Managing Security Aspects of Immigration in a Post 9/11 Environment - Report Example

Managing the Security Aspects of Immigration in a Post 9/11 Environment Affiliation Managing the Security Aspects of Immigration in a Post 9/11 Environment Introduction The concept of immigration in the United States has been a contentious one since time immemorial. For example, President Benjamin franklin was greatly concerned about German immigrants swamping the American culture two centuries ago. Also, Irish immigrants were viewed as being drunks by the American population during the 1800s. Additionally, Russian Jews and Italian immigrants were deemed to be too strange and unique to adopt the Americana culture at the turn of the century. Today, immigrants from Latin America and Asia are looked at with a doubtful and skeptical eye (Alden, 2008). Successive immigration into America has kept the nation demographically young in addition to adding to the productive capacity of the country. Furthermore, immigrants have enriched the nation’s culture. Also, the concept has enhanced the country’s influence in the world. Immigration offers the US an economic edge in the global economy. Immigrants bring to the economy innovative ideas and entrepreneurial spirit. Moreover, they provide business contacts to other markets, thus improving America’s capability to trade and invest successfully in the world economy. Not forgetting that they keep the American economy flexible, allowing producers in the country to keep prices down as well as respond to changing demands of consumers ( (Hines, 2006)). Although, immigration is vital to the United States; appropriate legislation, security measures and policy must be enacted and enforced in order to mitigate future acts of terrorism. Discussion The Pew Research Center approximates that 11.7 million unauthorized immigrants were in the United States as of 2012, almost the same number as in 2008. This was down from a 12.2 million high in the year 2007, though this was up from 8.6 million in the year 2000 (Passel et al, 2013), as shown in the graph below. Figure 1: Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States (Passel et al, 2013). The declines might be attributed to the reforms that have taken place in immigration in the U.S. with respect to security issues. The people of America are deeply divided on whether immigration is a good thing or a bad thing to the country. As opposed to the popular myth, immigrants do not actually push Americans out of their jobs. They tend to fill jobs that American people cannot or will not fill, especially at the high and the low ends of the skill range. In the U.S, immigrants are disproportionately represented in high-skilled fields such as medicine and physics, as well as in the lower-skilled sectors such as domestic services, hotels and restaurants, construction and light manufacturing. Actually, immigrants lead to an increase in the demand for goods as well as the supply Their contribution in the high-technology and other knowledge-based sectors has been quite evident. Silicon Valley and similar high-tech sectors would cease to function if the U.S. closed their borders to educated and skilled immigrants. They represent human capital that can make the U.S. economy more productive. Some have even developed new products hence creating employment opportunities for a lot of Americans. For instance, the Java computer language. Immigrants are actually not a drain on government finances. A study by the National Academy of Sciences found that the typical immigrant and their children will pay 80,000 dollars more in taxes in their lifetimes than they gain from government services. The number of immigrants who own businesses in the U.S Figure 2: Start-up capital distribution (Fairlie, 2012). A U.S Survey of Business Owners indicates that when compared to non-immigrants, immigrants tend to possess or form more businesses. It is estimated that in among ten immigrants, one of them owns a business. In addition, whereas businesses owned by non-immigrants have a lower starting capital, immigrants invest/ inject more startup capital into their businesses. According to Fairlie (2012), approximately 20 % of businesses owned by immigrants had a startup capital of about 50000 dollars compared to 15.9% of businesses owned by non-immigrants. Some of these statistics are shown in Figure 2 above. Significantly reducing the number of foreigners who come to the U.S. every year only would compound the economic damage of the 9/11 while doing nothing to enhance the country’s security. The tourist industry, for instance, would lose up to millions of foreign visitors, and universities in America would lose hundreds of thousands of foreign students. The United States borders are far much harder to cross unlawfully than at any time in the history of America, and the number of individuals entering illegally has gone down sharply. Escaping border enforcement has turned out to be more challenging, more expensive, and even more indefinite than ever before (Alden, 2012). The 19 of the hijackers in the 9/11 attack in the United States entered the country on legal visitor visas regardless of red flags that ought to have excluded several of them. When the attacks occurred, five of them had overstayed or