News (Noticias) Tagged ‘Center for Immigration Studies’

A new report released by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) on Wednesday, July 30th, claims that stepped-up enforcement measures account for much of the recent decline in the undocumented immigrant population. The following is a statement by Angela Kelley, Director of the Immigration Policy Center, an immigration research organization in Washington.

“CIS implies that the illegal immigrant population could drop to half of what it is now within the next five years if only presidential candidates keep silent about the details of comprehensive immigration reform, taxpayers continue to pour billions of dollars into enforcement, and the U.S. economic recession persists—according to CIS, reducing illegal immigration apparently comes with a cruel price tag.

Most researchers agree that undocumented immigration to the United States is driven largely by economics.  Yet, in a new report entitled Homeward Bound: Recent Immigration Enforcement and the Decline in the Illegal Alien Population, CIS dubiously claims that undocumented immigrants decide where to live and work based more on the politics of immigration enforcement than the economics of their own survival.  CIS concludes that the recent decline in the “likely illegal population” (which it defines as less-educated, foreign-born Hispanics age 18 to 40) is largely the result of new immigration-enforcement efforts rather than the downturn of the U.S. economy, including job losses in the construction sector that had been absorbing many less-skilled Hispanic immigrants.

The persuasiveness of CIS’ argument is undermined not only by an absence of hard data, but by the faulty logic and contradictory statements of the report itself.  The authors report confidently about a population that is nearly impossible to accurately measure.  They admit they did not include data about any population other than Hispanics.  They provide no evidence for their assertion that the immigration debate in Congress last summer spurred an increase in undocumented immigration.

CIS provides no real solutions to the nation’s immigration problems.  They insult thoughtful Americans when they seemingly hope for continued unemployment and recession, promote harsh enforcement measures that separate families and destroy communities, and suggest that politicians should not even talk about real solutions.  By requiring undocumented immigrants to come forward, legalize their status, and learn English, we would strengthen the rule of law and turn undocumented immigrants into taxpayers.  The U.S. must enact a practical, fair, and reasonable solution that includes smart enforcement measures.”

“What if all the leading anti-immigration groups were founded by the same man, funded by the same organization, and [had] ties to White supremacy?” So begins Heidi Beirich’s narrative in “Behind the Veil”—a new video being released today that details the common origins of many of the country’s leading anti-immigration groups and their ties to White supremacists. In the video, Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)—the nation’s premier monitor of hate groups—discusses SPLC’s research on organizations such as the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), NumbersUSA, and the Social Contract Press.

Beirich’s narrative, in particular, draws connections between anti-immigrant forces and one of their founders/funders, retired ophthalmologist John Tanton. Beirich shows how the more extreme groups are designed to coexist with those that appear to the public and media as more moderate.

“There is a debate to be had over immigration,” says the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) President and CEO Janet Murguía, “and we’re anxious to have it. But, so far, the rhetoric has not been about policy, it has been about hate. No good policy has ever come from the demonization of one group by another. The hate has got to stop.”

Produced by NCLR, “Behind the Veil” is the last of three videos that are part of a campaign to divorce hate groups and hate speech from the immigration debate. As with the organizations featured in the other two videos, the Anti-Defamation League (“Code Words of Hate”) and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (“America’s Immigration Legacy”), the SPLC has no public policy stake in the immigration debate. All three videos can be found on NCLR’s website: www.WeCanStopTheHate.org.

“On the one hand,” says Beirich, “the anti-immigrant system is based on pandering to the extremists that you know will join your ranks, back you, fund you, and attend your events. On the other hand, it tries to use groups like FAIR to present a more moderate face that seems disconnected from these folks, but really at the end of the day, isn’t.” “Most people,” says Murguía, “don’t realize that these groups have common origins and agendas that are suspect.”

Beirich also draws the connection between the dramatic rise in hate groups over the past eight years to their refocus on anti-immigrant rhetoric. According to the SPLC, the number of hate groups targeting Latinos is up 48% since the year 2000.

