America's Voice Blog

Posted 06/07/11 at 05:37pm By Mahwish Khan

MA Governor Latest to Opt Out of Secure Communities; Victory for Community Groups in Key States

Gov. Deval PatrickYesterday, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (D-MA) announced that his state will not participate in the federal government’s failed “Secure Communities” deportation program. Governor Patrick joins Governor Quinn of Illinois and Governor Cuomo of New York in taking a courageous stand against the flawed enforcement program, and others – like California -- seek to find ways out of the agreement.  

But Governors Patrick, Quinn and Cuomo aren’t fighting this battle on their own. They’re responding to calls from their communities to stand up for public safety and protect residents of their states. Grassroots groups have played a vital role in each statewide campaign to end Secure Communities. In Massachusetts, local groups including the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition and Centro Presente circulated sign-on letters and lined up testimonies at hearings around the state, laying the groundwork for Governor Patrick’s bold action. In New York, Governor Cuomo’s decision was a response to months of organizing by local groups, including Make the Road New York, the Immigrant Defense Project, the New York Immigration Coalition and the Northern Manhattan Coalition for Immigrant Rights. Leading the way was Illinois, where the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights led a successful campaign to get Governor Quinn to opt out even while they were fighting for the Illinois DREAM Act.  But the movement in the states was and continues to be big – so please add any leaders and organizations we may have missed in the comments section below!

These groups, and anyone who understands immigrant communities, knows that the Secure Communities program has gone way beyond its stated goal of targeting foreign-born individuals convicted of serious crimes. And thanks to the “Uncover the Truth” campaign led by the National Day Laborers Organizing Network, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Benjamin H. Cardozo School of Law, they have the numbers to back it up.  For example, according to the New York Times:

Official figures from Boston showed that 54 percent of the immigrants deported under the program had no criminal convictions, only civil immigration violations.  Only about one in four deportees under the program had been convicted of a serious crime.

Click here to read more.
Posted 05/31/11 at 02:12pm By Mahwish Khan

Ruben Navarrette: Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) “Creates His Own Reality” on Immigration

Ruben Navarett and Lamar SmithThis in from Ruben Navarrette last night:

You would think that the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee would have better things to do than respond to every column that mentions him.

(Ouch).

Navarrette’s column focuses on Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX), one of the most anti-immigrant members of the U.S. House and vocal member of the GOP Mass Deportation Caucus, as the Congressman continues to challenge the columnist (and those who publish him), defending his hard-right position on immigration.

According to the columnist, this is the third time Lamar Smith has responded to one of his columns. And while Navarrette claims to have no problem with Smith defending himself, it seems he might have one – as do we – with Lamar Smith trying to "create his own reality." From the piece:

In a recent letter, Smith accused the Obama administration of "not enforcing the immigration laws on the books."

That will come as news to the more than 800,000 people who have been deported since Barack Obama took office, at the rate of about 1,000 per day. Just as it will to the hundreds of thousands of employers who have been pressured by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to fire illegal immigrant workers. With a record like this, it's absurd for anyone to accuse the administration of going soft on immigration enforcement.

Yet, on that issue, the Texas congressman has mastered absurdity.

As when Smith wrote to editors that illegal immigrants "take jobs from lawful workers."

Someone should check the expiration date on that carton of milk. How many Americans do you know who complain that it was their life's dream to pick strawberries, or tar roofs, or clean horse stalls, or do some other hard and dirty job but, darn it, an illegal immigrant got there first?

Or when Smith suggested that "the mass amnesty" of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act only "encouraged" more illegal immigration.

If he spoke to more immigrants, he'd know that there is only one thing that encourages them to leave their family and friends and trek north: jobs. And they come courtesy of the folks that Republicans consider untouchable: employers.

Navarrette continues to list Smith's argument on various immigration related issues -- like framing the DREAM Act as "amnesty for 2 million people" (it isn't)  or claiming that E-verify works (it doesn't) -- and expertly rips them apart. The article is definitely worth a read-through and a tweet.

We look forward to Lamar Smith's response.

