AMERICAN VISAS CHRONICLE

Hector Maldonado is a 13-year-old Santa Maria boy who was involved in a schoolyard fight last month at Arellanes Junior High. Police were called, and Hector and others were arrested. Because there was a question about Hector's citizenship status, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security was called in - and the boy's situation has gone steadily downhill since then.
Cutting to the chase here, Hector apparently is now incarcerated in the Bay Area, awaiting deportation to Mexico. His parents say it's all a misunderstanding, that their son is in the process of becoming a U.S. citizen. The father has been living legally in the U.S. for nearly two decades.

Our question is not so much about Hector's immigration status, but why the federal government would spend such resources on a child's immigration status when thousands of people pour across U.S. borders every day.

Shuffling a child who was involved in a schoolyard scuffle around the state - at taxpayers' expense - seems somewhat Draconian in the overall scheme of tracking down terrorists, the assignment upon which Homeland Security's very existence is based.

We fail to see how jailing and then transporting a 13-year-old in shackles and chains around the state furthers the cause of making the United States safer from terrorism. Why couldn't the authorities simply have fined Hector for the fighting, which they did, and then turned him over to his parents? Why should taxpayers have to pay for this over-the-top demonstration of might by Homeland Security?

It comes down to a question of priorities, and this time Homeland Security seems to have gotten it wrong.

Mom's sacrifice inspired son to reach his educational goals

By Tony Freemantle and Elena Vega
The Houston Chronicle, December 5, 2005

The ballroom of the Galleria-area hotel was packed with almost 500 people. Houston Mayor Bill White was there, along with other city and county dignitaries.

The 20-year-old man at the podium that evening in the summer of 2004 was thanking Houston Community College for the modest scholarship that would enable him to take on a full course load, stop working to pay his tuition and become a full-time student.

The young man, Richard, told the audience how he had arrived in the U.S. illegally from Venezuela when he was 11. His dream had always been to go to college and become a 'professional.' He exhorted young people in tough financial circumstances who shared his dream not to give up, not to let hardship stand in their way.

And then he looked at an elegantly dressed, middle-aged woman sitting at a table in the front of the room.

'At this moment, I would like to ask Daisy Rincon to stand up, please. This is my mom,' Richard said as applause broke out. 'Mom, thank you for everything you have done. I love you.'

What Rincon had done was not insignificant.

Nine years earlier, trapped in an abusive marriage, she had decided to leave her comfortable middle-class existence in Maracaibo, her housekeeper and nanny, to seek refuge and a better education for her three children in Houston.

She arrived with a tourist visa and $70 in her pocket. When the visa expired, Rincon and her children became illegal immigrants, and she became a housekeeper to support them.

'If you ask me what is the only thing that I miss from my country, it is my housekeeper and my baby sitter,' she said. 'There are people that tell me 'You are crazy, you changed everything you had to be a housekeeper.' '

In the first few years, education for the children was simple. The Supreme Court ruled in 1982 that all children living in the United States, regardless of their immigration status, were entitled to a free education through 12th grade. Beyond that, they were on their own.

And for the vast majority of undocumented immigrant children who graduate from high school, a college education is simply out of reach financially. Most come from low-income families, yet virtually nowhere do they qualify for in-state tuition at state universities. Nor are they eligible for student loans or other forms of tax-supported assistance.

Last year, average nationwide in-state tuition for a four-year degree amounted to $5,143; average out-of-state tuition cost $13,753. Only eight states offer in-state fees to illegal aliens; Texas became the first to do so in 2001. Federal legislation proposed last session that would have opened the door for other states to follow suit went nowhere and has not been reintroduced.

'The hurdles are very high,' said Travis Reindl, director of state policy analysis for the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. 'Because of a combination of factors, the student who perseveres and persists has to have extraordinary effort and drive. The result is that very few of them take advantage of what little help is available to them.'

Along with three-quarters of youths like him, Richard chose to attend a community college rather than a state university offering four-year degrees. Even with the in-state tuition break, the fees were out of reach.

'I didn't have the financial means to become a full-time student when I first enrolled in HCC,' Richard said at the awards ceremony. 'I only had enough money for two classes and I didn't have the money to afford books. Thanks to this scholarship ... I am a full-time college student now.'

This year, Richard received another scholarship from the college, allowing him to continue his mission of graduating with a degree in management in May 2007.

His mission is to repay his mother for her sacrifices by making sure she will no longer have to work as a housekeeper and by helping his 14-year-old sister, Genesis, achieve her dream of going to the University of Texas and becoming a judge.

For Daisy Rincon, simply watching her children walk on to a stage to receive a college diploma will be reward enough.

'I do believe that it was God's intention to bring us to this country,' she said. 'Here there were a lot of opportunities for my children, so they could have a different kind of life. For all the opportunities, all the good things that my children have, I love this country, I love it. I am very thankful.'

Rhetoric prevails in immigration politics

By Lisa Friedman
The SGV Tribune (San Gabriel, CA), November 21, 2005

California Sen. Dianne Feinstein stood outside her office one recent afternoon explaining her plan for granting legal status to some farmworkers who had entered the country illegally.

She turned to leave, then beckoned back a departing reporter. 'Please don't use the word `amnesty,'' Feinstein said. 'It's not an `amnesty.' It's an `earned transition.''

Across the Capitol that day, during a testy immigration hearing, Massachusetts Democrat Sen. Edward Kennedy asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff how 'mass deportations' of illegal immigrants would impact the country.

'The bills don't call for `mass deportations,'' grumbled Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.

While every political fight has its public buzzwords, few have had a lexicon so brimming with anger and pathos as the current debate over illegal immigration.

And as a protracted battle looms in Washington over how to address the nation's estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants - with proposals ranging from beefed-up border security to guest-worker programs - those looking for a solution say they fear the loaded language is obscuring the real issues and making it hard to find any middle ground.