“The driving factor that we found behind this,” says Beirich, “is the shift to pounding the anti-immigrant drum. Every one of them recruits now on immigration. That’s what is driving the rise of hate groups—that, and almost that alone.””*

State lawmakers, in response to Congressional inaction on immigration law, are giving local authorities a wider berth. In 2007, 1,562 bills related to illegal immigration were introduced nationwide and 240 were enacted in 46 states, triple the number that passed in 2006, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. A new law in Mississippi makes it a felony for an illegal immigrant to hold a job. In Oklahoma, sheltering or transporting illegal immigrants is also a felony.

It remains unclear how the new laws will be enforced. Yet at the very least, say both advocates and critics, they are likely to lead to more of what occurred here: more local police officers demanding immigrants’ documents; more arrests for identity theft; more accusations of racial profiling; and more movement of immigrants, with some fleeing and others being sent to jail.

“It is a way to address illegal immigration without calling it that,” said Jessica Vaughan, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports intensified local enforcement. She added, “They don’t just have to sit and wait for Washington.””*

I am kind of perplexed at the different titles (image below of the front page)

*From: http://www.nytimes.com
Traducido: usando Google o Altavista/Babel Fish

Unfortunately, corruption is a way of life in Mexico. And labor unions, as much as any institution, demonstrate that fact. The National Union of Education Workers or SNTE (Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educacion), is a case in point: for decades, the 1.4 million-member labor organization has represented a huge obstacle to school reform in Mexico — and less directly, to immigration reform in the U.S.

Running this behemoth with an iron fist and a greased palm is one Elba Esther Gordillo Morales, a woman whose ability to strike fear into opponents has even current Mexican President Felipe Calderon walking softly. A new report published by the Washington, D.C.–based Center for Immigration Studies — called “‘Jimmy Hoffa in a Dress’: Union Boss’s Stranglehold on Mexican Education Creates Immigration Fallout” — reveals just how tight her union’s grip has been on that nation’s public schools. Actually, the main title seems somewhat unfair — to Jimmy Hoffa. Not even at his most ruthless did the late Teamster leader steal funds or wield political influence on the scale enjoyed by Ms. Gordillo and her cronies.”*

With immigration reform advocate Sen. John McCain’s emergence as the presumptive Republican nominee, the issue has faded from the campaign.

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that advocates lower levels of immigration, said the Arizona senator and his two Democratic rivals — Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Clinton of New York — have no reason to debate the issue.

“All three candidates have identical positions,” he said.”*

*From: http://www.ajc.com
Traducido: usando Google o Altavista/Babel Fish

Illegal immigrants are responsible for much of the gang activity in Virginia, and the relationship among local, state and federal law enforcement agencies should be strengthened to better address the problem, according to a study by a Washington think tank that advocates limits on immigration.

The Center for Immigration Studies has not released its 250-page report examining the relationship between illegal immigration and gang activity in the state, but representatives released several findings yesterday. The group plans to look at the issue on a national scale, but officials said it seemed logical to start in Virginia.”*

*From: http://www.washingtonpost.com
Traducido: usando Google o Altavista/Babel Fish

A new study out by the conservative think tank Americas Majority Foundation (www.amermaj.com) suggests a possible explanation why more Arizonans aren’t rushing to run off illegal workers. It turns out Arizonans may be better off — not worse — because of the presence of so many immigrants in the population.

This sounds counterintuitive, at least if you believe current political rhetoric and tendentious research by anti-immigrant groups like the Center for Immigration Studies, NumbersUSA, and the Federation for American Immigration Reform. But the Americas Majority Foundation data are pretty persuasive. States with the highest percentage of immigrants or the largest recent influx of immigrants –19 High Immigrant Jurisdictions (HIJs) in all — are wealthier, have better employment numbers and most have better crime figures than those with fewer immigrants.”*

*From: http://www.townhall.com
Traducido: usando Google o Altavista/Babel Fish

Florida, with the nation’s third largest immigrant population, faces rising costs linked to higher poverty rates, lower educational achievement and lack of medical insurance that plague those families, according to a report released today.

The study was conducted by the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank in Washington, D.C., that favors enforcement against illegal immigration. Based on March 2007 figures from the U.S. Census Bureau’s population survey, the study is the latest attempt to quantify the impact of the rising tide of immigrants, whether they come here legally or not.
“*

The median household income among immigrants living in Arizona is less than any other state with a large population of foreign-born residents, according to a study released Thursday by a group that favors limiting immigration.

