GROUP ESTIMATES 100 ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS LEAVING EVERY DAY
By DANIEL GONZA*** The Arizona Republic 09.01.2007
PHOENIX - Illegal immigrants are starting to leave Arizona months in advance of a new state law that will require employers to verify the employment eligibility of their workers.
The departures are drawing cheers from immigration hard-liners and alarm from business owners already seeing a drop in sales.
At least several hundred immigrants have left since Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano signed the bill July 2, according to interviews with illegal immigrants, immigrant advocates, community leaders and real-estate agents. The number departing is expected to mushroom as Jan. 1, the date the law takes effect, draws closer. There are an estimated 500,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona.
Some immigrants are moving to other states, where they think they will have an easier time getting jobs. Others are returning to Mexico. "I would say we are losing at least 100 people a day," said Elias Bermudez, founder of Immigrants Without Borders and host of a daily talk-radio program aimed at illegal immigrants.
Abel Ledezma, a 31-year-old telephone technician from Mexico, has a work permit, but his fiancee, a waitress, is an illegal immigrant. Ledezma put his house on the market after the governor signed the bill and the two plan to move to Albuquerque, N.M., which Ledezma thinks is more welcoming of illegal immigrants.
"I feel like the people's attitudes towards not only immigrants but also Hispanics has become very rude" in Arizona, he said.
Immigration hard-liners say the exodus is a sign the employer-sanctions law is already working. It is aimed at shutting off the job magnet by imposing harsh penalties on employers caught knowingly hiring unauthorized workers.
Violators face a 10-day suspension of their business license for a first offense and could lose their license for a second offense.
"Shut off the lights, and the crowd will go home," said Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, the main architect of the new law. "I hope they will all self-deport.''
Immigrant advocates, business groups and analysts say the exodus will make it more difficult to find workers and dampen the state's economy. A dozen business groups, including the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, have filed a lawsuit seeking to block the law on the grounds it is unconstitutional.
Arizona's labor market is already tight with just 3.7 percent unemployment in July, according to the state Department of Economic Security. Illegal workers leaving the state could make the labor market tighter, which could lead to higher wages but also higher costs for goods and services, said Don Wehbey, the department's senior economist.
There are labor shortages because of a native-born population that is aging and more highly educated and therefore doesn't produce enough low-skilled workers to meet growing demand, said Judith Gans, program manager for immigration policy at the University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy. As a result, illegal immigrants are doing jobs that Americans won't do or aren't available to do, she said. "If these workers leave, it's going to hurt the economy and put the state at an economic disadvantage with other states," Gans said.
Some areas of Arizona's economy already are taking a hit because of the hiring law. Real-estate agent Guadalupe Sosa said illegal immigrants are putting their homes up for sale when there is already an abundance of houses on the market.
What's more, many more are not buying homes because they are worried about losing their jobs under the law.
I missed this article in my daily reads - interesting and thanks for sharing!
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A lawsuit filed Tuesday claims that federal immigration agents who raided a meatpacking plant detained Hispanic workers, hurled racial epithets at them and forced the women among them to take off their clothes, while white workers were spared the harsh treatment.
The federal lawsuit was filed by Centro Legal, an immigrant rights group, on behalf of 10 workers at Swift & Co.'s Worthington plant who are in the U.S. legally. More than 200 illegal immigrants in Worthington were arrested Dec. 12 as part of a six-state raid of Swift plants that netted more than 1,200 undocumented workers.
The plaintiffs, all of whom were working at the Worthington plant when it was raided, claim they were detained and searched or interrogated without being advised of their constitutional rights, the lawsuit claims. None was charged with a crime, said Gloria Contreras-Edin, Centro Legal's executive director.
Federal agents "insulted, abused, and humiliated the plaintiffs on account of their race" and ordered female Hispanic workers to disrobe in front of federal agents, the lawsuit claims. White workers, meanwhile, were allowed to move about the plant freely during the raid and weren't subject to unlawful conduct on the part of agents, according to the lawsuit.
