What's Up with Immigration in the 112th Congress?

The rhetoric throughout many congressional campaigns was hot. Some of the newly elected members of the House committed to an agenda that would reduce the number of immigrants – both legal and illegal – and send packing all those who are here illegally. Will those campaign promises define the agenda of the 112^th Congress?

Probably not.

Democrats and Republicans – and indeed most people around the country – seem to agree on one central fact: our immigration system is broken. Families are broken up by the multi-year waiting lines for legal immigration – employers of both skilled and unskilled workers have difficulty finding that one particular scientist to fit in a research team, or teams of seasonal workers to harvest crops and serve tourists.

Meanwhile, many employers of workers who entered or stayed in the country illegally are able to take advantage of their workers’ status by offering low pay, demanding long hours, and maintaining unsafe working conditions. The ability of these employers to undercut wage, hour, and safety laws drags down the pay and benefits of other workers on the same rung of the employment ladder, including those born in the U.S. The system is broken – it needs to be fixed.

The disagreement comes in describing the fix. Should the objective be to seal off the country, scan the documents of every person within U.S. borders, and deport all those who don’t make the cut? Should the objective be to re-examine U.S. relations with our neighbors to the South, to determine the extent to which NAFTA and other trade agreements and practices have contributed to the pressures for immigration northward? Should the objective be to address the practical problems in the immigration system itself, to repair what can be repaired?

The new Congress will probably land somewhere in that third objective – fix what needs to be fixed. Which begs the question: what needs to be fixed? FCNL has urged that the legal immigration itself be repaired, to reduce the long lines for visas, to re-unite families and to reduce the pressure for immigration outside the legal system. At the same time, FCNL has encouraged enforcement of wage, hour and safety laws in all places of employment, regardless of the legal status of the workers there. If employers are

(1) able to find workers (fix the legal system) and

(2) unable to

• pay their workers less than minimum wage, or
• forego paying them at all, or
• require more than forty hours of work without overtime pay, or
• require work in unsafe conditions

then the employers’ incentive to reach beyond available U.S. workers to find “imported labor” evaporates. Enforcement of existing “worker protection” laws levels the playing field.

Rep. Lamar Smith, the new chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has said that his priorities for immigration will center on job creation and job protection. He will focus on workplace enforcement, consider an expansion of the E-Verify program, and step up enforcement of requirements on employers to hire only workers with appropriate documentation. (The E-Verify program is a digital system that would permit employers to check Social Security records immediately to determine whether a job applicant has a valid Social Security number. FCNL and others have opposed broad implementation of the program because of the high incidence of errors in Social Security records, and the fact that most of those errors occur with non-European names.)

Most immigration bills – and indeed, several other bills – in the past several years have included increased and intensified border enforcement. Now that the military and detention industries have entered that arena, it is reasonable to expect that there will be continued upward pressure for more detention space (offered by contractor Corrections Corporation of America) and more military-style hardware and technology at the border (offered by the major weapons manufacturers.) Spending for border security will likely be exempted from concerns about deficit spending, as the Department of Homeland Security is usually lumped in with the Pentagon in the rhetoric about cutting all discretionary spending – except for “security spending.”

One important signal about the coming agenda is the appointment of Rep. Elton Gallegley of California as the chair of the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration. Firebrand Steve King of Iowa was in line for the post and was widely rumored to be the next subcommittee chair; but Chairman Smith chose a more moderate member, one who has not been a prime champion of some of the more extreme rhetorical demands, such as ending birthright citizenship.

Can we expect anything that will actually fix the system? President Obama, meeting with the leadership of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said he would address immigration reform in the State of the Union address. He still wants to seek reforms in the immigration system. The nation needs answers to current problems such as the millions of people living in the U.S. now without appropriate documentation. Rational solutions to that problem and others may be proposed – but they will very likely be coupled (as they have been in the past) with increased border enforcement and employer-based enforcement.

Will the Dream Act resurface? Possibly, in a modified form. Some of the modifications introduced late in the debate last year already severely limited any financial assistance that non-citizen students might receive under the act – those limitations, at least, would return. A more worrisome development would be the elimination of the education option entirely. Military recruiters still strongly support the bill, and would not be unhappy to see the education path eliminated.

An Independent Commission on Immigration and Labor: What is it?

I attended a day-long conference last week at the Economic Policy Institute called Labor shortages and immigration reform: promises and pitfalls of an independent commission. A number of economists, immigration experts and labor representatives got together to discuss the idea of a commission that would figure out how immigrant workers would fit into the U.S. economy. Two representatives from Britain's Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) were also there, to talk about their experience with a similar commission in the United Kingdom.

The panelists agreed the U.S. should set up an independent professional commission to research labor shortages and make recommendations to the government about how many workers the U.S. should invite in, based on current data. Its main purpose would be to make sure that occupations are filled primarily by native-born workers, and foreign workers are invited in to take jobs when there is a labor shortage and native-born workers are not taking jobs in a given occupation. In times like these, when so many people who are already legally in the U.S. and without work, a commission like this would probably recommend few, if any work-based visas.

Doris Meissner, the Former Commissioner of the US Immigration and Naturalization Service, pointed out that the legal immigration system at the moment so inflexible that it can’t keep up with social changes and economic changes in the U.S. A better way to write policy, she argues, is to create a process that sets annual “quotas” that can be changed as circumstances change. The policy for recruiting immigrant workers should be flexible, not locked in. The independent commission should focus on just this one question: what kind of labor shortages are U.S. employers facing and how many immigrant workers should be invited in to meet that need.

