KEEPING IMMIGRANTS OUT OF HEALTHCARE

 

What?:

As current health care law stands, the 11 million undocumented people residing in the United States do not have access to any medical benefits.The current immigration reform proposal stipulates that an immigrant must wait 15 years until he or she can apply for any "anti-poverty" programs like Medicaid or food stamps. This 15 year period must also start after the individual has received a green card, and cannot be applied for during "provisional status". However, during the 15 year period after the person has received a green card, he or she will pay taxes into these types of "anti-poverty" programs.

History:

Since 1996 there have been restrictions as to what benefits an immigrant can receive in the U.S. while not having legal status. This restrictions were originally put in place as a means to decrease people coming into the country for benefits. This theory over the years has been proven wrong. Regardless of the lack of benefits being provided to undocumented people, immigration numbers have continued to rise in which the only drop has been during tough economic times.

How Could This Hurt the Economy?:

First off, any good business person would probably agree that it is important to have an maintain a healthy workforce. Having one or even multiple employees who become ill and do not have access to care can decrease the businesses overall productivity, which would be the same result if a parent has to take time off for a sick child that also cannot see a physician or get the proper antibiotics. The same children that may cause a parent to miss work will also be forced to miss school, which could lead to the child being less assimilated and not as successful in the future. If any of the people I listed above have a condition that worsens, in turn causing the individual to make a visit to the emergency room, all of these uninsured costs than fall on local governments and individuals. It would be more beneficial for the federal government, the citizens, and undocumented individuals to give them access to affordable health care and insurance.

http://immigrationimpact.com/

HOW MANY POINTS ARE YOU WORTH?

 

The New Immigration Reform:

The news immigration reform bill released last week is the official compromise proposed by the "Gang of Eight". The bill seeks to provide a pathway to citizenship for the roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants, while increasing border security and implementing a "meritocratic" system. Although the bill may seem well rounded, certain groups haven risen above.

Benefits of S.T.E.M.: 

If you are an immigrant who falls under any of these categories (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) than the United States has just become the land of infinite opportunity. The bill proposes to lift the numerical cap on these fields all together with the goal of attracting immigrants with degrees in any of these fields. These open opportunities would also be available for people with "extraordinary abilities" which can include athletic abilities, other academic fields, and even businessmen. Under the new bill, it pays to have very specialized skills.

Point System:

Under the new bill, there will also be points awarded to each undocumented immigrant, based on things such as education, employment history, and the amount of time the individual has been in the United States. The amount of points an individual receives will than be the deciding factor on whether or not the individual will receive one of the capped work visas, which total to 120,000. The number would than fluctuate each year based on the economic needs of the country.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/immigration-reform-once-more-with-more-meritocracy-20130422

RUBIO TAKES A CONSERVATIVE STAND FOR FOX

 

What Immigrants Won't Be Getting:

Marco Rubio took the opportunity to point out what immigrants will not be getting with the new immigration reform during an interview with Fox News. The Republican senator made it seem as though the immigration reform will not be giving immigrants "that much" status or benefits in the new political realm. The benefits they will not be getting according to Rubio are food stamps, welfare, and Obamacare. Rubio also stated that that an immigrant is in the country for at least ten years, the only think they can apply for is a green card which would be attached to a fine. Rubio also supports the critics view of making a green card harder to obtain than what is in now. The senator also used the term "illegal aliens" when describing the current situation and reform.

What Advocates Want:

Most supporters feel that the current immigration system poses too many obstacles for immigrants to gain legal status. They would like the new reform to make it easier for immigrants to attain a legal status and not cost as much money. Giving the immigrants legal status and allowing them to work in the United States would further help support the United States economy and allow the country to further prosper.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/14/rubio-immigration-amnesty-_n_3080184.html

LABRADOR: AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF THE PUZZLE

Currently:

Both the House and Senate are working toward an immigration reform plan, with an end hopefully in sight. The House has still not been able to reach agreements in regards to the guest worker program, or where the agricultural workers will stand.  Discussions within Republican and Democratic parties have already started, with opinions being given, and lines being drawn. In order for a truly comprehensive bill to be passed, everyone is going to have to get on board.

