Immigration Reform in the United States

Background

In 2014, The United States experienced major changes in immigration reform [1] that became a great subject of debate in the political sphere. As is often the case with this subject, the policies in question concern illegal immigrants [2] living in the U.S. and methods through which they may be able to attain citizenship so as to garner rights as members of the workforce and residents of the country. The circumstances leading up to this specific movement can be first traced to 2013 when a Congressional coalition with support from President Barrack Obama sought to pass an overhaul bill which essentially would grant citizenship to illegal immigrants over time. This, however, was not favoured by Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives who preferred that measures against additional illegal immigration to be prioritized before granting amnesty to current illegal immigrants. The resulting stagnation due to this disagreement finally made way in November of 2014 for President Obama to announce deferred action that would enable 40-45% of undocumented immigrants to live and work in the U.S., although this still would not mean full benefits as citizenship would be granted. Prepared for the backlash that would ensue in response to this course of action, President Obama explained his actions [3] as being due to Congress not reaching the point of passing a bill on the matter and executive action being necessary to move forward.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)

This particular program for immigration reform [4] enables individuals that came to the United States as children and that meet a set of guidelines to apply for work authorization.

The guidelines for requesting Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals are as follows:

1. Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012; 2. Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday; 3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time; 4. Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS; 5. Had no lawful status on June 15, 2012; 6. Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and 7. Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

This allows for immigrant youth or those who immigrated at a young age to pursue a lawful route to residence and citizenship and be able to obtain an education and employment rather than be deported. This requires a fairly length process, involving paperwork, payment of fees as back taxes, background checks, and a consideration before approval. However, this opens a door that did not previously exist for undocumented immigrants to gain access to the country in an official capacity rather than remain unknown.

Political Reception

As may have been expected, deferred action imposed under the executive authority from President Obama was met with immediate disagreement from Congressional Republicans who moved to have it reversed. Deemed as a violation of the Constitution [5], opposition has used this as a platform in order to argue against the action out of concern for more situations such as this occurring in the future.

Strong Republican opposition against the DACA, however, has redirected a substantial amount of votes towards the Democrats instead, particularly by the Latino population population. This is particularly because the DACA, to some extent, seeks to grant non-White populations in the United States a form of political, economic, and social equality. Republican opposition has furthermore been backed by the fact that Latinos constitute a large portion of the immigrant population, particularly that with little to no formal education.

Public Reception

Public reception to DACA has been varied, mostly due to strategic questioning and wording in various polls. For the most part, the divide between Democrats and Republicans on the issue remain clear; the former is supportive, while the latter is opposed to the legislation. There is an increased tendency for an American citizen to be supportive of DACA if these illegal immigrants contribute to society, such as joining the military or attending post-secondary institutions.

In terms of immigration reform, polls showed Americans voted strongly in favour for passing new laws that would be enforced, sustainable, and equitable for all. A poll done by the Federation for American Immigration Reform yielded the following results [6]:

• 59% of likely voters believe that the “policies and practices of the federal government encourage illegal immigration.” Only 23% disagree (Rasmussen, September 2011).

• 72% of likely voters believe parents should be required to prove they are legal residents when registering their child for public school; only 21% oppose such a requirement. Only 32% believe that children of illegal aliens should be allowed to attend public school in the U.S., opposed to 53% who disagree (Rasmussen, August 2011).

• 81% of likely voters oppose granting in-state tuition to illegal aliens in their state, with 12% supporting tuition breaks for illegal aliens (Rasmussen, August 2011).

• 66% of likely voters say that gaining control of the border is more important than amnesty for illegal aliens. Only 27% believe amnesty is more important (Rasmussen, July 2011).

• 43% of Americans believe that immigration to the U.S. should be decreased, 35% believe that it should be remain at its present level, while only 18% believe that it should be increased (Gallup, June 2011).

While action taken by the Obama administration is driven by an intent that many Americans believe in, some critical reception is resulting due to the focus on explaining rather than following through with immigration reform [7]. Such an example of this issue regarding the DACA is the fact that it does not extend to other immigrant groups such as parents and workers which still leaves vulnerability in the immigrant population for deportation. While the pursuits of the Obama administration in mitigating opposition to immigration reform has been largely supported, dissatisfaction still remains in the extent to which action is being taken. Arguments are being made towards administrative action taking a more hardline approach such as restricting deportation, expanding deferred action, as well as ending prosecutions of already existing illegal immigration cases and also developing better border-security plans. Potential Benefits and Consequences

To generalize, public reception of DACA is generally a positive one, especially those that are younger with high education backgrounds.