'The language is a big impediment to any solution,' said Feinstein, whose plan involves allowing longtime illegal farmworkers who agree to stay in the agricultural sector three additional years to seek legal status and eventually apply for green cards.

Experts say the language in this particular debate is becoming increasingly angst-filled because it veils a deep national divide in beliefs over who deserves to be here, and, ultimately, who we are as Americans.

'It's this sense that people are losing control over their own lives,' said Ira Mehlman, Los Angeles-based spokesman for the Federation for Immigration Reform.

'People wake up and discover half the kids in their children's class don't speak English and most of the resources are going to address that problem. People start to feel like strangers in their own country.'

Those enraged by the problem say illegal immigrants are 'invading our country,' and 'taking jobs away from Americans.' Those on the other side say illegal immigrants are 'living in the shadows' and 'doing jobs Americans won't do.'

Immigration advocates accuse opponents of wanting to 'round up,' illegal immigrants for 'mass deportations.' They say they want those here illegally to pay a penalty, but eventually be allowed to achieve some sort of legal status.

That, say opponents - in the most provoking buzzword of all - amounts to 'amnesty.'

George Lakoff, a Democratic political consultant and linguist at the University of California, Berkeley, said anti-immigration groups so far appear to be winning the language war, and the word 'amnesty' is their most powerful rhetorical weapon.

'Amnesty assumes that there's been a serious crime. I mean, you don't have amnesty
for shoplifters,' Lakoff said. 'It's seen as an attack on the country.'

Steven Camarota, research director of the Center for Immigration Studies, agreed that the word 'amnesty' stings. But he said that's because it's accurate.

'Those who would like to legalize people here don't want to remind folks that in effect, we're not going to enforce the law, that we're going to seemingly reward lawbreaking.

'Why don't the advocates of illegal immigration use `amnesty?' Because the polls tell them people hate it,' Camarota said.

But supporters of 'earned legalization,' 'earned transition' and 'earned adjustment' counter that they don't use the term 'amnesty' because it isn't precise.

'We're not really talking about an amnesty. We're talking about providing some legitimacy,' Feinstein said.

'What people are now saying is anything, no matter what its provisions are, they want to attack it as an amnesty,' said Rep. Howard Berman, D-Van Nuys, whose own plan for agricultural workers who entered the country illegally involves making them pay penalties and then allowing them to gain legal status.

'It's to their short-term advantage, but the cost of them doing that is getting any meaningful and comprehensive solution,' Berman said.

Meanwhile, advocates for undocumented aliens stand behind their own highly charged buzzwords. Among those, that opponents want to 'round up' undocumented workers for 'mass deportations.'

'If you say you want to get rid of anybody that came here illegally, how do you do it besides mass deportations?' Berman said.

But Camarota called it 'very harsh imagery of little children being dragged out of school.'

'I don't know anyone who is advocating mass deportations,' added Mehlman. 'It's a very clear public relations strategy that they're employing.'

Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, called the illegal immigration fight 'a debate that has become increasingly dominated by hotheads.'

Still, he said he is confident that amped-up rhetoric will ultimately give way to a middle-ground policy on illegal immigration.

'At the end of the day, people are going to be less interested in the words and more interested in whether we're going to have a solution for the 11 million people who are here illegally,' Sharry said. 'At the end of the day, people won't care what it's called.'

Yes, Immigration May Lift Wages

By Virginia Postrel
The New York Times, November 3, 2005

From 1990 to 2000, the number of people working in the United States grew by more than nine million, or around 8 percent, from immigration alone. What effect did all those new foreign-born workers have on the wages of native-born Americans?

The answer seems obvious at first. An increase in the supply of workers should push down wages, just as a bumper crop of wheat drives down wheat prices.

That is exactly what some influential economic studies, notably by George J. Borjas at Harvard, have found. In a 2003 article, for instance, Professor Borjas calculated that immigrants had depressed the average wage of American-born workers by about 3 percent in the 1990's.

But workers are not as uniform as wheat, and 10 years is a long time - long enough for employers to invest in new production and take on more workers. The model of surging supply meeting fixed demand is not realistic.

As economists know all too well, changing the assumptions of a model can often change the results. In a new working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research, two other economists using methodology similar to Professor Borjas's but different assumptions get the opposite result.

In 'Rethinking the Gains From Immigration: Theory and Evidence From the U.S.,' Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano of the University of Bologna and Giovanni Peri of the University of California, Davis estimate that immigration in the 1990's increased the average wage of American-born workers by 2.7 percent. (The paper is available at www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gperi.)

Although it still relies on a highly stylized model of the economy, their paper adds two complexities that bring it closer to reality.

First, the two economists assume that businesses can make additional capital investments to take advantage of the expanded supply of workers. Companies may open new restaurants or stores, add new factory lines or build more houses.

In their model, as in the real world, 'investment adjusts not to keep fixed the amount of capital but to keep fixed the return to capital,' Professor Peri said. As long as businesses can profitably add new production, they hire more workers, and wages do not necessarily go down. Instead, he said, 'more workers means more business.'

As businesses expand, hiring foreign-born workers to do one job may also require hiring more native-born workers with complementary skills. Immigrant engineers, for instance, may create demand for native-born patent lawyers and marketing executives.

That is the paper's second refinement. It assumes that immigrants do not always compete for the same jobs as American-born workers. The two groups are not 'perfect substitutes,' even when they have similar education and the same occupation. A Chinese cook is not the same as a Texas barbecue chef.

Immigrants often bring different skills to the American labor force, and concentrate on different occupations from natives. Among high school dropouts, the paper notes, the 'foreign-born are highly overrepresented in professions like tailors (54 percent were foreign-born in 2000) and plaster-stucco masons (44 percent were foreign-born in 2000).' By contrast, American-born workers make up more than 99 percent of all crane operators and sewer-pipe cleaners.