The British commission on immigration and labor consists of economists and experts on immigration and [labor?] policy. The government asks it to research specific questions such as researching labor shortages in a specific occupation that could be filled by foreign workers. In addition to broad national research, the commission engages in meetings and visits with employers to provide "bottom up" evidence as well. The MAC then publishes reports and recommends changes in immigration policy to the government, whichmay or may not be passed.

A main theme over the course of the day was the question, "what is essential to making a commission like this work?" Panelists agreed that the commission must be independent, and non-partisan; [labor and?] immigration [are?] intensely political issues, and the facts are not easily separated from the political arguments that usually occupy the center of the debate. Martin Ruhs, a member of the MAC, said that the commission's non-partisan research has contributed to the quality of the debate on immigration. Secondly, members that are experts in policy, labor, immigration, and economics will ensure that the commission is professional. The research process and data need to be transparent in order for the commission to be accepted and seen as credible by lawmakers and the public.

Immigration commissions are a long part of our U.S. history. Panelist Susan Martin, from the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University, explained that over centuries, commissions have informed immigration law in the U.S. The earliest was the 1775 Industrial Commission, to the Dillingham Commission whose recommendations led to the restrictionist laws in the Immigration Act of 1924 that established strict quotas based on nationality (Check out this blog post for more information on that era). A labor commission like the one being discussed here would focus exclusively on the need for foreign labor for jobs that aren't being filled by American workers and not on the nationality of the workers.

An independent commission fits into the comprehensive immigration reform puzzle by being part of the solution to control future immigration. Research-based empirical evidence can yield realistic and fair quotas to match up with the labor needs of the country, which can change more quickly than legislators can keep up with. The challenges are numerous, such as

• developing reliable and valid data gathering and evaluation tools (i.e. does the research accurately reflect the needs it identifies? Are the recommendations adequately supported?),
• the sheer number of issues that urgently need to be addressed, and
• the risk of politicization of those results on the floor of the House and Senate after publication.
  

The most recent CIR bill introduced by Senators Menendez (NJ) and Leahy (VT) includes a Standing Commission on Immigration, Labor Rights, and the National Interest designed to establish employment-based immigration policy, implement a policy-focused research agenda, and make recommendations to Congress and the President on quotas for employment-based visa categories. The purpose of the commission also includes "promot[ing] America's economic growth and competitiveness while minimizing job displacement, wage depression, unauthorized employment" (To see bill text, click here). By enforcing labor laws for employers and all workers, the commission would prevent further undercutting of U.S. employment. To see FCNL's summary of the Menendez CIR bill, click here, and read the post just below this on It's Our Community!

The keyword of the day was "sensible." Accurate research that shows where we need foreign workers can lead to sensible quotas that allow workers to come and work legally in occupations that need them. Laura Reiff from the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition made the point that there are millions of visas too few for low-skill workers (ie. workers for low-skilled jobs in agriculture, construction and the service industry), which is why we have such a high number of undocumented workers. Is an independent commission the right answer? Let us know what you think.

Injunction Granted, Just in Time!

Great news!!

A federal judge has blocked key provisions of S.B. 1070, the controversial immigration law in Arizona that was scheduled to go into effect tomorrow. The judge has blocked the requirement that police have to check the immigration status of anyone they "reasonably suspect" of being in the country without authorization.

A judge grants a preliminary injunction if he or she finds that the case is likely to suffer "irreparable harm" if the judge does not prevent the law (or part of the law) from going into effect. If police in Arizona were to start enforcing S.B. 1070 tomorrow, it would profoundly alter the context in which the lawsuits are considered.

You can read the full decision here.

Still, even though the critical components of S.B. 1070 will not go into effect tomorrow, some of the horrific effects of this discriminatory immigration law are already visible:

• Immigrants - both those with and without papers - have been packing up and fleeing the state in search of safer territory.
• Arizona's economy has plummeted due to a national boycott in which tourism has dropped, conferences have been rescheduled elsewhere, and cities across the country have refused to support business with Arizona.
• U.S. citizens fear being wrongfully deported if they experience racial profiling.
• Well-intentioned police officers in Arizona struggle to determine how to walk a fine line.
  

For more information, see the Detention Watch Network's website about the consequences of S.B. 1070, or see Immigration Policy Institute's new report, "A State of Confusion."

Advocates have been gathering in Arizona to participate in prayer vigils and to consider acts of civil disobedience if the law were to fully come into effect tomorrow. Meanwhile, the private prison industry stands to make a profit from increased arrests, detentions, and deportations - even if the people they detain were picked up due to racial profiling. No matter what, all eyes have been on Arizona.

At FCNL, we welcome the injunction against S.B. 1070. We hope that states considering similar proposals will rethink their positions, given the situation in Arizona at this point. Above all, we urge President Obama and members of Congress to act swiftly to comprehensively reform the broken immigration system, to reassert federal control and restore the U.S. tradition of welcoming immigrants.

Join the Call: Include All Families in Immigration Reform

You're invited to join Representative Mike Honda (CA), Bishop Minerva Carcano, and families impacted by our broken immigration system on a special grassroots call designed for advocates and concerned community members like you!

Learn about the moral imperative to move comprehensive immigration reform forward this year, and hear stories about why LGBT families need your support to make sure their immigration rights are protected.

