|
|
|
Immigration Consensus Meeting Question 1: Federal immigration laws should take into consideration criteria such as the following (not listed in any particular order or hierarchy): Part a: a. Ethnic and Cultural Diversity Lower Priority Diversity exists now with the 1965 law, but the implementation limits many people from coming because the numbers who want to come from specific countries greatly exceeds the number allowed in during a given year. Diversity is good in some ways because it broadens our perspectives, but it also creates tensions when there are different groups. Diversity becomes a greater threat to people when there are bad economic conditions. We rank it lower partly because the attempt to make it a high priority has not worked real well. b. Economic, Business and Service Employment Needs High Priority People with high income jobs can get visas fairly easy but for lower income workers there is a great shortage. American students don’t select science and engineering as much as the demand for those workers. Historically immigration has been important to the growth of our economy. c. Environmental Impact/Sustainability Lower Priority Concerns here focus on the increased uses of resources because of greater consumption levels that Americans have vs. other cultures plus the higher levels of pollution. Additionally there are environmental concerns with building a fence/wall for wildlife migration and the environmental damage done by hundreds of people crossing fragile desert environments. We believe there are better ways to address environmental issues than in immigration policy, but the environment should not be totally ignored. d. Family Reunification of authorized Immigrants and Citizens with Spouses and Minor Children High Priority The immigrants that we might want to stay may not want to stay if they cannot bring their families. Families are more stable, but it does put a strain on local hospitals and schools. We will need additional population to replace the baby boom generation which will soon be retiring in large numbers. e. History of Criminal Activity Lower Priority This is not a consideration in the 1965 law, but it is in the Patriot Act. What types of crimes do they mean? It could easily be abused to exclude DUI or other minor infractions. Remember when Castro released his prisoners. It would need to be defined well. f. Humanitarian Crises/Political Persecution in Home Countries High Priority This is a moral issue. Dave Frick: “If we are talking about this one as a high priority then shouldn’t we go back and change criminal activity to high priority as well.” The argument against doing that is that with humanitarian issues it is generally a group of people, whereas with criminal charges it would be individuals. g. Immigrant Characteristics (health and age) No Consensus Currently we do give priority to younger/healthier individuals. This is tied to economics as a high priority. Younger people would be more likely to culturally adapt as well. The fear is that too many elderly would tax the benefit systems. h. Rights of All Workers to Safe Working conditions and Livable Wage Disagree Fix should be in other laws because currently safe conditions are not always enforced. It should be addressed in labor laws. i. Rights of Families to Remain Together High Priority If parents of American citizen children are deported, the state would become in charge of the children. It has been reported that in some of these communities where the parents were deported that the Catholic Church ended up caring for many of these children because they did not neatly fit the child care criteria for the state and had fallen through the cracks. It seems Un-American to separate families. j. Rights of all Individuals in U.S. to Fair Treatment Under the Law (Fair Hearing, Right to Counsel, Right of Appeal, and Humane Treatment) No Consensus Currently legal aliens have been facing increasing discrimination. Clarice Reber feels very strongly that every person should receive a fair hearing. Others felt if they had violated a law that they should be deported. k. Education and Training High Priority At first there were concerns about immigrants receiving more benefits than citizens, but then it was clarified that this meant that priority in entry would be given to those with education and training. This needs to be a high priority then because it is tied to economic interests listed high earlier. Instructions: In Question 1, Part a, you marked items as “High Priority.” Of these items, please take a moment and select the three most important criteria and list them, in order (1, 2 and 3, with 1 being the most important) below. Question 1, Part b:
Question 2: Unauthorized immigrants currently in the U.S. should be treated as follows: (rate each) a. Deport Unauthorized Immigrants Disagree This would be impossible to do. It would raise costs for many things. They haven’t been able to keep track of them so far so how would they do it. We recognize that many local citizens would, however, be in favor of trying to do this. We should focus instead on fixing the law. Processing paper work takes so long that it often makes legals into illegals simply because of our bureaucratic backlog. IND needs more dollars to control immigration. b. Some Deported/Some Allowed To Earn Legal Adjustment of Status Based on Length of Residence in U.S. Lower Priority At first discussion was disagree or no consensus, but after examining b, c, and d, the position on this changed to low priority because it was felt that those who had been here longer would have more likely assimilated to the U.S. and would be a more stable population. c. Some Deported/Some Allowed To Earn Legal Adjustment of Status Based on Needs of U.S. Employers No Consensus Some felt that this might lead to feudalism and give too much power to employers over their workers and it would allow them to keep wages low. On the other hand, shouldn’t the employers who hire them receive benefit from the hiring? d. All Allowed to Earn Legal Adjustment of Status by