The same is true at the highest educational levels, where foreign-born college graduates make up 44 percent of all medical scientists but only 4 percent of lawyers. (Immigrants tend to be concentrated at the highest and lowest levels of income and education.)

Immigrants do, of course, compete to some extent with native-born workers. The question is how much.

To measure wage competition, the economists looked at how much an increase in the number of foreign-born workers affects the wages of other foreign-born workers versus American-born workers with the same educational background. If the groups were perfect substitutes, the change would be the same.

But there is a difference. When the number of immigrant college graduates goes up by 4 percent, their wages drop by 1 percent more than the wages of native-born college graduates. Immigrants, in other words, compete more with each other than with American-born workers.

Professors Ottaviano and Peri find that recent immigration has had the most negative effects on the least educated.

Immigration in the 1990's, they estimate, raised the wages of native-born high school graduates, college dropouts and college graduates by at least 2.5 percent. By contrast, they estimate that the wages of American-born high school dropouts fell by 2.4 percent because of immigration.

In an interview, however, Professor Peri noted that Americans are increasingly well educated, so that high school dropouts make up a small, rapidly declining portion of today's native-born work force. In 2000, he said, only 9 percent of American-born workers did not have a high school degree.

'If you look at the U.S. labor force,' he said, 'those people born in the U.S., I am talking about a negative effect for about 9 percent of the population and a positive effect for 91 percent of the population.'

'Rethinking the Gains From Immigration: Theory and Evidence From the U.S.' is available on line at:
http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gperi/Papers/ottaviano_peri_aug_2005.pdf

Keeping the best brains is critical if America wants to stay on top

By David Heenan
» The following is excerpted with permission from David Heenan's new book "Flight Capital: The Alarming Exodus of America's Best and Brightest," issued this month by Davies-Black Publishing.
Forget terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. The next global war will be fought over human capital. For years, immigrants provided a pipeline of brainpower to the United States. From Alfred Hitchcock to Albert Einstein, a steady stream of energetic and highly skilled newcomers yearning to breathe free propelled America's ascendancy.

Today, the country continues to benefit enormously from being a magnet for inventive and ambitious people who stimulate the economy, create wealth and improve overall living standards.

Chinese and Indian immigrants run nearly a quarter of Silicon Valley's high-tech firms. Half of the Americans who shared Nobel prizes in physics and chemistry in the past seven years were born elsewhere. Nearly 40 percent of MIT graduate students are from abroad. More than half of all Ph.D.s working here are foreign-born, as are 45 percent of physicists, computer scientists and mathematicians. One-third of all current physics teachers and one-fourth of all women doctors immigrated to this country.

However, the United States can no longer live off its transplanted foreigners. Beginning in the 1990s, a giant sucking sound could be heard as these immigrants' native countries improved economically and politically. In a world economy that places an increasing premium on knowledge, many of America's best and brightest began hotfooting it home in search of another promised land. ...

After centuries of importing brainpower, the United States is now a net exporter. Global mobility, once a cause of celebration, has become a nuisance. In each of the past few years, nearly 200,000 foreign-born Americans ... have, on average, returned to their motherland. This reverse brain drain, or "flight capital," stimulated in part by lucrative government incentives, has spawned flourishing new scientific havens from South Asia to Scandinavia. ...

Given the departure (of these individuals), it was perhaps inevitable that the land of opportunity would turn its back on newcomers. In the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, more and more Americans have sought to pull up the drawbridge.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has issued fewer temporary H-1B guest-worker and student visas and applied much stiffer requirements for newcomers. The number of foreigners with exceptional skills or advanced degrees allowed into the country dropped 65 percent in 2003. Fanning the fire, Patrick Buchanan, Richard Lamm and Michelle Malkin wrote best-sellers advocating highly restrictive immigration policies.

Anti-immigration policies could not have come at a worse time. Survey after survey reveals that the United States faces a massive labor shortage, particularly for knowledge-oriented workers. But while many countries are putting out the welcome mat to gifted outsiders, the United States is doing just the opposite. On its present course, our nation of immigrants could become a nation of emigrants. ...

Clearly, the United States must hang on to its best minds, while continue to serve as a beacon to highly skilled immigrants. But how? ...

Here are a dozen strategies for winning the talent war:

» Know thy competition.
Every American leader should buy a plane ticket to China, India or any number of other nations to see firsthand the economic supernovas rising in once-isolated locales.

» Adapt -- or die.

The key is to focus on new jobs -- in new industries. As knowledge workers search for the Next Best Thing, the United States must continue to woo the best and the brightest from around the world.

» Spur immigration reform.

The government should expedite the visa and security-clearance process by hiring more bilingual consular officers and facilitating multiple-entry, long-term privileges for anyone not deemed a security risk. Also a more targeted immigration policy that increases the number of H-1B visas and provides more entry slots to skilled workers and professionals would attract the kind of brainpower America needs.

» Dust off the welcome mat.

First impressions count. The United States should provide hospitality training to its immigration and customs personnel. ... Not every newcomer is a potential Mohammad Atta.

» Target the best minds.

"Send us your geeks" should be our national rallying cry. ... We must aggressively attract foreign students at the university and post-graduate levels by making visas and financial aid easier to obtain.

» Encourage dual loyalties.

Our leaders should develop special incentives -- from dual citizenship to adjunct professorships -- aimed at sharing these mobile superstars.

» Reform -- really reform -- education.

In the final analysis, simple solutions -- lengthening school days or years and demanding more homework -- may be the best medicine for the ills of public education. But these ridiculously straightforward suggestions require sacrifice by America's (spoiled) students. Changing adolescent and teenage behavior is never easy, particularly when it comes to hard work.

» Nourish the halls of ivy.

The United States must reverse its long decline in academic spending.

» Celebrate science and technology.