in other words violated the terms of their visas (Eldridge et al., 2004). After the attacks, preventing imminent terrorist attacks turned out to be the highest national priority of the United States. In light of this, preventing entry by future potential terrorists into America became the chief pillar of the strategy. The attacks altered border control from what had been basically a public order issue into a national security matter. It also widened the notion of boundary control from the historic focus on the southern border to distress with air and sea entries, also with the northern border with Canada. What followed were public debates and enactment of policy measures that followed originally conflated antiterrorism processes with immigration control (Eldridge et al. 2004). At first, a new Homeland Security office was established within the White House by executive order so as to enhance and coordinate the implementation of an all-inclusive national strategy that would help secure the United States from terror attacks or threats. The Homeland Security director reported to the president directly and was given far-reaching authority to harmonize the efforts of state, federal, and local law enforcement agencies (Stock, 2006). Conversely, following a series of congressional hearings in the year 2002 that highlighted serious failures in the government’s intelligence, the law enforcement performance, and foreign policy, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 was passed. It united some or all of the twenty two federal agencies into a new agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Creating the DHS represented the biggest restructuring of executive-branch functions ever since the establishment of the Department of Defense after the occurrence of the Second World War (Stock, 2006). Several policies have been passed to enhance security in the United States. A few days after the 9/11 attack, the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 was submitted, proposing new authority to collect domestic intelligence, streamline judicial procedures for extraditing suspected terrorists as well as combat money laundering commonly used in terrorist financing. The PATRIOT Act, passed in 2001, mandated that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) make available criminal records to Immigration and Naturalization service (INS) as well as State Department officials during visa screening. Congress also approved the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act (EBSVERA), and mandated additional sharing of data, stiffened document security, and quicker implementation of foreign student as well as entry-exit tracking systems (Alden, 2012). EBSVERA was implemented via the Justice Department’s National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS). NSEERS obligated male immigrants from twenty-five targeted countries and selected individuals from other states to surrender their biometric data, take part in in-person interviews with officers from the immigration offices, as well as re-register on a yearly basis. In addition, the movement of alien’s into and within the United States was tracked using programs that were merged into a more comprehensive US-VISIT program. This program required all nonimmigrants to submit biometric data upon getting a visa, upon leaving the United States, and at port exits although the implementation of exit tracking had delayed due to technical reasons (Hines, 2006). The American government has methodically rolled out other measures intended to lessen the flow of illegal immigrants in to the country over the past decade. One of these has been the extension of a quasi-military presence at the countrys land border with Mexico, and to a less significant extent with Canada. The Border Patrol, which was established in the year 1924, was for a long time little more than a symbolic presence between the land border ports of entry; currently, it is the single biggest law enforcement agency in the U.S. Border Patrol agents have in latest years also been reinforced by the consistent deployment of National Guard forces (Hines, 2006). Pedestrian and vehicle fencing has also been constructed across close to 700 miles of the border with Mexico; previously were metal barriers that blocked cars and trucks but could not stop walkers, while the second are high steel barriers that can be penetrated only through ladders or burrowing. The border region is additionally watched by electronic sensing devices and aerial drones that enable Border Patrol agents to react quickly to breaches (Eldridge et al. 2004). The sharing of information between intelligence and security agencies has greatly assisted border agents as well as Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in apprehending possible criminals and terrorist. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 as well as the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 necessitated the establishment of procedures under which federal agencies can share intelligence as well as law enforcement information about worldwide terrorism. The Intelligence Reform Act authorized the establishment of an Information Sharing Environment (ISE) that conglomerates policies, technologies and procedures to link information collections and users. A lengthy implementation plan for the ISE was implemented in November 2006. It sets forth techniques for sharing information between agencies at federal, state, as well as local levels and aims at promoting a culture of sharing information. It also provides techniques for protecting civil liberties and information privacy. More than 102,000 state, federal and local law enforcement personnel in the United States have online access to share intelligence as well as coordinate efforts against criminal networks that operate in most of the places across jurisdictional lines. This is enabled by the RISS Program, which is federally funded program controlled by the Department of Justice (DOJ) (Government). Many other information sharing projects have been initiated in the United States in a bid to increase information sharing and protection of United States from drug trafficking, terrorism and many other threats To improve the sharing of information, the DOJ, through the FBI, has formed 56 Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs) to include other state, federal, and local agencies in the examination of terrorist events. The program is aimed at preventing acts of terrorism before they take place by assisting in the identification, prosecution and investigations. Each JTTF is tasked with the responsibility of dealing with local and international terrorism issues within the FBI field office local jurisdiction area. Agencies taking part in the JTTF are needed to enter a formal memorandum of understanding that pinpoints the objectives of the program as both reactive and proactive. The United States and Canada have agreed upon border cooperation and information-sharing via bilateral agreements as well as cooperative arrangements including Integrated Border enforcement teams (IBets) and others. Mexico and the United States are also trying to cooperate on a number of border security issues. Politicians have special interest in the immigration policy as many citizens have strong feeling on the subject thus have been reluctant to pass laws that infringe on certain minorities rights in fear of political suicide. There are various perceived effects of immigration on citizens by liberal legislators. If immigration has an undesirable effect, for instance, by dislocating poor native workers, then just like in trading policies, left-wing persons might prefer administration policies to limit immigration, such as strict visa limits on low-skill immigration. On the other hand, if immigration is viewed as economically beneficial, or in a certain way satisfying a desirable set of political objectives, for instance, expanding the coalition of groups that approve of redistributive programs, left-wing legislators might then favor less restrictive immigration procedures, such as greater visa limits and minimal border control. In additional, left wing groups and legislators may prefer legalization of immigrants so that they can become part of the legal workforce. This means that they are able to join unions which are usually a liberal constituency. Therefore, they are expected to be less supportive of border control, more supportive of offering welfare benefits to immigrants, and favor more making employers endure the burden of immigration control. Conclusion A greater part of the U.S. population seems to be lobbying for reforms in immigration. This has specifically been common with technology companies. The big concern has to do with needing more visas for highly skilled workforces in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields. Although the unemployment rate in the U.S has remained high, tech companies repeatedly face difficulties in filling all of their vacant positions. The United States must continue to stay a step ahead of its many adversaries. Terrorist cells, groups and lone wolves will stop at nothing to enter the country through legal and illegal means. Thus, the federal government must take all necessary steps to physically protect their borders form potential harm of terrorists wishing to cross it illegally as well as run background investigations and share intelligence on individuals that desire to obtain a visa. References Alden, E. (2012). Immigration and Board Control. Cato J., 32, 107. Eldridge, T., et al. (2004) 9/11 and Terrorist Travel: Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. Washington: National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Government, U. (n.d.). Information Sharing Environment. Retrieved June 2015, from Information Sharing Environment: http://www.ise.gov/law-enforcement-information-sharing Fairlie, R. W. (2012). Immigrant Entrepreneurs and Small Business Owners, and their Access to Financial Capital. Small Business Administration. Hines, B. (2006). Overview of US Immigration Law and Policy Since 9/11. Tex. Hisp. JL & Poly. Passel, J. S., Cohn, D., & Gonzalez-Barrera, A. (2013). Population decline of unauthorized immigrants stalls, may have reversed. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center. http://www. pewhispanic. org/files/2013/09/Unauthorized-Sept-2013-FINAL. pdf. Stock, M. (2006). Immigration and National Security: Post-9/11 Challenges for the United States. In Homeland Security: Protecting America’s Targets,. Read More