"This is about upholding the basic constitutional rights and freedoms of Americans — whether they are black, white or Latino," Contreras-Edin said.
The lawsuit claims civil rights violations, abuse, discrimination, unlawful search and unlawful detainment. It seeks unspecified damages and a court ruling barring ICE from conducting similar raids.
Tim Counts, a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said Tuesday that government lawyers hadn't reviewed the lawsuit. But he said agents did nothing wrong during the raid.
"The worksite enforcement operation at the Worthington plant was done lawfully and in full accordance with ICE policies and procedures," Counts said. "Each person encountered was treated with respect and has been given full access to due process under the laws."
Worthington is a city of about 15,000 residents near the Iowa border.
Centro Legal has also sued on behalf of Hispanic residents in Willmar who claim agents broke into their homes and illegally detained them during a sweep in April. Many Hispanic immigrants in that west-central Minnesota community work at a poultry processor owned by Austin-based Hormel Foods Corp.
ICE has also claimed its agent acted properly in that raid, which led to the arrests of about 50 people.
Fact: There is no violent crime wave in America caused by illegal immigrants. Keep that in mind the next time you read sensationalized news stories of illegals involved in horrific crimes, such as the recent execution-style slayings of three students in New Jersey, allegedly by an illegal immigrant from Peru.
Shocking, yes -- but in the immigrant population, such stories are the exception, not the rule, according to a 2007 study by the Immigration Policy Center.
Contrary to popular myth and stereotypes, the vast majority of undocumented aliens are here to work, not commit crimes, according to the study. In fact, illegal immigrants are far less likely to commit serious crimes than legal citizens of any ethnicity.
Consider:
• Although the undocumented population has doubled since 1994, to an estimated 12 million, violent crime during that period fell 34 percent and property crimes decreased 26 percent.
• The majority of illegals here are Mexican nationals between the ages of 18 and 39, with little formal education -- a demographic you'd expect to drive a high crime rate. But native-born males in that age group were incarcerated at rates five times greater than foreign-born men, the study found.
Partly that's because Hispanic males who are in the United States illegally are a highly motivated group who are here to work and stay out of trouble.
An article in Tuesday's Eagle noted that one-fourth of inmates in federal prisons are illegal immigrants. But almost half of those offenders are in jail for immigration (a federal crime) or drug violations, not violent or property crimes.
In fact, increased immigration, whether legal or illegal, arguably is driving down crime rates in America, according to the study's authors.
Several studies of immigrant populations in the early 20th century reached similar conclusions. As the Dillingham Commission reported in 1911, "immigrants are less prone to commit crime than are native Americans."
That's why, instead of acting as immigration agents, it's more important for police to gain the trust of members of the Hispanic community so they'll come forward when real crimes are committed in their neighborhoods.
That's been the approach of the Wichita Police Department and many other urban police forces. Local police must put their limited resources where they will do the most good. And immigration enforcement is a federal issue.
Granted, there are some serious career criminals in the illegal population -- and when found, they should be deported, not set loose to reoffend. There can be no "sanctuary" for hard-core criminals.
Just beware of emotional arguments equating immigrants and crime.
There are many problems caused by illegal immigration. A crime wave isn't one of them.
NEW RULE WOULD PUT ONUS ON BOSSES TO PURGE ILLEGALS
What: The Social Security Administration is poised to send out letters to thousands of employers who have workers with Social Security numbers that do not match the appropriate names.
When: A federal judge has delayed any action on the letters until at least October in a case where the AFL-CIO sued to block them, claiming the documents violate workers' rights and would unfairly burden employers.
Why: With the apparent death of comprehensive immigration reform, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is using the information from the Social Security Administration to crack down on businesses employing illegal aliens.
For more information, visit www.ice.gov or call the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office of Investigations at (800) 421-7102.
New rule would put onus on bosses to purge illegals
BY DEVONA WALKER Herald Tribune Sarasota Forida September 05, 2007
With comprehensive immigration reform dead, the Social Security Administration is poised to send out controversial "no match" letters to thousands of employers, notifying them of the serious penalties for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.
