May Day…an Immigration Issue?

May Day (May 1) is not a holiday usually celebrated or observed in the United States. Its origin is from European Pagan roots, yet it has significance for Americans because of the reform efforts in the United States to demand equality in the work force.  It is probably the day of the year with the most holidays! It’s a celebration of Spring.  It’s a day of political protests.  It’s a neo-pagan festival, a saint’s feast day, and a day for organized labor.  In many countries, it is a national holiday.

For the ancient druids of the British Isles, May 1 divided the year into two halves and was celebrated with fire rituals during the Feast of Beltane and included fertility symbolism. For the Romans who later occupied Britain, it was a time devoted to the worship of Flora, goddess of flowers. By the Middle Ages all English villages had a maypole around which they danced. Villages competed to have the tallest maypole which was cut from a tree brought to the village from the forest. The cutting of the tree and the lopping of its branches unites the Celtic and Roman traditions. Going into the woods to gather flowers and greenery to celebrate the start of spring was referred to as “going a-maying.” In 1644 the Puritans put an end to the Maypole tradition. It was revived, however, under the Stuarts.

Dancing Around the Maypole at the University of Maryland in 1924

In France it was King Charles IX who, having received a Lily of the Valley May 1, 1561, decided to offer Lily of the Valley flowers to the ladies of his court each year on May 1. Around 1900, men started to present a bouquet of Lily of the Valley flowers to women to express their affection. The tradition of offering a “muguet” or Lily of the Valley on May 1 continues in France and Belgium (the government does not tax the buying and selling of these flowers on that day), and it is a token of appreciation between close friends and family. May 1 is an observed public holiday there, and is also know as La Fete du Travail (Labor Day). In England the 1^st Monday in May is a national holiday. The Maypole dance still a ritual in many towns along with the crowning of a May Queen and Morris dancing.

Children of Immigrants Suffer, Too – Part 5

HEALTH CARE REFORM (HR 3590) AND ITS EFFECT ON IMMIGRANTS

            Under the new health care reform, undocumented immigrants will get no federal coverage, nor will they be able to purchase private health care insurance even at full cost.  They are not eligible for premium tax credits or cost sharing reductions, nor are they eligible for Medicare, CHIP or non-emergency Medicaid.  They are exempt from the individual mandate. 

            They remain eligible for

• Emergency Medicaid
• Can seek non-emergency health care services at community health centers
• Can get emergency care but are liable for all costs of service

As for children of undocumented parents who are citizens or lawful permanent residents they can purchase from exchange but only for child coverage.  They can if they are lawful permanent residents or United States citizens be eligible for tax credits and reduced cost sharing. 

NEWS IS BETTER FOR LEGAL IMMIGRANTS

            Legal immigrants can obtain limited federal coverage subject to individual mandate.  They can immediately enroll in insurance for premium tax credits through the exchange and get cost sharing reductions.  Five year or longer waiting periods for lawful permanent residents and other restrictions on Medicaid continue as before. 

            Low- income legal immigrants are not eligible for federal Medicaid and cannot receive premium tax credits or cost sharing reductions in the exchange.  Furthermore, citizens of Compact Free Association States who reside in the U.S. are still ineligible to receive federal Medicaid. 

            Since April 2009, states can choose to provide Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program ( CHIP) benefits to lawfully residing children and pregnant women, regardless of their date of entry.  However if states do not elect this option then a wait of FIVE years or more is required before they can get affordable health care.

CERTAIN VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

            For the insurance exchange, citizenship or permanent residency proof is required.  It will be verified through Department of Homeland Security ( DHS) database  for permanent residents and through the Social Security Administration ( SSA) database for citizens. 

