Congress

Just across the Rio Grande from Brownsville, Texas, stands a dormitory-style shelter filled with people recently deported from the U.S. and other migrants waiting to cross the border.

The long rows of bunk beds offer immigrants a place to rest on their long journey. But the shelter is no safe haven in a town controlled by the Gulf cartel. Armed men once showed up and took away 15 men, who were probably put to work as gunmen, lookouts or human mules hauling bales of marijuana into the United States.

As Congress takes up immigration reform, lawmakers may have to confront the reality of this place and others like it, where people say the current system of immigration enforcement and deportation produces a constant flow of people north and south that provides the cartel with a vulnerable labor pool and steady source of revenue.

"This vicious circle favors organized crime because the migrant is going to pay" for safe passage, said the Rev. Francisco Gallardo, who oversees immigrant-assistance efforts for the Matamoros Catholic diocese.

If Congress sends more resources to the border, the government will also need to account for shifting patterns in immigrant arrests.

The cartel controls who crosses the border and profits from each immigrant by taxing human smugglers. At the shelter, the cartel threat was so alarming that shelter administrators began encouraging immigrants to go into the streets during the day, thinking they would be harder to round up than at the shelter.

There have been record numbers of deportations in recent years and tens of thousands landed in Tamaulipas already this year, the state that borders Texas from Matamoros to Nuevo Laredo. Arizona is often singled out as the busiest border crossing for immigrants entering the U.S., but more and more migrants are being caught in the southernmost tip of Texas, in the Border Patrol's Rio Grande Valley sector.

Apprehension statistics are imperfect measures because they only capture a fraction of the real flow, but the arrest numbers are definitely shifting.

Arrests in the Tucson, Ariz., sector dropped 3 percent last year, while Rio Grande Valley arrests rose 65 percent. In March alone, the Border Patrol made more than 16,000 immigrant arrests in the Rio Grande Valley sector, a 67 percent increase from the same month last year, according to the agency.

Immigrant deaths are also up. The sector reported last month that about 70 bodies were found in the first six months of the fiscal year, more than twice as many as the previous year.

The makeup of the immigrants apprehended here is changing, too, driven by people flowing out of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. The Border Patrol made 94,532 arrests of non-Mexican immigrants along the Southwest border last year, more than double the year before. And nearly half of those came in the Rio Grande Valley sector.

The Border Patrol is responding by redirecting personnel, including sending most new graduates from its academy to the Rio Grande Valley, according to senior Border Patrol officials.

When immigrants from Central America and Mexico arrive in Matamoros ahead of their trip to America, they are met by smugglers who have to pay the cartel tax for every person they take across the border.

Attempts to cross alone are met with violence. Some immigrants are kidnapped and their families extorted by the organization.

Reported murders in Tamaulipas, the state that borders Texas from Matamoros to Nuevo Laredo, increased more than 250 percent in the past four years, according to the Mexican government. Official statistics are generally thought to undercount the real toll. Soldiers recently killed six gunmen in a clash in Matamoros.

And yet, even with the high-degree of danger for immigrants crossing this part of the border, they keep coming.

Central American migrants continue to use the route up the Gulf Coast side of Mexico and through Tamaulipas because it's the shortest to the U.S., said Rodolfo Casillas Ramirez, a professor at Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales in Mexico City. The smugglers choose the route, and even if immigrants have heard about the violence in Tamaulipas, "they trust that the premium they've paid includes the right of passage," he said.

They continue to leave their home countries for economic reasons. Although the U.S. economy has provided fewer jobs for immigrants during the Great Recession and a long, slow recovery, opportunities south of the border have been even more limited, Casillas said.

That's why the Rev. Alejandro Solalinde, a Roman Catholic priest who founded a shelter for immigrants in the southern Mexican state of Oaxaca, said the answer is in regional development, not increased border security.

"This situation has grown because ultimately the migrants are merchandise and organized crime profits in volume," he said during a recent visit to Matamoros.

Rep. Filemon Vela, a member of the House Homeland Security Committee whose district includes Brownsville, said the immigration-reform debate has so far left out discussion of the security and economic development in Mexico.

"The incentive for people to cross over illegally from Mexico will never subside until these individuals feel safe and until they are able to feed themselves and their families," Vela said.