The letters would target employers who have workers with Social Security numbers that do not match the appropriate names.
It requires an employer to inform the employee, and for both to remedy the problem within 90 days.
The move represents the latest in the national crackdown on illegal immigrants and the businesses that employ them.
It now appears that the letters -- which have drawn scorn from a wide range of industries and labor players -- will not go out before October. Last week, a federal judge in San Francisco granted a temporary restraining order blocking the letters from being mailed Tuesday as planned.
But in Florida's seminal industries -- agriculture, construction and hospitality -- employers worry the government's move could translate into astronomical worker shortages.
With the 90-day deadline, those shortages could come at a critical time of year -- the height of the growing season and the beginning of tourism season.
"It's an enormous issue, and that's not an exaggeration," said Lisa Lochridge, a spokeswoman for the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association. "Because Congress did not enact comprehensive immigration reform, this is the consequence that agriculture is going to pay.
"It's making an already bad situation worse."
Labor attorneys, immigration experts and growers estimate that thousands of workers will be affected by the rule, and the Department of Homeland Security -- no longer satisfied with monetary penalties for knowingly hiring unqualified workers -- is pledging to push for even more criminal charges.
"It puts good employers in a very untenable position," Lochridge said. "If they comply with the rule, they risk losing a very large portion of their work force. If they do not comply, they face penalties and fines. It basically puts them in the position of enforcing a tax regulation, and it's just not the answer."
Publication of the "no match" final rule was delayed for a year as the Bush administration waited for Congress to pass reform. A few months ago, all hopes of passage was scrapped -- with many watchers doubtful it will even be brought up again until after the 2008 presidential election.
The final rule was published Aug. 15. But last week, a coalition headed by the AFL-CIO filed a lawsuit against Homeland Security, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Social Security Administration, attempting to block the rule permanently.
The suit contends that the Department of Homeland Security rules outlined in the letters threaten to violate workers' rights and unfairly burden employers.
Homeland Security has no plans to make any changes.
"There are no plans to modify it. This is nothing new. It's been out there for a year. It's already been vetted," said Pat Reilly, a Homeland Security spokeswoman who was aware of the lawsuit and said that it has no merit.
"We see work site enforcement as a vulnerability in national security. If we do not know who is in our community or who is in our workplace, how can we protect it?"
The consequences
An estimated 7 million undocumented workers pay about $7 billion to the Social Security Administration each year, and provide about $1.5 billion for Medicare, the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform reports.
More than $519 billion in wages has been reported to Social Security that cannot be matched with workers.
That total is presumed to reflect the large number of the undocumented working in the United States who are using fake Social Security cards.
About two-thirds of undocumented workers are believed to be "working on the books" and paying into Social Security as well as paying federal taxes.
"From a revenue perspective and a fairness and justice perspective, it's crazy," said Jennifer Hill, staff attorney for the Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center. "You're going to drive people into the underground economy, where records are not kept and where workers are exploited and where taxes are not paid."
Hill contends that enforcing "no match" is not the function of the Social Security Administration, and that the rules will hurt an agency already struggling.
"The Social Security Administration now has staffing levels lower than what they were in the '70s. It's overtaxing an under-resourced bureaucracy with a task it's not intended to perform," Hill said.
"It puts us as farmers in a very difficult position, as essentially being policy police," said Billy Heller, chief executive officer of Palmetto-based Pacific Tomato Growers Ltd. "This is like building a home without a foundation."
Homeland Security pushed for comprehensive immigration reform, but the Social Security Administration has, until this point, resisted the requests to share information.
But Michael Chertoff, secretary of Homeland Security, said his agency was pushing for the names of employers and employees receiving the "no match" letters so that they could be used in work site enforcement.
"That's a legal issue we are currently addressing," Chertoff said recently.
"We have asked Congress to make it clear that this kind of sharing can take place, and they have not yet stepped up to the plate.
"It would be very helpful for us, but it's not yet a tool we have available to us."
Sunshine State implications
Opponents of "no match" enforcement said that the federal government's actions will broadly affect some of Florida's biggest industries.