            For Medicaid and other health programs for citizens  requires 2005 documentation of citizenship and identity and with the state option verification via SSA under the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 ( CHIPRA).  For legal immigrants the USCIS can verify immigrant eligibility under SAVE  (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements)

For more information see www.nilc.org

Arizona Anti-Immigration Legislation Creates Fear in Latino Residents

Frighteningly antiquated laws have been proposed in Arizona state legislature that are as oppressive as they are unconstitutional.  S.B. 1070 includes clauses that would require officials to check the status of a person they deemed “reasonably suspicious” without any regulation or monitoring.  Such a clause not only encourages racial profiling, but it also forces government officials to stereotype the world around them in order to do their job.

Not only does the proposed legislation allow this unconscionable behavior towards minorities, it encourages it.  A second clause in the legislation allows any law enforcement officer to arrest a person at their own discretion – “an Arizona…cop has the right to unilaterally decide whether a particular offense is one for which a person could be deported” (Leopold, “Razing Arizona”).  Such an interpretation of the law has always been left in the hands of a select few – judges.  With this legislation, it seems that the interpretation is left open to anyone with a badge.

In a final blow to individual rights, the legislation requires that a lawful permanent resident carry their green cards on them at all times – a requirement too reminiscent of armband wearing to feel comfortable.

This legislation seems extraordinarily misguided and insensitive, as well as a violation of basic human rights.  It is a monumental blow to the betterment of American society – antiquated and prejudiced legislation that can only negatively affect the world – and people – around us.  While regulation is important and crucial to the immigration process, oppression is not, and this legislation seems to be more focused on the latter of the two.

SB 1070 has continued to cause uproar across the country, citing not only social damages that might be caused by the passing of the act, but now economic effects as well.  The implementation of SB1070 would have a detrimental effect on Arizona’s economy – as elaborated upon in Wendy Sefsaf’s recent article.  According to Sefsaf’s article, the economic repercussion in Arizona if SB 1070 were passed would be significant.  For a state with a 3 billion dollar budget deficit, SB 1070 proves to be a frivolous and irresponsible fiscal decision.

The Yuma County Sherriff’s office estimated costs include:

• $775,880 to $1,163,820 to cover processing
• $21,195,600 to $96,086,720 to cover jail costs
• $810,067 to $1,620,134 to cover Attorney and staff fees

Maryland’s Prince William County serves as a prime example of this flawed policy.  In 2007, the county would not use county police force to enforce an immigration law because of the whopping 14 million dollars more per fiscal year it would cost them.  When it comes to Arizona, this price tag is significantly larger.

Not only was the economic output of Arizona’s immigrant population alone around 44 billion dollars, but over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino owned.  This is not to say that these 35,000 Latino business owners are illegal immigrants.  However, SB 1070 would allow police to detain and question anyone at their own discretion – allowing the Arizona government to racially profile any of these minority business owners

The real question Arizona must ask itself before passing SB 1070 is whether or not it can afford to do so, both economically and socially.

Can the state afford such a societal setback?  Or is it as big a step backwards as it seems in the constant fight towards racial equality?  Can Arizona afford to enforce such a law, or would the funds it would require be better allocated to other state run programs? Most importantly, can Arizona afford to ostracize an entire population of people upon which the economic recovery of the state could very well depend?

Citations~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Razing Arizona, David Leopold: http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/04/razing-arizona.html

Immigration Impact, Wendy Sefsaf: http://immigrationimpact.com/author/wendy-sefsaf/

Implementation Costs: http://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/newsroom/release/implementation-costs-sb-1070-one-arizona-county

Children of Immigrants Suffer, Too – Part 3

What are the psychological effects on tens of thousands of children of whom 50% were under the age of 5 when their lawful permanent resident parent was deported?

Is It in The Best Interests Of U.S. Children to Have Their Parents Deported For Minor Crimes?

In this series of six brief articles, I am discussing our countries most valuable asset – our US citizen children and the effects of immigration enforcement on their lives.  Earlier blog articles discussed the statistics and other consequences to the US taxpayer in loss of revenue and costs of enforcement.

Psychological harm to child?

This article discusses the psychological effect on tens of thousands of children of whom 50% were under the age of 5 when their lawful permanent resident parent was deported. Currently, 10% of deported persons from the US are lawful permanent residents. These deported green card holders have usually lived in the US for over 10 years and more than half of them have at least one US citizen child living at home.

