Illegal immigration to the United States

Illegal immigration to the United States refers to the migration of people across the national borders of the United States that is in violation of U.S. immigration and nationality law. The terms illegal alien, illegal immigrant, undocumented alien, undocumented immigrant, and undocumented worker, are common terms used to refer to persons residing in the United States without either U.S. citizenship or a valid immigration status. . In the United States the term ‘’undocumented alien’’ typically refers to a foreign national who entered the country without valid travel documents or who overstayed the limited period of time granted upon entry. For example, a tourist who enters with a valid [B1 visa] and is granted a stay of 15 days and remains in-country for 30 days is an ‘’undocumented alien’’. The holder of a valid B1 (tourist) visa is barred from accepting employment. By accepting employment this hypothetical tourist becomes an ‘’undocumented worker’’ (whether he is an ‘’undocumented alien’’ or not). Technically, those who do not work are not "undocumented workers"; however, the term is often used to encompass all unauthorized individuals, including children, the elderly, and those who cannot or do not work.

Illegal Immigrants Info
Education Profile	Number	Percent
Less then 12 yr.	6,700,000	67.0%
High School	3,000,000	30.0%
College Graduate	300,000	3.0%
Total Illegal Pop.	12,000,000	Jan 2006
Total Working	7,500,000
Criminals Caught	202,842	2004
Criminals Deported	88,895	2004
Caught and Released	1,010,000+	2005
Illegal Immigrants/year	1,500,000+	Total
Voluntary returns/year	- 200,000+	2005
Change of Status/year	- 600,000+	2005
Net Increase/year	700,000+	Illegal Immigrants
Source: Pew Hispanic Data Estimates[2] A Description of the Immigrant Population [3]

Size of illegal immigrant population

The actual number of illegal immigrants is unknown and controversial. There are no national surveys, administrative data, or other sources of information that directly provide accurate estimates of this population. The basic method of estimating this population is called the “residual method” where the reported census number of self proclaimed foreign born people in the U.S. census is subtracted from the known number of legal immigrants to obtain the illegal immigrant population. This methodology is used by the US Department of Homeland Security, Pew Hispanic Center, the Census Bureau and others. Detractors of this methodology argue that this uncorrected subtraction gives too small a number of illegal immigrants because of significant census under reporting of foreign born residents particularly illegal immigrants who have many possible reasons for not reporting their presence (including language and communication problems) and no penalties for incorrect census replies.. Various investigators have estimated the census foreign born under count at 10-40% or 3-12 million. Using the residual methodology Pew, using an unexplained ~10% correction, came up with 8.4 million illegal immigrants in 2000 growing at a more-or-less steady rate to 10.4 million in 2004 and 12 million in 2006. The Census Bureau estimated 7 million illegal immigrants in 2000. The Office of Immigration Statistics in the Department of Homeland Security estimates that 10.5 million illegal immigrants were living in the United States in January 2005 and that the number grew at a national average of 408,000 a year.

Mexican Remittances and Illegal Population Growth
Year	* Remittances Billions	Remittances % Increase per year	Illegal ** Mexicans Millions	Illegal Increase thous./yr	Pew *** est. thous./yr
1995	3,673		3.000
1996	4,224	15.0%	3.450	450	400
1997	4,865	15.2%	3.974	524	400
1998	4,744	-2.5%	3.875	-99	400
1999	5,910	24.6%	4.827	952	400
2000	6,573	11.2%	5.369	542	500
2001	8,895	35.3%	7.265	1,897	500
2002	9,814	10.3%	8.016	751	500
2003	13,396	36.5%	10.941	2,926	500
2004	16,613	24.0%	13.569	2,628	500
2005	20,035	20.6%	16.364	2,795	500
Non-Mex.			4.0 to 6.0
Total	illegal	immigrants	20.0 to 22.0	million
Assumes the amount of remittances from the U.S. is proportional to the number of Mexican's living in the U.S. As can be seen the Pew and Bear Stern numbers are in basic agreement to about 2000 Sources: * Banco de Mexico[4] ** Bear Stern’s investigators [5] *** Pew data [6]

Bear Stern’s investigators came up with another way to attack this very difficult problem. They made the assumption that the amount of remittances (money sent back to Mexico) is directly proportional to the number of Mexican immigrants in the United States. Other data used for their estimates are the increases of households and school enrollment in Mexican immigrant communities. They conclude that the number of illegal immigrants in the United States is around twice the official number of 9 million and may be 20 million people or higher. A web document claiming to come from The Mexican Central Bank details the remittances and shows their growth [7]. According to that data, remittances stayed fairly stable until 2000 when a steady and dramatic increase began. The change in remittances between 1998 and 1999 is most likely a problem in accounting--the two year average is still about 450 thousand consistent with other data. The agreement with the Pew estimate is reasonably good up to 2001 where there is a significant difference--just where the Pew data becomes harder to extrapolate. Using this technique Bear Sterns investigators come up with a possible illegal population of 20 million or greater. (See figure for calculation) Other data confirming their estimates are the dramatic increases of households and school enrollment in Mexican immigrant communities (read their report for more details). Border Arrest data do not show this dramatic increase in apprehensions so how could all these new illegal immigraants have gotten here? A possible answer is simple--many of them simply drove to the United States on shopping trips that included new jobs and a new home and "forgot" to return to Mexico. According to the Bureau and Transportaion statistics [[8]there are over 200,000,000 "legal" border crossing from Mexico each year, ~80% by automobile. If only one percent kept on going plus the numbers that walk across the border and its easy to get the number of illegal immigrants projected and the lack of interior enforcement says they have a good chance of getting away with it.

