Migration

In a report by the CBC.ca, a discussion of the wage gap between Canadian Immigrants since the 1960s and American Immigrants since the same period shows that there is a significant difference between the two groups of immigrants. The report states that in Canada there seems to be less of a wage gap, as 4 in 10 immigrants to Canada have an undergraduate university degree or greater, while in the US it is 2 in 10. This has to do with the Canadian policy of taking in mostly skilled labour in the immigration process, as opposed to the US policy of taking mostly immigrants connected by family into the United States. While both countries also take in family related immigrants and skilled immigrants alike, the main engine might be where the immigrants come from and the need for certain skills in the American and Canadian society respectively.

Much of the US immigration comes from Mexico and Central America. As well, the US is a beneficiary of the Brain Drain from other countries, where highly educated people from one country flood to another for better opportunities and payment. Canada itself loses a great number of its educated citizens to the US which might explain while 2 in 10 are skilled immigrants to the US, it still is a large number of individuals from all over the world working and promoting the US economy.

Regarding Canada, in last week’s post on What Exactly is “Canadian Experience”?, we see that while Canada may take in many more skilled immigrants, there is strong evidence that the arbitrary barriers to employment for these skilled immigrants may dissolve any benefit to bringing in 4 in 10 skilled immigrants. In reality, many end up taking jobs in very low income sectors despite having a university education or higher. The situation in Canada has become so bad for many skilled immigrants that stories of foreign surgeons driving taxis or similar horror stories abound and a consensus among many skilled immigrants that Canada has become more of a trap for skilled immigrants than a benefit. Many skilled immigrants come to Canada to find that they will have an almost impossible task in requalifiying as well as living with lower real income than in their state of origin.

While Canada may bring in more skilled people, it is evident that the US benefits more from the skilled labour it does accept. There are of course many other factors in this comparison that require a full analysis, but in the meantime more attention needs to be brought on the issues of employment and economic rights in the debate on legal immigration in the US and Canada.

In her column on May 25th, Eleanor Clift of Newsweek discusses the benefits President Bush is gaining in the debate on new immigration policy. Her overview of the complex political views of Democrats who will most likely support Bush’s initiative under the guidance of Ted Kennedy is an interesting dynamic since most Democrats have tried to distance themselves as much as possible from the Bush Administration on almost all issues posed to them. Ironically, Bush will likely have more opposition from Republicans who think the immigration bill does not do enough to curb illegal immigration.

In reality, among all the issues surrounding Iraq and the War on Terror, the Bush Administration pre-9-11 was very focused on immigration policy and building stronger ties with Mexico and a Free Trade Agreement of the Americas. His efforts did not go unrewarded, gaining 41% of the Hispanic vote from 21% during his years in office.

Despite small successes in his Immigration Policy, Bush also has had much criticism of his years in office regarding Border Security. In a report issued by the organization The Third Way, it was found that apprehensions on the Southwest border have declined by 350,000 per year, almost 30 percent from the Clinton years. In addition, the number of deportable aliens found at the northern border and border locations other than the Southwest has dropped by almost 40 percent.

Despite the study and opposition from his own party, any progressive movement on the immigration front is positive in comparison to criticisms about Iraq and everlasting current scandals to hit the White House. Clift suggests that the biggest problem in a Republican position against the proposed Bill is that it is likely to take more votes away from the Republicans in states where the Hispanic vote may make the difference between it becoming a Blue or Red state. In any case, Bush might have some luck in pushing the Bill through, although not from traditional allies of the President.

In a continuation of last week’s weekly update on the deal reached in the US Senate on Immigration Reform, approval and criticism of the bill has been voiced by both sides of the political right and political left. While perspectives on the right of the debate will likely claim the bill to be somewhat of an “amnesty” for illegal immigrants, the opposing end of the political spectrum might claim the bill to be “not humanitarian enough” according to Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

While the bill is aimed at allowing illegal immigrants to right their status, it will also focus on border security and even adopt laws for fines against employers who are using undocumented labour in the conduct of their business. While many of these goals are accepted in a general sense, the technical issues and how policy is affected are fueling much debate over the Immigration Reform Bill.

