Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE





The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

  • Article: The Truth Behind the Fear-Mongering Around Immigration Executive Action By Wendy Feliz

    The Truth Behind the Fear-Mongering Around Immigration Executive Action

    by


    138591344_15e25ff83b_o

    The anti-immigrant crowd’s latest arguments against executive action are emerging. Not surprising, they are no different than the ones they have long levied against legislative efforts at immigration reform. Their linguistic fear-mongering includes the mischaracterization of temporary reprieves from deportation as amnesty/green cards and citizenship for all, as well as pushing the myth that immigrants hurt the labor force and economy and represent a fiscal burden. They will also continue to try to persuade the public that not knowing who is in our country is somehow safer than having everyone registered and on our radar.

    The program that President Obama is likely to announce is rumored to be something like the DACA program, which will likely be expanded to include the parents of U.S. citizen children, legal permanent residents and potentially DACA enrollees. Deferred action is a temporary, two-year renewable deferral from deportation. It is not a green card, nor does it put an individual on the road to U.S. citizenship. When an immigrant is granted deferred action, it means the Department of Homeland Security has deemed the individual a low priority for immigration enforcement and has chosen to exercise its discretion and not deport the individual. Deferred action provides temporary relief from enforcement but may be revoked at any time. It is not amnesty or immunity. It does not provide lawful immigration status or a path to a green card or citizenship. It does not extend to any family members of the person granted deferred action.

    On the argument that all immigrants will automatically represent a fiscal burden by becoming eligible for public benefits, the National Immigration Law Center explains how access to public benefits is tightly restricted for those who are not U.S. Citizens and denied to those who don’t have legal status. In other words, if the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program is any guide, beneficiaries of deferred action will be barred from access to public benefit programs, including access to health care under the Affordable Care Act.

    As for the concept that immigrants somehow hurt the labor force, research simply shows this is not true:

    Immigrants are not the cause of unemployment in the United States. Empirical research has demonstrated repeatedly that there is no correlation between immigration and unemployment. In fact, immigrants—including the unauthorized—create jobs through their purchasing power and their entrepreneurship, buying goods and services from U.S. businesses and creating their own businesses, both of which sustain U.S. jobs. The presence of new immigrant workers and consumers in an area also spurs the expansion of businesses, which creates new jobs. In addition, immigrants and native-born workers are usually not competing in the same job markets because they tend to have different levels of education, work in different occupations, specialize in different tasks, and live in different places.

    Finally, the idea that more people registered with the immigration agencies makes us less safe is absurd. By asking millions of individuals, to come forward and submit their finger prints and undergo criminal background checks, makes our nation more secure not less. Also, if speculation is true and programs like Secure Communities are scaled back or fewer immigration holds (detainers) are issued, this only enables enforcement agencies to focus on border removals of new arrivals over the deportation of long-time residents. Data shows fewer detainers does not and has not equaled fewer deportations. The idea of targeting for arrest those who are truly public safety threats and recent arrivals with no legal means of staying rather than mothers and fathers with deep roots in the U.S. is actually smart enforcement.

    The extreme restrictionists who have driven immigration policy in America for far too long will not give up without a fight. They know they are on the verge of defeat and will use all the rhetorical and political tools in their chest to bring an end to any progress on immigration reform.

    Photo by Thomas Hawk.

    This post originally appeared on Immigration Impact on November 18, 2014. Reprinted with permission


    About The Author

    Wendy Feliz is the Director of Communications at the American Immigration Council. Prior to joining the Council, Ms. Feliz served as Director of Development at New America Media, after having worked at the Open Society Institute, and public radio station WAMU 88.5 as the Manager of Foundation Relations and Public Information. Ms. Feliz has spent much of her career in the non-profit world including with The California Hispanic Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse in East Los Angeles and The Young Adult Institute and Latino Worker’s Center in New York City. Ms. Feliz received her M.A. in Public Communication from the American University in Washington D.C. and she holds a B.A. in Liberal Arts from the New School University in New York.


    The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ILW.COM.

    Comments 5 Comments
    1. Nolan Rappaport's Avatar
      Nolan Rappaport -
      I don't disagree with anything Wendy says. But, I know from spending seven years as an immigration counsel on the House Judiciary Committee that it doesn't matter which side is right. Congressmen have to please the constituents who voted them into office, in addition to being under political pressure from party leadership. If you want to change a congressman's position, convince him that the alternative you are advocating would meed his political needs and offer him something for his cooperation. Don't try to convince him that your position is right and his position is wrong.
    1. Chris1434's Avatar
      Chris1434 -
      Another slap in the face of real immigrants who are trying to get to the US through proper channels. Illegal behavior is rewarded once again.
    1. Uscitizen's Avatar
      Uscitizen -
      Obama is giving the equivalent of the middle finger salute to all law-abiding US citizens of the US. He is throwing the American worker under the proverbial bus. We have a person in office who puts the interests of foreigners willfully violating our immigration laws before the interests of ordiinary US citizens. Obama is a vindictive, arrogant person. His repeated statements lead one to believe that if congress doesn't pass the law that he wants, then he will take executive action to effectuate the same outcome. But the prerogative of congress to pass laws or to not pass laws belongs to them, not Obama. The average American worker now must face the exacerbation of what they are already dealing with - wage inequality, declining wages, increasing part time work instead of full-time, eroding percentage of workforce participation, and high unemployment especially among minority workers. Additionally, the nation gains participants who see that their illegal actions are rewarded with work permits that would-be immigrants waiting in their home countries do not receive. This action is an incentive more even more people to come to the us illegally to wait for their amnesty. Every time people who violate the law and spirit of our immigration laws are rewarded with membership in our society we gain members who do not believe in the rule of law. Thanks Obama.
    1. Uscitizen's Avatar
      Uscitizen -
      It is ridiculous to suggest that immigration restrictionists have driven immigration policy; the presence of at least 11 milion illegal aliens disproves that notion, plus the current immigration of over 1 million new green card holders each and every year. How many millions of immigrants should the US welcome each year? As many as want to enter? Does the future quality of life for this nation's citizens matter anymore? Does it matter to anyone that we have the lowest workforce participation rate in decades (no, it's not caused by baby boomers retiring), and that unemployment is still high, that the number of jobs produced during the so-called recovery was not even enough to keep up with population growth, that we have increasing wage inequality, that the median wage for a worker has declined about 8% in the last decade or so; that many new jobs are low-wage or part time? Does it matter that 47 million people are on food stamps? Does the welfare of US citizens matter anymore to the elite?
    1. rogertaylorjd's Avatar
      rogertaylorjd -
      Regardless of the political and humanitarian concerns,
      the fact is simply that USCIS has proved itself incapable of serving any new customers
      unless and until its "culture" is examined and corrected, or at least improved,
      as is happening over at the VA.
      Also, no bucks, no Buck Rogers...
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: