From the Dispatch

Arizona and the Nation: A Failing State Versus Positive Approaches to Immigrant Integration

Suman Raghunathan — Mon, 03 May 2010 18:33:14 +0000

As we highlighted two weeks ago, the Arizona legislature and Governor's decisions to pass a punitive, anti-immigrant bill - SB1070 - have unleashed a torrent of condemnations inside and outside of Arizona. Voices speaking up against the bill have come not only from civil rights organizations, but have also included public safety officials, constitutional legal scholars, and, significantly, Republican leaders and candidates from other states with significant immigrant populations.

While Arizona's extreme, draconian law is grabbing headlines, what's gotten less attention is how Arizona is an isolated case with increasingly anti-immigrant laws and policies advanced over the last few years. A handful of states have joined Arizona in its punitive approach to immigration, yet the often-ignored reality is that the vast majority of immigrants, including undocumented immigrants, live in states that have promoted far more humane and successful approaches emphasizing immigrant integration into local economies and communities.

As this Dispatch will detail, Arizona has blazed its own (misguided) path on immigration, which reflects dysfunctional right-wing politics that have driven the state into an economic disaster of low wages, mass-foreclosures and a punishing fiscal crisis. Grandstanding on race may be Arizona's substitute for grappling with its deep, systematic economic problems, but few other states have followed its lead in recent years, and even fewer seem likely to follow it on SB1070.

SB1070 highlights the need for more systematic campaigns to deepen immigrant integration policies in the states and for passage of federal comprehensive immigration reform to address the border and the need for legalization. The economic gains from positive reforms on immigration are too large to ignore at both the state and federal level.

We invite state legislators to join State Legislators for Progressive Immigration Policy (SLPIP) and other allies to sign up with PSN's State Immigration Project for updates on promoting progressive state immigration policy by emailing immigration@progressivestates.org.

Table of Contents:

- SB1070: Legalizing Racial Profiling, Violating Federalism

- Police, Civil Rights Groups and Republican Leaders Condemn SB1070

- SB1070: Symbol of Arizona's Failed Economy and Right-Wing Politics

- Arizona's Anti-Immigrant Politics Not the Norm for States with Immigrant Populations

- SB1070 Deepens the Need for Federal Comprehensive Immigration Reform

- The Economic Benefits of Legalization and Positive Immigration Integration Strategies

- Progressive Strategy to Address Immigration Policy

SB1070: Legalizing Racial Profiling, Violating Federalism

As we described two weeks ago, SB1070 is a radical anti-immigrant piece of legislation that will open the floodgates to racial profiling and abuses of civil liberties. The law will be challenged in court for both violating individual rights and being an illegal assertion of state authority given the federal government's primary responsibility for border and immigration matters. But in the meantime, the effects of its implementation will be sweeping, since the law:

Legalizes Racial Profiling: State and local government law enforcement officers are required to determine if a person is illegally in the United States based on a “reasonable suspicion,” an open ended approach that will encourage suspicions based on race. The law does little, if anything, to prohibit police officers from relying on race or ethnicity in deciding who to investigate.
Criminalizes immigration, which isn't a crime under federal law: Makes it a state crime to be in the country without legal status.
Undercuts Federalism: The law grants local police arrest authority for administrative violations of federal immigration law, even though the state police do not even have that authority under federal law.
Criminalizes Speech: The law criminalizes the solicitation of work even though courts have previously ruled that the solicitation of work is protected speech under the First Amendment.
Potentially Deters Enforcement of Other Laws: Since the law requires police officers responding to any city ordinance violation to automatically determine the immigration status of an individual they have reasonable suspicion of being an undocumented immigrant, many local violations won't be reported, consequently diverting law enforcement attention from violent crimes.

