U.S. Immigration Control Policy, 1993-2011: What Has It Accomplished? Wayne Cornelius Division of Global Public Health, UCSD.

U.S. Immigration Control Policy, 1993-2011:What Has It Accomplished?

Wayne CorneliusDivision of Global Public Health, UCSD

The Great Border Enforcement Build-up, 1993-present

The great border-enforcement build-up, 1993-present

U.S. immigration enforcement spending

(= $15+ billion/year))

U.S. Border Patrol has more than quintupled in size since 1992

Physical infrastructure for border enforcement has been vastly enhanced

Total miles of new fencing built , 2006-2010: more than 600 miles, including pedestrian fencing+ vehicle barriers (= 31% of southwest border)

Construction cost forpedestrian fencing:$3.9 - $16 million per mile

Smuggler’s Gulch fencing project near San Diego

Completed Smuggler’s Gulch fencing project

primary fence

new secondary fence

migrants waiting

Triple-fencedsection of U.S.-Mexico bordernear San Diego

Newest sections of border fence are 20 ft. high

Our own Great Wall

Border fence onOtay Mountain,near San Diego

Cost of construction:$16 million per mile

Concertina wirehas been added to 5 miles of border fence between San Diego and Tijuana

Border fence “floats” on sand dunes, Imperial Dunes, Calif.

Remote video surveillance systems have been installed in all urbanized areas along the border

SBInet (Secure Border Initiative)a.k.a. Virtual Fence

launched by Bush administration in November 2005

2 pilot projects built on Arizona-Mexico border

New York Times, January 15, 2011

Homeland Security Cancels ‘Virtual Fence’ After $1 Billion Is SpentBy Julia Preston

The Department of Homeland Security on Friday canceled a five-year-old project to build a technology-based “virtual fence” across the Southwest border, saying that the effort — on which $1 billion has already been spent — was ineffective and too costly.

“New Reaper” drone purchasedin June 2010

Does current U.S. immigration control policy deter and prevent illegal entry?

Border enforcement vs. the U.S. economy

“If the U.S. were experiencingthe kind of job growth it enjoyedin the 1990s, I would be verysurprised if there would be thesekinds of reductions, even withthe investments [in bordercontrol] that have been made.”

-- Doris Meissner, Senior Fellow,Migration Policy Institute;former Commissioner, U.S. Immigration & NaturalizationService (WSJ, Nov. 10, 2009)

Probability of migration has dropped in tandem with intensification of U.S. recession

Intention to migrate to the United States, relative to reference year 2006, among Yucatan interviewees, 2009 (N=1,031)

• No statistical difference in propensity to migrate between 2006 and 2007

• By 2008, potential migrants were 54% less likely to be planning migration to the U.S.

• By 2009, potential migrants were 2 times less likely plan migration, relative to reference year of 2006

Apprehension rates and eventual success ratesamong undocumented migrants from four Mexican states

Border deterrence factors: “What do you worry about most,when thinking about going to the U.S. without papers?” (Jalisco, 2010)

Most unauthorized entries still occur in Arizona

Entered through a legal POE on most recent trip to U.S.(percentages; N=827)

Mode of entry through legal port of entry(percentages; N=180)

Unauthorized entries are being made through legal ports of entry because they are more likely to succeed + reduce physical risk (mean number of apprehensions on most recent trip to border)

Undocumented migrants going ashore on Del

Mar beach, October 2011

People-smuggler’sboat abandoned on San Onofre beach,June 2011

Tighter border enforcement deters new migration mainly through its impact on people-smugglers’ fees:

• Higher probability of apprehension and more dangerous crossings = greater demand for people-smugglers

• More than 9 out of 10 Mexican migrants now hire people-smugglers

• People-smugglers can charge more for their services

Average fee paid to coyotes

Average amount paid to people-smuggler by Yucateco migrants on their most recent trip to the U.S.

Migrants who hire coyotes stay longer in the U.S.,since they need more time to pay off coyote debt

Source: CCIS survey of Yucateco migrants in U.S. and Yucatan, 2009.