In the 2001-2006 National Development Plan the Mexican Government says they want to support the 18 million Mexicans who live outside Mexico. There is no information on this report on the source of the data or on the number of those immigrants living in the United States

Illegal immigration overview

According to a 2002 Zogby International poll, "58 percent of Mexicans agree with the statement, "The territory of the United States' southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico." Zogby said 28 percent disagreed, while another 14 percent said they weren't sure. Meanwhile, a similar number – 57 percent – agreed that "Mexicans should have the right to enter the U.S. without U.S. permission," while 35 percent disagreed and 7 percent were unsure. " [9] The Pew Hispanic Center (Estimating the Size and Characteristics of the Undocumented Population; Figure 3) estimates that in the 1980’s net illegal immigration was at the 130,000 per year increasing to 450,000 /year from 1990-94, and further increasing to 750,000 /year from 1995-1999 and staying at 700,000+ /year since about 2000. Illegal Mexican immigration amounts to about 500,000 /year of this influx. According to the same Pew Hispanic Center study as of March 2005, the illegal immigrant population had reached nearly 12 million including more than 6 million Mexicans. Assuming the same rate of growth as in recent years. Adding the expected increases since 2005 gives about 12,000,000 illegal immigrants in the United States with illegal Mexicans amounting to about 60% of the total by 2006. About one-sixth of the illegal immigrant population—about 2.0 million people— is under 18 years of age.

The number of illegal immigrants emigrating [leaving] the U.S. is estimated at about 240,000 /year (~20% of illegal population) [10]

Professor Wayne A. Cornelius, (U.C. Davis) summed up the problems of illegal [11] U. S, immigration (Controlling ‘Unwanted’ Immigration) “Consequences predicted by advocates of the concentrated border enforcement strategy have not yet materialized: there is no evidence that unauthorized migration is being deterred at the point of origin; that would-be illegal entrants are being discouraged at the border after multiple apprehensions by the Border Patrol and returning home; that their employment prospects in the US have been curtailed; or that the resident population of undocumented immigrants is shrinking”

The main effect has been to drive illegal immigration to less well defended parts of the border and drive the cost of illegal immigration up as more and more illegal immigrants employ expensive “Coyotes” and their criminal associates.

In 2006 the Senate approved 370 miles of new double- and triple-layered fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers and then refused to fund them. In December, the House voted for 700 miles of new barriers. Neither was able to reach a compromise bill. There is no assurance that if built, these new layers of protection will reduce the flow of illegal migrants from Mexico. Welfare reform stimulated no mass exodus of unauthorized migrants, and there was no let-up in the massive wave of new immigration occurring in the second half of the 1990s. Both through the appropriations process and in its reluctance to close a giant loophole in the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act on acceptable employment documents that virtually precludes successful prosecutions of employers, the US Congress has sent very clear signals to the executive branch that what truly matters in the immigration control game is border enforcement—not interior enforcement. [12] Despite over 60% of the American public claiming they want to curb illegal immigration Congress is unable to agree on doing anything.

Staffing levels and priorities of finding illegal employers clearly reflect the low priority assigned to workplace enforcement by the Immigration services. Since 1986 the United States has had legislation that penalizes employers who knowingly hire unauthorized foreign workers, but enforcement of employer sanctions has always been at a token level. The provision of the 1986 law that provides sanctions for ‘knowingly’ hiring unauthorized immigrants contains no requirement that employers verify the authenticity of documents presented by job applicants. To reduce the magnet of US jobs, more vigorous worksite enforcement aimed at larger employers would have to be coupled with systematic efforts to remove unauthorized immigrants found to be employed by such firms from the labor market and the country. Without such ‘removal’ efforts, targeted workplace enforcement simply scatters unauthorized workers to other employers and industries. [13]

“A growing number of illegal aliens who cross our land borders arrive under the auspices of sophisticated alien smuggling operations, often connected to organized crime.” [14]

The number of Mexican immigrants in the United States has grown quite rapidly over the past 35 years, increasing almost 15-fold from about 760,000 in the 1970 Census to more than 11 million in 2004—an average annual growth rate of more than 8 percent, maintained over more than 3 decades. This remarkable growth has been largely driven by illegal immigration. On average the net Mexican population living in the United States has grown by about half a million people a year over the past decade. About 80 to 85 percent of the immigration from Mexico in recent years has been illegal. (Pew report Figure 4 and page 2)

After 2000 the estimation of the growth becomes more difficult beacuse of a lack of good information. The rate of growth of the illegal population is estimated with the Consumer Price Survey data [2004] which suffers from the same under counting problems of the Census plus the problem of a much smaller statistical sample of only 10-20,000. Its accuracy may well be suspect for lack of a truly representative "random" sample. Using these techniques Pew comes up with from 11.5 – 12 million illegal immigrants in 2006 with a growth rate of 700,000 to 850,000 net illegal immigrants per year. This is the so called "consensus" number used by most reporters. The unstated cummulative error in total illegal immigrants by 2006 could easily be an additional 8 million illegal immigrants or more and the error in the growth rate since 2000 could also be very large but again is unstated by Pew and others. There is a high probability of the illegal immigrant population's size in 2006 being significantly larger than predicted as all additional information points to a significant increase (300+ %) in illegal immigration rates after 2000. Bottom line, the number of illegal immigrants reported may well be a minimum estimate and their growth rate could easily be a lot more than is commonly reported—we just don’t know for sure.

Methods used to enter the U.S. illegally

Illegal border crossing

That Pew Hispanic article goes on to state, "The rest of the unauthorized migrant population, somewhat more than half, entred the country illegally. Some evaded customs and immigration inspectors at ports of entry by hiding in vehicles such as cargo trucks. Others tracked through the Arizona desert, waded across the Rio Grande or otherwise eluded the U.S. Border patrol which has jurisdiction over all the land areas away from the ports of entry on the borders with Mexico and Canada." Available online (PDF) meaning that they crossed a border without passing possible criminal or health inspection or having a valid passport and visa inspected by an immigration officer at a Port of Entry (POE). It is estimated that over a million people cross the border illegally each year, most of whom are of Mexican origin{fact}. The rest are labeled "Other Than Mexicans" (OTM), of whom a majority are Central Americans{fact}.

