US Policy on Immigration - Essay Example

US Policy on Immigration The current policy on immigration has been an offshoot of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the United States. The country for the first time since the war for independence experienced being attacked right on American mainland territory. According to M. Krikorian (Spring 2004) terrorism is a form of asymmetric threat characterized by civilian components rather than by military or conventional warfare and the country could defend itself by “keeping terrorists out or apprehending them after they get in” into the country. In March 2003, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – a cabinet level federal agency created under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and tasked to coordinate and implement internal security took over immigration duties from the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Under the supervision of DHS, immigration enforcement is now under the Border and Security Directorship and immigration services under the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (National Immigration Forum, August 2003). The mandate given to Homeland Security to implement immigration policy was to enable the body to strictly enforce immigration rules with regards to the fact that Al Qaida operatives who undertook terrorist activities from 1993 until 2001 were able to enter the United States by exploiting the weaknesses in the immigration system (M. Krikorian, Spring 2004). The Department of Homeland Security is tasked to secure the borders of the country in order to prevent illegal entries of immigrants, and to this effect a record 4.5 million people have been apprehended and repatriated, out of which were 350,000 have criminal records according to the White House, at least since President George Bush took office (White House, November 28, 2005). The message being sent is that the United States “border must be open to trade and tourism and closed to criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists” (White House, November 28, 2005). The legislation that created Homeland Security also gives power to the Secretary of Homeland Security to enforce laws pertaining to security in conjunction with the issuance of visas of consulates and visas, powers that were vested before in the Secretary of State (National Immigration Forum, August 2003). Thus, the Homeland Security has personnel posted at American embassies and consulates all over the world. However, immigration policy which fell under the national security context had been countered by parties which say that the current policy is harsh to immigrants who have traditionally bolstered the economic power and the democratic space of the United States. As a response, the Bush administration has made efforts to undertake reforms that would bolster national security concerns without undermining the rights of immigrants and making it difficult for those who are productive and law-abiding to become legal citizens of the United States. Border patrols and no-exception policy on repatriation of illegal entrants (most of those who come through Mexico) are coupled with proposals for a new Temporary Worker Program which will allow migrant worker to register for a definite period, after which they have to leave (White House, November 28, 2005). The temporary worker program has been advocated as a safer alternative than granting amnesty which the government believes would reward those who break the law. The current debate that still rages over immigration policy strikes at the very chord of the vulnerabilities of the United States in the age of terrorism and on the other hand the preservation of the values of America as a free country, one that is open to immigrants who yearn to make their lives better through hard work and perseverance -- values that have very much molded the United States as a democracy If the country wants first and foremost to secure itself, a hierarchy of importance seemed to be required, citizens first, immigrants second. The fact that the Department of Homeland Security had been given charged with the enforcement of immigration policy shows in fact that immigration is no longer a bureaucratic and normal matter for the government – but one that requires utter vigilance and a readiness for any sign of danger. And yet, it may not be the political cry for preservation of openness to immigrants that may save the day for the millions of people around the world who still want to enter America – but the pragmatic needs of American citizens who want to preserve their lifestyle and businesses that need cheap labor from other countries. Consider the fact that American’s health sector will collapse soon if health workers from other countries are not brought in to cater the country’s graying and aging population, or, that vast sectors of the American economy that have traditionally relied on seasonal migrant workers. The downside of course for the government who are not altogether against these workers per se – is that most of these workers have their eye on becoming American citizens eventually, and it will be easy for any determined terrorist to exploit this opening. A recent event that has challenged the anti-terrorism paradigm of the Department of Homeland Security that has somehow blunt its tough stance on immigration was when the government was caught incompetent and blundering on its response to devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina. As a result, Homeland Security’s mandate now includes protection of the territory against natural disasters, instead of just against terrorism. How DHS Immigration Policy affect States and their Immigration Policies The effect of the current immigration policy on states has ranged from economic (many states are wary of the negative effect of tough immigration enforcement on businesses, in that many businesses have been deprived a good supply of labor) to the confusion regarding the enforcement of immigration laws that are traditionally vested in federal government agencies. When the efforts of the Bush administration to pass a comprehensive immigration reform in 2005 and 2007 failed, states and local governments took the initiative to pass laws to curb illegal immigration on their own turfs (Wikipedia, “Illegal Immigration to the Unites States, 2007). The aim of the laws were aimed at first, “limiting an illegal immigrant’s ability to obtain jobs, housing or a legally acceptable form of identification” and two, allowing “local authorities to inquire into an immigrant’s legal status” (Wikipedia, “Illegal Immigration to the Unites States, 2007). Recently on July 2007, a federal court struck down ordinances passed by local governments in Hazleton, Pennsylvania and Farmers Branch Texas as constitutional with regards to a ruling where the local governments fined landlords who rent out to illegal immigrants (Wikipedia, “Illegal Immigration to the Unites States, 2007). The court decision upholds the traditional notion that immigration policy is the jurisdiction of the federal government, rather than those of the states. However, a reverse reaction of states and local governments to immigration policy is seen with the way in which cities such as Washington D.C., New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco and San Diego, among others and incidentally -- cities where immigrants congregate – have turned into so called “sanctuary cities”. These cities have passed ordinances banning the local