Comprehensive immigration reform isn't truly comprehensive unless all families, gay and straight, are included. We hope you can join us for this important nationwide call!

To register and receive materials for the call, please go to www.LGBTforCIR.org. You'll also have the unique opportunity to submit questions to Rep. Honda before the call.

Truly Inclusive Immigration Reform Must End Discrimination against LGBT Families

Today, key members of Congress stood in unity to call on their colleagues to support passage of the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) as part of any future immigration reform effort. Tens of thousands of LGBT binational families are counting on this critically important legislation in order to achieve the most basic equality: The freedom to be with their families, and the people they love.

FCNL joined fellow coalition members from lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT), immigrants’ rights, civil rights and faith communities in issuing a statement for the news conference. The statement reads, in part, "Today, leaders made clear that all future immigration legislation must be truly inclusive, and we are proud to stand with them in that call. We are committed to working, together, for this long overdue and much-needed victory and to honoring our country’s commitment to families and its rich history as a nation of immigrants."

Reps. Nadler (NY), Honda (CA), Gutierrez (IL), Polis (CO) and Quigley (IL) participated in this important news conference. For more information, read Immigration Equality's press release.

As my colleague Bill Mefford, director of Civil and Human Rights for the General Board of Church and Society with The United Methodist Church, said recently:

“Just as Jesus did not set any preconditions on identifying himself with, and loving, the sojourner, so too does he call all who claim to follow him to love and welcome the sojourner without moral preconditions... To demand the right to prophetically challenge the nation to incorporate hospitality into our immigration policy, but then to work to exclude some people based on their sexual orientation, is to lose the moral basis for making that prophetic challenge. We want immigration reform that is just and humane, and that is truly comprehensive and truly moral.”

Immigration reform will only truly be comprehensive when all families, including LGBT families, are included. We welcome the commitment by these members of Congress to work to ensure that binational LGBT families will no longer be locked out of the U.S. immigration system.

Rep. Honda discusses his bill, the Reuniting Families Act.

Rep. Honda states, "The President has called on Congress to address immigration reform, and I stand ready to heed that call and support an effort that is inclusive of LGBT families."

Rep. Polis insists, "We must provide all domestic partners and married couples the same rights and obligations in any immigration legislation."

Rep. Quigley reminds us, "Our march in the direction of progress and justice for families across this country cedes its moral high ground unless we say to say to LGBT families that this is their movement, too."

We listen as Rep. Gutierrez says, "We should modernize our laws to facilitate legal immigration so that we keep families together and individuals do not have to twist themselves in knots to conform to our outdated laws." I had no idea Rep. Honda was right behind me!

Take Our Jobs

Image courtesy of Ag Worker Health Project

Are you a native-born resident of the United States? Looking for a job? Sign up today to be a farmworker! But United Farm Workers offers a cautionary note:

Job may include using hand tools such as knives, hoes, shovels, etc. Duties may include tilling the soil, transplanting, weeding, thinning, picking, cutting, sorting & packing of harvested produce. May set up & operate irrigation equip. Work is performed outside in all weather conditions (Summertime 90+ degree weather) & is physically demanding requiring workers to bend, stoop, lift & carry up to 50 lbs on a regular basis.

On Thursday, Stephen Colbert hosted Arturo Rodriguez, the president of United Farm Workers (UFW), on his political comedy show, "The Colbert Report." The interview promotes the UFW's national “Take Our Jobs” campaign, a tongue-in-cheek effort to "recruit U.S. citizens and legal residents to fill jobs that frequently go to undocumented farm workers and to urge enactment of immigration reform."

You can watch the interview here.

About 85% of the U.S. farm worker population is foreign-born, and the vast majority of these immigrants lack work authorization. AgJOBS, as part of a comprehensive immigration reform package, would provide these workers with protections and offer a pathway to legal status.

Not Surprising

Photo courtesy of Latin American Studies

Yesterday, President Obama delivered his first major speech on immigration reform.

A year and a half ago, when he took office, President Obama was poised to act on an agenda of change - and to make good on a promise to reform the broken immigration system within the first year. That promise has not been kept.

In fact, the situation now is worse than it was then. Deportations are on the rise, immigration courts are overburdened, and families live in constant fear of being separated. In the absence of bold leadership from President Obama and swift action by Congress, states have taken matters into their own hands with dire consequences.

This speech was notable as much for its omissions as its content. We did not hear the president setting a timetable for drafting and passing a bill. We did not hear a commitment to protecting vulnerable populations during immigration enforcement actions. We did not hear any mention of the anticipated Department of Justice lawsuit against Arizona's new law.

What did we hear? A compassionate description of the value of immigrants' contributions to U.S. society and economy, an outline of the major components of immigration reform, and accusations that the minority party has impeded the creation of a viable bill. In short, nothing new.

President Obama did call the new Arizona law "ill conceived" and "divisive," and he acknowledged that we can't "solve the problem only with fences and border patrols." Still, at the moment the administration is doing just that. At FCNL, we are deeply disappointed with the president's decision to deploy 1,200 National Guard troops on the U.S.-Mexico border.

As the New York Times editorializes, "Mr. Obama appealed to middle of the debate, to Americans who crave lawfulness but reject the cruelty symbolized by Arizona’s new law." If lawfulness is the goal, then we need Congress to provide a federal solution - and soon.