Who is Raul Labrador?:

Raul Labrador is a senator from the 1st District of Idaho who takes a conservative, Republican standpoint on most issues, including immigration. He is the only Republican who also holds a seat on the House Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee and has formed a tight knit relationship with many of the other young, conservative, Republican senators piecing together the immigration reform plan. It looks as though Labrador will be a very important piece to the puzzle.

Opinions:

In recent negotiations, Labrador has stressed the need for border security, and urgency for the government to ensure undocumented immigrants will not be able to drain the United States budget. He has been quoted in the "Los Angeles Times writing “the undocumented must come out of the shadows, register and undergo thorough background checks. They must pay all taxes owed, and pay a fine. They must know English and remain employed and not become a financial burden to American taxpayers. Those who have committed serious crimes or who do not willingly come forward will not be eligible for the program”". Previously, Labrador has taken an even harsher stand on immigration. In an interview that took place in February, he stated that neither him or his fellow Republican senate members would vote in favor of giving undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship, and was also quoted on NPR stating "the people that came here illegally, knowingly, I do not think they should have a pathway to citizenship". Neither of these statements alone or together look promising when it comes to the idea of reform. Hopefully Labrador can take the more "pro reform" stance he has been known for in the past.

http://news.yahoo.com/whats-next-immigration-reform-074257568--politics.html;_ylt=AwrNUbFDJmNRexoAUcTQtDMD

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/07/raul-labrador-immigration-reform_n_2638484.html

"W" VISAS AND REFORM

 What is the "W" Visa?:

In a recent agreement made by the AFL-CIO, the "W" visa was put into motion in hopes to fill the United States "economic needs"(Johnson, 1). This would be a visa available to immigrants in low skilled jobs like construction, or domestic work and due to the amount of undocumented immigrants already being employed in these fields, it is important to give them legality. The visa states that all immigrant workers in possession of the "W" visa will receive the same pay as their American counterparts. Due to the large amount of immigrants already here doing these jobs as previously stated, the new visa would provide legal status to around 11 million undocumented immigrants. A solution such as this will be necessary in creating a comprehensive immigration reform.

Problems:

• Those who are Against the Visa-

  People who are not in favor of handing out work visas for low skilled jobs, are those referencing Americas current unemployment rate (national 7.7 percent). These individuals want the focus to be on the U.S. citizens who are currently out of work, belieivng that any of these people would be happy and willing to take a low skilled job instead of giving the position to an immigrant. 

• Reliability- 

  There are also issues associated with the idea of the visas fluxuating based on the needs of the U.S. economy. This would require every departments numbers to be up to date and accurate. There would also need to be a decision made on who will have the ultimate say in the number of visas given out each year.

• The Plan- 

  The year 2015- 20,000 undocumented workers would receive the visas
  The year 2019- 75,000 undocumented workers would receive the visas
  
  This is how many workers the government thinks the United States economy needs to continue to grow, the business sector says otherwise...

• Actuality-

  In the last ten years, 350,000 undocumented immigrants have come to the United States per year to fill the "low skilled jobs" and when the economy was prospering in 2007, that number rose to 700,000. Although 20,000 or even 75,000 seem like good numbers, the business sector is fearful, and rightly so that the amount of "W" visas will not be enough to keep up with the growing U.S. economy.
  
  http://news.yahoo.com/3-ways-visas-could-still-blow-immigration-bill-075512795--politics.html;_ylt=AwrNUbEp7FlRxQ4AgjbQtDMD
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

BORDER "SECURITY"

Progress?:

On Wednesday's hearing in the House of Representatives, it was expected that Homeland Security would produce an estimated progress report for both the Republicans and Democrats. Instead, Mark Borkowski, a senior official stated the department did not have any progress information to provide Senators for their quest in creating comprehensive immigration reform. The Department of Homeland Security was asked to begin documenting progress back in 2010, as it was explained to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano that the government was in need of a reliable measure of the effects of Obama's immigration reforms in order to continue. The previously used "operational control" measure was dropped by Napolitano under the belief that it failed to accurately consider the number of agents and new technologies, a new system has yet to be put in place.

Border Condition Index:

In response to the demands being made in the House of Representatives, Mark Borkowski, along with other officials have now proposed a new measurement of border security titled the Border Condition Index. This program in theory, will produce a very broad and easily understandable assessment of the border. The index will take into consideration things like crime rates in cities along the border, and the legitimate flow of people and goods across the border. Although the Border Condition Index seems like a nice idea, the Department of Homeland Security has still failed to produce any figures, or specific pieces of the measurement, stating it is still "undergoing internal reviews" and cannot provide a date for the finished product.

