Immigration

Amendment to Remove the Guest Worker Program from the Comprehensive Immigration Bill of 2006

hmoroz — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:56:03 -0400

Legislation

The middle class

Opposes

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Number workers employed in the U.S. under the nation’s current guest worker programs, who were aggressively recruited from Latin America to fill hotel jobs in post-Katrina New Orleans and then exploited by their employer, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center: 84

Percentage of workers in one study whose employers found out their immigration papers were falsified yet who were not fired until they complained about workplace conditions: 25

Percentage who were not fired until they tried to organize a union: 21

Number of days unemployed guest workers could legally remain in the U.S. without starting a new job: 60

Average length of unemployment in 2006: 9.6 weeks

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

The Middle Class Supports This Amendment and Opposes the Procedural Vote To Kill It. The middle class supports removing the guest worker provisions from the comprehensive immigration reform bill because of the potential for these vulnerable temporary employees to be exploited in ways that downgrade wages and working conditions for American workers. The fundamental problem with any guest worker program is the way it institutionalizes the second-tier status of immigrant workers, providing employers with a constantly renewing labor force that is in many ways at their mercy, and thus will tend to be paid less and work under worse conditions than citizens. The more jobs that can be transformed into “guest worker jobs,” the fewer domestic jobs will provide the wages and benefits capable of providing a middle-class standard of living. While the bill’s provisions for temporary workers to be hired at the prevailing wage would provide some important protection against this race to the bottom, a constant supply of disempowered guest workers could still prevent wages in an industry dominated by guest workers from rising when they otherwise might.

In addition to the general problem with guest worker programs, the specific program established by this bill leaves immigrant workers vulnerable to exploitation in additional ways. By mandating that guest workers who are unemployed for more than 60 days leave the country, the bill puts pressure on workers to remain in jobs with substandard wages and working conditions or rush to accept a new job with poor conditions before the period runs out, out of fear of losing legal status. In addition, stronger mechanisms for enforcing the bill’s labor protections are needed, because the bill’s weak administrative process carried out at the discretion of the already overburdened Department of Labor risks being insufficient to genuinely deter violations.

Quotes from Experts

Beyond this Bill

Additional Resources

“Close to Slavery: Guestworker Programs in the United States,” from the Southern Poverty Law Center

“Guest worker programs should include strong wage protections for U.S. workers,” from the Economic Policy Institute

Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006

hmoroz — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:03:53 -0400

Legislation

The middle class

Opposes

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Estimated percentage of those eligible to vote who do not have official state identification, according to the National Commission on Federal Election Reform: 10

Percentage of persons aged 65 and older in Wisconsin who do not have a driver’s license or photo ID: 23

Proportion of African Americans in Louisiana who lack government-sanctioned photo identification, as compared to the state’s white residents: 4 to 5

Percentage of black males aged 18 to 24 with a driver’s license in Wisconsin: 22

Number of states that do not currently require all voters to show photo identification when voting whose laws would be preempted by the Federal Election Integrity Act: 47

Number of instances of ineligible persons voting or attempting to vote in a survey of over 9 million votes cast in 2002 and 2004 in Ohio: 4

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

Middle Class Opposes. Public policy has the potential to make a profound difference in the lives of low-income citizens aspiring to the middle class. Lacking the resources of the wealthy and powerful, voting is one of the few ways the aspiring middle class can hold their government accountable. Yet the burdensome requirements of the Federal Election Integrity Act threaten to disenfranchise these very citizens. The Act’s photo identification requirement would not only impose significant costs on the millions of individuals who would need to obtain new documentation to acquire photo IDs, but would disproportionately affect the low income, people of color, the elderly, and the homeless who more frequently lack driver’s licenses and state identification cards. In fact, the Brennan Center for Justice calls the photo identification requirement a modern-day poll tax because of the costs and resulting disenfranchisement associated with obtaining the photo identification.

Furthermore, the type of voter fraud that the Federal Election Integrity Act purports to prevent is exceedingly rare. The very few instances of individuals misrepresenting themselves at the polls – one survey found that this occurred just four times out of over 9 million votes cast – do not come close to justifying the disenfranchisement of the numerous, and already vulnerable, individuals who do not have official photo identification.

