Hispanic / Latino

Businesses Along The Border: Valuing The Economic Importance Of Proximity To Mexico

Speaker of the House John Boehner, and many who oppose engaging on Immigration Reform in Congress, have said that they cannot move forward on the issue until the violence on the border is secured. As we have since learned, border communities in places like El Paso are actually much safer then the speakers own home state of Ohio.

What has been missing from the current debate over the Border, has been the very real economic benefits that come from being next door to our 2nd largest trading partner. Richard Dayoub, of the El Paso Chamber of Commerce, does an excellent job of outlining the important economic benefits that Mexico provides to his city:

Money from Mexican nationals has also had real effects on the value of the retail market in El Paso. Some studies estimate that the percentage retail value of Mexican nationals' purchasing power in El Paso is 18 to 22 percent of the total market. Our proximity to Mexico has also created huge trade dividends nationally. Last year, alone, more than $71 billion in trade passed through El Paso. Texas is the largest trade partner with Mexico, but it is not just states along the border that benefit.

Dayoub also notes that Mexico was the United States largest trading partner for five of the U.S. States last year:

Mexico was the top trading partner for five of the 50 U.S. states last year -- Texas, California, Arizona, New Mexico and New Hampshire. Mexico ranked as the No. 2 trading partner for 17 states and No. 3 for six. Thirty-seven of the states have experienced growth in exports to Mexico over the last five years, 28 of which realized growth of at least 25 percent. Fourteen additional states experienced more than 50-percent growth in exports to Mexico during this period.

What's more trade with Mexico has proven to be a job grower for individual states in America:

Another example of the importance of our trade relations with Mexico is job creation. It is estimated that 11,500 jobs in North Carolina and 13,000 jobs in Pennsylvania are directly attributed to trade with Mexico. Mexico ranks No. 3 in total trade with the United States behind Canada and China. Our proximity to Mexico has created enormous economic benefits for El Paso, the state and the national economy. The single most important thing that the president said in his remarks is that we can no longer afford to not fix our immigration policies.

What all of this important economic data underscores is the fact that the border is safe. It is difficult to advance the notion that the border is a war zone, or intrinsically dangerous place when there is in fact billions of dollars of goods moved thru ports of entry daily. The more the economic reality of our ports of entry and the border itself enter into the national debate on immigration, the harder it becomes to advance the notion that the region is out of control.

The full op-ed can be read here.

U.S. to investigate Secure Communities Deportation Program

Secure Communities is a controversial program, which some local law enforcement officials believe is a legitimate way of dealing with criminal undocumented immigrants however, immigration advocates and Congressional Democrats have become increasingly wary of the program as they feel that it may lead to racial profiling.

Recently Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, ranking member of the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Enforcement  wrote a letter to the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General to request an investigation into the program. Lee Romney of The Los Angeles Times has the full story here:

The Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General plans an investigation of an immigration enforcement program that purports to target "serious convicted felons" for deportation but has ensnared many illegal immigrants who were arrested but not subsequently convicted of crimes or who committed minor offenses, a letter obtained Wednesday shows.

The Inspector Generals Review aims to: "determine the extent to which ICE uses the program to identify and remove dangerous criminal aliens from the United States."  The Program it self seems like a good idea in theory:

Under the program, fingerprints routinely sent by local jails to the FBI for criminal background checks are shared with ICE. Although local law enforcement does not actively participate, the program has turned jails in about 1,200 U.S. counties into immigration screening centers. All 58 California counties are on board, though San Francisco and Santa Clara sought unsuccessfully to opt out.

Proponents are quick to ponit out that the program is showing results:

Proponents, including Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, say the program is successfully targeting serious threats to public safety. According to ICE, about 28,000, or 35%, of the people deported so far had been convicted of felonies including murder and rape. An unknown number who appear in ICE data on the program as "noncriminals" or as having committed only misdemeanors had prior violent felonies here or in their home countries, or were previously deported and returned illegally, they note.

However detractors note that the program does not achieve the goals that it was designed for and is actually being used incorrectly:

But opponents contend that by also sweeping up minor offenders or those never convicted of crimes, the program is dissuading illegal immigrants from cooperating with law enforcement. ICE data show that about half those flagged for deportation since the program began were not convicted after their arrest or were convicted of misdemeanors. Immigrant rights groups also say the program has encouraged racial profiling, an allegation that recently prompted Homeland Security officials to hire an outside statistician to analyze the arrest data.