At the 150-bed shelter, more than half of the immigrants have just been deported from the U.S., Gallardo said. The others are immigrants preparing to cross. He said shelter workers constantly chase out infiltrators who are paid by smugglers to recruit inside.

At Solalinde's shelter in southern Mexico, threats from organized crime forced them to bring in four state police officers and four federal ones, who have lived at his shelter for the past year as protection. Solalinde now travels with bodyguards after having fled Mexico for a couple of months last year following threats.

One immigrant at the Matamoros shelter was a 48-year-old man who would only give his name as "Gordo" because he feared for his safety. He said he had arrived two days earlier after traveling from Copan, Honduras. Gordo said he had lived in Los Angeles for 10 years but had been in Honduras for the past four. He was trying to make it back to California, where he has a 15-year-old daughter.

Asked about his prospects for successfully crossing the river, he said: "It's difficult, not so much for the Border Patrol" but for the cartels.
___

Associated Press Writer Elliot Spagat in San Diego contributed to this report. Read more about Cartel towns pose challenge for immigration reform

On Tuesday, May 21st, state and local groups around the country will hold a series of press conferences to highlight their opposition to S. 744, the Senate’s comprehensive amnesty bill. The goal is to call attention to the bill’s many failings and to promote an immigration-enforcement approach to reform.

An Arizona-based coalition called Remember 1986 took the lead in coordinating the press conferences. The coalition’s press conference web site page contains a list of planned events. In many instances, participants will be delivering to Senators NumbersUSA petitions that have been signed by a state's citizens.

The events will especially spotlight three key factors about the Gang of Eight immigration bill:

• It won't stop the next amnesty: Its format of amnesty first and enforcement later is the same as the 1986 amnesty in which "later" never came and enforcement promises were all broken.
• It is an attack on the 20 million Americans who can't find a full-time job: The bill doubles legal immigration to meet the desires of a gang of corporate lobbyists to continue to hold down wages. All-told, the bill offers 33 million lifetime work permits to 11 million illegal aliens and 22 million new immigrants in the first decade alone.
• It adds a massive unfunded mandate to government spending and debt: The Heritage Foundation studied the costs of the bill only for the 11 million illegal aliens who would get the amnesty. It projected $9.4 trillion in government services over their lifetime, but only $3.1 trillion in taxes, leaving a net cost of $6.3 trillion.

  Read more about National Press Day Opposing Comprehensive Amnesty Bill

A judge on Thursday refused to halt Gov. Jan Brewer's order that denies driver's licenses for young immigrants in Arizona who have gotten work permits and avoided deportation under an Obama administration policy.

U.S. District Judge David Campbell denied a request from immigrant rights advocates for a preliminary injunction and threw out one of their arguments, but their lawsuit remains alive as they pursue arguments that the young immigrants are suffering from unequal treatment.

Arizona's refusal to view those in President Barack Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program as legal residents has become the most visible challenge to his announcement in June that some young immigrants would be protected from deportation. The Department of Homeland Security has said immigrants with work permits issued under the policy are lawfully present in the U.S.

Campbell rejected the argument by immigrant rights advocates who said Brewer's policy was unconstitutional because it's trumped by federal law.

"This portion of the ruling is not only a victory for the state of Arizona _ it is a victory for states' rights, the rule of law and the bedrock principles that guide our nation's legislative process and the division of power between the federal government and states," Brewer said in a statement.

But the judge said the immigrant rights advocates are likely to succeed in arguing that the state lets some immigrants with work permits get driver's licenses but won't let immigrants protected under Obama's program have the same benefit.

Cecillia Wang, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, one of the groups representing the immigrants, said those who challenged Brewer's policy will examine their options in court for protecting the young immigrants.

"It's keeping people out on a limb," Wang said of the ruling.

Last summer, the Obama administration took administrative steps to shield thousands of immigrants from deportation. Applicants for the deferment program must have come to the U.S. before they turned 16, be younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, be in school or have graduated from high school or GED program, or have served in the military. They also were allowed to apply for a two-year renewable work permit.

Arizona's policy allows anyone with lawful immigration status to get a driver's license, and more than 500 immigrants with work permits have obtained Arizona driver's licenses in recent years. But Arizona officials have said they don't want to extend driver's licenses to those in the new program because they don't believe the youths will be able to stay in the country legally.