Crossing the border without a valid passport and U.S. visa is a misdemeanor for the first offense and a felony for subsequent violations. The first offense is punishable only by deportation, and in practice future offenses are only punishable by deportation and a ban on entering the U.S. legally in the future. Immigrants who are caught illegally trespassing U.S. territory are usually fingerprinted and immediately returned, unless they are a repeat offender, in which case they may be criminally prosecuted. H.R. 4437 would have made the first offense of crossing the border illegally a felony.

According to a report by the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, Committee on the Judiciary on 1997, "Through other violations of our immigration laws, Mexican drug cartels are able to extend their command and control into the United States. Drug smuggling fosters, subsidizes, and is dependent upon continued illegal immigration and alien smuggling." Another large scale multi-million dollar criminal operations connected to illegal immigration is identity theft. [15] The higher crime rates associated with all this traffic has led to extensive efforts on the part of individual sheriffs and communities trying to prevent further damage to their property and communities. [16], [17], [18], [[19]] [20]

In 2006 the number of apprehensions on the border is almost the same as last year through 16 July 2006 at 936,000 [21]. However, according to many US Border Patrol agents, they were instructed by their leadership to "keep new arrests to an "absolute minimum" to offset the effect of the Minuteman vigil, adding that patrols along the border have been severely limited" as one US Border Patrol agent put it [22]. Some of the traffic has spread away from the dangerous Tucson districts deserts where over a hundred illegal immigrants have died so far this year compared to 153 in 2005. [23]

File:ElPaso-Juarez-EO.JPG

El Paso (top) and Ciudad Juárez (bottom) seen from earth orbit; the Rio Grande is the thin line separating the two cities through the middle of the photograph.

Beach at Border Field State Park near San Ysidro, California. (Tire tracks from Border Patrol jeeps are visible on the beach.)

Border Patrol activity is concentrated around big border cities such as San Diego and El Paso which already have separation barriers and extensive Border Agent coverage. Each state in the United States has a National Guard organization that could, in principal, be placed on the border at a state governor's discretion to assist with border security; many states also have a backup to the National Gurard called the State Defense Force that could, in an emergency, also be activated for this purpose. Arizona and New Mexico have currently declared the counties that border Mexico to be under serious duress caused by uncontrolled illegal immigrant traffic, thereby enabling governors to deploy National Guardsmen to the international border. Arizona has exercised this option but New Mexico has not.

In an article published by Renew America, a website which defines itself as a "Alan Keyes' website for grassroots activism -- designed to foster a nationwide movement to restore America to its founding ideals", former US Border Patrol Supervisor David Stoddard asserts that "The whole U.S.-Mexico border could be sealed with as few as 100 helicopters equipped with FLIR (forward looking infrared) scopes, and a few hundred men equipped with state of the art sensors, scopes and other electronics..." [24]

See also United States–Mexico border, United States-Canada border.

From countries with no visa agreements

Immigrants from nations that do not have automatic visa agreements, or who would not otherwise qualify for a visa, sometimes cross the borders illegally. Individuals from North Korea, Libya, Cuba, Syria, Sudan, and Iran are required to submit to strict questioning from U.S. officials before their applications are processed. Their applications take longer to process than those for visitors and immigrants from other countries. [25]

Often, these individuals enter from a land border using falsified documentation from a third country. For instance, Ahmed Ressam, a member of Al Qaeda, originally from Algeria, entered Canada with a falsified French passport. Once in Canada, he procured a false Canadian passport to enter the United States. In the case of Cuba, the U.S. offers political asylum to many Cubans, but they first must reach U.S. soil. [26]

Visa or Border Crossing Card overstayers

A visa overstayer is someone who has entered the United States legally and then illegally overstayed his or her visa or violated the restrictions on Border Crossing Card (BCC) or laser visa. Fraudulent and forged visa and BCC passes are included in this category. An estimated average 40-60% of all illegal immigrants to the U.S. entered this way. The number of overstayers varies considerably from country to country depending on the location of the country, the cultural, political, social and economic conditions in a given country in a given time. The PEW Hispanic institute reported [27] that the INS had developed statistics that showed 3.2% of all Central and South America visas are overstayed. A U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) study gives estimates for all countries showing that China, India, Korea, and the Philippines had violation rates as high as 8%.[28] In general the poorer the country they came from the more likely the foreign visitor was to violate their visa.