One of the contentious issues surrounding the bill is the proposal of an altered Guest Worker Program. Many see the new bill as focusing more on job skills and education, and less on family connections. This merit based system is seen by many Democrats as unrealistic and likely the most disturbing part of the new bill as most illegal immigrants in the US would not achieve possible merit based qualifications proposed in the new bill. Beyond the qualifications issue, a proposal to cut the number of guest workers to 200,000 and capping the number of workers is also adding flames to the fire on the debate over the immigration bill.

“The point system does not reflect how much Americans value the family ties that bind people to their brothers and sisters or to their parents,” he said. “How many of our forefathers would have measured up under this point system? How many would have been turned back at Ellis Island?”-Barak Obama

Many Republicans also are concerned with the new bill, as Border Security is thought to take a second seat to immigration and newly proposed programs. This criticism is not new, as critics of the new bill point to past failures in immigration reform to secure the border and the current situation where illegal immigration has become almost unmanageable.

Beyond Democrats and Republicans, the concern of many immigrants in the US is also divided with regards to the new bill. While many illegal aliens, approximately 12 million may be able to gain legal citizenship, the new system changes connections via family ties in place since 1965 towards a system which values skilled labour and education. While people will likely adapt to the new system, it may be a challenge to both legal and illegal immigrants as much as it runs the debate on Capitol Hill. With much of the voting population taking clear sides on immigration as well, the issue may clarify the next election with Iraq as the two issues of most concern to all Americans, new and old.

The first test to the fragile Senate compromise on immigration reform came in a  vote on Tuesday. Scrapping the guest worker provision would have rocked the boat too far and could have brought the fragile compromise to a collapse. Tuesday’s vote, however, doesn’t rule out the possibility to curtail the guest worker program to 200,000 a year, as proposed by Democratic Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico. The New York Times has the full story on the vote and predicts more controversy once Senators return from their Memorial Day recess.

At the end of last week, senators announced their bipartisan compromise on immigration reform that combines border enforcement, a guest worker program, a path to legalization for illegal immigrants, tougher employer sanctions, and an education/skills-based point system for future immigrants. Rich Basas will comment on their proposal in the coming days.

<>Already, the policy proposal is having a divisive effect on Republican presidential hopefuls, as the UK’s Guardian reports. While John McCain has come out in support of the Senate proposal - as he was heavily involved in shaping the compromise - the article quotes potential rivals Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney criticizing the bill as “inadequate hodgepodge” and an “amnesty for illegals.” The division among presidential candidates is symbolic for the deep split the proposal cuts through the entir Republican party. Nevertheless, the Republicans are already hard at work to toughen the compromise further.

<>Meanwhile, Democratic candidates have been vocal in their criticism: Sen. Barak Obama has denounced the points system for evaluating future immigrants as giving “too little weight to family ties,” ABC news reports.

<>The New York Times’ Julia Preston and Randal Archibold sat down with illegal migrants to get their perspective on the bill’s provisions. Many said that living in US was worth overcoming the difficult legal hurdles. Advocacy groups, however, are quick to point out that the family reunification provisions represent a radical departure from US traditions: “This is an unprecedented shift from family unity being the cornerstone of our immigration policy,” said Isabel Garcia, a lawyer and a chairwoman of Derechos Humanos, an advocacy group here. Ms. Garcia also objected to what she called “insurmountable” obstacles in the bill.

Other commentators have plenty to say:

Navarrette: Immigration anxiety is cultural

Dobbs: New immigration plans ignores history’s

Washington Post Editorial: The storm over immigration

See also: Mexico Blog by Rohini Gupta - Bush strikes deal over immigration bill

This week’s news roundup takes a first look at France’s new ministry of immigration and national identity, Switzerland’s refusals to accept more Iraqi refugees and newest EU plans to curtail the number of illegal migrants employed throughout Europe:

• Nicolas Sarkozy is a man of his words. On May 18 he appointed Brice Hortefeux to lead the newly created ministry of immigration and national identity. In response, eight historians working on a national project on French immigration history resigned in protest. Among the eight is Patrick Weil, who developed the immigration policy program for the Jospin government back in 1997. Liberation has a full article on the demissions, while Le Monde quotes one of them as saying “to associate immigration and national identity is to portray immigration as a problem for France and the French in terms of their self-understanding.” The new ministry, headed up by a 30-year personal friend of M. Sarkozy, will eventually pull together all administrative functions related to immigration (i.e. visa and expulsion matters, asylum, integration and the elusive national identity) under one roof. For now, however, these areas will remain with their current ministries, while a full-fledged plan for their integration is developed, i.e. the foreign ministry will remain in charge of visa attribution.
• While Senators put the finishing touches on a compromise solution toward new a new US immigration policy, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of migrants, Jorge Bustamante, was kept out of immigrant detention centers in Texas. A scheduled visit to the T. Don Hutto facility in Taylor, Texas was called off at short notice, leaving Dr. Bustamante “frustrated,” though that must be a diplomatic understatement. The Dallas Morning Herald reports the following:
  “U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement canceled Mr. Bustamante’s visit to Hutto because of pending litigation regarding the facility, according to a State Department spokesman. ICE officials have invited Mr. Bustamante to visit another family detention facility near York, Pa. The Hutto detention center – a former prison – houses about 400 noncriminal immigrants awaiting deportation or other outcomes to their immigration cases. “I am particularly concerned with the treatment of children and children’s human rights,” said Mr. Bustamante, who is from Mexico. The Hutto center has come under fire from civil liberties and immigration advocates, who contend families detained there are subjected to psychologically abusive guards, inadequate medical care and inhumane conditions.”

• The ACLU has a full site, including podcasts, dedicated to Dr. Bustamente’s trip and his insights. We will continue to follow this story in the coming days.
• The New York Times examines the situation of Haitian migrants leaving their country, frustrated with the lack of change. On their way to the promised land of the United States many get stranded on the Turks and Caicos islands, and have become an administrative burden for the local government. A tragic incident on May 4, when a Haitian refugee boat capsized off the Turks and Caicos leaving 90 dead and survivors blaming the aggressive tactics by local authorities for many of the deaths.
  
• Business Week reports on EU immigration Commissioner Franco Frattini’s new plans to penalize employers who take on illegal immigrants.
  
• We recently reported on the plight of Iraqi migrants. Switzerland is the latest country to refuse the UNHCR’s request to accept a contingent of the 20,000 migrants the organization has identified as particularly in danger of falling prey to excessive violence and torture. The majority of these would-be migrants are women and children. According to an article in the Neue Zuericher Zeitung, Switzerland is refusing to accept additional Iraqi migrants pointing to the fact that 5,000 refugees already reside in the country. Instead, government officials want to step up humanitarian aid to internally displaced Iraqis.

The UK’s Daily Mail is picking up on a comment made earlier this week by London’s Mayor, Ken Livingstone, regarding the treatment of foreign business travelers by UK immigration staff, in its enlightening article “Welcome to America … from Mickey the immigration officer” .

London’s Mayor had accused immigration staff at Heathrow Airport of being racist and deterring business travel with their behavior.

While that particular aspect is not in question in the US, the recent announcement that the Department of Homeland Security will soon begin taking fingerprints of all 10 fingers from non-US visitors has led to speculations of a further drop in US tourism. Already, processing for non-US passengers to the US takes three times longer, and tourism organizations expect to see adverse effects once this new rule is enforced.

Enter the Daily Mail and its article on how officials are teaming up with Disney to make entry into the US an altogether more enjoyable experience:

“But now officials are responding to the criticism by employing Disney’s recipe for tirelessly upbeat and helpful customer service in an attempt to get the free-spending British back, particularly with the pound at nearly two dollars.

Immigration officers will be taught the secrets of Disney theme parks by learning how to welcome visitors, manage large queues and respond to ‘negative reaction’ from the public without letting their smiles slip.

A spokeswoman for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement last night confirmed the initiative.

She said: “There has been a problem in the way we have been perceived in countries including Britain, and we are working very closely with Disney.

“They have offered suggestions about how we can improve the entire arrivals process.”

The move is being run by the Discover America Partnership, set up by the US Government to tackle what it calls the nation’s ‘image crisis’ abroad. It aims to attract ten million more visitors a year to the US.

Perhaps the immigration officers at Heathrow could get a pointer or two from their American counterparts - because….”It’s a small world after all..It’s a small, small world..”