Ten years ago 5 year old cause celebre Elian Gonzalez fled Cuba to ask for asylum in the US only to be returned to Cuba to his father, a very forceful communist supporter of Castro.  Today the 16 year old is a featured active youth communist in military uniform in Cuba at a Congress.  What a missed opportunity by the US to make a difference and strike a blow for freedom!

Recently, the Supreme Court in March 2010 case Padilla v. Kentucky addressed the issue of guilty pleas in court made without understanding the consequences of such a plea.  Clearly our Supreme Court Justices understand how a minor criminal incident of no harm or violence to person or property could make a difference of being deported after the sentence and no jail time.

According to news reports from University of California  law schools at Davis and Berkeley, 88,000 U.S. children lost a lawful permanent resident parent ( green card holder) due to relatively minor crimes such as simple assault, non-violent drug offenses and driving under the influence.  Since 1996 under President Clinton with the draconian new immigration laws of AEDPA and IIRAIRA a huge increase in deportation of lawful permanent residents occurred.  The effect of the new immigration laws by Congress was to broaden the category of crimes considered “aggravated felonies”.   Previously only more serious crimes were included in this category but now even charges that are not felonies under criminal law can be aggravated felonies for immigration purposes, including offenses that a sentence of one year or more could have been imposed.  When charged as an aggravated felony by immigration for the offense,  the green card holder is subject to mandatory detention and cannot return for 20 years.  Most significantly, the removal of the 212 c relief  that previously allowed persons not convicted of aggravated felonies, who also satisfied  lengthy resident requirements and legal status, to apply for relief in an immigration court if they could prove rehabilitation and very strong equities in their favor.  This was known as the “second chance doctrine”.

The study found reported negative health impacts, increased depression, anxiety and sleeplessness.  Results also showed a plummeting of grades, increased behavioral problems and a strong urge to drop out of school to help family.  Aside from this the bread winner is often parent and this results in huge economic hardship and loss of insurance, home and other devastating consequences.

Thus, a three fold effect occurs:

• Parent is punished with often a minor charge and minimal to no jail time
• Parent is again punished by long delays in jail by ICE detainer and court deportation
• Child and remaining family is left without financial support and is psychologically devastated.

These effects argue very strongly in favor of JUDICIAL DISCRETION so that Immigration Judges CAN weigh the best interests of the child.

SIGN UP and WATCH for our next issue on EDUCATIONAL and HEALTH CONCERNS.

Children of Immigrants Suffer Too

Is There a Better Solution?

According to the Urban Institute, the fastest growing segment of the United States’ child population is that of children born to immigrant parents – of legal and illegal status alike.  CNN reports that 4 million of these children are born to illegal parent(s).  This has created the issue of children born with every right to remain in the US while their parents stand a daily chance of being deported.  Not only does this create a population of children in the U.S. who stand the great emotional risk of being separated from their parents, but it also creates a pool of children from which orphans can be instantly created so huge that it is enough to overwhelm the United States foster care system.

Not only do these children often lose one or both parents to deportation, but they may also lose siblings.  Often, children will choose to remain with their parents in the parents’ home country, while other children from the same parents choose to remain in the United States.

Between 7 and 10 percent of children enrolled in US public schools are the children of one or both illegal parents.  Not unexpectedly, these figures are closer to 10 percent in states bordering Mexico, which produces the highest number of illegal status immigrants in the US.

It is disheartening to learn that families can so easily be torn apart because of the laws that are currently in place – however, it highlights the need for all persons to follow protocol when immigrating to the US.

Recent estimates put the cost of deporting all illegal immigrants in the US (approximately 11 million people) back to their home countries at approximately 285 billion dollars.  This combined with the cost of the possible 4 million orphans that would be created is astronomically huge – and inefficient for both parties.  Not only would it be traumatic to the core family values that America prides itself on being built around, but it would be financially inefficient.  There must be a better solution to this issue, but what?