“The low incomes are a result of the low levels of education in immigrant families, especially illegal immigrants,” said Steven Camarota, who directed the survey for the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies.”*

Most of the 953,000 immigrants living in Georgia are in the country illegally, according to an analysis for the Center for Immigration Studies released Thursday.

Basing its findings on U.S. Census Bureau data, the analysis said Georgia has one of the fastest-growing immigrant populations of any state. It calculated that 53 percent of the state’s foreign-born population — 504,000 people — are illegal immigrants. Only the estimates for Arizona, at 65 percent, and North Carolina, at 58 percent, were higher.”*

Please note that I try to note the ‘leanings’ of this Center - most don’t, including politicians. I do this because of their simple name. I have been ‘duped’ into the past into thinking this group was neutral. Also please note that I don’t have to do this with groups like La Raza because, well their name says it all.

Immigration over the past seven years was the highest for any seven-year period in American history, bringing 10.3 million new immigrants, more than half of them without legal status, according to an analysis of census data released today by the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington.

One in eight people living in the United States is an immigrant, the survey found, for a total of 37.9 million people — the highest level since the 1920s.

The survey was conducted by Steven A. Camarota, director of research at the center, which advocates reduced immigration. “*

“One source was Lt. Col. Margaret Stock, a member of the U.S. Army Reserves who teaches immigration law at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

The other source was Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.

At first glance, the two would seem like excellent sources for a story such as this, but it quickly becomes clear that while one offers unbiased expertise the other offers nothing but biased rhetoric that has less to do with Gonzalez and the military and more about their own political/personal agenda.”

“In the public debate over illegal immigrants, advocates on both sides of the issue have included Hispanic family values into their arguments. Interlocutors such as President George W. Bush have praised the family values of Hispanic immigrants and argued that, in an era of moral relativism, they would strengthen the national character. Not to be out-done, the opposing camp has published a plethora of articles suggesting that Hispanic family values are, in actuality, the very anti-thesis of American values.

Leading the charge are Heather MacDonald of City Journal, and Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies. Citing statistics on “illegitimate births,” Mr. Camarota’s recent article, “Illegitimate Nation,” paints not only a grim picture, but proposes that there is an endemic pathology in Hispanic culture with regards to illegitimate births. The arguments therein are, without a doubt, compelling, but flawed and untruthful in their conclusion because, as I remind my students, an argument may be “nothing but the truth” but not the “whole truth.” A partial truth, thus, while creating a technically “valid” syllogism may still be fallacious.”

“CIS is one of several anti-immigration groups exposed in a Wall Street Journal article “Borderline Republicans” June 14, 2004, “In fact, CIS, FAIR, NumbersUSA, Project-USA and more than a half-dozen similar groups that Republicans have become disturbingly comfy with, were founded or funded or both by John Tanton, a retired doctor in Michigan. In addition to trying to stop immigration to the U.S., appropriate population-control measures for Dr. Tanton and his network include promoting China’s one-child policy, sterilizing Third World women and wider use of RU-486.”

The mastermind of the groups, John Tanton, was exposed by the Intelligence Report published by the SPCL, “The Puppeteer,” June 12, 2002 written by Rick Swartz. In an interview with SPLC, Swartz said: “The Tanton blueprint envisaged creating a whole array of organizations that serve the overall ideological and political battle plan to halt immigration. ”¦They camouflage the links between these organizations, their true origins, so that they appear to have arisen spontaneously. But in fact they have the same creator, Tanton.””

“BY APPOINTING Florida senator Mel Martinez to chair the Republican National Committee, President Bush sent a blunt message to conservatives: “Drop dead.” That’s the opinion of Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, who has lobbied hard against Bush’s “comprehensive” immigration reform package. Hyperbole, perhaps, but it highlights the GOP fissure on immigration–one deepened by the recent election.

Martinez, a Cuban refugee who fled the island in 1962, supports the Bush vision of a guest-worker program for future immigrants and a “path to citizenship” for illegal aliens. He is also a prominent GOP envoy to the Latino community. His elevation to RNC chief, says Krikorian, shows how “emotionally” invested Bush is in passing an “amnesty” bill. “This is something the president can’t let go.”"