Quotes from Experts

Beyond this Bill

Additional Resources

“Voter ID,” from the Brennan Center for Justice

ACLU Letter to the House of Representatives Urging Opposition to the Federal Election Integrity Act

“Requirements for Voter Identification,” from the National Conference of State Legislatures

Secure Fence Act of 2006

hmoroz — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:57:19 -0400

Legislation

The middle class

Opposes

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Percentage of undocumented immigrants who enter through U.S. legal ports of entry and remain past the expiration dates of their visas: 40

Number of immigrants who die crossing the border from Mexico to the United States each year: 400

Amount of growth in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement budget between 2003 and 2006: $3.6 billion

Annual spending on border security in 1993: $480 million

Annual spending on border security in 2005: $1.4 billion

Estimated percentage increase in the number of undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. during that time period: 300

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

The Middle Class Opposes. The American middle class relies on the economic contributions of immigrants. Unfortunately, the Secure Fence Act fails to recognize undocumented immigrants’ contributions, ignoring the complexities of economic integration between the United States and Mexico in favor of a wall between the two countries. While border security must ultimately be a part of any comprehensive immigration policy, history suggests that ramped up enforcement in the absence of sufficient opportunities for immigrants to enter the country legally is a waste of resources. Between 1993 and 2005, annual spending on border security tripled, from $480 million to $1.4 billion. Yet the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. also nearly tripled during the same period. Would-be migrants simply adopt more remote and dangerous routes of entry into the country, leading to a much higher taxpayer cost per apprehension, or they enter the country legally and overstay their visas. As long as the nation’s immigration laws are fundamentally mismatched with our economic reality, efforts to enforce them are doomed to be costly failures, enacted at the expense of middle-class taxpayers.

Quotes from Experts

Beyond this Bill

Additional Resources

“Border Security: Barriers Along the U.S. International Border,” from the Congressional Research Service

“Fencing in Failure: Effective Border Control Is Not Achieved by Building More Fences,” by Jason Ackleson at Immigration Policy Center

“Secure Border Fence Construction Costs,” from the Government Accountability Office

Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act of 2009

hmoroz — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:34:29 -0400

Legislation

The middle class

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

Quotes from Experts

Beyond this Bill

Additional Resources

Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009

hmoroz — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:23:29 -0500

Legislation

The middle class

Supports

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Number of children uninsured in 2007: 8,149,000

Percentage of all children who are uninsured: 11.0

Percentage of children in poverty who are uninsured: 17.6

Percentage of uninsured children with no usual place of care: 32

Percentage of children with private coverage and Medicaid or other public coverage with no usual place of care, respectively: 3, 4

Number of children who would otherwise be uninsured by 2013 without this legislation: 4.1 million

Percentage of additional children who would gain SCHIP or Medicaid coverage under the legislation who would otherwise be insured with private coverage at some time before 2013, as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office: 37

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

The Middle Class Supports. Being able to take a child to the doctor for regular check-ups and immunizations is fundamental to a middle-class standard of living. This legislation would put that middle-class building block within the reach of more Americans. Though 8 million children are currently uninsured, SCHIP has been highly successful at shrinking the number of uninsured low-income children, helping reduce the uninsured rate by about one third between 1997 and 2005. However, as employer-provided coverage has declined – only 60% of U.S. companies offered health insurance in 2007 compared to 69% in 2000 – and as premiums rise – premiums have increased 78% since 2001 and health care coverage costs have outpaced increases in wages more than 3 to 1 since 2000 – children are increasingly at risk of going without insurance, especially during a recession in which the ranks of the unemployed have grown by 3.6 million people.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the legislation’s increased funding would enroll in SCHIP 1.6 million children who would otherwise be unenrolled and uninsured, would prevent 1.8 million children from losing their coverage, and would enroll about 700,000 children newly eligible for coverage under the bill’s broadened enrollment criteria. Expansion of SCHIP is crucial to ensuring that more children, particularly of the aspiring middle class, do not fall into the ranks of the uninsured as the economy worsens and states cut important programs in the face of severe budget crises. Indeed, 22 states have already implemented or are considering cuts that will affect low-income children’s or families’ access to health insurance.