Missed the speech? You can watch the video here or read the transcript here.

The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal both offer coverage of the speech.

Obama's Speech on Immigration: Why Now?

Today, President Obama will deliver a major speech on comprehensive immigration reform. But the lackluster effort by Congress to create a bipartisan bill, and the ever-rising rate of deportations, leads us to ask: Mr. President, why now?

The Daily Beast's Bryan Curtis offers an incisive assessment of the timing of the president's speech in this article. Bottom line: When the Obama administration took office, we expected bold leadership on humane immigration reform but that promise has not yet been fulfilled. The humanitarian crisis stemming from the broken immigration system has become increasingly severe.

Stay tuned for an analysis of the speech later today.

Comprehensive Immigration Bill in House Secures 100 Cosponsors

Families attend the immigration march in DC in March 2010.

Today, Representative Luis Gutierrez (IL) held a press conference to announce that his bill, CIR ASAP (Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity), has secured 100 cosponsors.

FCNL welcomed the introduction of CIR ASAP in December 2009, and we have worked to promote cosponsorship of the bill. Thank you to the thousands of constituents who wrote letters to their representatives urging them to join this comprehensive immigration reform bill. As Rep. Gutierrez said today, the achievement of gaining 100 cosponsors is a "milestone."

The immigration system is broken, and the consequences of inaction are becoming increasingly severe. More than 22 states are considering or have introduced legislation that mimics Arizona's new law, S.B. 1070, against which the Department of Justice will be filing a lawsuit. Families are torn apart on a daily basis and the number of detentions and deportations is skyrocketing.

I'll leave you with a quote from Rep. Gutierrez's press release this morning:

We know the legislative clock is ticking. We know people are getting deported at the highest rate in modern history. We know that the inter-related problems of illegal immigration, clogged and unattainable legal immigration, border security, deportation, detention, and a two-tiered labor market that hurts all workers will not solve themselves... We need a rational solution. We need a practical solution. We need a fair solution.

In Our Community: Immigration News

Photo from Alto Arizona.

It's been a big week for immigration, with significant highs and lows. The news on immigration from Monday, May 24 to Tuesday, June 1:

On Tuesday, May 25, President Obama announced the decision to deploy 1,200 National Guard troops on the U.S.-Mexico border. He also requested an additional $500 million to enhance border enforcement activities. In 2006, the Bush administration sent 6,000 National Guard troops to the border during Operation Jump Start and, while this current deployment is at a smaller scale, it is still the same enforcement-only approach that hasn't worked in the past.

FCNL strongly opposes the use of the National Guard on the border. Our colleagues on the border have released a powerful statement of opposition as well. Law enforcement, not military personnel, should focus on stopping drug smuggling, arms smuggling, and human trafficking. To deal most effectively with migrants crossing the border, President Obama and Congress should act swiftly to enact comprehensive immigration reform. We've seen that border-only strategies don't work, so why would President Obama keep trying that same tired routine?

We had a big success here on the Hill this week - on Thursday, the Senate voted against three amendments to the emergency war supplemental which would have drastically expanded border enforcement initiatives. Senators McCain (AZ), Kyl (AZ), and Cornyn (TX) had introduced amendments that would have added 6,000 National Guard troops, 6 more drones for surveillance, 3000 new detention beds, and thrown millions of dollars at unworkable deterrence programs. FCNL and our partners acted swiftly to contact members of Congress and our networks generated tens of thousands of grassroots calls. In the end, the Senate rejected all three amendments - but we are still working for decisive action on immigration reform.

On Saturday, May 29, over 100,000 people gathered in Arizona and around the country to oppose the new Arizona law and copy-cat bills in other states. You can see photos and videos here. The message of the people is clear: NO to racial profiling and YES to immigration reform.

Police chiefs from Los Angeles, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Houston, Maryland, and Arizona met with Attorney General Eric Holder on May 26 to voice their concerns about the new Arizona law and similar proposals from other states. The chiefs stated that these laws, which virtually require racial profiling, would erode trust between police and their communities and distract officers from their primary tasks. Holder is expected to make a decision soon about whether to challenge the Arizona law in court.

Other highlights from the news:

Detained immigrants are being counted for the census without their knowledge and then deported, while the cities and towns hosting detention facilities are rewarded by receiving more federal money than they would otherwise.

The number of immigration cases in federal courts reached a new all-time high of 242,776 at the end of March and this backlog continues to extend wait times - immigrants now wait, on average, 443 days for their case to be resolved.

In Our Community: Immigration News

On Wednesday, I attended the arrival ceremony at the White House for President Calderon of Mexico - you can see him pictured above with President Obama. For more on that and other updates, here it is, your immigration news from Monday, May 17 to Monday, May 24.

During a joint session of Congress, President Calderon spoke strongly against the new Arizona law which, as he said, "introduces a terrible idea: using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement." His remarks on this subject were greeted with a standing ovation. Also during his visit, the United States and Mexico announced the creation of a joint committee on border-related activities.

In the pop culture world, immigration also got a shout-out: The new Miss USA is Rima Fakih, an Arab-American immigrant. She was born in Lebanon and came to the United States as a young child, eventually settling in Michigan. She is believed to be the first Arab American and Muslim to win the contest.