Government, for its part, must ... rationalize regulation, increase tax incentives, protect intellectual property and, most important, increase funding for basic and early-stage research. The government also should unshackle research in sensitive areas such as stem-cell research and defense-related activities.

» Expand the work force.

In a world of flight capital, immigration is not a panacea. ... The best way forward is to broaden work force participation among working-age people and to defer retirement.

» Reconsider national service.

At the very least, a program of effective conscription might give new meaning to "duty, honor and country" and reinvigorate the communitarian values and institutions needed to survive future decades.

» Act now.

In a world in which economic growth and competitiveness depend above all on human capital, policymakers cannot dillydally. Restocking our talent base could take years, even decades. ...

Squaring these recommendations with today's fiscal realities will surely test the country's will. However, long after the defeat of terrorism and the return of global harmony, the talent war will remain. ... In a world where creativity and innovation are central to growth and prosperity, keeping the best brains in the country, or encouraging them to come back, will be critical if the United States wants to stay on top.
David Heenan is a trustee of the Estate of James Campbell, one of the nation's largest landowners with assets valued at more than $2 billion. Formerly, he was chairman and chief executive of Theo. H. Davies & Co. Ltd., vice president of academic affairs at the University of Hawaii, and dean of the UH business school. "Flight Capital" is Heenan's sixth book.

Senate will take up border security as its first major bill next year
By Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times, October 26, 2005

The Senate will take up border security as its first major bill next year, but the debate will include both guest-worker plans and a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, Majority Leader Bill Frist announced yesterday.

“We’re going to start with border security, but in the same time we’re on the floor we’re going to build on that and extend that to the enforcement issues and the issues of more comprehensive reform, and give guest-worker [plans] full consideration,” said Mr. Frist, Tennessee Republican.

With the Senate’s open rules for debate, that means senators will end up voting on Sen. John McCain’s plan to legalize illegal aliens and increase legal immigration, Sen. John Cornyn’s temporary-worker plan that requires illegal aliens to return home within five years, and probably several different versions of border and interior enforcement.

“We start out with enforcement, we move to guest-worker, and then we move to the issue of the 11 million people who are here,” said Mr. McCain, Arizona Republican, who is sponsoring a plan along with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, that would offer a multistep path to citizenship for most of those estimated 11 million illegal aliens. “It’s just the resolution of how you shape the guest-worker program and also how you treat the 11 million people who are already here.”

Mr. Frist said he has not decided what the initial border security bill will look like, but it “will look at the number of [U.S. Border Patrol] agents, it will look at what supplies we provide them with [and] the increasing use of technology.”

Mr. Frist told The Washington Times two weeks ago he would bring a border security bill to the Senate floor first. But senators made it clear they would offer their own broad immigration plans as amendments to any border security bill that reached the floor, which meant the whole debate would erupt whether Mr. Frist wanted it to or not.

Advocacy groups who want broad legalization and a guest-worker program were happy with the arrangement, saying it would allow Republicans to satisfy their base’s call for border security while also offering a chance to legalize the estimated 11 million illegal aliens already here.

“The leaders in the Senate are smart enough to know it’s got to be comprehensive. Those are the policies we’ve seen introduced in the Senate,” said Angela Kelley, deputy director of the National Immigration Forum. “The debate’s going to happen. The Senate’s going to step up and take a lead in a responsible way, which they’re better capable of doing than the screaming matches I see going on in the House.”

Whatever the Senate passes will have to be reconciled with the House, and the broader the Senate bill the less chance there is of an agreement. House Republicans plan to pass a stand-alone immigration enforcement bill by the end of this year, according to Republican leaders.

One Senate aide who is opposed to legalization said building a bill from the ground up on the Senate floor is preferable to having to go through the Senate Judiciary Committee, because a bill from that committee would probably be lenient bill toward illegal aliens. If a broader bill were the starting point, it would be difficult to remove those provisions, the aide said.

The issue for Republicans like Mr. Cornyn, who opposes what he calls the “work-and-stay” concept in Mr. McCain’s bill – which allows both new foreign workers and current illegal aliens a path to remain in the United States permanently – is whether they will support the final bill if Mr. McCain’s amendment is included.

“I’m going to reserve judgment on that,” Mr. Cornyn said. “I will tell you I will not support, nor do I think the American people will accept, a bill that’s perceived as being amnesty, and that is the outlier I think that we all have to live with.”

Also yesterday Sen. Chuck Hagel, Nebraska Republican, reintroduced his own immigration plan that he sponsored last Congress with then-Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, South Dakota Democrat.

This year, Mr. Hagel split his plan into four parts – border security, employee verification, a guest-worker plan and a path to citizenship for current illegal aliens – and put more emphasis on the border security provisions.

His plan would give illegal aliens who can show they have been in the country for five years and who have worked for three years a multistep path to citizenship. Those here for less than five years could apply for a visa to stay in the short term, but would eventually have to return home and go through the regular process to return.

Mr. Hagel said he, too, thinks that nothing can pass the Senate “unless the border security issue is dealt with right up front and, to our citizens, giving them some assurance that we can then fit these other areas of immigration reform in without loosening our borders or without sacrificing our security.”

Bush vows to oust 'every single' illegal
By Stephen Dinan and Bill Sammon
The Washington Times, October 19, 2005
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051019-121035-2494r.htm

President Bush said yesterday that his goal is eventually to expel 'every single' illegal alien from the United States as his administration pressed Congress to pass a guest-worker program.

Although conceding that the administration cannot immediately deport the estimated 11 million illegal aliens who are here, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao told Congress that a temporary-worker program would give aliens an incentive to come out of hiding and let them work legally for six years before being forced to return home.

As Mr. Bush signed the homeland security spending bill yesterday, he said Congress should couple a guest-worker plan with increased border security.

'We're going to get control of our borders,' he said during the signing ceremony in the East Room. 'Our goal is clear -- to return every single illegal entrant, with no exceptions.'