"This is not just an issue that affects agriculture, but it goes to the heart of the three-legged stool in Florida -- agriculture, hospitality and construction," said Lochridge, the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association spokeswoman. "That's what the Florida economy depends on."
The Florida Department of Agriculture estimates that farming is a $97 billion economic machine, employing 390,184 workers and paying $2.85 billion in taxes.
But Reilly, the Homeland Security spokeswoman, said immigration enforcement should not be an economic debate.
"I've heard that argument -- everyone has heard that argument about how devastating this will be economically," Reilly said.
"But we have also seen unemployment rise. I believe you can find legal workers. What we're doing is taking away the employers' ability to say, 'Oh, I didn't know.'"
Work site enforcement has more than tripled in the last year. Penalties for working in the United States illegally, and for employing undocumented workers have resulted in hundreds of criminal arrests.
Last week, 25 people were arrested and charged with identity fraud in North Carolina, as a result of work site enforcement. On the same day in Ohio, 160 workers at a Koch Foods Inc. chicken plant were arrested in work site enforcement.
Criminal fines and restitution so far this year have topped $30 million, Reilly said.
"Work site enforcement is a priority. We have been given more money to investigate and given encouragement to step up enforcement."
A federal judge has delayed any action on the 'no match' letters until at least October in a case where the AFL-CIO sued to block them, claiming the documents violate workers' rights and would unfairly burden employers.
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A lawsuit filed Tuesday claims that federal immigration agents who raided a meatpacking plant detained Hispanic workers, hurled racial epithets at them and forced the women among them to take off their clothes, while white workers were spared the harsh treatment.
The federal lawsuit was filed by Centro Legal, an immigrant rights group, on behalf of 10 workers at Swift & Co.'s Worthington plant who are in the U.S. legally. More than 200 illegal immigrants in Worthington were arrested Dec. 12 as part of a six-state raid of Swift plants that netted more than 1,200 undocumented workers.
The plaintiffs, all of whom were working at the Worthington plant when it was raided, claim they were detained and searched or interrogated without being advised of their constitutional rights, the lawsuit claims. None was charged with a crime, said Gloria Contreras-Edin, Centro Legal's executive director.
Federal agents "insulted, abused, and humiliated the plaintiffs on account of their race" and ordered female Hispanic workers to disrobe in front of federal agents, the lawsuit claims. White workers, meanwhile, were allowed to move about the plant freely during the raid and weren't subject to unlawful conduct on the part of agents, according to the lawsuit.
"This is about upholding the basic constitutional rights and freedoms of Americans — whether they are black, white or Latino," Contreras-Edin said.
The lawsuit claims civil rights violations, abuse, discrimination, unlawful search and unlawful detainment. It seeks unspecified damages and a court ruling barring ICE from conducting similar raids.
Tim Counts, a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said Tuesday that government lawyers hadn't reviewed the lawsuit. But he said agents did nothing wrong during the raid.
"The worksite enforcement operation at the Worthington plant was done lawfully and in full accordance with ICE policies and procedures," Counts said. "Each person encountered was treated with respect and has been given full access to due process under the laws."
Worthington is a city of about 15,000 residents near the Iowa border.
Centro Legal has also sued on behalf of Hispanic residents in Willmar who claim agents broke into their homes and illegally detained them during a sweep in April. Many Hispanic immigrants in that west-central Minnesota community work at a poultry processor owned by Austin-based Hormel Foods Corp.
ICE has also claimed its agent acted properly in that raid, which led to the arrests of about 50 people.
I had to read this twice. The reputation of ICE is sinking deeper and deeper. If the article is reporting the truth, think about human rights violations. They are going after all Hispanics, legal or not. I hope they are slapped with serious lawsuits. It is bully tactic and a senseless display of authority! Perhaps our Senators and Congressman will soon realize what a mistake they made letting the immigration reform bill drop dead on the floor! You think?
Immigration and Customs Enforcement are now responding every time Valley police call them for assistance with illegal immigrants.