GAO estimated that 40-60% of all Mexican illegal immigrants got here by violating their border crossing document's conditions. [29] In operation Tarmac where ICE and DHS checked airport employees for legal employment they found 27% of the over 4900 violators found were visa or BCC violators. In one of the rare ICE check ups on a grocery chain they found that over 57% of the several hundred violators were visa overstayers or BCC violators (Overstay Tracking Is a Key Component of a Layered Defense) patrol officials believe Visa violator numbers would increase if it became more difficult to illegally sneak across the border as illegal border crossers switched techniques. About 33% of all Central American illegal immigrants came by overstaying their visa with the rest traveling through Mexico to reach the border and then crossing illegally. At lest 95+% of all illegal South American, European, and Asians got here by overstaying their visa. (The other ~5% represent illegal immigrants smuggled by ship or plane) An increasing number of illegal immigrants are now flying to Mexico or Canada and then crossing the border illegally by foot or car. The ICE agents on the border report a 52% increase in border violators caught that are Other Than Mexican (OTM). The two main sources of illegal visa violators are Mexico and Canada which the U.S. has a large amount of cross border traffic with. Other estimates done by the GAO show that the overstayers and BCC violators from Mexico alone in the year 2001 may exceed 2,000,000 /year. [30] The Bureau of Transportation Statistics [31] reported that in 2003 (the last year of available statistics) there were 79,000,000 and 245,000,000 border crossings between Canada and Mexico respectively and the US. The tourist bureau shows that there were less Mexicans (as reported by their government) doing all this traffic than their were Canadians (as reported by their government).[32] Mexico has roughly three times the population of Canada. The latest ICE statistics show that they captured 30,000 Brazilians after they crossed the U.S. Mexican border illegally for the first time in 2004. Two of the terrorists behind the September 11, 2001 attacks were visa overstayers. The federal government historically has not extensibly checked up on visa holders once they are in the country; but visa checks has been used extensively after 9 September 2001 to check up on illegal immigrants from countries with large populations sympathic to terrorists. Several hundred visa violators were deported and several thousand more left voluntarily rather than face deportation hearings.

To help improve the lack of good information on visa overstayers the new US-VISIT program collects and retains biographic, travel, and biometric information, such as photographs and fingerprints, of foreign nationals seeking entry into the United States as well as requiring electronic readable passports containing this information. Information collected is checked against lookout databases to ensure that known or suspected terrorists, criminals, and previous U.S. immigration law violators are not admitted. [33] and then checked against their eventual departure. US-VISIT entry procedures have been operational in the secondary inspection areas of the 50 busiest land border ports of entry since December 29, 2004, and are also in place at 115 airports and 15 seaports.[34] Early in 2007 the DHS is hoping to replace the laser visa or boundary crossing cards with People Access Security Service (PASS) card, as a secure identity document for people traveling to or from Canada or Mexico. [35] These would include Radio Frequency Identification Data (RFID) for ease of transit and security.

Visa overstayers violators tend to be somewhat more educated and be better off financially than those who walked crossed the border illegally. [36] The financial and education status of the thousands of BCC or laser visa violators is unknown; but is probably very similar to the illegal border crossers who walked across since they both come from the same population base.

One common means of visa overstaying is coming to the U.S. on a student visa and not going to school or not leaving the country after finishing school. [37] The number of foreign students in the United States is over 600,000.

Profile summaries of illegal immigrants

Profile Summaries of Illegal Immigrants January 2006
Job Category	% of Illegal Immigrant	% of Native -1 w/8+ yr sch.	% of Average Native	# Illegal Immigrant	# Native 8+ yr sch.	# Average Native
Managerial / Self Employed	1.50%	5.9%	32.2%	108,000	758,000	33,810,000
Retail / Business	4.90%	15.2%	29.2%	352,800	1,952,700	30,660,000
Service Private	1.20%	1.0%	0.3%	86,400	128,500	315,000
Farm Mgr	1.60%	1.6%	1.1%	115,200	205,600	1,155,000
Service Retail	18.20%	20.3%	10.3%	1,310,400	2,607,900	10,815,000
Farming -2	17.50%	2.9%	1.0%	1,260,000	372,600	1,050,000
Production	22.0%	20.1%	11.9%	1,584,000	2,582,200	12,495,000
Construction	33.0%	33.1%	14.0%	2,376,000	4,252,400	14,700,000
Total # Working	7,500,000	12,847,000	108,000,000
Labor rate of Participation -3	82%	46.3%	66.30%
Unemployment Rate	7.0%	7.0%	4.10%
Country Profile			Sex / age Profile			Worker profile
Mexican	6,840,000	57%	men 18-39	5,300,000	43.7%	4,500,000	80%
Latin & Central Amer.	3,000,000	25%	women 18-39	3,500,000	29.1%	2,000,000	60%
Asia	1,080,000	9%	more than 40	1,300,000	10.7%	1,000,000	80%
Europe + Canada	720,000	6%	less than 18	2,040,000	17.0%	200,000	10%
Rest of World	480,000	4%	Born / yr.	300,000
Totals Jan 2006	12,100,000		Total Pop.	12,400,000	Total Working	7,500,000
Net Rate of Increase / year	700,000+	Illegal	Immigrants	See Note 7
Net Rate of Increase / Month	60,000+	Illegal	Immigrants

1. Native Population that most closely matches Illegal immigrant population is workers that never graduated from high school.
2. Farm work is the only job category that illegal immigrants uniquely fill; but it does have a 30,000 H2-A visa program for it!
3. Rate of Participation is fraction of total population seeking work
4. Average Education of illegal immigrants may be less if the ~30% Central American's are included.
5. How many criminals turn around after deportation and return is unknown; but it is significant that ICE catchs more than they deport.
6. Estimated number may be low by several hundred thousand
7. Other estimates of net increase are over 850,000 illegal immigrants / year.