Posted 05/09/11 at 05:32pm By Mahwish Khan

Florida Provides Perfect Case Study for the Politics of Immigration

Aniteres Flores (Florida)The fact that Florida’s state legislature will not advance Arizona-style anti-immigration legislation this year is a welcome development – and one that should puncture several myths that surround the politics of immigration. 

For one, the developments in Florida should make Republican strategists think twice as they seek to use immigration as a wedge issue and advance the notion that pushing Arizona copycat laws is a smart political strategy for the GOP (It’s not).

Here’s why:

State senate president Mike Haridopolous, running for the Republican nomination to U.S. Senate, made a deal with the Tea Party to do what he could to pass an anti-immigration bill in the Sunshine State.  After Spanish-language radio advertisements highlighted the role key Hispanic legislators were playing in providing cover to Haridopolous as he rammed through the legislation, Sen. Anitere Flores and House Majority Leader Carlos Lopez-Cantera came under intense scrutiny.  They denounced the legislation, and it finally died. 

The zeal of this fringe group of Republican hard-liners proved to be no match for the power of the Hispanic vote in Florida and the state’s business community, which was extremely worried that the law would negatively impact Florida agriculture, tourism, and reputation on the world stage -- just like SB 1070 did for Arizona.      

The developments in Florida also tested the idea — popular among anti-immigration restrictionists like Rep. Lamar Smith — that the GOP can court Latino voters with a few tweaks in their overall brand. 

According to Lamar Smith, an outspoken member of the "Mass Deportation Caucus," there is no need to change the Republican Party position on immigration reform, just change the "tone" of the debate. All they need, according to Mr. Smith, is to run a few more Latino candidates.  As our report from earlier this year makes clear, adding more Latino Republicans to the GOP ticket is not enough to win Latino voters. In fact, neither Governors Brian Sandoval of Nevada or Susana Martinez of New Mexico came even close to winning the Latino vote.  

To win over the Latino vote, the Republican Party really does have to move away from a mass deportation strategy to embrace comprehensive immigration reform. They apparently didn't get the memo. 

Click here to read more.
Posted 05/09/11 at 12:03pm By Mahwish Khan

Approximately 3 in 4 Americans Support Path to Citizenship and Want Immigration Solutions

pew research immigrationNew polling shows that by a 3:1 margin, Americans want a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. This confirms that Republicans are blocking the solutions that the American people want. 

The timing is interesting. Released one day before President Obama gives a major speech on immigration at the U.S./Mexico border, this new poll from Pew Research Center underscores that Americans are well ahead of some in Washington when it comes to understanding how to fix the broken immigration system. 

The poll finds overwhelming 72%-24% support for a path to legal citizenship for the undocumented, “provided they pass background checks, pay fines and have jobs.” For you more visual folk, that's approximately three out of four Americans who believe in a path toward citizenship.

Pew divided voters into eight distinct subgroups, and support for the path to legal citizenship was at least 58% among seven of the eight subgroups. The eighth, which was the “staunch conservatives” subgroup, was split 49%-49% on the topic.

Yet many Republicans in Congress, led by Representatives Lamar Smith (TX), Elton Gallegly (CA) and Steve King (IA) continue to push for enforcement-only approaches or hide behind the empty "border security first" argument. However, the public understands that a lasting and workable version of immigration reform must also include a path to legal citizenship for the 11 million undocumented people living in our nation, once again showing that Republicans are almost clueless on what the average American thinks or wants.

Clearly, Republicans in Congress are on the wrong path, and this poll provides more evidence of it.

Click here to read more.
Posted 04/26/11 at 05:26pm By Mahwish Khan

Undocumented Immigrants Paid Approximately $11.2 Billion in Taxes in 2010

There’s more news for those naysayers who claim that undocumented immigrants don’t pay taxes, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary.

Last week, the Immigration Policy Center came out with a report using data from the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), estimating that in 2010, the state and local taxes paid by households that are headed by undocumented immigrants came to approximately $11.2 billion in state and local taxes. 

Here’s the breakdown, followed by a chart showing which states benefited the most in tax dollars from their immigrant populations:

  • $1.2 billion in personal income taxes,
  • $1.6 billion in property taxes
  • $8.4 billion in sales taxes. 