Vinnie Picard with ICE explains how they are doing it. "We kind of shifted our policy and said, 'you know, it makes more sense for this Office of Dentition and Removal Operations - DRO - to do this initial uniformed response,' so we put that responsibility in their lap last year and its really paid off volumes."
ICE has arrested more than 6,000 illegal aliens this year alone. Picard said they strive for a 100-percent response rate and are fairly close to it.
By Domenico Maceri New America Media Posted September 5, 2007.
One tenth of the U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq have been immigrants. But not all of their parents have qualified for green cards. Tools
Three years after U.S. Army Private Armando Soriano, 20, died fighting in Haditha, Iraq, his father is facing deportation. Soriano is now buried in Houston, Tex., his hometown, where his parents, undocumented workers from Mexico, are currently living.
Before his death Soriano had promised his parents he'd help them get green cards. He only succeeded partially before losing his life. Although his mother was able to obtain a green card, his father did not qualify and is on the verge of being deported.
Enrique Soriano, Armando's father, is not the only person to have lost a son or daughter in the Iraq war and face deportation. There are more than three million people born in the U.S. with parents who came into the country illegally. Those born in the U.S. are automatically citizens and have all the rights and duties enjoyed by Americans. That includes military service with the possibility of losing one's life.
Losing a son or a daughter is always tragic. To try to compensate the families the U.S. government makes efforts to help. In the case of individuals with family members needing immigration help, officials assist them to obtain green cards. That's what happened with Soriano's mother. But in spite of governmental flexibility, certain rules prevent some people from qualifying.
Enrique Soriano had been formally deported in 1999 when he returned to Mexico for a brief visit. That makes him ineligible for any immigration benefits. Enrique Soriano is not alone.
Although exact figures are difficult to come by, many parents with sons and daughters who died in Iraq have been deported.
Official statistics show that more than 68,000 foreign-born military individuals are serving the U.S. How many of these individuals have relatives who do not have a legal right to be in the United States is not known. Figures from the National Center for Immigration Law show that one in 10 U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq have been immigrants.
One estimate claims that five percent of those serving in the American military are illegal immigrants who joined with false papers. The military does not recruit illegal immigrants. Yet, given the shortages of volunteers, meeting quotas may put pressure to close some eyes. Illegal immigrants may feel that joining the military will help them and their families obtain legal papers in addition to other benefits.
Inevitably, some die in the process. The first soldier to die for the United States in the Iraq war was in fact Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez, an illegal immigrant from Guatemala.
Enrique Soriano's case is also complicated by the fact that the rest of his family has a legal right to be in the U.S. His wife has a green card, three of their four kids are U.S. citizens, and another born in Mexico has applied for a green card. If Enrique is deported, the family will have to make the hard choice of going back or separating.
"I think it would be a travesty for these parents to be deported after their son died in Iraq fighting for his country," stated Congressman Gene Green, D-Houston. The congressman introduced a bill in the House, which would help Enrique Soriano obtain a green card. Nothing has happened yet.
Earlier this year President George Bush commuted the sentence of Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff. In so doing, the President spared Libby two and a half years in prison for his conviction for lying to federal investigators. The President cited Libby's "exceptional public service" and prior lack of a criminal record as explanation for his action. He concluded that Libby's sentence was "excessive" and the punishment "harsh."
In light of the sacrifice made by Armando Soriano, one wonders whether deporting his father is a far more "excessive" and "harsh" punishment?
MEXICO CITY - The Mexican government said Tuesday that it is talking with U.S. officials about whether a deported illegal migrant could return to the United States.
Elvira Arellano was arrested and sent back to Mexico last month after taking refuge in a Chicago church for a year to avoid a deportation order.
Mexican Foreign Secretary Patricia Espinosa Cantellano said she approached U.S. authorities on Arellano's behalf after the activist asked Mexican President Felipe Calderon to help her return to the United States as a "peace and justice" ambassador.