SB1070 Is a Product of a Racist, Anti-Immigrant National Network: The sweep of the law is hardly accidental, since it is the product of a national network of anti-immigrant groups tied to racist hate groups. As the Center for New Community noted in a recent email update:

[SB1070] was drafted by a lawyer for the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), whose founder has warned of a “Latin onslaught” and complained about Latinos’ alleged low “educability.” FAIR has accepted $1.2 million from the Pioneer Fund, a racist foundation that was set up by Nazi sympathizers to fund studies of eugenics, the science of selective breeding to produce a “better” race. The legislation was sponsored by state Senator Russell Pearce, who once e-mailed an anti-Semitic article from the neo-Nazi National Alliance website to supporters.

Kris Kobach, a Kansas law professor now running for Kansas Secretary of State, is the chief author of the bill, as emails recently revealed. Kobach was a top immigration advisor to John Ashcroft at the Justice Department who promoted national racial profiling of legal U.S. residents post-September 11th. He also drafted the local anti-immigrant ordinance for Hazelton, PA, which was struck down as unconstitutional by a federal judge in 2007.

With an eye on empowering allied groups like FAIR and related anti-immigrant groups, SB1070 is designed to allow them to sue local law enforcement agencies if they believe that are not adequately enforcing the new law, giving the right-wing new tools to control local police departments under threat of litigation.

Resources:
Progressive States Network - Arizona Risks Jeopardizing its Economic Future as it Contemplates Passing Anti-Immigrant Law
Center for American Progress - Fast Facts on Arizona’s Immigration Crack Down
Center for New Community - Fair Exposed, an online bi-weekly publication produced by the Center for New Community, a national civil rights organization. To subscribe email, fairexposed@newcomm.org.
Southern Poverty Law Center - Arizona Immigration Law Violates Constitution, Guarantees Racial Profiling
Wonk Room - The Group Behind The Harshest Immigration Bill In America
TalkingPointsMemo - AZ Immigration Bill Writer's Resume: GOP Activist, Ashcroft Aide, Arpaio Ally
The Rachel Maddow Show - Against Racial Profiling, Except When They're For It, Immigration Group President Addresses Racism Accusations, To Be FAIR: Following Dan Stein, Correcting the Record

Police, Civil Rights Groups and Republican Leaders Condemn SB1070

Unsurprisingly, a wide range of civil rights, labor, community and immigrant rights organizations within Arizona and the nation have condemned the law. The opposition to the bill has extended to law enforcement officers, legal experts and even Republican leaders in other states with large immigrant populations.

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush noted, "I think it creates unintended consequences. It's difficult for me to imagine how you're going to enforce this law. It places a significant burden on local law enforcement and you have civil liberties issues that are significant as well." Even Republican strategist Karl Rove echoed, "I think there is going to be some constitutional problems with the bill. I wished they hadn't passed it, in a way."

Within Arizona, it is notable that the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police has opposed the law on both fiscal and public safety grounds, since they worry that fear of government officials by immigrant populations will diminish the public’s willingness to cooperate with police in criminal investigations and will “negatively affect the ability of law enforcement agencies across the state to fulfill their many responsibilities in a timely manner.”

The President of the American Bar Association in a statement said, "It is, quite simply put, a law based on prejudice and fear, one whose purpose is to be divisive. This law encourages second-class treatment of individuals based on the color of their skin, and that is unacceptable."

Most telling for how out of step Arizona leaders have been are statements by Republican state leaders from states with large immigrant populations:

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger believes Arizona's approach is "as unconscionable as it is unconstitutional," and vowed to pull California's state pension funds invested in Arizona.
Florida Senatorial candidate, former Florida Speaker of the House and Tea Party darling Marco Rubio warned SB1070 will create a police state: "From what I have read in news reports, I do have concerns about this legislation... I think aspects of the law, especially that dealing with 'reasonable suspicion,' are going to put our law enforcement officers in an incredibly difficult position." He later told reporters, "That's not really something that Americans are comfortable with, the notion of a police state."
Texas Governor Rick Perry said in a statement that "some aspects of the law turn law enforcement officers into immigration officials by requiring them to determine immigration status during any lawful contact with a suspected alien, taking them away from their existing law enforcement duties, which are critical to keeping citizens safe." Perry's views parallel those of his corporate supporters, like the president of the right-wing Texas Association of Business, who recently called Arizona's law "blatantly unconstitutional," saying there was "little likelihood the Texas Legislature would pass anything so misguided as what they've done in Arizona."

When conservative stars like Marco Rubio and Rick Perry think a law is too extreme, it's clear Arizona's leaders have moved into their own corner of anti-immigrant extremism.

SB1070: Symbol of Arizona's Failed Economy and Right-Wing Politics

Click for larger image online.

If other state leaders, even conservative ones from border states like Texas, are not rushing to copy SB1070, it's because whatever their partisan politics, they don't share the peculiar brand of pathological right-wing politics and the hollow economy that has left Arizona such a political and economic basket case.

Other states have grappled with a range of programs to reform their economies and budgets during the current economic crisis. That Arizona's claim to fame in this crisis is immigrant bashing in the form of SB1070 is symbolic of years, even decades of failed political and economic policies. That Arizona politics has promoted low-wage jobs that have left state residents with falling individual incomes relative to the rest of the nation and conditions for the state's children that rank at the bottom of the nation. Since the current economic recession began in December 2007, Arizona has lost 265,000 jobs, or 9.9 percent of the state's employment. And with little else to offer the unemployed, scapegoating immigrants has become a substitute in Arizona for having a real solution to solving the economic needs of its residents.

Individual Incomes Fall Behind the Nation: For decades, Arizona's average wages and income have been falling behind other states. A University of Arizona business school study from 2005 noted that "over the long term, the real income of the average Arizonan has lagged behind the rest of the nation... Arizona slipped from 94 percent of the U.S. level in 1970 to 86 percent in 2003." While the bubble economy in the state of the mid-decade gave a slight bump to individual incomes in the state, per capita income fell 4 percent from 2008 to 2009 after having been stagnant for the previous two years, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis recently reported. Arizona was tied for fourth place with Idaho in having the highest drop in personal incomes per capita. Nationally, the decline last year was 2.6 percent.

An Economy Built on a Construction Bubble: The Urban Land Institute has referred to Phoenix as the "poster child" for the housing downturn and bad mortgages. The average price paid for office space in the Phoenix metro area tumbled more than 50 percent one year in 2009. Back in 2006, when growth peaked, about 30 percent of the Phoenix area’s economic output was tied to real estate and construction; subtract that bubble economic engine and even the nominal job growth in the state during the last decade collapsed into unemployment and foreclosures.

Part of the problem is that state leaders encouraged a low-wage, bubble-based economic strategy that added a mirage of job and population growth during the last decade, but left the state with poor fundamentals for long-term growth when the financial bubble collapsed nationally. Highlighting the weak economic underpinnings of the state economy, the Arizona Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale metropolitan area ranked near the bottom, 192nd of 200 metro areas, for growth in high-tech gross domestic product from 2003 through 2008, according to the Milken Institute.

Fiscal Solutions More Irresponsible Than Any in Nation: Arizona's fiscal crisis is considered one of the worst in the country by the Pew Center on the States. Since 1992, the state has approved 42 tax cuts to its three major revenue sources -- personal and corporate income, and sales -- and eliminated statewide property taxes that accrued to the general fund-- and despite promises of right-wing economic nirvana, the results have been low personal income growth and a generally low-level of resources for human needs.

Arizona has some of the highest foreclosure rates in the country, 18.9 percent of the state lacks health insurance and 276,500 Arizona children do not have coverage. In the most recent Annie E. Casey Foundation's annual "Kids Count" report, Arizona ranked 40th in the nation in child well-being, one of the worst in the nation for its teen birth rate (46th), high-school dropout rate (46th) and percentage of children not attending school and not working (44th).