Arizona: Then And Now Progress Made Along The Southwest Border

NDN has been fortunate to have had conversations with elected officials and local law enforcement leaders in Arizona about the  border, across the board those that we have talked too have said that along the United States Mexico border there has been a marked improvements in security.

Denise Wagner of The Arizona Republic has written a piece that does an excellent job of contextualizing just how much the border has undergone a transformation over the last several years. The full article can be read HERE. The article starts by recounting how the Yuma Sector of the Border has come under control, and the steps that are being taken to achieve similar results in Tucson:

Along a bleak expanse of U.S. border in western Arizona, where the sun beats down mercilessly, Border Patrol agents nowadays spend a lot of time listening to wind blow across the sand dunes.  Once a thoroughfare for hundreds of thousands of illegal border crossers, the Yuma Sector now records barely 7,000 arrests each year. The 126-mile stretch of landscape is the only southwestern border segment listed under "operational control" by the Department of Homeland Security.

Operational Control, is what DHS uses to describe areas: where officials are reasonably ensured of capturing most crossers. Yuma achieved this status by:

  • Engaging in Operation Jump Start. This program employs National Guard troops  to build multilayered fences and vehicle barriers along the entire Mexican line.
  • The Border Patrol tripled its number of agents in the area.
  • Employing Observation posts, equipped with giant spotlights.
  • Engaging in a Justice Department program Operation Streamline which  imposed a new prosecution policy which does not engage in a catch release program but jails all immigrants that are caught

These strategies showed results:

As word spread about the campaign, drug runners and human smugglers abandoned their routes in the Yuma area. The number of illegal immigrants apprehended in the desert plummeted from 138,460 in 2005 to 7,116 last year. "It was chaos," said Rodolfo "Rudy" Karisch, acting chief agent of the Border Patrol's Yuma Sector. "Now, we've been able to manage it. . . . The border can be controlled if you apply the right resources."

While critics of the Administrations strategy are quick to point out that what worked in Yuma may not work in Tucson, where seizures of drugs have reached high levels, However the Border patrol is putting similar resources to work in Tucson.

A helicopter rises above Tucson, quickly leaving cityscape behind for barren desert.On board are Bersin and two other Department of Homeland Security officials most responsible for securing the border with Mexico: Mike Fisher, chief of the U.S. Border Patrol, and Randy Hill, head of the Border Patrol's Tucson Sector. The administrators note that criminals who operated in Yuma for decades now run their smuggling operations across the rugged terrain below, competing for routes. Although tactics used in Operation Jump Start are being employed in the Tucson Sector, they say, this is a different environment: The region is tangled with mountain ranges - the Chiricahuas, Huachucas, Patagonias and Baboquivaris - that provide forest cover with few roads and limited radio access. Even at lower elevations, the desert here is often thick with foliage and marked by arroyos.

While it would be impossible to know exactly how the situation will improve, CBP Commissioner Alan Bersin is confident that the "trends are right" for a marked improvement in the future:

Aboard the CBP helicopter, Bersin talks about progress in the Tucson Sector: A decade ago, 616,000 undocumented immigrants were captured. Last year, even with far more manpower and technology, there were 212,000 apprehensions. Bersin says, the numbers show illegal traffic is subsiding; smugglers are being forced into the wilds. "It's not inconsistent to say the border is safer and more secure than it's ever been and to say there's more to be done," he adds. As the helicopter lands at the Border Patrol station in Ajo, Bersin is asked when the government will gain "effective control" of the entire Arizona line. He hesitates. "I wouldn't tell you it will be a year from now or three years from now, but it could happen faster than you think," he says. "The trends are right."

NDN In The News: What’s At Stake With Mexico And How It Affects Our Immigration Policy

NDN has been at the forefront of examining how the U.S. Mexico Border is undergoing a profound change due to the unprecedented resources being provided by the Obama Administration. We have also been making the argument that securing the border should not be used as a reason not to move forward on comprehensive immigration reform.

Juliette Kayyem has written a compelling editorial in the Boston Globe, that provides further context to how the border has changed in recent years, the full story is here:

IN HIS address last week in El Paso, President Obama made a new push for immigration reform. Just a few feet away, the Mexican flag waved from that country’s side of the border. There were no decapitated bodies, lootings, or shootings during Obama’s speech. That may seem surprising, as fears of spillover violence from Mexico have captivated our national imagination. We tend to view Mexico through the lens of a border war. Such a focus overemphasizes the threat the United States faces at the border, and underestimates the challenges Mexico is facing internally. We blame Mexico for almost nonexistent violence here, and take no responsibility for how our conduct helps fuel violence over there.