Tax Revenue by State

Earlier today, we wrote about the relatively unknown, but powerful, California Congressman, Elton Gallegly, and how California farmers are worried about the immigration policies that the Mass Deportation Caucus in the House (namely Gallegly, and his two right-hand men, Reps. Lamar Smith and Steve King) is trying to implement.  As you can see from the chart above, if California mass-deported their tax-paying undocumented workers (many of whom are migrant farmworkers), California would lose approximately $2.74 billion in tax revenue. More, actually, when you consider that for every farm worker job, there are approximately 3.1 upstream and downstream jobs created.

But this is only if Gallegly had his way with undocumented immigrants. His immigration policies are also anti-“legal” immigration (though he’d have you believe otherwise), which would gravely affect workers in California’s Silicon Valley.

The short of it: Gallegly’s immigration strategy could sink our economic recovery -- and California's in particular.

The other anti-immigrant “amigo,” Rep. Lamar Smith, is more vocal and better known in political circles for some of his more extreme views. He and Rep. Steve King have famously pushed to revoke 14th amendment rights, and labor intensively with Gallegly to push for enforcement-only “solutions” (that don’t work). And our more vocal anti-immigrant House member hailing from Texas would be surprised to learn that his state is number two on the list of states receiving the most tax revenue from households led by undocumented immigrants, at $1.6 billion dollars.

But that’s such a small number to both Smith and Gallegly. It’s especially unimpressive when you compare it to the numbers related to the Gallegly, Smith, and King’s much-loved strategy of mass deportation, though there’s more damage than benefit here. Mass deportation would cost an estimated $206 billion to $230 billion over 5 years, and a $2.6 trillion cumulative loss in GDP over 10 years.

Any lawmaker who was concerned with the economy and had passed a second-grade math class would, especially after seeing these numbers, try to create a path toward citizenship to create more taxpayers.  But Gallegly, Smith, and King are driven by their anti-immigrant views, and very soon, if they keep it up, they'll be driven out of office.

Posted 04/07/11 at 12:30pm By Mahwish Khan

Younger Voters Support Immigration Reform, Reject Divisiveness

Immigration Reform NowOften, we've written about the importance of the Latino vote in American politics. The recent census numbers focused the attention of the political punditry on the growing power of Latinos in America.  And, we’ve been very clear that public opinion research shows that immigration is a key concern for that fastest-growing voting demographic.

But there’s another key demographic that shows increasing support for immigration reform. And it bodes well for the future, because, well, it is the future. Polling shows that support for immigration reform is increasing, particularly among younger Americans. Yes, younger Americans strongly support immigration reform and immigrants. The anti-immigrant wedge doesn’t work with them.

Tim Rutten from the Los Angeles Times looked at the numbers in a Los Angeles Times/University of Southern California poll and from the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life:

The [LA Times/USC] survey found that nearly 60 percent of respondents younger than 45 felt immigrants are a benefit to California and 68 percent feel they should be able to keep their jobs. In other words, opinion on immigration may be shifting in much the same way that it has on same-sex marriage: Younger Americans no longer accept the orthodoxies that once made both questions such divisive wedge issues.

Last month, for example, a Washington Post/ABC poll found that 53 percent of Americans now believe that same-sex marriage should be legalized. Like many such surveys, a recent nonpartisan Pew Research Center poll found that approval is strongest among younger voters. Similarly, a study in September by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life found that 51 percent of Americans under 30 believe that “immigrants work hard” and “are not a burden,” while 65 percent think they “strengthen society” and “don’t threaten American values.”

In other words, two once-powerful political wedges appear to be crumbling because Americans, who for most of their lives have lived and worked alongside openly gay and lesbian people and immigrants, have drawn conclusions from experience rather than fanciful rhetoric.

Makes sense to us.

Opponents of immigration reform use scare tactics and try to dehumanize immigrants. That’s a lot harder to do when people know, go to school with, work with and generally, just live among immigrants. That’s life in the United States for most younger people. This trendline is moving in the right direction.

