Out of proportion

Illegal immigration has been incessantly discussed during the US Republican race. However, hardly any of the discourse has focused on the fact that it’s not that big a problem, writes Edward Alden

ILLEGAL immigration and what to do about it has emerged as one of the more controversial issues as the US gears up for an election year.

Republican presidential candidates have vied for the toughest response — from more military troops to electrified fences along the border with Mexico. The Obama administration is busy setting records for deporting illegal immigrants. Yet figures released by the Department of Homeland Security show that illegal immigration may not be such a big problem after all.

In the fiscal year to the end of September, just 328,000 people were caught trying the difficult and dangerous border crossing, a 27% drop from 2010 and the lowest number since the early 1970s.

The combination of high US unemployment and the collapse of the construction sector; brutal gang violence in much of northern Mexico; and a gauntlet of drones, cameras, and Border Patrol agents on the US side of the border has stopped large-scale illegal crossings, say experts.

Notable as well is the fact that more Mexicans are returning home as their country’s economy continues to outpace that of the US. In 2010, Mexico’s economy grew nearly twice as fast as that of the US and has continued robust gains this year. Mexico’s government census data and surveys suggest that almost as many Mexicans are heading south — voluntarily or because they were deported — as are heading north for the US.

Mark Adams, US co-ordinator of Frontera de Cristo, a Presbyterian ministry that straddles the border towns of Agua Prieta in Sonora, Mexico, and Douglas, Arizona, says most of the border crossers he now sees are somewhat older men and women seeking to reunite with families in the US. The teenage hopefuls who used to make up the bulk of those sneaking across the border no longer see the potential wage gains as worth the risk of crossing the border, he says.

Politicians have yet to catch up with the facts on the ground. Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has made border security the centre of his immigration platform, promising to add 2,250km to the nearly 1,125km of fencing on the Mexican border. He also wants to block the children of illegal immigrants from paying in-state tuition at universities.

Newt Gingrich, now leading a resurgent campaign and vying for the position of frontrunner for the nomination, has backpedaled on his stance on immigration after facing criticism from Republican hardliners. During a November 22 debate he suggested a “humane” policy that could legalise some of the 11 million undocumented immigrants who had already lived many years in the country.

However, after charges that he favoured “amnesty”, he declared there was a “national-security crisis” along the border, promising to fence the entire border and pledging support for laws in Georgia, Alabama, and elsewhere that have sent illegal immigrants fleeing from those states.

While Republicans play to their base by stoking fear of a border out of control, President Barack Obama is hoping Hispanic voters will overlook his record on immigration and side with him again. They gave him a majority of their votes in 2008 in such key swing states as Florida, Colorado, and Nevada.

Obama had promised that immigration reform that would legalise most of the unauthorised immigrants still in the US would be a top priority in his first year. However, the economic crisis, the stimulus plan that followed and the healthcare overhaul robbed the oxygen from other legislative initiatives.

Instead, his administration has been carrying out one of the tougher crackdowns on illegal immigration in US history. Led by former Arizona governor Janet Napolitano, the Department of Homeland Security has championed a programme called Secure Communities, which requires immigration checks on anyone picked up by police and booked on suspicion of a crime.

While this has resulted in a higher percentage of criminals being deported, the administration has also set a target of removing about 400,000 illegal immigrants each year, and about half of those have no criminal history at all. Cecilia Munoz, formerly a top advocate with Hispanic rights group La Raza and now Obama’s senior immigration adviser, defended the policy in September, saying “even broken laws have to be enforced”.

Munoz and others in the administration insist this approach is sensible and targeted, because it focuses on deporting those who have committed crimes. In November, the Department of Homeland Security began a review of nearly 300,000 people awaiting deportation to dozens of different countries to determine if they have any criminal background or other history that makes them a priority.

However, a study last month by the Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy at the University of California — a research group on criminal justice — found that more than two thirds of those held under Secure Communities were non-criminals or had committed only minor offences.

The immigration issue could still break in Obama’s favour. The Supreme Court recently agreed to rule on whether police in Arizona, where Republican governor Jan Brewer gained national stature by accusing the administration of failing to secure the border, have the power to question the immigration status of individuals.

The administration has successfully challenged the Arizona law, known as SB 1070, in the lower courts, and is challenging copycat laws in other states. The Supreme Court ruling is expected by next summer, in the middle of the campaign season.

The focus on Arizona could bolster the Obama campaign’s argument that, whatever the president’s shortcomings on immigration reform, Hispanics have more to fear from Republicans.

While the political campaigns remain obsessed over what is actually a dwindling problem of illegal immigration, they are largely ignoring an urgent need to reform the nation’s legal-immigration laws.

Growing prosperity in developing countries such as China, India, and Brazil has produced a surge of talented, would-be immigrants to the US. America’s universities last year attracted a record 723,000 foreign students, according to data from the Institute of International Education. More than 250,000 came from China and India.

Yet rigid US quotas on green cards for skilled immigrants mean that any person who wishes to stay in the country after graduation is likely to face waits of a decade or more to gain permanent residence. The House of Representatives recently passed a measure that would shrink the queue for Chinese and Indians, though it would not increase overall immigration quotas. The measure is currently blocked in the Senate.

Other proposals are circulating in Congress to address bits of the problem. Senators John Kerry and Richard Lugar have suggested a “start-up visa” that would offer green cards to foreign entrepreneurs who invest and create US jobs. Representative Jeff Flake proposes an immigration fast track for foreign PhDs in the sciences, engineering and mathematics.

The odds are long against any of these passing. Republican leaders are busy pushing new enforcement measures, including mandatory verification of the legal status of new hires by all US businesses.

Democratic leaders fear that passing bills only for high-skilled immigrants would make it impossible later to pass legislation that would legalise the 11m undocumented immigrants, which remains their top priority.

However, the long-term consequences of a continued stalemate on immigration reform could be significant. Robert Guest, author of the book Borderless Economics, warns that while the US has benefited enormously from immigration, “America’s immigration system is a disgrace. In the long term, it poses a serious threat to the United States’ status as top nation.” That could be a subject for a serious election-year debate on immigration, but so far there is no sign of that happening.

* (c) 2011 Newsweek/Daily Beast