in expansion of U.S. business and trade competitiveness. Ultimately, sending money abroad expands the consumer base able to purchase U.S. goods, a critical facet in maintaining a strong U.S. economy."
The IPC also released a Fact Check on the key role remittances will play in Haitian recovery efforts and how that will in turn help U.S. exports which notes:
"Over half of Haiti's imports originate in the U.S., and the states with the most Haitian immigrants also have large export markets in Haiti. In this way, the remittances that immigrants in the U.S send abroad have a positive impact on the U.S. economy and trade."
To read the report and fact check in their entirety see:
• Many Happy Returns: Remittances and Their Impact (IPC Special Report, February 10, 2010)
• Remittances Will be Critical to Haitians: The U.S. Benefits from Remittances As Well (IPC Fact Check, February 10, 2010)
A Sinking Feeling: Immigration Reform Not Likely Till 2011
posted on January 15, 2010 at 12:03 PM
Texas Observer
It always bothers me when cable TV talking heads and anti-immigrant shouters say "We're not against immigrants coming to this country, they just need to follow our laws."
Clearly, they have never applied for a travel visa to the United States, or heaven forbid, a work visa. They have no idea of the truly scary, bureaucratic nightmare that is our immigration system. Why not just insert bamboo needles under your fingernails instead? Because it will be much faster and more pleasant.
When Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez anncounced the filing of comprehensive immigration reform last month hundreds of thousands rejoiced. Gutierrez also said that the Obama Administration promised to bring up the issue in 2010. Hallelujah and amen to that.
I really really hope that's true. But I have a sinking feeling that it's a tad too hopeful. I was catching up on some stories in the Rio Grande Guardian today and lo and behold, Rep. Henry Cuellar made my heart sink. He says immigration reform will more than likely take place in 2011. Though it pains me I think he is probably right. With the two wars, the economy, the upcoming elections and the knock-down drag-out battle over healthcare reform -- I can see immigration reform getting pushed to the back of the bus.
Cuellar is one of the myriad Congressional Hispanic Caucus members that signed on to Gutierrez's bill. Here's what he had to say:
“Realistically, it is going to be hard (to pass the legislation this year), I can tell you now. We have to go back and finish the health care bill. We’ve got to finish the jobs bill. Then, of course, you get the 2010 election. So, I think, 2011 will probably be more realistic. I want it this year but realistically, it will probably be 2011.”
Another year of agonizing about how Congress is going to muck up immigration reform.
Texas Observer
It always bothers me when cable TV talking heads and anti-immigrant shouters say "We're not against immigrants coming to this country, they just need to follow our laws."
Clearly, they have never applied for a travel visa to the United States, or heaven forbid, a work visa. They have no idea of the truly scary, bureaucratic nightmare that is our immigration system. Why not just insert bamboo needles under your fingernails instead? Because it will be much faster and more pleasant.
When Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez anncounced the filing of comprehensive immigration reform last month hundreds of thousands rejoiced. Gutierrez also said that the Obama Administration promised to bring up the issue in 2010. Hallelujah and amen to that.
I really really hope that's true. But I have a sinking feeling that it's a tad too hopeful. I was catching up on some stories in the Rio Grande Guardian today and lo and behold, Rep. Henry Cuellar made my heart sink. He says immigration reform will more than likely take place in 2011. Though it pains me I think he is probably right. With the two wars, the economy, the upcoming elections and the knock-down drag-out battle over healthcare reform -- I can see immigration reform getting pushed to the back of the bus.
Cuellar is one of the myriad Congressional Hispanic Caucus members that signed on to Gutierrez's bill. Here's what he had to say:
“Realistically, it is going to be hard (to pass the legislation this year), I can tell you now. We have to go back and finish the health care bill. We’ve got to finish the jobs bill. Then, of course, you get the 2010 election. So, I think, 2011 will probably be more realistic. I want it this year but realistically, it will probably be 2011.”
Another year of agonizing about how Congress is going to muck up immigration reform.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)