Potential Benefits and Consequences

Discussing the pros and cons of such a widely debated national issue relies heavily on speculation and personal opinion. In the particular case of deferred action, many opportunities have now been opened to immigrants in providing the possibility of obtaining work permits and various benefits as a result such as licenses, social security cards, etc. [8] The drawbacks of this same program for eligible immigrants lie in the uncertainty behind this executive action. In the event that this action is reversed, the results for individuals who have benefited from the rights given to them will surely lose them and suffer the impending conditions. Furthermore, there are limits to be associated with such a program aimed at the millions of eligible enrollments. So far, due to fees, educational requirements, and cultural barriers there is still a major percentage of immigrants who are refraining from taking advantage of DACA. This is a tricky condition because even if a larger portion of eligible individuals decide to take advantage of the program, the logistics for such a large group could be overwhelming and result in the system being unable to process so many applicants. [9] Thus, critics of deferred action praise it for the major opportunities provided for immigrants where 95% of applicants have been able to receive temporary exemption from deportation but are still weary of the various limitations that exist within the program as well as the overall issue of reconciling fearful illegal immigrants revealing themselves to the government.

DACA may very well be the first milestone in addressing the issue of illegal immigrants in the United States. Some may view this piece of legislation as a measure of legitimizing youth raised in the United States who are equally capable and hardworking as others who are regarded as legal citizens. This in turn is beneficial for the country, as a strong workforce could help the American economy flourish, while simultaneously preventing a "brain drain" of these skilled workers to other places where they are more valued and have legal status. As aforementioned, if these immigrants were willing to contribute positively to society, such as through joining the military, acceptance towards this group would be much higher because they "earned" their status in order to be legitimately recognized. As a country, the United States undoubtedly owes no responsibility to these illegal individuals. However, from a moral perspective, by addressing the issue of illegal immigration and reducing (or even removing) the impact on the lives of these youths could bring about positive benefits to the country as a whole. DACA is a "glimmer of hope providing certain (qualified) childhood arrivals with a temporary means of remaining in the United States and legally obtaining employment therein".

Of course, the obvious downside to passing legal instruments such as the DACA is that the problem of illegal immigration into the United States could be exacerbated. For example, fraud could be a byproduct of this legislation. Rather than attracting skilled and educated workers and citizens into the country, the DACA could provide a leeway for hopeful and poverty-stricken immigrants wanting to pursue the American dream to come to the United States. Scholars such as Carol Schmid have pointed out that interestingly enough, in seeking to address the problems of illegal immigration, DACA exposed (or rather, more overtly directed attention towards) other re-occurring issues such as social class and racism; in fact, she believes that a "hierarchy of aspects of citizenship" exists. In other words, some Americans feel that by allowing these illegal immigrants to achieve legal status, immigrants as a whole will lose incentive to work hard and contribute to the society they are integrating themselves into.

A study done by the Center for American Progress [10] highlights the prospective economic effects of DACA on the country due to the increase of working immigrants; with the estimate of 5.2 million individuals being able to work legally that would mean a significantly higher specialization efficiency as legal workers would be eligible to seek out careers according to their skill sets and become trained and educated. This would further result in higher wages (estimated total of $103 billion over the next decade) leading to U.S. GDP increasing by $230 billion over the same time frame. The benefits will not only be experienced by DACA members as the economic stimulation will increase American gross income by approximately $124 billion. In total, this growth in economic activity alone can create an average of 28 814 jobs annually over the next decade for the national population. These figures were placed in contrast to a lawsuit filed by 26 states led by Texas that argued against the costs DACA would impose on the government by requiring the issuing of driver’s licenses to DACA applicants. While this is an issue that reflects on the costs that would inevitably result in the establishing of this program, the potential benefit to the economy is argued as more than enough reason to continue with the necessary procedures.

In conclusion, DACA will require several modifications and amendments before both the public and political opinion will be accepting of the legislation. Until then, immigration reform remains an issue on the American political agenda for decades to come.

References

Richard, Michael Jeb (2013). Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals: Place a Bet or Wait on a Dream. Southern University Law Review, 40(2), 293-317.

Schmid, Carol L. (2013). Undocumented Childhood Immigrants, the Dream Act and Deferred Action for the Childhood Arrivals in the USA. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 38(11/12), 693-707.

http://www.business-of-migration.com/migration-today/us-immigration-reform-issues-since-2013

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/illegal+immigrant

http://www.business-of-migration.com/migration-today/us-immigration-reform-issues-since-2013/obama-20-nov-14-speech-transcript

http://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/01/republicans-vote-to-gut-obamas-deferred-action-program

http://www.fairus.org/facts/public-opinion

http://www.ranchodlaw.com/blog/dreamer-work-permit/pros-and-cons-of-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-dreamer-work-permit

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/