But there's a warning here for the GOP. The party is letting advocates of mass deportation, Representatives Lamar Smith (R-TX),  Elton Gallegly (R-CA), Steve King (R-IA), set its immigration strategy. They thrive on divisive wedge politics. But, following their lead is bound to alienate Latino voters -- and young voters. There's not much of a future without either.

Posted 04/05/11 at 03:11pm By Mahwish Khan

Immigration System Needs Solutions to Protect High and Low-Skilled Workers

start-up visaRepresentatives Lamar Smith (R-TX), Elton Gallegly (R-CA) and Steve King (R-IA) are in the driver’s seat on immigration policy for the GOP.  Their goal is mass deportation of 11 million undocumented workers and their families, which they couch in the friendlier-sounding “attrition through enforcement”.  As revealed in a series of hearings this year, their strategy is to pit one group of workers against another—U.S. workers against immigrants, native-born American workers against foreign-born American workers, African-American workers against Latinos, etc.  A recent hearing on the H-1B work-visa program also made it clear that while Smith, Gallegly, and King have never met an undocumented dishwasher or field hand they liked, they recognize the vital role of high-skilled immigration to the United States. 

Gallegly is already plotting legislation to make the E-verify employment authorization system mandatory.  It doesn’t take a clairvoyant to predict where this is headed: a crackdown on undocumented workers through nationwide E-verify and other measures, and a sweetener for the business community through changes to high-skilled immigration.           

Recently, the President said that he wants to deal with changes to high-skilled immigration, including the Kerry-Lugar Startup Visa bill, as part of comprehensive immigration reform.  That position garnered criticism from Vivek Wadhwa in TechCrunch:

I debated this with [United States Chief Technology Officer] Aneesh Chopra, at the Economist Innovation Summit in Berkeley, last week.

The day before that event, Aneesh had invited me to a meeting with the director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Alejandro Mayorkas, at Stanford Law School. We had had a very productive discussion with leading academics, lawyers, and entrepreneurs about how the government can interpret existing laws in a more favorable way for immigrant entrepreneurs. I was pleasantly surprised at how open Mayorkas was to criticism and at how he listened to the ideas presented to him. Both he and Chopra acknowledged the deficiencies of the current system and pledged to do all they could to have them fixed.

But Chopra dropped a bombshell at the Economist event. He said that the President would only support the Startup Visa in the context of “comprehensive immigration reform.”  What this means is that the legislation will be lumped in with toxic debates about illegal immigration and will be held hostage to other interests.

If Wadhwa is concerned about the “toxicity” of the immigration debate, he should direct his criticism at Lamar Smith, Steve King, and Elton Gallegly—along with Sens. Jeff Sessions, David Vitter, and others.  They are the ones who try to use every immigration issue—however important—as a vehicle for anti-immigration amendments and increased enforcement against undocumented workers.  Yes, our country needs immigrant entrepreneurs and their contributions.  But we also need busboys, farm workers, and landscapers.  Helping one group while hurting another is not acceptable.    

Our entire economy – and especially the economy of California (from Silicon Valley to the Central Valley and beyond) -- is dependent on immigrants from across the spectrum.  With Smith, Gallegly, and King at the helm in the House, it’s clear that any bill expanding access to America for high-skilled workers will also be a magnet for punitive enforcement targeting low-skilled workers. 

It’s time for the adults in the Republican Party to step up, set aside the Smith-Gallegly-King agenda, and work with Democrats on real, comprehensive immigration reform.   

Posted 04/01/11 at 01:03pm By Lynn Tramonte

Dept. of Homeland Security, Dept. of Labor Sign Memorandum of Understanding on Workplace Enforcement

Department of Homeland Security and Department of LaborYesterday, the Obama Administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Labor Department finally agreed to work together to make sure the government’s zeal to enforce immigration laws doesn’t hurt labor enforcement efforts.

Let me break down the power equation here.  Like labor unions, some employers support comprehensive immigration reform because it’s the only way to a fair system where everyone has the same rights and responsibilities.  But other employers—the notorious Agriprocessors comes to mind—profit from the status quo.  They hire undocumented immigrants because they are easier to control.  They use the broken immigration system to enhance their profit margin, undercut law-abiding competitors, undermine workers, and cheat American taxpayers.  When workers start demanding their rights, these employers threaten them with deportation.   