Espinosa did not say whether Mexico planned to give Arellano the diplomatic post but said officials are trying to determine whether there is any way she could go back to Chicago. Arellano's U.S.-born 8-year-old son, Saul, is a U.S. citizen. He flew to Mexico on Friday.
Mexico has yet to receive an answer, Espinosa said at a news conference Tuesday. "The government in the receiving country has to authorize diplomatic posts. It has to grant the visa," Espinosa said.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: explora,
DEPORTED ENTRANT WANTS TO RETURN TO U.S. AS MEXICAN AMBASSADOR
The Associated Press Tucson, Arizona | Published: 09.05.2007
MEXICO CITY — The Mexican government said Tuesday it is talking with U.S. officials about whether a deported illegal entrant and activist could return to the United States.
The entrant, Elvira Arellano, was arrested and sent back to her native Mexico last month after taking refuge in a Chicago church for a year to avoid a deportation order.
Mexican Foreign Secretary Patricia Espinosa said she approached U.S. authorities on Arellano's behalf after the 32-year-old activist asked Mexican President Felipe Calderon to help her return to the United States legally as a "peace and justice" ambassador.
Espinosa did not say whether Mexico planned to give Arellano the diplomatic post, but said officials were trying to determine if there was any way she could could go back to Chicago.
Arellano's U.S.-born 8-year-old son, Saul, is a U.S. citizen. He flew to Mexico on Friday to be reunited with his mother, and plans to stay here indefinitely, although he was expected to return briefly to the United States this month to participate in an immigrant-rights march.
Mexico has yet to receive an answer from U.S. officials, Espinosa said at a news conference Tuesday.
"The government in the receiving country has to authorize diplomatic posts. It has to grant the visa," Espinosa said.
Arellano said she would not back down from her request and was angered that Mexico was seeking a U.S. visa, adding that the Mexican government should not have to ask permission to send her north of the border.
"I'm not asking for any visa," she said. "I want a diplomatic post as ambassador of peace and justice, and I won't accept anything less."
CHICAGO (AP) — The 8-year-old son of a deported illegal immigrant who took refuge in a Chicago church for a year plans to travel to Mexico on Friday to visit his mother and try to renew his U.S. passport.
Saul Arellano, a U.S. citizen, will visit his mother Elvira in Mexico for several days, the Rev. Walter Coleman said Thursday.
Elvira Arellano was in the U.S. illegally for several years before taking sanctuary at Chicago's Adalberto United Methodist Church, where she lived with her son for a year in defiance of a deportation order.
She left the church earlier this month to attend rallies in Los Angeles and was arrested by immigration authorities and deported to Tijuana, Mexico, hours later.
Arellano, 32, has said her son will remain in Chicago so he can attend school and she will stay in Mexico to continue fighting for others in her situation.
"We want to reunite them," said Coleman, Adalberto United's pastor. "They need to be together right now."
Saul cannot renew his U.S. passport without his mother present, Coleman said.
Arellano, who has become a symbol for illegal immigrant parents with children who are U.S. citizens, has asked the Mexican government to help with a visa so she can enter the United States.
"They're going to continue to struggle," Coleman said.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: explora,
ARELLANO DEPORTATION HIGHLIGHTS ECONOMIC INSECURITY FOR MILLIONS
By Francis Calpotura, AlterNet. Posted August 28, 2007.
Until we prioritize the economic security of working families throughout the hemisphere, we leave little choice but for millions to migrate to provide for their loved ones. Tools
For the millions of immigrants who have left their countries due to the failed economic policies of the past twenty-five years, this week's arrest and deportation of Elvira Arellano and resulting separation from her only child is nothing new. It is only the most recent example of families being broken up by a corporate-driven globalization model that couples harmful economic policy with unjust immigration policy.
The fundamental reality of immigration is that migration is a necessity, not an option for millions around the world. Individuals weigh the severity of leaving their families behind against taking the gamble of earning a living in a richer country with more economic opportunities.
Ms. Arellano made that difficult decision to provide economic security for herself and her loved ones. But the flawed economic and immigration policies of corporate-driven globalization that forced her to look outside of Mexico to find a better living in the first place, led ultimately to her deportation.