It was a far cry from the president's usual rhetoric on illegal immigration, which focuses on the need to reunite families and provide labor for companies. Since taking office, Mr. Bush has called for relaxing rules so that illegals from Mexico can remain in the U.S. to take unpopular jobs.

The sudden hard line comes as Mr. Bush is trying to assuage his conservative political base, much of which is upset over his nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Mr. Bush said the government has to stop illegal entrance in the first place, needs to improve its ability to catch illegal aliens who have crossed, and must ensure that those who are caught are deported.

But even as he talked tough on illegal immigration, he continued to lobby for a program that would allow foreign workers to legally cross the border to fill U.S. jobs temporarily.

'If an employer has a job that no American is willing to take, we need to find a way to fill that demand by matching willing employers with willing workers from foreign countries on a temporary and legal basis,' he said.

As Mr. Bush was pushing his proposal, though, his nominee to lead the Citizenship and Immigration Services was telling the Senate Judiciary Committee that the agency, which probably would run such a guest-worker program, cannot do it right now.

'The systems that exist right now wouldn't be able to handle it,' Emilio Gonzalez said, though he added that, if approved, he would take immediate steps to get the agency ready.

The Cabinet secretaries told the panel that deporting 11 million illegal aliens is impractical and too costly.

'I think it would be hugely, hugely difficult to do this,' Mr. Chertoff said. 'A lot of these people would not want to be deported. We would have to find them. That would be an enormous expenditure of effort and resources.'

Instead, they said aliens will identify themselves by taking part in the temporary-worker program and that the government then would know who they are and where to find them when their work period ends.

'We would ask them to sign up with a temporary-worker program for three years. They can extend for another three years for a total of six years and at which point we would ask that they return to their home country,' Mrs. Chao said. 'They would not have a legal pathway to citizenship.'

The administration previously had said only that the program would be renewable, and hadn't set a limit on the number of times.

The secretaries said putting in a legal channel for workers would reduce the population of illegal aliens, which would make workplace enforcement and deportation more manageable.

The stance puts the administration on record opposing the bill from Sens. John McCain, Arizona Republican, and Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, that would put illegal aliens on a multistep path to citizenship if they work for a set period and pay a fine.

But the administration's position is similar to a bill sponsored by Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Jon Kyl of Arizona that would create a temporary-worker program and give current illegal aliens five years to leave.

The day marked several reversals for the administration.

For example, Mr. Chertoff said the department can handle training the 1,500 new Border Patrol agents who will be hired in fiscal 2006. Just months ago, when Mr. Bush submitted a request for 210 agents, administration officials said they couldn't train many more and that the 210 new agents would suffice to gain control over the border.

Also, Mr. Bush acknowledged that the country does not have the resources to detain and deport many of the illegal aliens. Those from countries other than Mexico are released into the U.S. while the deportation case is being decided, but most do not show up for deportation when their case is concluded.

'We capture many more illegal immigrants than we can send home, especially non-Mexicans,' he said. 'And one of the biggest reasons for that is we don't have enough bed space in our detention facilities.'

Mr. Chertoff also promised to streamline the number of days it takes to deport illegal aliens, though he said the administration 'will probably have to lean pretty heavily on some foreign governments' to force them to accept illegal aliens it wants to deport.

Congress faces illegal-immigrant issue
By Anne C. Mulkern
The Denver Post, October 5, 2005

Washington - Tough decisions about the nation's porous borders and its millions of illegal immigrants await lawmakers later this month, but agreement on a solution may prove elusive.

Congress has hesitated to address the volatile problem but feels forced to tackle it now because of pressure from constituents and big-money donors. Republican leaders say it's at the top of their agenda for the period after Columbus Day.

'People are demanding that this issue be addressed,' said Jeff Lundgren, spokesman for Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisc., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which oversees immigration law. 'It's no longer a border-state issue. It's affecting all 50 states.'

Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, a leader of the drive to stop illegal immigration, said the issue is reaching 'critical mass.'

Republican lawmakers, who control Congress, privately admit they're in a political vise, caught between constituencies with very different desires. Businesses demand the ability to hire foreign workers. Latino groups, which Republicans want as a voting bloc, seek recognition of people they call contributing members of society.

Citizen activists, meanwhile, patrol the U.S.-Mexico border, light up phone lines and send thousands of e-mails asking for tougher enforcement and deportation of those here illegally. Governors in Arizona and New Mexico have declared illegal immigrant-related states of emergency in border counties.

In Washington, two comprehensive bills have been introduced in the Senate. In the House, there are bills addressing aspects of the issue. But many involved in the issue agree that there will need to be congressional hearings, fierce lobbying and painful arm twisting before any legislation can pass both chambers.

'There are no easy solutions on it,' Lundgren said. The House could decide to tackle immigration one piece at a time instead of in a sweeping package, he said.

Proposed legislation already introduced in the Senate includes a guest-worker program that would allow undocumented workers to apply for permanent residency, and a measure that requires that all undocumented workers leave the country before they can apply to work here legally.

Estimates place the number of illegal immigrants in the nation as high as 20 million people. But some of those are thought to be nonworking family members, with the workforce closer to about 10 million or 11 million.

The total U.S. workforce is about 125 million, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

One of two Senate bills already introduced, sponsored by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., includes fines for illegal immigrants but allows a limited number of workers to stay in the country temporarily as guest workers and ultimately apply for permanent residency. The number is set at 400,000 the first year. A commission would determine guest- worker allotments for future years.

That's a proposal close to the plan the White House has floated, which would allow illegal immigrants who pay a fine to obtain a temporary work visa. In February 2004, President Bush proposed allowing a three-year stay that would be renewable.

The Kennedy-McCain bill is endorsed by groups such as the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest constituent- based Hispanic organization, and the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, a business alliance that includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Restaurant Association and Colorado's First Data Corp.