Underfunding SCHIP has consequences, not only for children’s individual health and well-being, but for society as a whole, which bears the cost of preventable emergency room visits from children who never received preventive care. By renewing SCHIP and expanding it to more low- and middle-income children, this bill offers children a healthy start in life.

Quotes from Experts

Beyond this Bill

Additional Resources

“Child Health Insurance Research Initiative,” from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

“Medicaid/SCHIP,” from the Kaiser Family Foundation

“Improving Children’s Health: A Chartbook about the Roles of Medicaid and SCHIP,” from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act of 2007

atraub — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:20:17 -0400

Legislation

The middle class

Supports

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Estimated percentage of undocumented high school graduates who currently attend college: 10

Difference between the amount of taxes paid annually by the typical 30-year-old Mexican immigrant woman with a college degree and amount paid by a similar high school drop-out: $5,300

Difference in the amount of expense this college-educated woman will cost the government compared to her high school drop-out counterpart: -$3,900

Number of young people between the ages of 5 and 17 who would have an incentive to complete high school and pursue college or military service as a result of this legislation: 715,000

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

The Middle Class Supports: The DREAM Act would enable students who immigrated to the U.S. as children to further their education, get better jobs, and, as a result, pay more in taxes, contributing more to the economic prosperity necessary to sustain a strong middle class. Fulfilling their potential, they may be the nation’s future innovators and entrepreneurs and will make up part of the educated workforce needed to help the U.S. compete in the global economy. The students who would be impacted by the legislation grew up in this country, attended U.S. schools, speak English, and consider themselves Americans – many cannot remember living anywhere else. An unsatisfactory alternative to the DREAM Act is that these talented young people might never achieve their potential, but will instead be marginalized by their lack of legal status in the country they grew up in, and will continue to live in the shadows, working low-paid jobs off the books and contributing far less to the U.S. and its national prosperity than they might have. America does not benefit when young people eager to offer their skills and talents are punished for the decisions made by their parents.

Quotes from Experts

Beyond this Bill

Additional Resources

The Immigrant Student Adjustment / DREAM Act page from The National Immigration Law Center

“Wasted Talent and Broken Dreams: The Lost Potential of Undocumented Students” by Roberto G. Gonzales for the Immigration Policy Center

Dream Act page from the National Council of La Raza

Amendment to Remove Legalization Provisions from the Immigration Bill of 2007

atraub — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:03:52 -0400

Legislation

The middle class

Opposes

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Percentage of Americans who support the earned legalization provisions of the immigration bill, which this amendment would eliminate: 67

Amount undocumented immigrants are estimated to have contributed in federal taxes between 1996 and 2003: nearly $50 billion

Percentage of workers in one study whose employers found out their immigration papers were falsified yet who were not fired until they complained about workplace conditions: 25

Percentage who were not fired until they tried to organize a union: 21

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

The Middle Class Opposes. The American middle class relies on the economic contributions of immigrants. While the overall immigration bill this amendment is attached to recognizes these contributions and would allow them to continue under the Z visa program, this amendment eliminates that pathway to legalization. Instead, by taking out the bill’s only means for otherwise law-abiding undocumented immigrants to remain in the country legally, the amendment effectively endorses a policy of imprisoning and deporting the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants currently helping to support the economy as workers, entrepreneurs, taxpayers and consumers. This mass deportation is the explicit aim of many of the bill’s supporters. But imprisonment and deportation is not only a bad policy for the middle class but also a tremendously expensive and ultimately unworkable one. Many undocumented immigrants would still evade deportation, while others would continue to enter the country illegally. Attempting to enforce such an unworkable policy would further drain scarce enforcement resources.

Equally important is the way this legislation would exacerbate the threat that undocumented workers pose to the wages and workplace conditions of aspiring middle-class Americans. Because unscrupulous employers can threaten to have their undocumented employees deported at any time, these immigrants are particularly vulnerable to exploitation in the workplace. This underground workforce competing in the labor market with American citizens perpetuates a "race to the bottom" in which employers, especially those in industries requiring unskilled labor, are driven to reduce wages and benefits and degrade employee working conditions in an effort to compete with companies that employ undocumented workers under substandard conditions. While this legislation seeks to drive undocumented immigrants out of the workplace completely, the more likely effect would be that they remain in the country but are driven further underground, increasing their vulnerability and further undermining middle-class wages and working conditions.