“A new poll, using neutral language, finds intense voter concern over immigration in 14 tight congressional races. The surveys were conducted by the Polling Company Inc. for the Center for Immigration Studies.

In addition to a national survey, detailed polling on immigration was conducted in four contested Senate races: Missouri, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Montana and in 10 contested House races: Arizona fifth, Connecticut fourth, Indiana eighth, Kentucky fourth, Pennsylvania sixth, Texas 17th, Louisiana third, Georgia eighth, Colorado seventh and Ohio sixth.”

“Approximately 60 percent of the 1.3 million new Latinos in 2005 are citizens born here, according to Census Bureau estimates released in May 2006.

While the Center for Immigration Studies estimates that about one-third of newborn Latinos were born to mothers of undocumented resident status, even if immigration came to a standstill, the Latino population boom would not end for at least another generation.

This revelation sets the stage for a new report on the status of Latino healthcare released this week by The Latino Coalition.”

“Almost 8 million immigrants settled in America between 2000 and 2005, more than in any other five-year period in history, according to the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington.

In the Fredericksburg area, the Hispanic population has more than doubled in six years, according to estimates.

The U.S. Census Bureau recorded 9,186 Hispanics in the city and surrounding counties in 2000. The estimate for 2006 is about 22,000 people.

Some believe that estimate is low.”

“WHO: The Association of Hispanic Advertising Agencies (AHAA) A national trade association representing nearly 98 percent of the Hispanic advertising agencies in the United States and more than $5 billion in corporate advertising and marketing spending allocated to reach the Hispanic population in America.

WHAT: The AHAA Forum on the Economics of Immigration A moderated panel discussion featuring: Dr. Steven Camarota Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies Daniel Griswold Director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Trade Policy Studies Doug Woodward Director, Division of Research and Professor of Economics Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina

WHEN: Tuesday, June 6, 2006 Noon to 3 p.m. Lunch will be provided

WHERE: J.W. Marriott Hotel Salon E 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20004″

“Republicans are understandably and laudably concerned about expanding their electoral base to include more Hispanics. But it’s insulting to assume that Hispanics will vote for you, as some leading Republicans seem to, only if you turn a blind-eye toward those who have entered the country illegally via “economy class” (that’s how making it across our open southern border was described in the movie Spanglish). As one GOP Hill staffer puts it, “it borders on racism to think that Hispanics automatically support amnesty for illegal immigrants over security at our borders.”

Indeed, Steve Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, notes that: “polls show that for actual Hispanic voters, immigration ranks as a relatively low priority. So it’s not clear this is a way to win Hispanic voters.” He adds that “for actual Hispanic voters who might vote Republican, they tend to be more law-and-order types, so again it’s not clear that this is a winner politically.” “Law-and-order types” would generally nod in sincere agreement when President Bush talks about the “American Dream” being open to folks who “work hard and play by the rules.” They want rules to be the nation’s priority before we announce an official amnesty (codifying out current general non-enforcement policy) for those who have already broken said rules.”

“Republicans understandably and laudably are concerned about expanding their electoral base to include more Hispanics. But it’s insulting to assume that Hispanics will vote for you, as some leading Republicans seem to, only if you turn a blind eye toward those who have entered the country illegally via “economy class” (as they dubbed making it across our open southern border in the movie Spanglish).

As one GOP Hill staffer puts it, “it borders on racism to think that Hispanics automatically support amnesty for illegal immigrants over security at our borders.”

Indeed, Steve Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, notes that “polls show that for actual Hispanic voters, immigration ranks as a relatively low priority. So it’s not clear this is a way to win Hispanic voters.” He adds that “for actual Hispanic voters who might vote Republican, they tend to be more law-and-order types, so again it’s not clear that this is a winner politically.”"

“Steven Camarota doubts that Congress will agree on an immigration bill this election year. The research director for the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C., sees too great a divide between the views of “elites” and the “public” over the economic and social merit of a massive inflow of foreigners.

A legislative stalemate would result in a continuation of what a study for the conservative Heritage Foundation calls “a policy of benign neglect.”"