'We can't afford, if the administration or if Congress goes forward and pushes for greater enforcement, to have that kind of volume of people drop out of our economy,' said Laura Reiff, co-chairwoman of the coalition. 'Eight to 12 million workers dropping out of the workforce is going to be devastating to the economy, especially in a situation where we can't find people to do entry-level, what we call essential worker positions.'

A spokesman for First Data said the company supports Bush's position on a guest-worker program. First Data owns Western Union, which benefits from money that workers send from the United States to foreign countries.

Another Senate bill - sponsored by Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. - has only one co-sponsor so far. It increases penalties for smuggling illegal immigrants, drug trafficking and document fraud. It also sets up a guest-worker program but requires workers to first leave the country for a year, and when they return, they cannot bring family members along.

A coalition created by former Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie and two former congressmen is asking businesses to pay up to $250,000 each to help promote a guest-worker program. The group wants to change public opinion about immigration so that a guest-worker program can pass Congress, said Robert de Posada, one of three directors of Americans for Border and Economic Security.

'Everybody wants to go in with very specific legislative proposals,' Posada said. 'You can't go into that without first changing the overall atmosphere of the issue. If we start debating details we're going to lose.'

But some in the business community said they are concerned Gillespie's group might be too closely aligned to the White House. If Bush the White House does decide to back more aggressive enforcement of labor laws, businesses say they would not be able to support that.

House leaders trying to develop their own legislation so far have agreed on just one issue, Tancredo said: that employers should be required to check the validity of workers' Social Security numbers. They have not agreed on whether that rule would apply retroactively to existing workers.

Tancredo and his allies want military-like enforcement on the borders and sanctions against employers who hire undocumented workers.

'Employers in this country create the demand,' Tancredo said. 'If we can stop the employment of people who are here illegally, a huge part of this problem would go away.'

A bill Tancredo has introduced would allow a guest-worker program, but only after the nation meets a series of benchmarks, such has a decrease of illegal entry into the U.S. to at or below the level of deportations.

Congressional leaders say legislation that advances will likely include a guest-worker provision with some sort of penalty for people already in the country illegally, such as a fine or restriction on their ability to become U.S. citizens.

It will also need to include some measures to lessen the flow of illegal immigrants over the borders, they say.

But Tancredo plans to fight any bill that would allow undocumented workers to stay legally, something he and his backers consider amnesty.

'It will be one a hell of a fight, I guarantee you,' he said. 'I will do everything that I can do.'

'Members (of Congress) realize enhanced border security is going to have to be at the core of whatever we do,' said Lundgren, spokesman for the House's Judiciary Committee chairman. 'Right now we don't have control of our borders. Members and their constituents are demanding better border security.'

ICE employees call leader nominee 'unqualified'
By Jerry Seper
The Washington Times, October 3, 2005

President Bush's nominee to head U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has drawn the ire of several ICE supervisors and agents who say she is 'unqualified' because she has never held a law-enforcement management position.

The nomination of Julie L. Myers 'just doesn't pass the smell test and is another indication that this administration created the Department of Homeland Security as window dressing and does not care whether ICE is successful,' said Matthew Issman, national legislative vice president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA).

'What we need is a strong, law-enforcement leader, not another inexperienced, well-connected lawyer with friends in the White House.'

During the first session of Mrs. Myers' confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs earlier this month, Sen. George V. Voinovich, Ohio Republican, told Mrs. Myers that he was 'really concerned' about her management experience.

'I think that we ought to have a meeting with [Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff] ... to ask him ... why he thinks you're qualified for the job,' Mr. Voinovich said. 'Because based on your resume, I don't think you are.'

Mr. Voinovich later met with Mrs. Myers and is expected to support the nomination.

But several ICE supervisors and agents complained last week that the agency has struggled in its attempt to establish a specific mission strategy, despite the expenditure of billions of dollars in tax money and said a strong leader is vital for improvement.

They also criticized what they called poor administrative systems, ongoing budgetary concerns, a hiring freeze, morale problems and a lack of cohesion and identity.

Mr. Issman has been at the forefront of a movement within ICE to point out to members of Congress what supervisors and field agents say are major 'systemic issues and concerns.'

'With a lightweight like Myers, we will just continue to lose more ground and will be relegated to becoming an also-ran,' Mr. Issman said.

Mrs. Myers, 36, a White House special assistant for presidential personnel, has Mr. Chertoff's endorsement, serving as his chief of staff when he headed the Justice Department's criminal division. She also was an assistant secretary at the Commerce Department, where she oversaw the department's efforts to prevent and sanction violations of U.S. export-control laws.

She also worked as a deputy assistant secretary for money laundering and financial crimes at the Treasury Department, served as an assistant U.S. attorney in New York and as an associate independent counsel for Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth L. Starr.

Her uncle is Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Last week, she married Mr. Chertoff's chief of staff, John F. Wood.

Her confirmation by the committee remains pending.

ICE was created March 1, 2003, with the merger of U.S. Customs, Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Federal Protective Service. With a work force of nearly 20,000 and an annual budget of $4 billion, it is the second-largest law enforcement agency in the federal government.

Report: Illegal Immigration Has Increased
By Stephen Ohlemacher
The Associated Press, September 27, 2005

Washington (AP) -- The pace of illegal immigration to the United States has increased despite tighter security measures and it generally parallels the pace of economic growth and the availability of jobs, a report said Tuesday.

The report by the Pew Hispanic Center also found that the stronger security steps since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 have had the effect of reducing legal immigration.

Overall, immigration to the United States declined along with the economy after 2000, but the report says the number of people trying to get into the country is on the upswing again.

Immigration -- both legal and illegal -- topped 1.5 million people in 1999 and 2000, according to the report. The number of people entering the United States then plummeted to 1.1 million people by 2003, the same level it was at in 1992.

Immigration levels bounced back to 1.2 million in 2004, but the report cautioned that it is difficult to predict whether the recent upswing is part of a new trend.