The editorial also does a great job in showing just how much of what occurs on the Border has been politicized:

House Speaker John Boehner paints a picture of utter chaos when arguing that “our first priority must be ending the violence at the border — we really can’t deal with other issues until it is secure.” If that’s the standard, it has been met. Let’s consider, just for the fun of it, Boehner’s great state of Ohio. The six largest cities in Ohio all have higher rates of violence and crime than every major American city along the Mexican border. In fact, the speaker’s own district in Dayton saw more homicides in 2010 than Texas’s four largest border cities combined; Dayton’s population is only about one-tenth of the size.

Simon does an excellent job of contextualizing just how much progress has been on our southern border:

The reality is a dynamic border, better managed and protected due to investments in technology and increased manpower by the last two US administrations and the Mexican government. It is where legal trade flourishes, people and goods cross without incident, and where local economies grow. Daily, nearly a million people cross the border lawfully at 54 different checkpoints over 2,000 miles.

"We now let more of the things we want through: legal goods and people — and fewer of the things we don’t: smuggled migrants, drugs, bulk cash, guns,’’ said Simon Rosenberg of the think tank NDN, which works on border issues.

The Presidents Speech: A Note About "Operational Control" Along The United States Mexico Border

Some of the fact checks on the Presidents speech have gotten caught up on one particular metric which the President used to show progress along the border.  ABC's Political Punch has a piece up on the border security portion of the Presidents speech. The first fact they check is on the Presidents assertion that the border fence is complete:

1)“They wanted a fence,” the president said. “Well, that fence is now basically complete.”

ABC Fact Check:The president is referring to the fact that 649 miles of fencing have been completed out of 652 miles of fencing mandated by Congress. (Out of 1,969 miles of border with Mexico.) That is factually correct, according to a February 2011 study of the border by the Government Accountability Office.

This is all good so far, but then the fact checkers assert the following:

More to the point, the border remains quite porous.

The Border Patrol, per the GAO study, has achieved “varying levels of operational control for 873 of the nearly 2,000 southwest border miles at the end of fiscal year 2010…GAO’s preliminary analysis of the 873 border miles under operational control in 2010 showed that about 129 miles (15 percent) were classified as ‘controlled’ and the remaining 85 percent were classified as ‘managed.’”

Now this may get a bit wonky, but the above statement is somewhat misleading. Admittedly this is more of a nuance issue then anything else, but if you do not know what the actual definitions of "Operational Control" vs. "Managed" then the border does indeed sound porous, when it is in fact not... 

So according to that same GAO Report, Operational Control is the highest level of control a border sector can have. To be under operational control, the sector must show: Continuous detection and interdiction resources at the immediate border with high probability of apprehension upon entry.

Not all sectors of the border need to be under operational control, certainly it would be desirable but not necessary to produce the results borne out in the FBI Crime Statistics which show that crime rates on the border are down to all time lows.

In fact digging a bit deeper here the big story should be, and this is what the president was referencing yesterday, that 85 percent of the border is managed. In unpacking the quote referenced in the ABC article this statistic points to the broader reality along the border, while not secure it is certainly safer then it has ever been.

A "Managed Border Sector" means that the sector is: multi-tiered detection and interdiction resources are in place to fully implement the border control strategy with high probability of apprehension after entry.

This definition is nearly exactly the same level classification as the Operational definition, but given that there are four lower classifications, and that the number of sectors under operational control have icreased both both full years President Obama has been in office, things are getting under control.

The President's Speech Puts A Marker Down On Improved Border Safety

Yesterday President Obama took credit for improved safety along the south west border and made a call for a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Simon wrote about this yesterday, noting that the President did the right thing by contextualizing the gains on the border with a broader overhaul of our immigration system.

This is important as not only did he acknowledge both the importance of border security as a component of CIR he also noted that now it should no longer be an impediment to moving forward with it, speaking about the Border Patrol:

So they’re doing outstanding work.  And in recent years, among one of the greatest impediments to reform were questions about border security.  And these were legitimate concerns.  What was true was a lack of manpower and a lack of resources at the border, combined with the pull of jobs and ill-considered enforcement once folks were in the country.

All this contributed to a growing number of undocumented people living in the United States.  And these concerns helped unravel a bipartisan coalition that we had forged back when I was in the United States Senate.  So in the years since, “borders first, borders first,” that's become the common refrain, even among those who were previously supportive of comprehensive immigration reform.
 