• <> The clock is ticking as Senators are meeting behind closed doors to put a cap on the much-awaited immigration reform package. An article in the Boston Globe outlines the remaining points of contention. We will have a full commentary on the likely compromise early this week.
• Think tanks are debating the ‘right’ solution to the issue Senators face. The North County Times highlights contradictory studies by the Heritage Foundation and the Immigration Policy Center on the impact immigrant workers have had on the US economy.
• With UK Prime Minister Tony Blair announcing this week that he will leave office on June 21st, analysts are busy at work reflecting on his political legacy. Over at the Migration Policy Institute, Will Somerville, does just that for immigration policy. He argues that Blair and his successive Labour governments have succeeded in building a robust immigration system, one that will shape the country’s approach to migration in the future.
• The MPI also has a brief on new French President Sarkozy’s immigration policies, which supports our commentary with a number of statistics. (This document is a PDF download and requires Adobe Acrobat).
• My friend, immigration journalist Daniela Gerson, addresses the issue of circular migration in her latest article for German news magazine, Der Spiegel. The article (in English) examines a new trend in labor migration: hiring mothers as seasonal workers to ensure they return home to their husbands and children in their country of origin. The European Union’s Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner, Franco Frattini, plans to address the issue of circular migration, which is an integral part of the EU migration strategy, in the coming days.
• Speaking of Frattini initiatives: integration and fundamental rights received a financial boost last month, when the Council gave the Commission proposal for a new budget toward the promotion of fundamental rights the go-ahead. Over 93 million Euro will be allocated to transnational projects between Member States and other NGO projects between 2007 and 2013.

In what seems like a farce, the Utah Daily Herald published an article on the recent convention of the Utah County Republicans, who closed their recent meeting with a debate on Satan’s influence on illegal immigrants. I kid you not.

Read on:

Don Larsen, chairman of legislative District 65 for the Utah County Republican Party, had submitted a resolution warning that Satan’s minions want to eliminate national borders and do away with sovereignty.

In a speech at the convention, Larsen told those gathered that illegal immigrants “hate American people” and “are determined to destroy this country, and there is nothing they won’t do.”

Illegal aliens are in control of the media, and working in tandem with Democrats, are trying to “destroy Christian America” and replace it with “a godless new world order — and that is not extremism, that is fact,” Larsen said.

At the end of his speech, Larsen began to cry, saying illegal immigrants were trying to bring about the destruction of the U.S. “by self invasion.”

Um, self invasion? Frankly, this just makes me laugh - and laugh - and laugh. Rather than take the article seriously and waste my time commenting on this hogwash, I would like to defer to Washington Post columnnist, Sebastian Mallaby, who so eloquently takes the “nativist nonsense” apart, one ridiculous argument at a time.

Mallaby notes:

The livelihoods of millions are at stake, yet most immigration pronouncements are nonsense.

People accuse immigrants of gang violence, drunken driving and a general contempt for the law. But in 2000 the incarceration rate for immigrants was just one-fifth the rate for the population as a whole, according to Kristin Butcher of the Federal Reserve and Anne Morrison Piehl of Rutgers University.

People say, contrariwise, that immigrants steal jobs from native-born Americans. But economists have patiently explained for years that there is no finite “lump of labor” in an economy. The presence of migrants causes new jobs to be created: Factories that might have gone abroad spring up in Arizona or Texas. Hasn’t anyone noticed that California, where fully one-third of the adult population is foreign born, has an unemployment rate of less than 5 percent?

I urge you to read Mallaby’s article in full, as a vivid reminder of the important role that immigrants play in sustaining the American economy, all while largely living without full access to rights and benefits. And then laugh again at the line “…illegal immigrants (were) are Marxist and unter the influence of the devil.”

On May Day, thousands of immigrants across the world took to the streets to demonstrate. While in Germany immigrant and Muslim rights groups were voices among many in the traditional May Day (Labor Day across Europe) marches, migrant organizations in the US seized the moment to remind Congress that the promised, comprehensive immigration policy reform is still outstanding.

Our fellow bloggers, Rohini Gupta (Mexico) and Cassandra Clifford (Children) have examined the impact of these protests and compiled a wide selection of press articles. While they examine the protests from different angles, they offer a comprehensive overview of some of the issues raised in the protests and we would encourage you to read their postings.

FPA Mexico Blog: US Media Coverage of Pro-Immigrant Rallies

FPA Children Blog: May Day…AKA Illegal Immigrant Rights Day