'The extremely high (immigration) flows at the end of the past decade were not the norm, nor part of a long-term trend, but rather the peak of a momentary increase that lasted for only a few years,' said the report, authored by demographer Jeffrey Passal and Roberto Suro, a former journalist who heads the Pew Hispanic Center. 'Thus, even as the United States consistently experiences historically high rates of migration, flows are subject to considerable variation.'

The report documents immigration levels from 1992 to 2004, generating estimates from a variety of Census data. The report acknowledges weaknesses in the data, especially when it comes to estimating annual changes in the number of illegal immigrants trying to enter the country.

The Pew Hispanic Center is a nonpartisan research organization supported by the Pew Charitable Trusts.

Immigration levels closely mirror economic conditions in the United States -- as the economy improves, immigration increases -- suggesting that the lure of jobs is a strong factor in attracting people to this country, the report says. The U.S. economy appears to be a stronger factor than economic conditions in the countries sending immigrants here, the report says.

Among the reports findings:

*Since 2001, the number of legal permanent residents entering the United States has declined from 578,000 to 455,000, while the number of illegal immigrants has increased from 549,000 to 562,000. Legal, temporary residents account for the remainder of people entering the country.

*Declines in legal immigration 'appear to reflect processing backlogs, security delays and other developments that followed the Sept. 11 attacks,' the report says.

*Mexico accounted for about a third of all U.S. immigrants, a percentage that was steady from 1992 to 2004.

*More immigrants are shunning states with large immigrant communities, such as New York and California, and moving to states with smaller foreign-born populations, such as North Carolina and Iowa.

EDITOR'S NOTE: The Pew Hispanic Center's study is available on line at:
http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=53

[Back to Top]

Legal aide admits to alien scam
By Gary Emerling
The Washington Times, September 28, 2005

A 21-year-old Silver Spring legal assistant has pleaded guilty to charges that he participated in a scam providing illegal aliens with fraudulently obtained green cards. Elnor Veliev was indicted, along with two D.C. lawyers, their law firms and another legal assistant, on April 26 for filing false labor-certification applications with the U.S. Labor Department and false petitions for green cards with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on behalf of more than 140 aliens between April 2001 and May 2005.

Veliev, an Azerbaijani national and not a U.S. citizen, faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine when sentenced Dec. 15. He also could be deported, officials said. 'America's immigration and labor laws are undermined by schemes to secure green cards based on false representations about employment,' U.S. Attorney for Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein said. Veliev, fellow legal assistant Alp Canseven, 30, of the District, and lawyers Irwin Jay Fredman, 72, of Bethesda, and Sergei Danilov, 44, of McLean, all were included in the 149-count indictment. The law firms of both lawyers also were named in the indictment: I. Jay Fredman P.C. and Sergei Danilov and Associates LLC, both in Northwest. Prosecutors said the group took advantage of a program that allows an employer to sponsor an alien for employment if that employer is not able to find qualified U.S. workers to fill the position.

Veliev admitted that those involved in the scheme often falsified the alien's work experience and forged the names of employers who had not agreed to sponsor the aliens, prosecutors said. In addition, the suspects manipulated recruiting requirements to ensure that no U.S. workers would be hired for the jobs. The aliens -- most of whom came from Pakistan, Turkey, the Philippines and Russia -- paid the law firms as much as $25,000 to obtain the green cards, prosecutors said.

Ernestine Fobbs, a spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), said agents will attempt to locate the aliens who either knowingly or unknowingly participated in the scheme. 'Some of these people may have valid applications because all of the cases may not have been fraudulent,' she said. 'There will be a complete examination with the investigation into this case.' A trial date for the two lawyers and their law firms is scheduled for Jan. 17. Mr. Danilov, a Russian national, also could be deported if convicted. Officials said Mr. Canseven, a Turkish national, is a fugitive.

[Back to Top]

Homeland Security Action Against Illegals Lacking
By Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times, September 22, 2005

The agency charged with interior immigration enforcement all but ignores going after illegal aliens in the workplace, the Government Accountability Office said in a report released yesterday.
The GAO found that an antiquated system for businesses to verify employees' right to work has hindered U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in its mission of tracking and deporting illegal aliens in the nation's interior. In addition, the widespread use of fraudulent documents has made it difficult for both employers and ICE to detect illegal workers.
GAO investigators also said ICE, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, is devoting more attention to preventing terrorism, but that has meant less attention to illegal immigration in general.
'Work site enforcement has been a relatively low priority,' the GAO said, adding that some problems from the former Immigration and Naturalization Service carried over when that agency was abolished and split into ICE and other agencies in the Department of Homeland Security.
The report is likely to boost some House Republicans' efforts to pass an immigration security enforcement bill. Rep. David Dreier, California Republican, said it shows why his plan to create a counterfeit-resistant Social Security card is needed.
Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Wisconsin Republican and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the situation with ICE was 'unacceptable.'
'Despite a substantial increase in enforcement officers and a huge public outcry about weak border security and increased levels of violent crime visited upon local communities by alien criminals, ICE can find no time for one of its most basic functions,' he said.
Rep. John Hostettler, chairman of the immigration, border security and claims subcommittee, said the report should be a message to the Bush administration.
'No serious effort to stem the flow of illegal aliens into the United States can take place without placing the elimination of the 'jobs magnet' at the top of the priority list,' the Indiana Republican said. 'I hope that at some point this administration learns that fact.'
GAO staff had presented some findings to Mr. Hostettler's subcommittee earlier this year, including that between 1999 and 2003 the number of notices of an intent to fine employers for immigration law violations dropped from 417 to three.
In a response included in the GAO report Steven J. Pecinovsky, the Department of Homeland Security's liaison to the GAO, said ICE would set a timetable for looking into whether it could change the employee work verification process, but did not commit to actually streamlining it. Mr. Pecinovsky also promised to have ICE set targets for workplace enforcement.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The GAO's audit is available on line at:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05813.pdf