San Francisco is trying to opt out of Secure Communities, a Homeland Security program run by ICE in which fingerprints taken at local jails are run through a national database to check arrestees' immigration status. The city's sheriff has said that Secure Communities conflicts with the city's policy of only reporting foreign-born persons who are booked for felonies. Secure Communities doesn't align with ICE's objective of going after the "most dangerous criminals" - instead it casts a wide net regardless of individual circumstances - and we need cities like San Francisco (and DC) to push ICE to clarify the program's purpose.

As I was perusing the immigration blogs this past week, I came across this concerning clip: South Carolina has introduced a bill copying the Arizona law. The Wall Street Journal has an article on how immigrants are often reluctant to report domestic abuse, if going to the police means risking deportation. This problem, of states taking federal law into their own hands, is clearly going to get worse before it gets better.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (IL) recently endorsed a plan to include LGBT partners in immigration reform. Currently, LGBT Americans are unable to petition for their foreign-born partners. The inclusion of the Uniting American Families Act in immigration reform would end this long-standing denial of civil rights and equality.

Michelle Obama's visit to an elementary school in Maryland catapulted the question of family unity onto the national stage, when a second-grader expressed fears that her mother would be deported. You can watch the video here. According to the Interfaith Immigration Coalition, families can't wait any longer for a just, humane immigration reform bill.

President of Mexico Opposes AZ Law, Calls on Congress to Find a Better Solution

Today, addressing a joint session of Congress, President Calderon of Mexico stated his strong opposition to the new law in Arizona. Mexico has issued a travel warning to its citizens in the United States and has terminated a student exchange program with Arizona.

In his speech, Calderon recognized that each country has the right to enact and enforce its own laws, but he simultaneously stressed the urgent need to fix the "broken and inefficient" immigration system. He favors the creation of a "legal, orderly, and secure flow" of migrants, and pointed out that the border would not be secure without comprehensive immigration reform.

Calling for a "responsible" solution, Calderon said, "I strongly disagree with the recently adopted law in Arizona." Using racial profiling as the basis of law performance is a "terrible idea." He emphasized that the new law "carries a great amount of risk when core values are being breached." He called on President Obama and the Congress to "find a better way together to face and fix this problem."

While Mexico has a lot on its plate - stamping out bureaucratic corruption and bribery, boosting the economy and creating new jobs, halting organized crime, and more - it is clear that President Calderon will not stand idly by as the United States pursues dangerous enforcement policies. From both a moral and practical standpoint, racial profiling and other forms of discrimination cannot be tolerated as legitimate enforcement strategies.

In Our Community: Immigration News

Welcome back for another week of immigration news, from Monday, May 10 to Monday, May 17. Happy reading!

Arizona's new immigration law, which requires racial profiling, goes into effect on July 28. However, some people just aren't that patient. We've heard scattered reports that Arizona police officers are already "enforcing" the new law. What's more, twelve states - including Minnesota, Michigan, and more - are introducing copy-cat legislation. These outrageous proposals should be a wake-up call for Congress - urge your representatives to take swift action to enact immigration reform this year.

Boycotting Arizona? Yup, me too. So is Austin, along with many other cities across the country. We're also waiting for MALDEF, ACLU, and NILC to introduce their lawsuit challenging the unconstitutional and discriminatory Arizona law. The Department of Justice may take action as well, but we are concerned to learn that Attorney General Eric Holder hasn't even read the Arizona law yet. We know he's busy, but it's less than twenty pages.

Mexico has issued a travel warning to its citizens about the Arizona law. In addition, the President of Mexico will be arriving in the United States on Wednesday. We anticipate that he and President Obama will have a lot to discuss when it comes to immigration.

Even the United Nations is taking note of the new Arizona law. A group of independent UN rights experts expressed serious concerns about whether this law violates the United States' obligations under international human rights treaties.

Believe it or not, Arizona keeps coming up with new, innovative ways to take away residents' rights, and now state lawmakers are focusing on education. AZ Governor Jan Brewer just signed into law a bill prohibiting any classes that "advocate for ethnic solidarity" or "promote resentment toward a race or class of people." This bill seeks to eradicate ethnic studies programs, such as those that teach Mexican-American history. I see this as a nativist impulse favoring revisionist history, which seeks to mask oppression and deny students the opportunity to study civil rights. We can do better.

However, the Department of Homeland Security seems to be deporting immigrants at an exceptionally rapid pace this year even without Arizona's assistance. ICE director John Morton has said that he plans to deport people at a "massive scale," and he has set the goal of 400,000 deportations in 2010. He seems to be outdoing himself. Time has reported this astonishing figure:

Thus far this year, some 185,887 people have been deported, a record pace that, if maintained, will nearly double the number of deportations in 2010 to 604,133.

One last note: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has an announcement - the new "green cards" for legal permanent residents will actually be green! Not only that, but they'll incorporate new security measures to avoid fraud.

In Our Community: Immigration News

The heat from Arizona continues to radiate, so check out the news on immigration from Monday, May 3 to Monday, May 10:

At FCNL, we see the outrageous Arizona law as a wake-up call to Washington. On April 29, five senators introduced a framework for immigration reform, which was met with mixed reactions from advocates. The framework, intended to prompt bipartisan talks, has yet to yield such cooperation. We can't afford to have politicians use immigration reform as a political football to score points against one another. Write to your senators today to urge them to support humane, comprehensive immigration reform.