Information Sources:

• [38] Estimates of the Size and Characteristics of the Undocumented Population
• [39]A Description of the Immigrant Population
• [40] Labor Participation less than High School
• [41] Economy Slowed, But Immigration Didn't
• [42] Immigration Enforcement Actions: 2004
• [43] The Labor Force Status of Short-Term Unauthorized Workers
• [44] Labor Statistics

Illegal immigration economics – NSF study

The economics of illegal immigration are a highly contentious issue with much conflicting information presented. In 1990 the Congress appointed a bipartisan Commission on Immigration Reform to review the nation's policies and laws and to recommend changes. Information about the commission and its reports are available at http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/uscir/. In turn, the commission in 1995 asked the National Research Council of the National Science Foundation to convene a panel of experts to assess the demographic, economic, and fiscal consequences of immigration. The panel was asked to lay a scientific

Education, Income and Taxes
Source of Immigrant	Europe/ Canada	Asia	Latin America	Other	U.S. / CA
Years of Education *	14.2	14.7	9.2	12+	14.4
Household Income *	$42k	$57k	$32k	$42k	42k
Effective Federal tax rate **	18.7%	22%	5%	18.7%	18.7%
Effective State tax rate ***	10%	12%	9%	10%	10.9%
Average Federal taxes	$7.9k	$12.5k	$1.6k	$7.9k	$7.9k
Average State taxes	$4.2k	$6.8k	$2.9	$4.2k	$4.5k
Source: * Census data [45] **Average federal tax data from CBO estimates of effective Federal tax rates [46] ***State taxes are from California Statistical Abstract [47] Note: Most of the Federal and state taxes are paid by households earning significantly more than average.

foundation for policymaking on some specific Immigration issues. [48] The panel consisted of over 15 well respected professors from highly ranked universities [49]. The National Science Foundation panels charge was to address three key questions:

1. What is the effect of immigration on the future size and composition of the U.S. population?
2. What is the influence of immigration on the overall economy?
3. What is the fiscal impact of immigration on federal, state, and local governments?

The report by 15+ researchers was issued after 3 years study was called “The New Americans: Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration” (1997) Edited by James P. Smith and Barry Edmonston, ISBN 0-309-06356-6. The book is available on line at [50]. The enclosed table summarizes some of the National Academy of Sciences main conclusions.

"As long as there is a virtually unlimited supply of potential immigrants, the nation must make choices on how many to admit and who they should be." National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, 1997.

National Science Foundation Immigrant Economics Federal State Local Net Annual Fiscal Impact per Household [1997]
Source of Immigrant	Europe/ Canada	%	Asia	%	Latin America *	%	Other	%	All **	%	Total Cost ***
California	$1,631	26%	$1,081	25%	($7,206)	43%	$3,313	6%	($2.206)	100%	($20.0) billion
New Jersey	$449	26%	$2,022	25%	($5,625)	43%	$3,052	6%	($1,613)	100%	($15.0) billion
Illegal Immigrant Economics 2005 ****
California	$1,631	6%	$1,081	9%	($7,206)	81%	$3,313	4%	($5,509)	100%	($22.0) billion
New Jersey	$449	6%	$2,022	9%	($5,625)	81%	$3,052	4%	($4,225)	100%	($17.0) billion
Source: The New Americans, National Science Foundation Table 6.4, pg 284[51] * Red data in parenthesis means this is the calculated cost over and above tax payments by illegal immigrants to other taxpayers per family ** All costs are the net prorated costs for all immigration and then illegal immigration alone. *** Total costs calculated for all U.S. immigrants, legal and illegal, 9.166 million households 1995 **** No adjustments for price or tax changes since 1995, assumes 4 million illegal households, percent distribution to different groups from Pew

Other Economic Studies

Previous studies (and many subsequent) of the fiscal impacts of immigration were found to have serious deficiencies. In 1995, only a handful of existing empirical studies were available. According to an article in The National Academies Press, these studies "[...]represented not science but advocay from both sides of the immigration debate, often offered an incomplete accounting of either the full list of taxpayer costs and benefits by ignoring some programs and taxes while including others", and that the "foundation of this research was rarely explicitly stated, offering opportunities to tilt the research toward the desired result"

In an article that appeared in the World Policy Journal (1994), Peter Andreas asserts that constraining the flow of illegal immigration in states such as California, may result in economic stagnation.

A study by the Rand Corporation, conducted by Kevin McCarthy and Georges Vernez, came to the conclusion that immigrants do not have a negative effect on the earnings and the employment opportunities of native-born Americans. McCarthy and Vernez believe that many of the immigrants settling in the state of California are not likely to be integrated successfully, and that the policy of the federal government need to change. Their book, that was sponsored by the Department of Defense and several foundations, concludes with three recommendations for the federal government:

1. reduce total immigration from the current 1.2 million per year (900,000 legal and 300,000 illegal) to between 300,000 and 800,000 a year;
2. expand the number of legal immigration slots available for Mexicans, in exchange for Mexican help to reduce illegal immigration; and
3. encourage immigrants to learn English and to naturalize.

The report also recommends that the state of California do more to help immigrants succeed in school, to encourage English learning and naturalization, and to establish a state office of immigrant affairs to help residents understand immigration better.

Contrary to the NSF study, a study by Francine Lipman states that the belief that undocumented migrants are exploting the US economy and that they cost more in services than they contribute to the economy, is "undeniable false". Lipman asserts that illegal immigrants provide a net positive benefit to federal coffers, because of the tax law's treatment of those in the country illegally and those who are married to illegal immigrants: they are ineligible for the Earned Income Credit and the Child Tax Credit, and that 85% of eminent economists surveyed have concluded that undocumented immigrants have had a positive impact on the U.S. economy

The CIS claims that many illegal immigrants use the U.S. welfare program with false identification. [52]

Backing up the NSF, another study put the cost to the federal government at $2,700/household [53] On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal government are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households. Still another study put the net costs to California residents at $433/household for European/Canadian immigrants, $1,240/household for Asian immigrants and $8,182/household for Latin American workers TABLE 4-7a Net Fiscal Impacts by Nativity of Householder pg 160-1. These are the costs calculated for all immigrants legal and illegal. The costs for illegal immigrants are significantly higher since they have even less education, earn even less income and often avoid paying even the small taxes they are elgible for.

Madeleine Cosman contends that the requirement of hospitals to offer service to illegal aliens regardless of the alien's ability to pay has led to many hospitals running a deficit and being forced to close.[54] Also, free public education is extended to all children in the U.S. regardless of their citizen status. The matricula consular and passports are usually considered legal identification by many police agencies and governments.