Opinion: 

Reading that the Department of Homeland Security has not and does not seem close to providing an accurate measure of "security" makes one question the concept itself. How exactly do we measure security? Is it by apprehension of those crossing without documentation? Is it how many crossings there are? How many crimes are committed in cities with major immigrant populations? Or how "secure" each person living in the United States feels? The concept of security is a very fluid concept that I am not sure can be accurately measured and if it in fact cannot, what is the government spending so much of our money on?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/22/us/officials-still-seek-ways-to-assess-border-security.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&

BRINGING FAMILIES BACK TOGETHER?

Form I-601A:

This form, better known as the "Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver" will be available to immigrants starting March 4th of this year. The specific use of the form will be to bring families back together. The applicant must be an immediate relative of someone residing in the United States, either a spouse, a parent, or child under the age of 21. The I-601A form is used as a waiver for the three and ten year blocks of time the government currently allows immigrants to reside in the country without legal status. The immigration form seems pretty extensive and answering yes to committing a crime, or crossing the border without inspection will more than likely result in the immigrant being permanently banned from the United States. Immigrants are also required to have an approved green card application to apply for the I-601A, but the application does not require that the immigrant is out of the United States, and therefore he or she can apply before their time is up in the country.

Opinion:

Although this does seem to be a good place to start in reuniting families, I do not know if I think it is a real solution to the problem. It seems as though the entire process is costing a lot of money beginning with the deportation of family members, causing the separation in the first place, and then processing these people to be reunited. Focusing on the initial separation may be time better spent for the United States government, creating a step in the process to check into an immigrant's family status before separating them. Examining the problem from the beginning may prove more productive and useful when it comes to keeping families together in the United States.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/filling-out-form-i-601a.html

http://www.immigrationdirect.com/immigration-news/green-card/uscis-beginsaccepting-new-provisional-waiver/index.html

VERIFI ACT

 

What is it?:

Todd Akin, who is a Republican representative Montana. According to Akin, the United State's budget is being drained due to Federal benefit programs. Akin is worried that there will not be enough resources for future generations. The VERIFI Act proposes to use the federal government to check the status of every individual prior to handing out any government checks. Federal Agencies can use the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements which already allows federal agencies to check the status of beneficiaries.

Immigrants Real use of Benefits:

A recent study conducted by the Cato Institute provides a better understanding of just how many resources undocumented immigrants use compared to native citizens. The study was based on Medicaid SNAP, cash assistance programs, and the Supplemental Security Income Program. Due to many immigrants being ineligible for benefits because of their illegal status, the average value of received benefits is actually lower than a U.S. citizens'. Non-Hispanic whites who made up 64% of the population in 2010 received 64% of the entitlement benefits.

• In Regards to Medicaid
• 100 native-born adults used $98,400
• 100 immigrants used $57,200

Conclusion:

Although immigrants do use some of the government funded money, the actual amount is much less than some are making it out to be. A government program like the VERIFI Act being proposed by Todd Akin will use more resources and money to operate. It does not seem fair to blame strains on the budget on immigrants alone, instead people need to look at everyone receiving entitlements from the government.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/22/Prevent-illegal-immigrants-from-receiving-federal-benefits

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/poor-immigrants-government-benefits-cato_n_2807490.html

ARE BUDGET CUTS REALLY "RELEASING" IMMIGRANTS?

Background:

President Obama has recently decided on budget cuts which will be taking effect later this week. The new economic plan cuts $85 billion dollars from Federally funded programs, including ICE (Immigration Customs Enforcement). The budget debate has been a tough one, with Republicans and Democrats still not in agreement on how to lower the United State's deficit, and unable to come up with successful plans. Obama began on Monday with listing budget cuts by state, and shortly after Janet Napolitano addressed the effects these cuts would have on the security of our border. Ms. Napolitano stated there would be delays in certain areas of the border, but that citizens should not feel endangered.

Releasing Immigrants:

ICE has immediately felt the results of the budget cuts, being unable to provide beds for all of the detained immigrants in their facilities. ICE chose to release several hundred individuals who were determined to be "low-risk" or in other words "non criminals" back into society due to the unavailability of space and money. Although these immigrants have been released by ICE, they will more than likely be sent back to their country of origin in the future. ICE officials also stated these immigrants are still being supervised under electronic monitoring or monitoring through phones.