As Congress remains bound by hyper-partisan politics, states mimicking Arizona continue to take immigration law into their own hands. Minnesota just introduced legislation modeled exactly on the Arizona law. Eleven other states are considering similar legislation: Arkansas, Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pensylvania, South Carolina, Texas and Utah. Recent polling shows that the overwhelming majority of Americans think the immigration system should be overhauled, but without decisive federal action to build a realistic legal immigration system, our civil rights will continue to be trampled.

However, in two cases, officials are standing up to say NO. In New York, Governor Paterson announced that the state would consider pardons for people subject to "embarrassingly and wrongly inflexible" immigration laws. In DC, the City Council unanimously supports a boycott of Arizona and opposes the District's participation in misguided immigration enforcement programs - for more, see my blog post on the resolutions.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, best known for his courageous efforts to promote reconciliation following South Africa's apartheid, has a message for you: Arizona is not the solution. I strongly encourage you to read his entire article, excerpted here:

Abominations such as apartheid do not start with an entire population suddenly becoming inhumane. They start here. They start with generalizing unwanted characteristics across an entire segment of a population. They start with trying to solve a problem by asserting superior force over a population. They start with stripping people of rights and dignity - such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty - that you yourself enjoy. Not because it is right, but because you can. And because somehow, you think this is going to solve a problem.

I'll leave you with an exciting tidbit - Arizona rappers have collaborated to protest the new law requiring racial profiling. Props to these brave artists for reminding us all that hip hop can still break through commercial ties and speak truth to power. Check out their music video here:

But Didn't They Break the Law?

One of the most common questions I hear is, "But didn't they break the law? Why should we reward immigrants for coming to the United States illegally?"

FCNL's work on immigration is guided by the call for right relationships among all people. We recognize that it is neither feasible nor humane to deport the 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the United States. Instead of lining up the buses, we need to find a workable solution.

First of all, the U.S. immigration system is broken. Sometimes I get asked, "Why don't they just get in line?" For many people seeking to enter the United States so that they can work hard, support their families, and contribute to the U.S. economy - there is no line to get into.

Work visas
The national economy depends on both high- and lower-skilled foreign workers, even though that fact can sometimes be hard for us to acknowledge. As Senator Feinstein (CA) described in a press conference last week, even in a recession certain industries - like agriculture - still can't find enough native-born workers to get the job done. But visas for lower-skilled immigrant workers just aren't readily available. Moreover, the current system creates incentives for disingenuous employers to hire undocumented immigrants, keep them in poor work conditions, and pay them well below minimum wage. This drives down wages for all. The broken system hurts law-abiding employers, native-born workers, and immigrants alike. The "wink wink, come on in" system facilitates exploitation and is no longer sustainable.

Family visas
Families are the fundamental unit of society. But immigrants seeking to be reunited with their families have to wait between four and twenty-two years to be reunited with their close loved ones. It is immoral to keep a young girl apart from her father or mother for up to seven years. These wait times exist because of backlogs of pending applications and bureaucratic delays. Reforming the family visa system wouldn't allow for "chain migration" (you can't bring in your aunts, cousins, or other extended relatives anyway), but it would allow parents and children to reunite in a timely manner. Plus, family reunification does contribute to the U.S. economy. Immigrant workers will be more likely to stay in the country and integrate if they can bring their immediate relatives with them, and most family members come to the United States intending to work hard to provide their children with opportunities to succeed.

So, neither the work-based nor family-based visa systems are working properly right now. As a result, immigrants are faced with impossible choices.

The vast majority of undocumented immigrants come to the United States to work hard and rejoin their families, not to cause our communities harm. But those who would utilize the legal system are prevented from doing so, because the current system is inefficient and outdated. Then, immigrants - and not the broken laws - are perceived as the problem and punished.

When the United States was founded, one of the core principles woven into the fabric of the national identity was this: Where the law is unjust, it should be changed.

FCNL does not advocate for rewarding illegal immigration. Rather, we support a reasonable and inclusive path for undocumented immigrants to regularize their status and eventually earn citizenship. Such a program should be workable and not hindered by overly punitive criteria.

Components of a pathway to legal status
We need a solution that allows undocumented immigrants to meet a reasonable set of criteria so that they can be integrated into the legal system. Over the past several years, a number of constructive proposals have been put forward. An earned pathway to legal status would include requirements such as:

• Paying any unpaid back taxes
• Learning English
• Providing biographic and biometric information
• Completing a criminal background check
• Paying a reasonable fee or fine
• Performing community service
  

At FCNL, we maintain that this set of criteria should not be overly punitive. In the past, Congress proposed exorbitant fees and other measures that would have prevented large swaths of people from participating and thus defeated the primary purpose of the program.

In addition, this kind of pathway to legal status would be fair - undocumented immigrants would go to the "back of the line." As mentioned earlier, there is a backlog of family visa applications. Undocumented immigrants wouldn't get to "cut in line" ahead of individuals who have been waiting since the mid-1990s (or even earlier) to reunite with their loved ones. Instead, they would be registered, receive a transitional visa, and then wait seven or eight years for the family backlog to clear. Only then could eligible undocumented immigrants adjust to become legal permanent residents and eventually apply for citizenship.

Some special cases need additional consideration. One of FCNL's principles is that the pathway to legal status should be inclusive. This means that refugees, asylum-seekers, and multi-status families (in which some family members have papers while others do not) should be included. In addition, undocumented students (who came to this country as children, not of their own will) should be encouraged to stay and pursue their education in the United States via the DREAM Act.