Unfettered trade (e.g., under the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA), privatization of state-run industry and services, and the triumph of investor rights over labor rights have not only failed to reduce poverty or create economic growth, they have made conditions worse. NAFTA precipitated the loss of 1 million manufacturing jobs in the U.S. and the displacement of 3 million farmers in Mexico.
Rather than acknowledge the failures of NAFTA, the U.S., Mexico, and Canada discussed the expansion of these failed trade and economic policies this week at their Security and Prosperity Partnership summit. Their final statement called NAFTA "a tremendous mutual success" and planned to "build on NAFTA's success and reduce unnecessary trade barriers."
In reality, these policies have failed, forcing people to transfer labor and capital by migrating away from their families to work in rich countries and send money transfers, or remittances, back to their loved ones in impoverished communities around the world. The World Bank estimates these remittances are now bigger than official development assistance and foreign direct investment in impoverished countries. Inflows from Mexicans living abroad, for example, represent the country's second largest source of foreign income behind oil exports.
An immediate challenge faced by immigrant communities is the high fees incurred when sending money. Spending billions to send money back home for food, urgent medical care and education is a major economic security issue. Studies show that if money-transfer fees were cut in half, 33 million people could be lifted out of poverty in the developing world. Immigrant workers spend up to a week's wages to pay these yearly fees; for families in their home countries, the fee represents almost two month's worth of wages.
This is why immigrants have joined the Transnational Institute for Grassroots Research and Action to pressure the global money transfer giant, Western Union, to lower fees and prioritize community reinvestment in sustainable development. Such a move would make the money transfer industry more accountable to its customer base: immigrants who often work low-paying jobs with little regulation. This scenario is grounded in economic reality; wire transactions cost less than $5 to a company that charges more than $20.
Until we prioritize the economic security of families like Elvira's, we leave little choice but for millions to migrate to provide for their loved ones. As the laws in place continue to disrespect and disregard these economic realities, people like Ms. Arellano will continue to cross borders and face subsequent deportation. As Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote from Birmingham jail forty-years ago: "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."
If we want to move beyond such injustice as a society, we must broaden efforts that work to make migration a choice and not a necessity while holding financial institutions accountable to immigrants. Shifting focus from simply border security to economic security is the first step.
Originally from the Philippines, Francis Calpotura is the Executive Director of the Transnational Institute for Grassroots Research and Action (TIGRA), a national network of more than 100 immigrant organizations.
AMERICAN FAMILIES UNITED: FAMILY UNITY IN 2008 KICK-OFF ACTION ALERT
Since the defeat of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill in the Senate earlier this year, we have kept up the lobbying efforts with the House of Representatives and met with significant support for our cause. The 110th Congress, which is in session through the end of 2008, is a very real and exciting opportunity for us to reunite millions of spouses and children and address processing delays that keep people from visiting family abroad.
With the lobbying effort well underway, it's up to us to continue our momentum at the grassroots level. And we are up to the challenge! Members are organizing in New York, Philadelphia, Raleigh, Chicago, San Jose, Detroit and Houston, with more new members every day as word spreads.
Our First National Action: October 1st Visit to Washington, DC To bring our message directly to our Representatives in Congress, we are organizing another lobby day on Monday, October 1, 2007. American Families United members, volunteers and constituents will travel to Washington, D.C. to meet directly with key House members.
We will bring our message of Family Unity in immigration to Congress and seek support for legal immigration reform. You can sign up to join with us by registering online at:
On our last lobby day we garnered the support of the leading presidential candidate, Senator Hillary Clinton. Initial results from early announcements of our lobby day are that this lobby day will be even more impressive than our first.
A Job Worth Doing Right To win Family Unity in 2008, we need to do things right. And to do things right we need to raise $150,000. It sounds daunting, but already with local efforts, and with the support of recurring donations, we have raised over $2,000 already. But more importantly, we have numbers. Our strength is in the thousands. If you help us with a donation of $100, we can meet this goal tomorrow:
Add to del.icio.us