Nearly all modern developed societies like Sweden, Canada and the United States heavily subsidize the cost of all government services for low income people by heavily taxing the higher income people. In the United states the effective federal tax rate considering all federal taxes as calculated by the Congressional Budget office runs from 4.8% for the bottom quintile [0-20%](avg. income = $34k) to 25% for the last quintile [80-100%] of income households. The bottom two income quintiles, with exemptions, are nearly exempt from all income tax and social security taxes are heavily subsidized. Many illegal workers claim they have income tax witheld not bothering to mention it is nearly always negligibly small.[55] The state's tax systems vary more but nearly always tax the higher income people much more than the lower income people.

2004 illegal immigration debate

Main article: United States immigration debate

In 2004, United States President George W. Bush proposed a guest worker program to absorb migrant laborers who would otherwise come to the U.S. as illegal aliens. However, the details were left to legislators. In 2005, the Congress began creating legislation to change the current illegal immigration policies. The legislation approved by the U.S. House of Representatives led to massive protests.

See also 2006 United States immigration reform protests.

Legal issues

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service employes controversies

Misconduct charges

In September 2005, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service reported that there were over 2,500 cases of their employees facing misconduct charges involving exchanging immigration benefits for sex, bribery, and influences by foreign governments to assist in violations of U.S. border security. In addition, another 50 such cases are being added weekly. These include cases turned over to the CIS and might not be the complete list according to sources speaking to the Washington Times [56]. Several other news agencies have also reported known cases of the U.S. Border Patrol supporting trespassing of U.S. borders. . Agents have also been discovered to be illegal immigrants themselves conspiring to smuggle illegal aliens.

A CNN report by Lou Dobbs aired on October 3, 2005 reads:

Alarming charges are being leveled tonight against the agency that makes key national security decisions about just who wins U.S. citizenship. Critics say the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service is plagued by employee misconduct, corruption, and may be giving green cards to foreigners who threaten our national security.

Not only have charges been filed, in some cases, the Border Patrol agents have pled guilty (such as the case of Pablo Sergio Berry) or been found guilty in a court of law (such as the case of Oscar Antonio Ortiz who was found to have smuggled more than 100 aliens across the border.

Allegations of abuse

In addition, there are allegations of abuse such as the ones reported by Jesus A. Trevino, that concludes in an article published in the Houston Journal of International Law (2006) with a request to create an independent review commission to oversee the actions of the Border Patrol, and that creating such review board will make the American public aware of the "serious problem of abuse that exists at the border by making this review process public" and that "illegal immigrants deserve the same constitutionally-mandated humane treatment of citizens and legal residents".

An article by Journal article by Michael Huspek, Leticia Jimenez, Roberto Martinez (1998) cites that in December 1997, John Case, head of the INS Office of Internal Audit (OIA), announced at a press conference that public complaints to the INS had risen 29% from 1996, with the "vast majority" of complaints emanating from the southwest border region, but that of of the 2,300 cases, the 243 cases of serious allegations of abuse were down in 1997. These serious cases are considered to be distinct from less serious complaints, such as "verbal abuse, discrimination, extended detention without cause."

Birth citizenship and illegal immigration

Before passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, in 1865 after the conclusion of the Civil War, the United States commonly granted citizenship on the basis of jus soli. The Fourteenth Amendment was originally passed to protect newly emancipated former slaves, and in keeping with the jus soli tradition of the Republic has been interpreted by the United States Supreme Court, in precedent set by United States v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898, to cover everyone born in the U.S. regardless of the citizenship of the parents, with the exception of the children of diplomats. The decision in Wong Kim Ark upheld the jus soli which had often been practiced before the adoption of the 14th Amendment. In short, the Court found that the 14th Amendment re-affirmed jus soli. Wong Kim Ark did not overturn or weaken Elk v. Wilkins; it simply defined jus soli. The Court found that Wong Kim Ark, having been born to Chinese citizens, who were lawfully residing within the United States, and with the intention of amicably obeying its laws, was a citizen of the United States. Under these two rulings, the following persons born in the United States are explicitly not citizens:

• Children born to foreign diplomats
• Children born to enemy forces in hostile occupation of the United States
• Children born to Native Americans who are members of tribes not taxed (these were later given full citizenship by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924)

The following persons born in the United States are explicitly citizens:

• Children born to US citizens
• Children born to aliens who are lawfully inside the United States (resident or visitor), with the intention of amicably interacting with its people, and obeying its laws.

Under these rulings, the citizenship status of the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants is in the same gray area as people born in foreign countries of foreign parents - that is, neither ruling explicitly denies or grants them citizenship. Various aspects of both Elk v. Wilkins and Wong Kim Ark lend reasoning that such children are not US citizens. Wong Kim Ark is often cited as granting the children of illegal aliens US citizenship, but the ruling is explicit in that it applies to the children of aliens who are legally within the United States. Some may even argue that it implicitly denies them citizenship by doing so. However, in terms of Supreme Court rulings, or the rulings of any court, implicit is meaningless. The status quo is that the children of illegal aliens are US citizens, and it will remain that way until government policy changes or is challenged, and the Supreme Court inevitably makes an explicit ruling.

Some legislators, reacting to illegal immigration, have proposed that this be changed, either through legislation or a constitutional amendment. The proposed changes are usually one of the following:

• The child should have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen. (requires amendment)
• The child should have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident (requires amendment)
• The child should have at least one parent who is lawfully present in the United States (requires an Act of Congress, probably challenged to the Supreme Court).