Opinion:

It seems as though agencies such as ICE, could have "gotten by" on less federal funding from the start. These budget cuts have clearly showed there are alternatives to detaining every immigrant at the border, especially those who are "non criminal" and not posing any immediate threats to society. The United State budget deficit is something that needs to be addressed, and Obama has chosen to take action. As stated in the article, these immigrants are still facing deportation, and are still be processed through the court system, just on less money.

Los Angeles Times

Yahoo

IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS HURTING MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY?

 

H1B Visa:

This is a non-immigrant visa the federal government allows U.S. employers to use. This visa allows immigrants to be employed for up to six years by a U.S. company. This is not something the immigrant themselves can apply for, but instead, the employer must petition for the immigrant to be given an H1B Visa. The visa is typically used for "specialty" professions, those requiring a specific knowledge, such as engineers, or scientists. The federal government further regulates the use of the H1B Visa by setting a numerical cap, which is currently set at 20,000 per year. Last year, the allotment for these visas was reached in a mere ten days.

Manufactures in Need:

There is no doubt that President Obama's recent state of the union address was centered around the U.S. economy and economic growth. The need for constant expansion and prosperity is a goal of both the government and manufacturers. Although it is a common goal, manufacturers are struggling to reach it. There are not enough qualified U.S. born citizens to fill all of the positions needed and there are not enough H1B Visas to go around. Many of the visas are allotted to technological companies such as Intel or Microsoft, but companies like Caterpillar and Cummins are in need as well. In order for our economy to be the most successful, corporations need to hire the best individual for the job, which may involve hiring from outside the U.S. In recent years, manufacturers have been forced to let go, or pass over immigrants because of a lack in visas and other documentation. These companies are planning on hiring thousands of individuals to boost production, which means these companies may have to look outside the U.S. Immigration reform is not only wanted by these companies, but it seems to be a necessity, which will hopefully be answered.

http://www.green-cards.com/company/h1b_visa.htm

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/12ce6d3c-740e-11e2-a27c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2LGuBtap6

http://www.immigrationdirect.com/immigration-news/green-card/manufacturing-companies-need-higher-cap-on-work-visas/index.html

http://images.search.yahoo.com/images

"STREAMLINING" IMMIGRANTS THROUGH THE FEDERAL SYSTEM

Operation Streamline: A "Zero Tolerance" Policy

 What is it?

Operation Streamline was first proposed and put into place during the Bush Administration in 2005 in Del Rio, Texas. The Operation has since spread along much of the Southern border including, Yuma, Arizona, Del Rio, Laredo, and the Rio Grande Valley in Texas.This program seeks to bring Federal criminal charges upon those crossing the border illegally, regardless of circumstance, origin, or gender, every individual gets processed in the same manner. For an immigrant's first entry into the country, he or she is charged for a misdemeanor, which is punishable for up to eight months. A second entry on the other hand, calls for felony prosecution which is punishable for up to twenty years. These cases are typically resolved within two days, sometimes even less. The program speeds up due process for undocumented immigrants, giving these individuals inadequate representation in the legal system, and denying them of all other options.

 Consequences?

During the Bush Administration alone, federal criminal prosecutions of immigrants more than quadrupled, drawing more attention from law enforcement, courts, judges, and prosecutors. This trend continued under our current federal government, the Obama Administration. In April, 2009 criminal immigration cases outnumbered white collar crime, civil rights crime, environmental crime, drug related crime, and all other criminal crimes combined. The trend has continued on, where in 2012, Federal criminal prosecution of immigrants accounted for more than fifty-three percent of federal criminal prosecutions throughout the nation. Operation Streamline has also inspired other programs such as the Arizona Denial Prosecution Initiative in Tucson, AZ. This program enures immigrants can face up to 180 days in jail, a formal removal, and permanent denial of legal reentry.

Concerns?

There are both financial and societal consequences being seen from Operation Streamline. The financial costs alone include costs of incarceration, costs for operating the courts, and paying employees of the courts, and attorney fees. Attention is also being taken away from crimes that may be a more pressing matter, such as drug trafficking, violent crimes, or crimes that threaten the safety of the public.