Brewer's lawyers argued that Obama's policy isn't federal law and the state has the authority to distinguish between immigrants with work permits who are on the path toward permanent residency and those benefiting from Obama's policy. The state's lawyers argued Arizona isn't violating its own policy by refusing to grant licenses to the immigrants in the program, because the youths haven't been granted legal protections by Congress.

Immigrant rights advocates filed their lawsuit in November on behalf of five young-adult immigrants who were brought to the U.S. from Mexico as children. They were granted deferred-deportation protections under the Obama administration's policy but were denied driver's licenses in Arizona.

The lawsuit said Brewer's policy makes it difficult or impossible for such young immigrants to do essential things in their everyday life, such as going to school, going to the grocery store, and finding and holding down a job.

A similar lawsuit was filed in Michigan after officials there initially decided to deny young immigrants licenses, but the case was dropped when the state changed its policy last month. At least 38 states have agreed to give driver's licenses to immigrants benefiting from the Obama policy, but Nebraska and Ohio officials have also balked.

Brewer has clashed with the Obama administration in the past over illegal immigration, most notably in the challenge that the federal government filed in a bid to invalidate Arizona's 2010 immigration law. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the law's most contentious section, but threw out other sections. Read more about Judge lets Ariz. immigrant license policy stand

A national biometric database of virtually every adult in the United States would be created under the comprehensive immigration reform legislation currently being debated in the Senate.

Such a database, introduced on page 178 of the 844-page bill, has privacy groups fearing that it is the first step toward a national identification system, Wired.com reports.

The reform bill would create a “photo tool” — a huge federal database — that would be administered by the Department of Homeland Security, Wired reports.

It would contain the names, ages, Social Security numbers and photographs of everyone in the nation with a driver’s license or other state-issued photo ID.

Employers would be required to check the database for every new hire to verify that they match their photo, Wired reports.

The database seeks to curb the employment of undocumented immigrants, but privacy advocates fear widespread abuse on many levels.

“It starts to change the relationship between the citizen and state. You do have to get permission to do things,” Chris Calabrese, a congressional lobbyist with the American Civil Liberties Union, told Wired. “More fundamentally, it could be the start of keeping a record of all things.”

The legislation currently allows the database to be used solely for employment purposes — though such limitations haven’t lasted long historically, privacy advocates say.

They cite the Social Security card, created in 1936 to track individual government retirement benefits.

Now, the number is necessary virtually any major purchase, including health insurance.

“The Social Security number itself, it’s pretty ubiquitous in your life,” Calabrese said.

David Bier, an analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the libertarian think tank, agreed.

“The most worrying aspect is that this creates a principle of permission basically to do certain activities — and it can be used to restrict activities,” Bier told Wired. “It’s like a national ID system without the card.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee has not yet examined this part of the immigration bill, formally known as the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act.

Debate is scheduled to continue on Thursday. Read more about Immigration Reform Bill Includes National Biometric Database

Earlier this today, the Heritage Foundation released its analysis on the fiscal costs to U.S. taxpayers should the Gang of Eight's amnesty bill pass in Congress. The study found that an amnesty for the nation's 11 million illegal aliens would cost taxpayers $6.3 trillion over the lifetime of the illegal aliens. The study compared dozens of ways that the government would collect taxes and fees from amnestied illegal aliens against the benefits they would receive from the federal government.

The study assigns all federal benefits to four separate categories:

• Direct benefits. These include Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation.
• Means-tested welfare benefits. There are over 80 of these programs which, at a cost of nearly $900 billion per year, provide cash, food, housing, medical, and other services to roughly 100 million low-income Americans. Major programs include Medicaid, food stamps, the refundable Earned Income Tax Credit, public housing, Supplemental Security Income, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
• Public education. At a cost of $12,300 per pupil per year, these services are largely free or heavily subsidized for low-income parents.
• Population-based services. Police, fire, highways, parks, and similar services, as the National Academy of Sciences determined in its study of the fiscal costs of immigration, generally have to expand as new immigrants enter a community; someone has to bear the cost of that expansion.

Robert Rector, who conducted most of the research for the report, has been studying government-funded services for years and has found that only households with high levels of education pay more in taxes over their lifetime than those with lower levels of education.

The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that only 15% of illegal aliens have at least a college degree, while nearly three out of every four illegal aliens has no more than a high school diploma. Rector used government data similar to Pew's data to reach his conclusion.