Representative Nathan Deal, Republican of Georgia, introduced legislation in 2005 to assert that U.S.-born children are only "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" (and therefore eligible for citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment) if at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. [57]. Similarly, Representative Ron Paul of Texas has introduced a constitutional amendment that would explicitly deny automatic citizenship to U.S.-born children unless at least one parent is a citizen or permanent resident [58]. Neither of these measures has come to a vote. Even if Rep. Deal's legislation were passed by Congress, it would likely be struck down by the courts based on the precedent established in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, which allows for the US born children of lawful visitors to be citizens as well. The issue remains controversial, reflecting both tensions about immigration and disputes about the appropriate balance of power between the courts and the Congress.

Children of families where at least one parent is an illegal immigrant are sometimes referred to as anchor babies because once the illegal family's mother gives birth to the baby inside the U.S., the baby is said to "anchor" them to the U.S.. Legally the illegal parent or parents can still be deported so the anchor is more perceived than real. However, some illegal immigrant advocates and some of the children with parents of mixed legal immigration status feel the term "Anchor Baby" is pejorative.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, "383,000, or 42 percent, of births to immigrants are to illegal alien mothers. Thus births to illegals now account for nearly 1 out of every 10 births in the United States"[59]

Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) made the hiring of an individual without documents an offense for the first time. Enforcement has been lax, but major businesses have often been found to use illegal immigrants. The act is somewhat redundant since the forging of government documents (fake immigration documents or providing falsified social security numbers) is already a felony, and for most companies such documents must be provided to the government in its tax filings. However, the government does not notify those whose identities have been stolen for the falsified social security numbers, thus making it difficult to estimate the extent of the problem. [60]

Legal cases

Some major companies have been accused of hiring undocumented workers.

• Tyson Foods was accused of actively importing illegal labor for its chicken packing plants, but a jury in Chattanooga, Tennessee acquitted the company after evidence was presented that Tyson Foods went beyond mandated government requirements in demanding documentation for its employees.
• Wal-Mart was convicted of using illegal sub contracted janitorial workers, though it claimed they were hired by a subcontractor without company knowledge or permission.
• Philippe Kahn, who wanted to stay in the United States, created the successful computer software company Borland International without ever getting proper legal status.

Immigration with and without quotas

The immigration quota system was first expanded with the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 which was used to reduce the influx of East and Southern European immigrants who were coming to the country in large numbers from the turn of the century. This immigration was further reduced by the Immigration Act of 1924 which was structured to maintain the cultural and ethnic traditions of the United States.

There has never been a quota for Jews or any other religious group, only for people from specific countries. The waiting list for the few available immigration spots grew enormously in the 1930s in the U.S. and throughout the free world that was accepting any immigration. In the 1930's the number of Jewish immigrant applicants seeking visa to the U.S. alone exceeded the quota for all of Germany. Adolf Hitler started his Holocast program in the 1930's that ultimately led to the death of over 10,000,000 people including 6,000,000 Jews. The Franklin D. Roosevelt administration had nearly shut down immigration during the decade of the Great Depression of 1929. In 1929 there were 279,678 immigrants recorded and in 1933 there were only 23,068 [61]. By 1939 recorded immigrants had crept back up to 82,998 but then the advent of World War II drove it back down to 23,725 in 1943 increasing slowly to 38,119 by 1945 [62]. After 1946 about 600,000 of Europe's Displaced Person (DP's) refugees were admitted under special laws outside the country quotas, and in the 1960s and 1970s large numbers of Cuban and Vietnamese refugees [63] were admitted under special laws outside all quotas. Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965 which esssentially removed all nation-specific quotas, while retaining an overall quota, and included immigrants from Mexico and the Western Hemisphere for the first time with their own quotas. It also put a large part of immigration, so-called family reunification, outside the quota system. This dramatically changed the number, type and composition of the new arrivals from mostly European, to predominantly poor Latino and Asian. It also dramatically increased the number of illegal immigrants as many poorer people now had family or friends in the U.S. that attracted them there. [64] In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) was passed, creating amnesty for about 3,000,000 illegal immigrants already in the United States. Critics believe IRCA just intensified the illegal immigration flow as those granted amnesty illegally brought more of their friends and family into the U.S.. [65]

Without quotas on large segments of the immigration flow, legal immigration to the U.S. surged and soon became largely family based "Chain immigration" where familys brought in a never ending chain of off quota new immigrant family members. The number of legal immigrants rose from about 2.5 million in the 1950s to 4.5 million in the 1970s to 7.3 million in the 1980s to about 10 million in the 1990s. In 2006 legal immigrants to the United States now number approximately 1,000,000 legal immigrants per year of which about 600,000 are Change of Status immigrants who already are in the U.S. Legal immigrants to the United States are now at their highest level ever at over 35,000,000. Net Illegal immigration has also soared from about 130,000 per year in the 1970's, to 300,000+ per year in the 1980's to over 500,000 per year in the 1990's to over 700,000 per year in the 2000's. Total illegal immigration may be as high as 1,500,000 per year [in 2006] with a net of at least 700,000 more illegal immigrants arriving each year to join the 12,000,000 to 20,000,000 that are already here. (Pew Hispanic Data Estimates[66], [67])

See also: Immigration to the United States

Other

There have been occasional incidents where immigration status has been an issue in politics.

• During his 2003 campaign for California governor, it was alleged that Arnold Schwarzenegger had violated his visa by working without a permit in the 1970s; he vehemently denied the charge and produced his documents.
• Linda Chavez, Zoe Baird and Tom Tancredo are among those accused of hiring illegal aliens, the resulting scandals sometimes being dubbed "Nannygate". In Tancredo's case, a home contractor allegedly hired illegal aliens.