Doing Things Such as Paying Taxes, Learning English, Studying Civics, Etc. High Priority Of b, c, and d the consensus was that we preferred d. There should be rewards for “being a good citizen.” e. If Deported, Assess Fines Before Possible Re-Entry. Disagree The thought was that this would be unfair because the low skill workers would not be able to afford it and the dollar amount would not matter much to the higher skilled workers. Again this goes back to the impossibility and high costs of deportation. f. Assess Fines Before Allowed To Earn Legal Adjustment of Status Disagree Same as above except it does not involve deportation. Question 3: Federal immigration law should provide an efficient, expeditious system (with minimal or no backlogs) for legal entry into the U.S. for immigrants who are: (rate each one) a. Immediate Family Members Joining Family Member Already Admitted for Legal Permanent Residence in the U.S. High Priority Dave Frick said that since he has been a Commissioner they have toured 20 businesses in the county and they have all said that nobody knows how to work. The employers do not even care if they are skilled or not (they can train them), but their biggest problem is that people do not come consistently and when they are there they have a rotten attitude. For every 4 people they hire they have to fire 3 within a short period. Aida Shotts related a story of similar lack of work ethic for a new engineering position hire where her daughter works because the new employee wanted a week off right after starting employment. It has to do with how we are raising our children. We need an efficient immigration system; it is broken now. b. Entering the U.S. to Meet Labor Needs High Priority See above and our earlier discussion c. Entering the U.S. as Students High Priority This is important to our universities and important for our country’s future to keep skilled jobs. d. Entering the U.S. because of Persecution in Home Country High Priority See above and our earlier discussion. Question 4a: In order to deal more effectively with unauthorized immigrants, Federal immigration law should include: Social Security Card or Other national Identification Card with Secure Identifiers for All Persons Residing in the U.S. No Consensus Can we trust the government to have a reliable system of IDs? It seems like an un-American idea. Americans are used to freedom and movement and we have protested against locations that have had national IDs. It would however make it easier to travel and feel secure. With the REAL ID that will soon be required, will we be prohibited from entering our Post Office, since it is a federal building? Question 4b: Federal immigration law dealing with unauthorized immigrants should be enforced by including: (rate each one) i. Physical Barriers (such as Fences) and Surveillance at Borders Disagree We only have so much money so why are we spending it on the fence. Politics – it looks like something is being accomplished. ii. Increased Personnel at Land, Air, and Sea Entry Points High Priority It seems necessary to decrease the back log that now builds up at borders even with semis. iii. More Effective Tracking of Persons with Non-Immigrant Visas Until They Leave the Country High Priority Important but recently there was a story on 60 Minutes how one lady decided to start tracking some of these people on her own and it turns out that she knew more than the government agencies that were in charge of this. iv. Verification Documents, such a Green Cards and Work Permits with Secure Identifiers. High Priority Without this it is hard to totally blame the employers because they often have no way of knowing for sure if a document is illegal. Currently it takes too long to verify and for seasonal employment, they need to know the answer quickly or the season is over. v. Improved Technology to Facilitate Employer Verification of Employee Visa Status High Priority Ditto. vi. Improved Technology for Sharing Information Among Federal Agencies High Priority It seems that the main problem now is getting the government agencies to cooperate, not the technology. vii. A Program to Allow Immigrant Workers to Go In and Out Of the U.S. to Meet Seasonal and Sporadic Labor Needs. Lower Priority This seems relevant because in the past workers came and then went back home when the season was over, now they stay all year because it is too risky to cross the border. viii. Significant Fines Proportionate to Revenue for Employers Who Fail to Take Adequate Steps to Verify Work Authorization of Employees Lower Priority Yes but it definitely needs to be proportionate and only if there is an efficient system to verify. Question 5: Federal immigration law should address and balance the long-term federal financial benefit from immigrants with the financial costs borne by states and local governments with large immigrant populations. Consensus It was agreed that states and local governments are unfairly bearing much of health care, policing, and educational costs. This discussion focused on the increasing number of English as a second language students in the Indiana School District (mostly the result of IUP professors or students’ children). It was noted that this issue was a reason why a town like Hazelton enacted its legislation, but then faced opposition from the same federal government that caused the problem. Question 6: Federal immigration law should be coordinated with U.S. foreign policy to pro-actively help improve economies, education and job opportunities, and living conditions of nations with large emigrating populations. Consensus Clarice felt very strongly about this and had actually brought up the issue earlier in the discussion. Mobility among countries of the world is something that we are going to see more and more of, globalization is not going to disappear. Sometimes our economic policies impact our immigration situation such as the case of American corn subsidies displacing Mexican farmers who then needed to emigrate. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||