Through Rector's research, he's determined that the average illegal-alien household receives around $24,721 in government services, while only paying $10,334 in taxes, amounting to a $14,387 net cost to the American taxpayer. That cost would obviously continue, but legalization of the illegal alien population would also make them eligible for many other forms of federal benefits, primarily Medicare and Social Security in retirement, once they receive green cards and citizenship.

The final phase of amnesty is retirement. Unlawful immigrants are not currently eligible for Social Security and Medicare, but under amnesty they would become so. The cost of this change would be very large indeed.

• As noted, at the current time (before amnesty), the average unlawful immigrant household has a net deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of $14,387 per household.
• During the interim phase immediately after amnesty, tax payments would increase more than government benefits, and the average fiscal deficit for former unlawful immigrant households would fall to $11,455.
• At the end of the interim period, unlawful immigrants would become eligible for means-tested welfare and medical subsidies under Obamacare. Average benefits would rise to $43,900 per household; tax payments would remain around $16,000; the average fiscal deficit (benefits minus taxes) would be about $28,000 per household.
• Amnesty would also raise retirement costs by making unlawful immigrants eligible for Social Security and Medicare, resulting in a net fiscal deficit of around $22,700 per retired amnesty recipient per year.

In terms of public policy and government deficits, an important figure is the aggregate annual deficit for all unlawful immigrant households. This equals the total benefits and services received by all unlawful immigrant households minus the total taxes paid by those households.

• Under current law, all unlawful immigrant households together have an aggregate annual deficit of around $54.5 billion.
• In the interim phase (roughly the first 13 years after amnesty), the aggregate annual deficit would fall to $43.4 billion.
• At the end of the interim phase, former unlawful immigrant households would become fully eligible for means-tested welfare and health care benefits under the Affordable Care Act. The aggregate annual deficit would soar to around $106 billion.
• In the retirement phase, the annual aggregate deficit would be around $160 billion. It would slowly decline as former unlawful immigrants gradually expire.

  Read more about Heritage: Amnesty will Cost U.S. Taxpayers $6.3 Trillion

The Gang of Eight has stated, “this legislation does not significantly increase long-term, annual migration to the United States” and has indicated the legislation shift the United States from low-skill and chain migration to high-skill merit-based. Conspicuously, however, they have refused to provide an estimate of future flow. A conservative analysis of the legislation, with low-range estimates for the new and expanded visa programs, reveals that the proposal would dramatically increase the future flow of low-skill workers and chain migration and provide legal status and work authorization to 30 million immigrants over the next 10 years—who will then be able to bring in family members, initiating a wave of non-merit-based chain migration that will greatly increase low-skilled immigration.

Here is a shorthand way of looking at the explosive growth in the number of people who will be granted work authorization and permanent residency over the next 10 years, largely on a non-merit based track:

· An estimated 2.5 million DREAM beneficiaries of any age (including those no longer living in the country) will be eligible for citizenship in five years.

· DREAM beneficiaries will be able to bring in an unlimited number of parents, spouses, and children (not subject to any cap) and those spouses,  children, and parents will get permanent legal status in five years and be eligible for citizenship in 10.

· An estimated 800,000 illegal agricultural workers will become legal permanent residents (green card holders) in five years and will then be eligible to bring in an unlimited number of spouses and children.

· An estimated 8 million additional illegal immigrants, including recent arrivals and millions of visa overstays, will receive legal status and work authorization. These 8 million will be able to bring in their relatives as soon as 10 years from now. Those relatives, over time, will be able to bring in spouses, children, and parents.

· An estimated 4.5 million aliens awaiting employment and family-based visas under current cap limitations will be cleared in less than 10 years, not subject to the family-based annual cap (thus freeing up room for more family-based migration that is subject to the annual cap).

The bill increases the level of immigration through current and new visa systems. Here are just some examples of how the bill increases legal immigration through visas:

· The bill creates a new merit based visa, which allows for up to 250,000 visas annually. If a little over half of the visas are issued over a 10-year period, the increase in the number of immigrants would be 1,250,000.

· The bill creates a new guest worker program (W-1) for low-skilled workers with a cap of 200,000 visas annually. If a little over a half of the guest workers visas available are issued over a 10-year period, the increase in the number of immigrants would be 1,000,000.

· The bill creates a new nonimmigrant agricultural workers program (W-3 & W-4 visa) which allows up to 112,333 annually. If half of the visas are issued over a 10-year period, the increase in the number of nonimmigrants would be 561,665.