But over the last two years, thanks to the outstanding work of Janet and Alan and everybody who’s down here working at the border, we’ve answered those concerns.

Perhaps most importantly the President listed the accomplishments of his administration along the border:

  • The Border Patrol has 20,000 agents -- more than twice as many as there were in 2004. 
  • Then they wanted a fence.  Well, the fence is now basically complete.
  • We tripled the number of intelligence analysts working at the border. 
  • I’ve deployed unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol the skies from Texas to California.
  • We have forged a partnership with Mexico to fight the transnational criminal organizations that have affected both of our countries.
  • For the first time we’re screening 100 percent of southbound rail shipments to seize guns and money going south even as we go after drugs that are coming north. 

This is showing real results, the President noted that over the last 2 and 1/2 years:

  • We’ve seized 31 percent more drugs.
  • 75 percent more currency,
  • 64 percent more weapons than ever before
  • Apprehensions along the border have been cut by nearly 40 percent from two years ago.  That means far fewer people are attempting to cross the border illegally.

Some have questioned the veracity of some of these statistics, specifically just how much "operational control" CBP actually has on the border. I will be writing about this later today, but in closing this post, its important to note that the President didn't hold back in calling out Republicans who continually move the goal post on border enforcement as a way to hold back on immigration reform:

So, here’s the point.  I want everybody to listen carefully to this.  We have gone above and beyond what was requested by the very Republicans who said they supported broader reform as long as we got serious about enforcement.  All the stuff they asked for, we’ve done.  But even though we’ve answered these concerns, I’ve got to say I suspect there are still going to be some who are trying to move the goal posts on us one more time.

You know, they said we needed to triple the Border Patrol.  Or now they’re going to say we need to quadruple the Border Patrol.  Or they’ll want a higher fence.  Maybe they’ll need a moat.  (Laughter.)  Maybe they want alligators in the moat.  (Laughter.)  They’ll never be satisfied.  And I understand that.  That’s politics. 

 

Last Year There Were More Homicides In Speaker Boehner's District Then In The Four Largest Texas border Cities Combined

Ahead of President Obama's speech on immigration Speaker of the House John Boehner said the following to Roll Call, “Our first priority must be ending the violence at the border — we really can’t deal with other issues until it is secure.”

Today Congressman Silvestre Reyes of El Paso, a Border City which is considered one of the safest cities in the country, pointed out that the murder rate in Speaker Boehner's district was higher then those in all four of Texas border cities. His full statement can be seen here, quotes and statistics can be seen below:

The Speaker's own district in Dayton, Ohio saw more homicides in 2009 and 2010 than Texas' four largest border cities combined, despite the fact that Dayton's population of 141,500 is only about one-tenth of the size by comparison. According to the most recent City Crime Rankings Survey by CQ Press, Ohio's cities have higher rates of violence and crime in every category, including murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft than border communities.

The statistics dont lie, the City Crime Ratings do show that the four Texas border states have a lower crime rate then Dayton, OH the Speakers District:

What To Expect Ahead Of The Presidents Speech On Immigration

Upon hearing that President Barack Obama will be giving a key note address on immigration at the Border, one may wonder why any sane politician would combine two such highly charged political hot potatoes in a single speech.

Yet, if anyone can speak to the facts surrounding both the border and immigration in a measured and tempered way it would be the President.

The President is giving his speech on the Border so it is highly likely that he will touch on some of the steps his administration has taken to make the region safer. It is also a safe bet that there will be some discussion of enforcement of current immigration laws and how the system as a whole must be fixed.

Some of this is reflexive, as the Republican Party has continually accused his administration and Congressional Democrats as a whole of being weak on enforcement and border security.

I have argued against the idea that Democrats are weak on enforcement before, however given the Presidents upcoming speech it is important to contextualize why addressing the issues of enforcement and border security is important from both a rhetorical and process standpoint in overhauling our current immigration system.

There is broad consensus that enforcement of current immigration laws and making the border region safer is in the best interest of the country and creates a path forward for broader overhauls.

What has been lost in the debate is why:

Since 2005 the current immigration debate has always been framed as a three legged stool: enforcement, future flow, dealing with the 11.1 million undocumented immigrants currently here. There is no sequential order in accomplishing these tasks; in fact the best way to accomplish these goals would be in tandem. Much like a stool, if you only utilize two of these legs, then the structure of the endeavor is compromised and the entire enterprise fails.

