The New Undocumented -- The Irish

There have always been undocumented Irish workers. In the 80s and 90s many young Irish came to work temporarily -- legally or illegally -- and always a few remained. The lure of the U.S. job market faded as the Celtic Tiger emerged. Now many Irish returned home as the economy boomed with membership in the European Union. Now the Irish economy has gone bust and the Irish are following familiar paths to New York, Boston and Chicago in search of jobs. (See New York Times article.) This new illegal migration begins with a tourist visa and a warm welcome in generally prosperous Irish neighborhoods. Family ties and ethnic bounds are expected to generate jobs. But in this tight economy these are hard to come by. Still many of the new immigrants find it better than back home.

The new Irish immigrants, unlike the Mexican newcomers who are fleeing grinding poverty, are refugees from a boom. Well educated and use to better, they did well in Ireland. If they were in America previously, it was just for a couple of months to make a little bundle of cash -- and back to steady jobs in Ireland. Now there is little hope there and their intended here stay is indefinite. Still, like the Mexican experience (see Arizona Republic article on the impact of remittances on Mexico), most immigrants have close ties and obligations back home. Community advocates have commented that much of the new migration is of men who have left wives and children to keep heavily mortgaged, unsaleable home occupied.

The experience of the Irish has not been reflected yet with other old immigrant groups. There always has been an undocumented issue among the Poles. Every other new immigrant groups -- Asians, Arabs, Indians, Pakistanis, Haitians -- have their own particular issues. True comprehensive reform must respond to all their needs and concern. So reform must be a coalition
effort.

New Push for E-Verify

The Bush administration had proposed a E-Verify requirement of all federal contractor to check immigrant status of workers. The Obama administration suspended it and had Homeland Security investigated it over the last months. Now E-Verify gets a green light and will go ahead as of September. All employers who receive federal contracts will have to submit the names of all employees for verification of status. These names will be matched to Social Security numbers and other documents. If the search indicates a worker is undocumented, he must be fired.

At the same time, Homeland Security dropped its no-match" requirement. If a worker's Social Security number did not match the agency's records -- usually a worker using a false number -- the employer was expected to fire him. But Social Security's records are replete with error. Immigrant advocates and business groups had challenged the program in federal court. Though the system had previously been been voluntary, it will now be mandatory for federal contractors and will include current employees as well as new hires. Some form of E-Verify is expected to be in any comprehensive immigration legislation. (See New York Times article.)

SENATE IMMGRATION REFORM BILL BY LABOR DAY
Senator Charles Schumer (D, NY), chair of the Senate immigration committee, promised a bill by Labor Day. The Arizona Republic reports, however, the issue of a guest worker program may foul up the timing.

The Undocumented and Health Care Reform

The unresolved immigration issue is complicating the move for health care reform. Theoretically, the undocumented ought not to have a right to health insurance, since they have not rights to work in this country But in reality about half are covered through employers. Insurance companies do not ask about status. Still 6.1 million of undocumented are without insurance and the number is growing quickly. That's one in five of the uninsured. Now the undocumented can get emergency treatment, which makes up 1 to 2 % of demand. Only in the borderland Southwest has this become a problem for hospitals. Most observers believe the undocumented do not generally cause an economic problem; rather it's more a political issue. (See National Public Radio report.)

SHERIFF JOE WON'T CO-OPERATE WITH THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Sheriff Joe Arpaio is under investigation by the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Justice Department. This isn't the first time. He was investigated in the '90s for his treatment of inmates of the county jail. Those complaints he had denounced as politically motivated, as he does with this investigation. Now he refuses to co-operate, which includes his staff. The Justice Department will continue to talk to complainants, some of whom are Hispanic who object to his street weeps as racial profiling. (See Arizona Republic article.)

Tale of Two Borders

This summer a passport or a passport card is necessary to cross our northern border -- at least coming in from Canada. This is more a reaction to 9/11 than a question for stemming undocumented immigration. The statistics on apprehensions of unauthorized immigrants last year clearly demonstrate this -- 662,000 from Mexico, 610 from Canada. The idea that fences -- virtual or real -- be set up along the 4,000 mile Canada border is easily dismissed as unworkable. But trouble does come across the northern border and that upsets many in the Southwest. The two borders are treated differently. The Arizona Republic reports that the issue is now being raised in the fashioning of new immigration law.

Obama's Alternative to Factory Raids -- A Letter

The Obama administration signaled in April that it would be shifting immigration enforcement from factory raids, which created much havoc for the immigrants' families, to auditing employers and penalizing them with fines and civil sanctions. ICE has begun sending out letters notifying companies of such audits. Immigration advocates welcomed the end to "the showboat enforcement raids", but anti-immigration activists hope the fines are more than a slap on the wrist. The auditing will target companies with large workforces, especially those that "serially" and knowingly employ those unauthorized to work here or that have taken advantage of the undocumented to cheat on wages and labor standards. While the shift is welcomed by immigration advocates, it still presents the undocumented worker with the prospects of job loss and deportation. The New York Times profiles the new policy in the case of Los Angeles' American Apparel which had been a sympathetic employers.

Big City Police Chiefs Want to Bring the Undocumented out of the Shadows

Fifty chiefs of large urban police departments that have long experience dealing with immigrant communities asked Congress to support public safety measures to bring the undocumented out of the shadows. Their concern, of course, is for the public safety of citizens. To do that they need the trust of population. As long as workplace raids terrorize immigrant communities, victims of crimes or witnesses to crimes are reluctant to step forward, They also criticized the 287(g) program that gives the police a role in immigration enforcement. The police have neither time nor money for the job, especially with looming budget cuts. It is usually smaller police jurisdictions, new to large populations of immigrants, that are drawn to the program. Anti-immigrant groups, like the Center of Immigration Studies, dismissed the chiefs as "misguided" (See New York Times article.)

Arizona Anti-undocumented Trespass Law Defeated

The Arizona House of Representatives failed to pass a law that would criminalize the presence of the undocumented in the state through the trespass laws. The bill also would have allowed police to cooperate with federal agents in enforcing immigration laws and would monitor the presence of undocumented children in the schools. A majority of votes were in favor of the bill, but no enough for passage. Significant absentees killed it. But the fight is not over. The Senate had passed the bill. So the idea is very popular. Now its architects are planning a campaign to place the measure on the ballot. (See Arizona Republic article.)

BANK OF AMERICAN AND THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is in the midst of an organizing campaign at Bank of America (BoA). Like other organizing campaigns -- e.g., to organize hospitals -- the union features claims as to unfair treatment of poor customers. In this case, former branch employees, some let go because of union activity, described how BoA pressured them into aggressively recruiting new customers in Hispanic neighborhoods and among the newly arrived. And the product lines they were pushing were no simple saving and checking accounts, but confusing high interest accounts. BoA strongly denies the SEIU claims and trumpets products that help the unemployed and working class customers. But California consumer advocates agree with SEIU's claims and have already caught BoA out in unfair practices. (See Los Angeles Times article.) SEIU is taking its complaints to congress.