It would be smart to focus enforcement efforts on these abusive employers, to break the cycle of abuse and protect the rights of all workers.  Unfortunately, Michael Chertoff’s Department of Homeland Security instead targeted immigrant workers with massive worksite raids, criminal prosecutions, and deportations.  The Labor Department was largely unaware or uninvolved.  Immigration and Customs Enforcement even used the Department of Labor to trap immigrants by impersonating the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and arresting workers who showed up for safety training.

Click here to read more.
Posted 03/28/11 at 01:50pm By Van Le

Report Analyzes True Economic Effects of Arizona SB 1070

laborersA year ago this April, Arizona passed its now-infamous SB 1070 bill, which has polarized the immigration debate around the nation and spawned both counter and copycat bills.  The law itself yet remains unenforced, due to legal challenges to its constitutionality.  Ahead of the one-year anniversary, the Immigration Policy Center and Center for American Progress last week released a very interesting new report, entitled “A Rising Tide or a Shrinking Pie: The Economic Impact of Legalization Versus Deportation.”  The report analyzes two scenarios: what would happen if SB 1070 were carried out to its full intended effect and every single undocumented immigrant was purged from Arizona, and would happen if the state instead decided to pursue legalization.

The report points out that the US immigration debate has become so heated that public discussion tends to be lacking in substance, with facts left altogether out of the equation.  It seeks to explore what is best for Arizona economically in this post-recession, and the numbers are significant.

If every undocumented immigrant were expelled from Arizona, it would:

  • Decrease total employment by 17.2%

  • Eliminate 581,000 jobs for immigrants and native-born workers alike

  • Shrink the state economy by $48.8 billion

  • Reduce state tax revenues by 10.1%

However, if all of the undocumented in Arizona were instead legalized, it would:

  • Increase total employment by 7.7%

  • Add 261,000 jobs for immigrants and native-born workers

  • Increase labor income by $5.6 billion

  • Increase tax revenue by $1.86 billion

Why?  The report’s introduction explains:

Undocumented immigrants don’t simply “fill” jobs; they create jobs. Through the work they perform, the money they spend, and the taxes they pay, undocumented immigrants sustain the jobs of many other workers in the U.S. economy, immigrants and native-born alike. Were undocumented immigrants to suddenly vanish, the jobs of many Americans would vanish as well.

In contrast, were undocumented immigrants to acquire legal status, their wages and productivity would increase, they would spend more in our economy and pay more in taxes, and new jobs would be created. Simply put, Arizona’s current approach to immigration policy is economically self-destructive.

Click here to read more.
Posted 03/11/11 at 10:29am By Mahwish Khan

In Idaho, 73% Support Creating Program to Allow Undocumented Immigrants to Stay in U.S.

Polling ClipboardThere's been a lot of discussion about immigration policy in the states. Arizona and Utah have garnered a lot of attention. But, an article this week on Yahoo Noticias pointed us to some very interesting findings on the issue in Idaho.

A poll of Idaho residents, conducted by Boise State University’s Public Policy Center late last year, showed some expected -- and surprising -- results on immigration. Check this out:

Immigration

•    Two-thirds of survey respondents (67 percent) think immigration is a problem in Idaho.

•    Just over 62 percent believe counties should deny indigent health services to undocumented workers; 31 percent disagree.

•    58 percent of respondents think Idaho should pass an immigration law similar to one recently enacted in Arizona, and 55 percent think such a law would reduce illegal immigration.

•    More than 7 of 10 respondents (73 percent) think that a program should be created to allow illegal immigrants to stay in this country permanently.

We added the emphasis to that last point.

Of the immigration questions, the one with strongest support from Idahoans was about finding a way to let undocumented immigrants stay in the U.S.

Last fall, then-Congressman Walt Minnick (D) launched a series of vicious anti-immigration attacks on his GOP opponent, Raul Labrador. Trust us: Labrador is no champion of immigration reform, but it's clear now that Minnick's attacks were way off-base. The people of Idaho, like most Americans, want practical solutions.

 1 2 3 >  Last »