The fact that there is a lack of consensus that the President enforces immigration laws is a curious development. Recently immigration activists have become increasingly frustrated with what they see as an enforcement agenda and conservative pundits and politicians have continued to claim that there has been not enough enforcement of the nation's immigration laws.

In a way Immigration advocates (which I consider myself) are right, since the last major immigration legislation passed in 1996 (by a Democratic President written by a Republican Congress) was almost entirely enforcement and security based.

Republican's may have a point as well, but for the wrong reason. This Administration has put unprecedented amounts of resources towards the border and enforcement. Showing real results, crime on the border is down, in Texas where the President is giving his speech from 2008 to 2009 violent crime is down 1.6%, murder is also down 3.1% and aggravated assault has dropped by 3.1%. According to the 2010 City Crime Rankings the City of El Paso, which neighbors Ciudad Juarez one of the most dangerous cities in the world, has been rated the safest large city in America. What is more the according to the same report, the two largest border cities, El Paso and San Diego, are among the five safest in the nation.

Interior enforcement is also at an all time high. The Administration is currently deporting record levels of criminal immigrants at nearly four thousand every two year. There are roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country. We are at the highest rates of deportation in the history of the country, even at this maximum capacity rate DHS will never be able to deport enough criminal aliens to meet the expectations of the GOP. The real problem here is that enforcement alone is quite simply not the solution.

Senior level officials at the Department of Homeland Security, starting with Janet Napolitano on down have continued to note that they will continue to enforce the laws as they are written, but a real solution must come from Congress because enforcement alone is not the solution.

Going back to that three legged stool on immigration, Democrats with the help of their Republican friends along with the current administration have done a lot on enforcement and border security. The problem is not that the country needs more enforcement or less, it is that at the very least we should be having conversations about dealing with future flow and the 11 million currently here.

With the President's speech tomorrow let's hope we can put all of this narrow minded talk on border security enforcement in perspective and broaden the conversation to ways in which we can truly fix our broken immigration system.

Local Law Enforcement On The Border: Sheriff Ralph Ogden On How Unprecedented Amount Of Resources Made The Yuma Sector Safer

NDN was fortunate enough to be invited down to Arizona, to talk to local law enforcement officials who live and work along the border regarding their views on what is happening in the region between Mexico and the United States. 

Next in our series of interviews is Yuma County Sheriff Ralph E. Ogden.  Sheriff Ogden began his law enforcement career with the Yuma County Sheriff’s Office in 1970 after completing four years of service in the United States Marine Corps.  His 40 year career began as a dispatcher and jailer in Parker.  He was promoted to Deputy one year later and transferred to Wellton to become the area Sergeant.  In November 1980, he became Chief Deputy for the Yuma County Sheriff’s Office and served in that position until December 1992.

As the Sheriff of Yuma, Mr. Ogden notes that 7 to 8 years ago, the Yuma sector of the border was in a similar situation to Tucson, however since then there has been an unprecedented amount of resources allocated to the border. This has resulted in an area which is safe with little traffic from drug or human smuggling.


U.S. Hispanic Chamber Of Commerce Opposes Mandatory E-Verify In Florida Immigration Legislation

As Florida continues to grapple with passing an Arizona style immigration law which would require all state businesses to use E-Verify a federal employment verification system, the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce has weighed in with its opposition to the proposed legislation.

Marcos Restrepo has the full story at The Florida Independent which can be read here:

In a letter sent to Florida Senate President Mike Haridopolis, R-Merritt Island, the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce voiced its opposition yesterday to the state Senate’s proposed immigration-enforcement bill, “for fear of the economic impact such legislation will have on the state of Florida.” 

Senate Bill 2040 would among other things:

  • Mandate the use of E-Verify, a federal employee eligibility-verification program,
  • Require local law enforcement to establish Section 287(g) agreements with the federal government.

Section 287(g) is a controversial immigration-enforcement program that authorizes local law officers to enforce federal immigration law. The full legislation can be read here.

The Hispanic Chamber letter agrees the immigration system is broken and that immigration policy should be developed by the federal government. It adds that Florida residents are right to be concerned about immigration, but that when a state takes on this issue, it sees unintended consequences.

The letter points out that when the Arizona passed immigration enforcement law S.B. 1070 the Hispanic Chamber did not boycott the state but took a fact-based and business response. They voiced their opposition.

The full letter can be read here.

Syndicate content