Hours of U.S. work needed to repay coyote fee (for most recent trip to the U.S.)

“Rescued” migrant in the Arizona desert, July 2010

Tighter border enforcement has increased physical risk

Migrant fatalities have increased in tandem with tougher U.S. border enforcement

*Incomplete data, through September 21, 2010. Data sources: Maria Jimenez, Humanitarian Crisis: Migrant Deaths at the U.S.- Mexico Border, October 1, 2009, p.17; Arizona Republic, 9/22/10; Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, Mexico.

Record number of border-crossing fatalities (252) in Arizona in FY 2010

Migrant’s body being removed from Arizona desert, August 2010

Berlin Wall:239 deaths in crossing attempts, over 28 years

U.S.-Mexico Border:6,678 documented deaths since 1995

= 28 times morefatalities;

deadliest land border in the world today

Body of Maria Eugenia Martinez, age 32, being removed from California’s Imperial Valley desert, July 2005

Causes of death among unauthorized border crossers

0

50

100

150

200

250

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Environmental causes (hypothermia, dehydration, sunstroke, asphyxia)

Drowning

Auto accident

Source: Mexican Consulates/Mexican Ministry of Foreign Relations

Phase 1

Phase 2Phase 3

Implementation of Operation Gatekeeper, 1994-1998

All American irrigation canal near Calexico, Calif.

Hundreds of migrants have drowned inIrrigation canals and the Rio Grande River

Partly due to immigration enforcement, the immigrant stock in U.S. (especially of Mexicans) is much more diverse, socio-demographically,

than in the 1960-1990 period

• Lone (unaccompanied) males are now a minority

• Farm workers are a very small minority (less than 5%)

• More likely to be long-term residents of U.S. (de facto permanent settlers) vs. sojourners

• Higher % of women and children (due to family reunification migration), who have greater need for health services, especially OB/GYN, pediatrics, preventive care

• Higher % of “mixed legal status” families, in which one or more members are undocumented

Increased socio-demographic diversity reflects this process: Tighter border enforcement longer

family separations more migration of women + children, and of whole family units

Border enforcement build-up since 1993 (and associated increases in people-smugglers’ fees) has essentially

ended circular Mexico-to-U.S. migration

• Traditional pattern of short-stay migration (6 months in U.S, 6 months in Mexico) depended on a porous border, giving easy access to the U.S. labor market.

• Migrants today are staying longer in each trip to the U.S. to amortize the costs/physical risk of illegal entry over a longer period.

• The longer they stay, the more likely they will remain indefinitely and try to reunify their family on the U.S. side. (= less return migration)

• Absent border fortification, perhaps 2 million Mexicans would still be living in Mexico today rather than the U.S. ( = those who have settled permanently in the U.S. due to “caging effect” of border enforcement); government spending at all levels to provide human services to those settled migrants and their U.S.-born children would be reduced commensurately.

Traumatic border crossings =a new form of PTSD

Border Patrol usesBlackhawk helicoptersto pursue, blind, and corral migrants in the Arizona and California deserts

Migrants apprehended near Tecate CA

“It was like I was alreadyhalf dead. My third crossing lasted eight days. Scorpions,rattlesnakes, terrible heat,the river. There were six of us, and thank God, the six of us made it through. On the sixth day we came across [the body of] someone who was lessfortunate. Who knows whathe died of.”--Mejía, a 52-year-oldundocumented migrant from Tlacuitapa, Jalisco

Undocumented immigrants in the U.S.: A population under stress (“muy golpeada”)

Continually being beaten up by:• The economy (underemployment)• Politicians (federal, state, and local)• Local police• The media (cable TV, talk radio)• (sometimes) Neighbors, co-workers

The result:• Higher levels of chronic stress + stress-related physical health problems (e.g., hypertension)• Depression + depression-related diseases (coronary artery disease, diabetes, etc.)• Persistent sense of impermanence, insecurity (even among “green carders” – permanent legal residents)

Roger Hedgecock, San Diego talk radio host

Large-scale deportationsUnder Obama, formal deportations (vs. “voluntary

departures) have reached a record high: nearly 400,000/yr

2010 Fiscal Year: 392,862 people deported (a new record), of whom195,772 (50%) were classified as “criminal immigrants” (= 50% were economic migrants with no criminal record)

Cost: Nearly $5 billion, @ $12,500 per person deported

“Revised Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Removable Aliens.”