[Back to Top]

Illegals Get Reprieve From Katrina
Fox says U.S. won't prosecute victims of hurricane
WorldNetDaily.com, September 3, 2005

Mexico City -- The United States has agreed with a request from Mexico to not prosecute undocumented Mexican migrants affected by Hurricane Katrina who recur to U.S. officials for help, President Vicente Fox said Friday.
'We have agreed with the government of the United States that those who were not documented at the time will not be subject to any pressure or persecution whatsoever,' Fox said during a government event Friday afternoon.
'In this way, they can receive help from the American authorities, they can approach the authorities to point out what they've lost and, above all, to ask for support.'
Mexico estimates that about 40,000 Mexicans were living in Louisiana, the majority in New Orleans, which was devastated by the hurricane.
Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said Friday that Mexico would set up temporary consulates near the disaster area to help Mexicans and Central Americans alike affected by the storm. Officials did not have reports of any Mexican deaths, but 87 citizens were reported missing, Derbez said.
He added that Mexico also was ready to send immediate assistance to the United States, but was just waiting for the go-ahead from officials there. The aid will include Navy ships, food and medicine, amphibious vehicles and health and rescue personnel, the foreign secretary said.

[Back to Top]

Homeland Security Suspends Worker Document Checks
The Associated Press, September 6, 2005

Washington (AP) -- The Department of Homeland Security said Tuesday it will not sanction employers for the next 45 days for hiring people who cannot prove they are eligible to work in this country.
The agency said it is temporarily suspending the sanctions required under immigration law because many Hurricane Katrina victims lost or left without documents needed to prove they are eligible to work.
Immigration law requires employers to verify that applicants are citizens, legal residents or have permission to work in the country.
The agency said government offices also were affected by the hurricane and won't be able to provide replacement documents immediately.
Employers still should fill out Eligibility Verification forms, known as I-9s, the agency said.
The agency said any employers fraudulently hiring people not eligible to work or individuals falsely claiming to be Katrina victims could be held liable.
The Gulf Coast is home to a number of migrants who were among evacuees from the hurricane. Latin American nations were trying to locate citizens, particularly from Mexico and Honduras, after Katrina hit. Consulates set up mobile offices near disaster areas to help migrants affected by the hurricane.
Last week, Mexican President Vicente Fox said the United States agreed not to prosecute undocumented Mexican migrants affected by Hurricane Katrina who turn to U.S. officials for help.
NOTE: The Department of Homeland Security press release is online at:
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_0735.xml
********

[Back to Top]

U.S. Web Site Helps Screen For Illegal Workers
By Laura Wides
The Associated Press, September 6, 2005

Los Angeles (AP) -- Many Americans focus on the border when they consider the fight against illegal immigration. But some experts say the real battle should be in the workplace to stop the hiring of people without work visas.
Simple in theory, but how can you tell who is an illegal immigrant?
Many companies now do little more than eyeball documents, saying they lack the expertise and resources to go further - and they seldom face federal sanctions.
But across the country, a small group of businesses is quietly testing a Department of Homeland Security program that can check immigration status with a few clicks on the Internet. The program probably will be at the heart of any federal immigration reform, even as critics say it needs improvement.
'It's not a question of 'Can we fix this?' It's 'When and how?' ' said Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute think tank who specializes in immigration.
Many businesses, however, oppose making the program mandatory because it would stop them from hiring illegal workers and force them to pay higher wages, said Maria Echeveste, an immigration expert and political consultant who worked as a deputy chief of staff in the Clinton White House.
'I see this as a battle over whether we are going to be hypocrites or not,' she said. 'If we're not ready to give up cheap labor, then we should shut up about illegal immigrants.'
Under the Basic Pilot Program, employers enter a person's name, birth date and other data on a Web site. The information is then run through databases maintained by the Social Security Administration and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Employers never learn whether the individual might be in the country illegally. They simply get a 'yes' or 'no' on the person's work status. Applicants can appeal if they disagree.
Companies using the program said the latest version is quicker and easier to use than people might think. But experts caution that it needs tweaks before Congress could roll out a mandatory version nationwide.
Among other things, they worry that it could hurt legal immigrants, whose visa status often changes faster than the Department of Homeland Security can update its databases, and who sometimes use the surnames of both parents, which can further trip up the process.
No one has estimated the expense of a national rollout. But expanding the pilot to serve the more than 8 million businesses in the country would cost the government much more than the $1.5 million being spent on the program.
Congress will likely consider the issue when it reconvenes tomorrow. All the major immigration bills moving through Washington call for an expanded version of the program.
Ayesha Tully hires dozens of factory workers and secretaries each week at the Staffmark temp agency office in the Orange County, Calif., city of Cypress. She prefers the pilot program to merely glancing at documents to see whether they look fraudulent.
Just knowing a company uses the program can deter undocumented workers from applying.
The push for workplace enforcement of immigration law has languished since Congress passed a bill in 1986 holding companies responsible for checking the status of potential hires.
The pilot program was started in 1996 in a handful of states and has grown by 40 percent since it expanded nationwide last December. About 700,000 job applicants are checked annually, said Chris Bentley, a spokesman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Five full-time Homeland Security agents check the applications of those not immediately cleared to work by computers.
In the last three years, an average of 83 percent of applicants were authorized to work: 81 percent were immediately cleared, and 3 percent were approved in 24 hours or more, according to a review of DHS data by the Associated Press.
No conclusive data were kept on the rest, so it's unclear if they were trying to work illegally or if they were legitimate applicants who got frustrated by the bureaucracy and gave up. That uncertainty concerns critics of the program.
Businesses have joined the program for a variety of reasons. A number of firms in the meat industry decided to use it after federal raids in 1999 led to fines.

[Back to Top]