At this point, I occasionally hear concerns expressed that this kind of pathway to legal status and eventual citizenship would create incentives for more people to attempt to immigrate to the United States without proper authorization. Rest assured: any immigration reform bill enacted by Congress would almost certainly only allow undocumented immigrants to earn legal status if they could prove that they have been in the country since the date of enactment of the bill. If an individual had arrived in the country after the date of enactment, they would not be eligible.

Ultimately, a reasonable earned pathway to legal status would deal squarely with the current reality without rewarding illegal immigration.

As Archbishop Desmond Tutu said of the new Arizona law, "A solution that fails to distinguish between a young child coming over the border in search of his mother and a drug smuggler is not a solution."

We need solutions that actually work. Migration has been a part of human existence since its inception. With careful consideration and open dialogue, our nation can create an immigration system that protects public safety and national security without sacrificing the principles upon which the United States was built - fairness, opportunity, and compassion.

Quakers Welcome Next Steps on Immigration Reform, Call for Humane Enforcement

On Thursday, April 29, Senators Reid (NV), Schumer (NY), Menendez (NJ), Durbin (IL) and Feinstein (CA) introduced a 26-page proposal for bipartisan legislation on immigration reform. Their hope is to start a conversation with key Republicans to craft a viable bill that could be brought to a vote this year.

FCNL has released a statement in response to the proposal. We look forward to working with Congress and the administration to enact bipartisan legislation that would restore integrity to the U.S. tradition of welcoming immigrants.

In Our Community: Immigration News

The new Arizona law, and the corresponding need for decisive federal action on immigration reform legislation, continue to make headlines across the nation. So, grab a seat, buckle up, and get ready for key updates from Monday, April 26 to Monday, May 3.

The new Arizona law, which requires police officers to stop anyone who they "reasonably suspect" to be an undocumented immigrant, has been broadly criticized for permitting racial profiling. Its opponents include President Obama, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, members of Congress, the Arizona association of chiefs of police, the mayor of Phoenix, the sheriff of Pima County, many American Indians, many religious groups, immigrants rights organizations, civil liberties advocates, and more. Al Sharpton says that he is organizing "freedom walkers" to march on Arizona. Click here to learn how you can take action to oppose rampant racial profiling in Arizona.

Critics of the new Arizona law are calling for economic boycotts of the state. This means avoiding traveling to Arizona and choosing not to purchase products from companies based in Arizona. Several cities have already chosen to divest from Arizona while others - including San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Washington DC - are considering doing so. You can do your part: See this website for easy ways to participate in the boycott.

Please note: Arizona will likely face a number of lawsuits to stop the implementation of the new law - but some recent changes to the new law may make it harder to litigate. Meanwhile, seven states are considering similar legislation.

While all eyes are on Arizona, let's not forget that immigration enforcement is out-of-control on the federal level too. Bill Quigley, legal director for the Center for Constitutional Rights, has an excellent op-ed on the "Secure Communities" program which also leaves the door open for racial profiling. In addition, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) has released a new report on immigration detention in New Jersey - and the New York Times is shocked at their findings.

Finally, last Thursday, Senators Reid, Schumer, Menendez, Durbin, and Feinstein introduced a draft framework for an immigration reform bill. Senator Menendez, in particular, spoke eloquently about the need for Congress to take action. You can watch the video clip of his speech at the press conference here. FCNL's statement on the framework is available here.

Senators Introduce Proposal for Immigration Reform, Call for Bipartisan Negotiations

On Thursday evening, Senators Reid (NV), Schumer (NY), Menendez (NJ), Durbin (IL), and Feinstein (CA) introduced a draft framework for immigration reform. The five senators appealed to their Republican colleagues to join them in negotiations to craft a bipartisan bill that could be brought to the floor for a vote.

I'd like to share with you one clip of the eloquent words spoken by Senator Menendez:

"We understand the history of not only this country, but the history of the world. When one group of people become a suspect class, when one group of people are blamed for all the ills of the nation, history has taught us that that has a sad ending. We cannot let that happen here in the greatest country on the face of the earth. It is not who we are as a people. It is not who we are as a nation... That's what is at stake here. This is not a partisan question. This is about the national security of the United States. It is about the national economy of this country. And it is ultimately the preservation of the Constitution - because when I can become a second-class citizen, there is a road in which you can become a second-class citizen. And that is not something we can accept."

You can watch the introduction of the framework on C-SPAN here.

In response, President Obama released a statement highlighting the urgent need for reform:

"What has become increasingly clear is that we can no longer wait to fix our broken immigration system, which Democrats and Republicans alike agree doesn’t work. It’s unacceptable to have 11 million people in the United States who are living here illegally and outside of the system... The next critical step is to iron out the details of a bill. We welcome that discussion, and my Administration will play an active role in engaging partners on both sides of the aisle to work toward a bipartisan solution that is based on the fundamental concept of accountability that the American people expect and deserve."

Senator Leahy (VT), the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, offered a comment on the proposal:

"I remain committed to meaningful comprehensive immigration reform... I hope the outline released today will encourage discussions across the aisle, and that they will lead to a bipartisan legislative proposal. All Americans are concerned with updating our immigration laws, fulfilling our labor needs, and addressing the escalating violence along our southern border. I hope we can come together to address these pressing matters."

