Earlier this week, the Center for Migration Studies (CMS) hosted an event on an important report authored by Charles Kamasaki, Susan Timmons and Courtney Tudi, titled "Immigration Reform and Administrative Relief for 2014 and Beyond." The report was written on behalf of the Committee for Immigration Reform Implementation (CIRI), a coalition of 27 agencies devoted to building immigrant service and advocacy capacity with the goal of assisting immigrants to secure legal status and immigration benefits for which they may be eligible.
For many years, there has been strong public skepticism -- some of it well-grounded -- on whether the federal government can effectively carry out its responsibilities in the immigration field. Politicians have returned to this theme again and again in the context of immigration enforcement, including in the current presidential race.
Against the evidence, they claim, for example, that the United States is "still not enforcing the law." From this faulty premise, they argue against legislative reform of U.S. immigration laws until "the border" is totally impenetrable, which no national border has ever been. Interestingly, the great majority of "new" unauthorized immigrants, a population far smaller now than at its apex in 2007, come not from "border" crossers, but from persons who stay longer than their temporary visas permit. The larger point, however, is that a legalization program and reform of the outdated legal immigration laws, which have not been overhauled for 50 long years, would make it possible to build a more effective, humane enforcement system.
The federal government's performance in adjudicating immigration applications and petitions has also been criticized over the years. In the debate over legalization, many have asked how U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a fee-driven agency which struggles to adjudicate six million applications per year, could possibly accommodate the millions of additional applications that legalization would generate. Immigrant service and advocacy agencies have harbored similar concerns about whether their under-funded and over-worked agencies -- that will be vital to the success of any legalization program -- could meet this level of demand.
This was a particular concern when the Obama administration instituted the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program in 2012 for unauthorized persons who entered the United States as children and who meet educational and other requirements. It arose again with the President's November 2014 announcement of an expanded DACA program and the Deferred Action for the Parents of US Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) program. And, of course, these concerns have repeatedly surfaced over the last decade during consideration of immigration reform bills with earned legalization provisions.
The CIRI report directly responds to these concerns by detailing what it would take - in staffing, financial resources, service models, partnerships, division-of-labor, and mobilization of communities -- to successfully implement a legalization program. Looking at past programs, current funding sources, and the capacity of community groups nationwide, the report identifies a relatively modest funding "gap" of $83 million to carry out the DAPA and expanded DACA programs.
One might ask why this report is important at a time when the DAPA and expanded DACA programs have been stalled in the courts, and broad legislative reform is, at best, a presidential election away. There are three reasons. First, there will ultimately be a legalization program that covers a broad swath of the U.S. unauthorized population. In fact, there are no other viable options but a legalization program to address this challenge. The disastrous consequences of attempting to deport 11 million persons, with their U.S. citizen children, can be suggested by the composition (previously discussed in this blog ) of the unauthorized, which includes:
• Most of the 4.4 million family members of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents (LPRs) who have been tentatively approved for family-based visas but languish in multi-year backlogs.
• 3.9 million parents of U.S. citizens and LPRs who would be prima facie eligible for the DAPA program.
• 1.9 million persons who have lived in the United States for at least 20 years and 6.6 million for 10 years or more.
• 1.5 million persons brought to the United States as children who would qualify for the expanded DACA program.
• A disproportionately large share (5.1 percent ) of the U.S. labor force, including the persons we entrust to care for our children and elderly, to nurse our sick, to prepare our food, to tend our lawns, and to build our homes.
Second, the report is timely because the United States can pursue a large legalization program, which does not depend on Congress or the courts, but does depend on the capacity of community groups and the ability of immigrants to access basic services. A CMS survey from last year found that 14 to 15 percent of U.S. unauthorized residents were potentially eligible for permanent legal status, even without administrative or legislative reform. A subsequent screening program sponsored by the New York City Mayors' Office for Immigrant Affairs indicates that this percentage may be far higher. In addition, roughly 500,000 DACA-eligible persons have not applied for this benefit and tens of thousands more become DACA-eligible each year by meeting its age and education requirements.
Third, as the CIRI report points out, legalization confers obvious benefits to the unauthorized and their families, and would represent an economic boon for the nation as a whole "at literally no cost to the taxpayer." Realizing these benefits, the report concludes, will require a comparatively modest investment in "building and sustaining the infrastructure" needed to maximize legalization opportunities under our current and future laws.