New memo (Nov. 8, 2011) issued to DHS officials to reduce deportations of unauthorized immigrants who are not suspected of being a national security threat and have not committed violent crimes.

Tougher workplace enforcement

The Obama administration is aggressively “auditing” records of suspected employers of unauthorized migrants

• Number of audits (“silent raids”) has quadrupled since Jan. 2009

• Audits have only driven unauthorized migrants to seek work at other businesses, often in the underground economy; migrants have not been removed from U.S.

• 26% of U.S.-based Jalisco migrants had been stopped by police and questioned in last 12 months

(MMFRP survey, Jan.-Feb. 2010)

• 17% of a national sample of Latino immigrants had been stopped and questioned by local police

(Pew Hispanic Center survey,April 2009)

Local police are enforcing federal immigration law

Local police stops of immigrants have increased sharply in recent years

Family of José Lima,who after many years of residence in San Diego, Calif., was apprehended in a traffic stop and placed in deportation proceedings (Dec. 2010)

His crime? -- Driving while Mexican

Aggressive interior enforcement doesn’t deter new migration, but it:

Creates a climate of fear in immigrant communities, discouraging undocumented parents from seeking health care for themselves and their U.S.-born children.

Sharp increase in mixed-legal-status families = a huge potential for under-utilization of health care and under-enrollment in health insurance, due to fear that applying for such coverage could expose undocumented family members to detection and deportation.

Magnitude of these chilling effects is poorly documented.

Source: Pew Research Center, 2011

Measuring the chilling effects of interior enforcement and anti-immigrant hostility on health-care seeking behavior

Things that most worry unauthorized migrantsliving in the U.S. (by main place of residence)

“Attrition through (interior) enforcement” : The immiseration approach to immigration control

Inducing undocumented immigrants to leave the U.S.by making it more difficult for them to find employment and housing; restricting their access to health care, public education, and financial services; denying citizenship to their U.S.-born children

Basic premise of this approach is false!

There is no scientific evidence that:

• availability of basic human services (health care, public education, etc.) stimulates new unauthorized migration

• restricting access to public services causes undocumented migrants to go home (“self-deport”)

But this kind of thinking shaped the 2010 Health Care Reform Act:

Undocumented immigrants are totally excluded from benefits, prevented from buying their own insurance through government-sponsored insurance policy exchanges

Rationale: Providing access to health insurance would be a magnet for would-be illegal immigrants

A population left behind in health care reformHow immigrants are covered under health care reform legislation will

particularly affect states with the largest uninsured immigrant populations. In California, undocumented immigrants represent one out of five of the uninsured population under age 65.

UndocumentedImmigrants

Body of migrant beingremoved from Arizonadesert, July 2005

“Dying to Get In”CBS News “60 Minutes,”October 2008

The counter-factual scenario:What if we hadn’t fortified the border since 1993?

• The federal debt would be about $30 billion lower (= tax dollars that would not have been spent on border fortification)

• Perhaps 2 million Mexicans would still be living in Mexicorather than the U.S. ( = those who have settled permanently inthe U.S. due to caging effect of border enforcement), and government spending at all levels to provide human servicesto those settled migrants and their U.S.-born children would be reduced commensurately.

• 7,000-14,000 people might still be alive (= migrants who diedattempting clandestine entry since 1995, high-end figureincluding estimate of undiscovered bodies of missing migrants)

• People-smugglers would be hundreds of millions of dollars poorer.

Economic growth in Mexico, 2011