Historical context

Every wave of immigration into the United States has faced fear and hostility, especially during times of economic hardship, political turmoil, or war: in 1882, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, one of our nation's first immigration laws, to keep out all people of Chinese origin; during the "Red Scare" of the 1920s, thousands of foreign-born people suspected of political radicalism were arrested and brutalized; many were deported without a hearing; and in 1942, 120,000 Americans of Japanese descent were interned in camps until the end of World War II.

Chinese experience

In 1882 the Chinese Exclusion Act had cut off nearly all Chinese immigration. The first laws creating a quota for immigrants were passed in the 1920s, in response to a sense that the country could no longer absorb large numbers of unskilled workers, despite pleas by big business that it wanted the new workers. Ngai (2003) shows that the new laws were the beginning of mass illegal immigration, because they created a new class of persons - illegal aliens - whose inclusion in the nation was at once a social reality and a legal impossibility. This contradiction challenged received notions of sovereignty and democracy in several ways. First, the increase in the number of illegal entries created a new emphasis on control of the nation's borders - especially the long Canadian border. Second, the application of the deportation laws gave rise to an oppositional political and legal discourse, which imagined "deserving" and "undeserving" illegal immigrants and, therefore, just and unjust deportations. These categories were constructed out of modern ideas about crime, sexual morality, the family, and race. In the 1930s federal deportation policy became the object of legal reform to allow for administrative discretion in deportation cases. Just as restriction and deportation "made" illegal aliens, administrative discretion "unmade" illegal aliens. Administrative law reform became an unlikely site where problems of national belonging and inclusion played out.

History of border security

For a period of time in the 1990s U.S. Army personnel were stationed along the U.S.-Mexico border to help stem the flow of illegal aliens and drug smugglers. These military units brought their specialized equipment such as FLIR infrared devices, and helicopters. In conjunction with the U.S. Border Patrol, they would deploy along the border and, for a brief time, there would be no traffic across that border which was actively watched by "coyotes" paid to assist border crossers. The smugglers and the alien traffickers ceased operations over the one hundred mile sections of the border sealed at a time. Sher Zieve claims this was very effective but temporary as the illegal traffic resumed as soon as the military withdrew.[68]. After the September 11, 2001 attacks the United States looked at the feasibility of placing soldiers along the U.S.-Mexico border as a security measure. [69]], [70], [71]

In December, 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to build a separation barrier along parts of the border not already protected by a separation barriers. A later vote in the United States Senate on May 17, 2006, included a plan to blockade 860 miles of the border with vehicle barriers and triple-layer fencing along with granting amnesty to the 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. and roughly doubling legal immigration. Bay Buchanan, head of Team America, an immigration reduction political action committee, estimated that it would take less than six months to build a 2,000 mile, triple-layer fence and would cost roughly $1.5 - 3 billion. On the same show, Buchanan claimed that the 1990s-era border security program Operation Gatekeeper cut down unauthorized immigration by 90%. The actual numbers are not quite that high with 565,581 apprehensions in San Diego district in fiscal year 1992 before Operation Gatekeeper and its enhanced border fencing and policing to a low of 100,681 apprehensions in in 2002--an 82% reduction. Apprehensions in 2006 are at 138,608 or a 75% reduction. [72] Apprehensions have gone up in other areas as border security was enhanced in San Diego and El Paso which saw a similar drop in apprehensions.

Further reading

• Barkan, Elliott R. "Return of the Nativists? California Public Opinion and Immigration in the 1980s and 1990s." Social Science History 2003 27(2): 229-283. in Project Muse
• Cull, Nicholas J. and Carrasco, Davíd, ed. Alambrista and the US-Mexico Border: Film, Music, and Stories of Undocumented Immigrants U. of New Mexico Press, 2004. 225 pp.
• Thomas J. Espenshade; "Unauthorized Immigration to the United States" Annual Review of Sociology. Volume: 21. 1995. pp 195+.
• Flores, William V. "New Citizens, New Rights: Undocumented Immigrants and Latino Cultural Citizenship" Latin American Perspectives 2003 30(2): 87-100
• Lisa Magaña, Straddling the Border: Immigration Policy and the INS (2003
• Mohl, Raymond A. "Latinization in the Heart of Dixie: Hispanics in Late-twentieth-century Alabama" Alabama Review 2002 55(4): 243-274. Issn: 0002-4341
• Ngai, Mae M. Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America (2004),
• Ngai, Mae M. "The Strange Career of the Illegal Alien: Immigration Restriction and Deportation Policy in the United States, 1921-1965" Law and History Review 2003 21(1): 69-107. Issn: 0738-2480 Fulltext in History Cooperative

See also

• Immigration reduction
• United States immigration debate
• Free immigration
• History of US immigration
• Immigrant deaths along the United States Border
• Melting Pot
• Mexifornia
• Migra
• Nativism
• NumbersUSA
• H-1B visa
• Mara Salvatrucha
• Minuteman Project
• S. 2611

External links

News Coverage

• Orange County Register: “ 'Visa overstayers' fuel illegal population” - April 5, 2006 [73]
• USA Today: Text of President Bush's Immigration Law Reform Speech on May 16, 2006 [74]
• CNN: Reaction to Bush immigration speech - May 15, 2006 [75]
• Miami Herald: “No human being is `illegal” – May 24, 2006 [76]
• Washington Post: “One Sheriff sees immigration answer as simple – May 20, 2006 [77]
• Associated Press: “Ariz. Posse to Arrest Illegal Immigrants” –May 4, 2006 [78]
• NY Times “Arizona County Uses New Law to Look for Illegal Immigrants” –May 9, 2006 [79]
• City Journal “How Unskilled Immigrants Hurt Our Economy” –no date [80] A publication of The Manhattan Institute

Others

• Border Security: Fences Along the U.S. International Border[81] a report of the Congressional Research Service (January 13, 2005) provided by the Federation of American Scientists.