Quotes from Experts

Beyond this Bill

Additional Resources

“Immigration and the Middle Class Toolkit” from the Drum Major Institute for Public Policy

Comprehensive Immigration Reform update page from the National Immigration Law Center

“The Role of Immigrants in the U.S. Labor Market,” from the Congressional Budget Office

Border Protection, Antiterrorism, And Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005

atraub — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:13:45 -0400

Legislation

The middle class

Opposes

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Percentage of the U.S. civilian labor force that is undocumented, according to the Pew Hispanic Center: 4.9

Approximate proportion of U.S. farming workers who are undocumented: 1 in 4

Amount more the average immigrant and his or her immediate descendents pay in taxes over their lifetimes than they receive in public services, according to the National Academy of Sciences: $80,000

Percentage of workers in one study whose employers found out their immigration papers were falsified who were not fired until they complained about workplace conditions: 25

Percentage who were not fired until they tried to organize a union: 21

Estimated public and private sector cost per year of the workplace enforcement part of this legislation, according to the non-partisan Government Accountability Office: $11.7 billion

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

The Middle Class Opposes: The American middle class relies on the economic contributions of immigrants. Yet this bill does nothing to acknowledge the contribution, instead endorsing a policy of imprisoning and deporting the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants currently helping to support the economy as workers, entrepreneurs, taxpayers, and consumers. Imprisonment and deportation is not only a bad policy for the middle class, but also a tremendously expensive and ultimately unworkable one: the Government Accountability Office reported that just implementing the workplace enforcement part of this legislation would cost the public and private sectors at least $11.7 billion annually. Many undocumented immigrants would still evade deportation while others would continue to enter the country illegally. Attempting to enforce such an unworkable policy would further drain scarce enforcement resources that could be used to strengthen border security.

An additional concern is the way this legislation would exacerbate the threat that undocumented workers pose to the wages and workplace conditions of aspiring middle-class Americans. Because unscrupulous employers can threaten to have their undocumented employees deported at any time, these immigrants are particularly vulnerable to exploitation in the workplace. This underground workforce competing in the labor market with American citizens perpetuates a race to the bottom in which employers, especially those in industries requiring unskilled labor, are driven to restrict wages and benefits and degrade employee working conditions in an effort to compete with companies that employ undocumented workers under substandard conditions. While this legislation seeks to drive undocumented immigrants out of the workplace completely, the more likely effect would be that they remain in the country but are driven further underground, increasing their vulnerability and further undermining middle-class wages and working conditions.

Immigration

Amendment to Remove the Guest Worker Program from the Comprehensive Immigration Bill of 2006

Legislation

The middle class

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

Related Blog: Header

Quotes from Experts

Related Blog: Text

Beyond this Bill

Related Blog: Link

Additional Resources

Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006

Legislation

The middle class

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

Related Blog: Header

Quotes from Experts

Related Blog: Text

Beyond this Bill

Related Blog: Link

Additional Resources

Secure Fence Act of 2006

Legislation

The middle class

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

Related Blog: Header

Quotes from Experts

Related Blog: Text

Beyond this Bill

Related Blog: Link

Additional Resources

Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act of 2009

Legislation

The middle class

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

Related Blog: Header

Quotes from Experts

Related Blog: Text

Beyond this Bill

Related Blog: Link

Additional Resources

Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009

Legislation

The middle class

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

Related Blog: Header

Quotes from Experts

Related Blog: Text

Beyond this Bill

Related Blog: Link

Additional Resources

Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act of 2007

Legislation

The middle class

Video Summary

Injustice Facts

Overview/Summary

Middle Class Position Analysis

Related Blog: Header

Quotes from Experts

Related Blog: Text

Beyond this Bill

Related Blog: Link

Additional Resources

Amendment to Remove Legalization Provisions from the Immigration Bill of 2007