police from inquiring into an individual’s immigrant status (Wikipedia, “Illegal Immigration to the Unites States, 2007). According to the National Immigration Forum, immigration law is very complex, one that involves both criminal and civil liabilities – and that the federal government is conflicted itself on whether states have the power and authority to enforce immigration violations (National Immigration Forum, August 2007). The police on the other hand, have become targets of civil rights activists who charge that local authorities are taking cue from federal government’s stance of tough immigration enforcement and that they are culpable for violation of civil rights, not only of American citizens per se, but non-citizens who are only in America to work, to study or to visit. At the same time, a key component of policing is community relations, and since the 1980s, police forces have relied on the trust and cooperation of residents to do their jobs – ones that are at stake if police would be dreaded by immigrant communities as deportation agents (National Immigration Forum, August 2007). On the other hand, federal agencies tasked to have a grip on anti-terrorist measures have in particular relied on the cooperation of local and state authorities to report any suspicious person or activity – one that would have of course touch on immigration enforcement. The solutions to the dilemma may require long-term solutions, including the passing of the long-delayed immigration reform and the refining and tuning of what exactly fall under the tasks and duties of the Department of Homeland Security – an agency that has come to be burdened with too much duties as a result of its anti-terrorism paradigm. For example, a simple bureaucratic duty that falls within its jurisdiction is to be able to identify and document the more than 10 million immigrants staying illegally in the United States – a task that if it able to execute would make the rhetoric of national security get down to its basics. Also, the public needs to be aware of immigration issues for in the end, they would be in charge of changing the laws, whether at the state or federal level and the formation of policies that they would entrust to their elected representatives. References: Kirkorian, M. (Spring 2004). Keeping Terror Out: Immigration Policy and Asymmetric Warfare. Retrieved November 23, 2007, from the Center for Immigration Studies website http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/mskoped050104.html National Immigration Forum (August 2003). Backgrounder: Immigration Under The Department of Homeland Security. Retrieved November 23, 2007, from the National Immigration Forum website http://immigrationforum.org/documents/TheDebate/NationalSecurity/DHSBackgrounder.pdf National Immigration Forum (August 207). Backgrounder: Immigration Law Enforcement by State and Local Police. Retrieved November 26, 2007, from the National Immigration Forum website http://www.immigrationforum.org/documents/TheDebate/EnforcementLocalPolice/Backgrounder-StateLocalEnforcement.pdf Office of the Press Secretary, The White House (November 28, 2005). Fact Sheet: Securing America Through Immigration Reform. Retrieved November 23, 2007, from the White House website http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051128-3.html Wikipedia (2007). Illegal Immigration to the United States. Last Updated 26 November 2007. Wikipedia. Retrieved November 26, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States. Fact Sheet: Securing America Through Immigration Reform Topic:  Department of Homeland Security's Policy on Immigration Instructions: Topic: The Department of Homeland Security's current policy on immigration. Additionally, how DHS' policy effects the individual states and their respective immigration policies as well. Goal: This paper is designed to move groups of students beyond description of intergovernmental matters, and into a usable analytic and predictive perspective within a given policy area for the benefit of all students in the class. Process: Some of the groupings may come from political assignments (such as the “Congressional Committee on Higher Education”) or professional training (such as Transportation engineers or Public Safety officials). Students within groups may choose their own approach to gathering information on the intergovernmental dimensions of their policy area; the simplest description of effort involves students researching specific policies separately, and once they bring together their background research, trying to establish generalizations about intergovernmental dynamics within the policy area. The best model you have for an outcome from your efforts is Scheberle’s book Outline: The papers should split, fairly evenly in coverage, a description of the intergovernmental relations in the chosen policy area, and a useful critique, analysis, and or prediction of intergovernmental relations in this area. Description: The paper could study any of the following dimensions (and need not cover all of them): · Difference of policy engagement across national, state, local, and non-profit levels · Difference across the main course focuses of FED (theory/rationale for service strategies), IGR (political system responses), and IGM (administrative/managerial) components · Differences from other policy areas · Dynamics over the history of the policy area (especially formation of policy efforts and recent events) · Financial and other capacity aspects · Conflict and cooperation across actors within this policy area Analysis: Similarly, choose among these kinds of questions (need not answer all): · What has gone well of poorly in this policy area? Why is this? · What lies in the future for intergovernmental relations in this policy area? · What could politicians and practitioners learn from intergovernmental effort on other policy cases in the past (from other cases or readings in the course)? · What would you recommend for future intergovernmental efforts in this policy area? · How should intergovernmental management be pursued (improved or bolstered) in this policy area? Suggested journals for use in this project: Policy Studies Review Policy Studies Journal Journal of Policy Analysis and Management Publius: The Journal of Federalism Other sources could include committee and subcommittee reports, and background analysis within specific professional associations and from their Web sites. For example, on transportation policy, one good association site is the Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org); they also produce a reasonably good journal, the Transportation Research Record, and have about a gazillion research papers linked through their Web site. APA 5 pages 3 sources http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandDefense/wm1527.cfm http://vienna.usembassy.gov/en/download/pdf/aliens_removal.pdf http://vienna.usembassy.gov/en/download/pdf/crs_visaiss.pdf http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2006,0207-crs.pdf http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/mskoped050104.html http://www.iie.com/publications/chapters_preview/3802/11iie3802.pdf http://www.nilc.org/immspbs/sf_benefits/statelocalimmpolicies06-07_2007-05-24.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States http://www.ncsl.org/programs/press/2005/pr050328.htm http://lanic.utexas.edu/project/etext/llilas/ilassa/2007/speasmaker.pdf http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/04/02/EDGIFI0RDJ1.DTL Read More