The Washington Post

Unproven Benefits Outweighed by Cost to Taxpayers

Operation Streamline Fact Sheet

WAR ON DRUGS VS. WAR ON IMMIGRATION: HOW DIFFERENT ARE THEY?

I am currently reading "Operation Gatekeeper and Beyond" which has brought up some interesting points I thought I might discuss. Many have heard about the "War on Drugs" which was started by former President Nixon, but what some may not be aware of the coincidental correlation this movement has had with the increasing attention on illegal immigration. The need for border enforcement first began drawing attention in the 1960's when Americans increasingly concerned about border security, and how much control the government had over it. This carried over into the 1970's, which was the beginning of a new era in American history; both the "War on Drugs" was launched, and there was an obvious increase in attention being focused on the U.S.-Mexico border (Nevis: 2010, 77-80)

Former President Nixon, who launched the war on drugs, continually looked toward Mexico as the source of illicit drug sales and supply in the U.S.  President Ford, who was elected after Nixon, put General Leonard Chapman in charge of the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service), continuing to point the finger at immigrants from the South for illicit drugs and economic problems. As one can probably predict, the media also began influencing these movements, airing stories that focused on the problems immigrants from Mexico were creating in the U.S.

Moving into the Carter administration in 1977, it was announced the size of the Border Patrol would be doubled, which led to a very large increase in federal resources being given to border enforcement; it had become a national security matter. Former President Reagan than took office in 1981 when "congressional funding appropriations increased 130 percent and staff positions grew 41 percent for the INS" (Nevis: 2010, 84). This major increase in funding was justified by maintaining the goal of decreasing drug trafficking from the border and ultimately the "War on Drugs" was being intertwined with the war on immigration once again. During former President Reagan's time in office, Border Patrol began to take on the role of Drug Enforcement agents as well.

In my opinion, it seems as though, starting with former President Nixon, the Federal government has been successful in masking the "war on immigration" behind the highly publicized "War on Drugs". This goal of curtailing illicit substances from being smuggled in to the U.S. has been used as a justification for the explicit amounts of energy and money being put into border enforcement. Immigrants coming from Mexico have been portrayed as dangerous, drug dealing individuals who need to be stopped. It would not hurt for people to take a step back and think twice about why America has the policies it does, and where these policies originated.

Nevins, Joseph. Operation Gatekeeper and Beyond. 2nd. New York: Routledge, 2010. 76-85. Print.

OPINION: OBAMA MISSING KEY ELEMENTS OF REFORM IN HIS IMMIGRATION REFORM

President Obama's recent speech on Immigration Reform fell short of anything resembling a plan of action. In typical political fashion, the President stated America's immigration system was broken, stating there are 11 million undocumented immigrants in the world. The president than focused his speech on specific areas of immigration, such as emphasizing the majority of undocumented immigrants are contributing members of society, while also taking credit for the significant reduction in illegal border crossings (80%). He gave other facts such as 1 in 4 immigrants complete high tech startups or are small business owners. President Obama then laid out what he deemed the "three principles of immigration reform", which I feel many Americans would agree with, but President Obama failed to provide a plan of action for how the Federal government will achieve these principles. These principles included:

1. Strengthening security and enforcement which was broken into several components. The first component involves cracking down on those companies and employers who hire undocumented workers. Doing so creates an unfair competition between those hiring undocumented individuals and companies who hire U.S. citizens. The second component addresses enforcement and involves "dealing with those who are already here illegally". 
2. Creating a pathway to citizenship was the second principle Obama outlined. It is no secret that achieving U.S. citizenship can be a very long, tedious process. According to the U.S. Citizenship website, it can take anywhere from 5 months to 2 years for individuals to gain citizenship.
3. The third principle Obama outlined was the need for improvements in the legal immigration system. The immigration system currently operating in America is not functioning as it should. The system needs to be updated to reflect the technology and capabilities of society today. 

While each of these principles are in my opinion, necessary for immigration reform it would have been more substantial if President Obama had laid out a plan if action to implement these principles. The speech seemed as though The President placed the responsibility on Congress to develop new, useful legislation regarding immigration. Although Congress is more than likely capable of this task, it is always encouraging to see The President standing behind his political agenda, rolling up his sleeves, working alongside Congress to tackle immigration reform, and leading this country in a positive direction.

 http://www.uscitizenship.info/ins-citizenship-process.html