· The bill exempts Priority Workers (EB-1 under current law), STEM graduates, and spouses and children of LPRs from the employment-based visa caps. By taking the average number of immigrants in the two exempt categories over the past 10 years, the exemption will account for an additional 762,000 immigrants over 10 years.

· The bill increases the H-1B visa cap up to 180,000 with a floor of 110,000. If half of the H-1B visas are issued over a 10-year period, the increase in the number of immigrants would be 1,450,000.

· The bill leaves current employment visa caps unchanged and moderately decreases family caps, allowing 301,000 visas a year with some exemptions, but allows for unused visas from 1992 through 2013 to be recaptured. Over a 10-year period, the number of legal immigrants would be 3,879,094.

The total number of immigrants obtaining legal status from the programs listed above is 24,702,759 over a 10-year period. That number does not include other immigrant and nonimmigrant visa programs in the bill (e.g. refugee and asylum seekers, W-1 visas, W-2 visas, W-3 visas, W-4 visas), nor does it include student visas who are now allowed dual intent.

The Gang of Eight’s bill will drastically increase low-skill chain migration. Some of the chain categories are subject to an annual family-based visa cap of 161,000, including adult unmarried sons and daughters of citizens or LPRs, and married sons and daughters (under the age of 31) of U.S. citizens. However, the bill completely exempts the largest categories of chain migrants from the family- and employment-based visa caps, including spouses and children of LPRs or citizens and parents of citizens. The following illustrates how the exempt chain migration categories will dramatically increase the future flow by millions of immigrants over the next 10 years:

• An estimate 2–3 million DREAM beneficiaries are eligible for legal permanent residency and citizenship after just 5 years. After receiving LPR status, the DREAMers may bring a spouse and child through the bill’s exempt chain category and, once granted citizenship, can bring their parents as well (not subject to cap). Assuming 1 million DREAMers bring any combination of two people, the future flow of immigrants would increase by over 2 million. This does not include other chain migrants that a DREAMer may petition under the caps, including adult unmarried sons and daughters, and married sons and daughters. Subsequently, the chain migrants will have the same opportunity to petition for their relatives in the same manner as the DREAMers.

In sum, over the first decade, the total number granted will be well over 32 million (not taking into account chain migration from increased legal flow). Adding in all the various categories of nonimmigrant work visas, and the number climbs to more than 57 million. Further, because approximately 7 million illegal immigrants are on a 13-year track to citizenship, there will be a second wave of chain migration initiated just outside the 10-year window (substantially increasing the net low-skill immigration).
  Read more about Analysis of Future Flow In Gang of Eight Plan: More than 30 Million Immigrants Granted Legal Status In 10 Years, With The Ability To Bring Their Relatives

In a telling vote early Saturday morning, the Senate rejected an amendment (#614) by true immigration reformer Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) to the Senate's 2014 budget bill that would deny illegal aliens ObamaCare and Medicaid in the event Congress passes an amnesty bill later this year. (The Hill, Mar. 23, 2013)

"My amendment would simply say if you are here illegally and then get lawful status, you do not qualify for ObamaCare and Medicaid," explained Sen. Sessions ahead of the vote. (The Hill, Mar. 23, 2013) Long-time pro-amnesty Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), a member of the Senate "Gang of Eight" who was recently investigated for hiring an illegal alien intern, argued against the Sessions' amendment, saying "current law already explicitly excludes undocumented people from receiving benefits." (Id.)

Although illegal aliens are prohibited from receiving subsidized healthcare under ObamaCare, non-immigrants and immigrants (green card holders) are allowed coverage. This means that if Congress grants amnesty to the 11-12 million illegal aliens currently in the U.S., those aliens will be eligible for subsidized healthcare from day one of legalization. So far, the Senate "Gang of Eight" proposal does nothing to prohibit illegal aliens from receiving these benefits.

Republican Senators Susan Collins (ME) and Lisa Murkowski (AK) voted with the Democrat majority to deny the sensible reform measure 43 to 56. To see whether your Senators voted to support subsidized healthcare for amnestied aliens, check the vote here. To find your Members of Congress to tell them to oppose Obamacare and other benefits for amnestied aliens, click here. Read more about Senate Rejects Amendment to Deny Amnestied Illegal Aliens ObamaCare