Senator Graham (SC), who recently halted his efforts to work with Senator Schumer on draft legislation, released a statement with Senator Kyl (AZ) in opposition to the framework:

"Since 2007, threats have increased, some border technology has failed, and the American people have lost confidence in the federal government's ability to secure our borders. So it is our belief that Congress should focus on border security first and that will eventually allow Congress to seriously consider bipartisan immigration reform, instead of politically-motivated ‘conceptual papers.'"

FCNL's statement on the framework is forthcoming.

Arizona: Becoming a Police State?

The Arizona House and Senate have passed a bill, S.B. 1070, which would require police officers to check the papers of anyone who looks like they could be undocumented. Governor Jan Brewer is expected to sign this bill into law sometime this week, turning Arizona into the closest thing that this country's seen to a police state in many years.

Picture it: Parents terrified to drop their children off at school in case an officer sees their skin tone and decides they could be "illegal." Victims of domestic violence refusing to call the police for risk of being wrongly arrested and deported. Residents, acting out of fear or malicious intent, turning each other in to the police. Anyone with an accent or who "appears" to be foreign-born staying in their homes rather than risking a trip to the grocery store.

This isn't who we are. This isn't what we stand for.

But if we don't stand up now, this could become our reality.

Critics - including members of Congress, police, faith leaders, civil rights groups, immigrant advocacy groups, and more - have been fiercely vocal in urging Governor Brewer to veto the bill. ACLU and others are preparing a lawsuit. Petitions have been circulating and gathering more signatures every hour, vigils have continued around the clock, and countless messages have been sent opposing this horrific bill.

LA Cardinal Mahoney said in the Huffington Post:

"I can't imagine Arizonans now reverting to German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques whereby people are required to turn one another in to the authorities on any suspicion of documentation," the cardinal said. "Are children supposed to call 911 because one parent does not have proper papers? Are family members and neighbors now supposed to spy on one another, create total distrust across neighborhoods and communities, and report people because of suspicions based upon appearance?"

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (IL) also weighed in:

"It is open season on the Latino community in Arizona... It is a horrifying glimpse at what our future holds across the country if we continue down the path the Obama administration is leading us on immigration... I'm afraid we have turned a very dangerous corner in the war on immigrants. And we have heard nothing from the President."

Nine young adults in Arizona have stepped up their advocacy to include acts of nonviolent civil disobedience, by chaining themselves to the Capitol in protest of S.B. 1070.

The situation in Arizona should be a wake-up call for the Obama administration and for the members of Congress who have promised to deliver immigration reform, but have been badly sidetracked by partisan political calculations. President Obama and Congress need to act swiftly to fix the broken immigration system, or else Arizona may only be the start. We don't want to go down that road.

Is the US at War with Mexico?

It's a reasonable question.

20,000 Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agents roam the border looking for economic migrants, smugglers, and traffickers. Those who are picked up - including children - are often held for hours or days without food, water, or blankets. The border fence disrupts livelihoods for border communities and destroys the environment. Individuals endure racial profiling, wrongful arrest, and other abuses. Immigration prosecutions are at an all-time high and federal courts are overwhelmed. But it's getting worse........

Source: Washington Independent

Most recently, the Department of Homeland Security has wasted more than $700 million dollars to create new surveillance technology (a "virtual fence"). What do they have to show for it? A faulty pilot project along 23 miles of the border near Tuscon. That's it.

An SBInet tower. Source: Boeing

Earlier today, I attended a hearing on border security. Senator Lieberman (CT) raised questions on increased cross-border violence due to "narco-terrorism" while Senator McCain (AZ) insisted that "we must move immediately to fully secure our border." Their witnesses - the head of CBP, a US attorney for Arizona, the sheriff of Cochise County, and the mayor of Nogales - offered their assessments of the situation and made recommendations on how to expand border security initiatives.

While I would not seek to diminish the severity of the cartels' violence (and over 22,000 Mexican residents have been killed in the past three years), I was deeply concerned to hear some of the suggestions being put forward, without critique, at the hearing.

All of the witnesses supported Senator McCain's proposal to deploy 3,000 National Guard troops on the border. One claimed that the presence of the military "creates a whole new level of deterrence." Other suggestions which were lofted include:

• Building double and triple fences in urban areas, or across the entire border
  
• Deploying technologies from SBInet (the virtual border fence) and elsewhere to track incursions on the border
• Expanding the use of unmanned aerial vehicles
• Securing funding for additional CBP agents
  
• Looking to the Minutemen as a model for how to successfully secure the border

Many of these suggestions mirror the 10-point plan for border security that Senators McCain (AZ) and Kyl (AZ) released today.

What's missing: Any serious consideration of the negative impact that border militarization has on border communities. Recognition of the human rights abuses caused by reactive, unfocused security efforts. Indications that the border will not be "secure" until the broken immigration system is fixed so that people can come to the US in a legal, orderly manner.

It is nearly impossible to seal a 2,000-mile border, and most of us wouldn't want to live in a country that did. But until the U.S. government decides that enough is enough, that taxpayer dollars are better spent on workable solutions than impractical displays of force, then the out-of-control militarization of the border is likely to continue.

When will it be enough?

In the hearing today, the mayor of Nogales said, "It is a full-blown war." What will we sacrifice - our country's values, the lives of our people, the trust in our law enforcement agencies - in order to fulfill a dream of ever-expanding military engagement?

Members of the National Guard survey the border during Operation Jumpstart in 2007. Source: LIFE