But what truly distinguishes Arizona is its right-wing, inhumane and short-sighted approaches to addressing its current fiscal problems:

State leaders passed a law to abolish the state's KidCare program providing children's health care to 40,000 kids, the only state in the country to take such a step, and only reversed themselves when they discovered they would forfeit billions in federal dollars if they did so.
Wide-ranging cuts in programs across the state, from eliminating full-day kindergarten to cutting state employee salaries to removing 10,000 families from TANF cash assistance.
Two-thirds of Arizona state parks will be closed.

And this has been combined with a whole range of other right-wing and just plain kooky laws promoted by the Arizona's legislature.

SB1070 Will Make Arizona's Economic Problems Worse: Passing SB1070 will simply deepen the state's economic crisis. As the National Employment Law Project points out, smaller-scale anti-immigrant ordinances have cost individual localities millions of dollars. And other studies estimate SB1070 will further decimate Arizona's economy by driving immigrant families, undocumented and legal residents alike, from the state, further depressing demands for goods and already vacant housing tracts.

The Arizona Republic detailed, "More than 100,000 undocumented immigrants have left Arizona in the past two years because of the bad economy and earlier enforcement crackdowns. Now, a new wave of Latinos is preparing to leave."

"So, rather than massive deportations, we are basically going to encourage them to leave on their own," said State Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, who is also a criminal-justice professor at Scottsdale Community College. But even he admits that the law will likely drive legal residents and their families out of the state.

The Texas-based Perryman Group found if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs.

Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon and other local leaders anticipate a drop in new business creation in the state because of the new hostile environment. Phoenix Vice Mayor Michael Nowakowski observed: “We’re the laughing stock of the country because of these crazy laws.”

Resources:
Think Progress - Arizona Expands Its Discrimination: Teachers With Heavy Accents Can’t Teach English, Ethnic Studies Are Banned
Rogue Columnist - Arizona's Continuing Crisis and Kookocracy Watch
Arizona State University W.B. Carey School of Business - Jobs, Income, And Growth In Arizona: Individual Versus Aggregate Measures Of Economic Performance
Progressive States Network - Eye on the Right: Arizona's Failed Experiment with Tax Cuts

Arizona's Anti-Immigrant Politics Not the Norm for States with Immigrant Populations

Despite much media hype, most states with high concentrations of undocumented and legal immigrants have rejected the punitive approach of Arizona and a handful of like-minded states. Most states have quietly been moving forward with positive, integrative approaches to new immigrants in their communities.

As PSN detailed in a report in 2008 -- and the basic numbers have changed little since then -- only 11% of undocumented immigrants live in states that have enacted comprehensive punitive policies or sanctions in private workplaces against undocumented workers.

Most Undocumented Residents Live in States with Integration Policies: Instead, a significant majority of undocumented immigrants live in states with positive integrative or somewhat integrative policies. As detailed in a section below, with the right state policies, new immigrants bring new skills, business startups and economic growth-- and most states with experience with new immigrants have promoted policies to tap that economic growth potential.

Many states, including many of those where most undocumented immigrants live such as Texas and California, now provide in-state tuition (so-called DREAM Acts) for undocumented immigrants going to public universities. Others are promoting policies to integrate immigrants through English language instruction and assistance in navigating the citizenship process. A number of states such as Illinois and New York are providing health insurance to undocumented children. And instead of trying to punish immigrant workers, states are increasingly working with native and immigrant workers to crack down on bad employers who are violating minimum wage, safety and workers compensation laws.

In fact, over 50% of undocumented immigrants live in states that provide in-state tuition for undocumented immigrant children and nearly the same majority of undocumented immigrants live in states that are promoting "New Americans" policies to better educate new immigrants and nearly a majority also live in states that have recently enacted new penalties for wage law violations in order to raise wages for all workers, native and immigrant alike. See the chart for a comparison of the more pervasive positive approaches to immigration compared to the minority punitive approach.

The media largely rewards the tactics of political opportunists who to use the issue of immigration as a "wedge" issue, but ignore the political and economic success of other states in integrating new immigrants into their state economies and communities.

A State Agenda for Progressive Immigration Policy: As we highlighted in our Dispatch, State Immigration Policy to Promote National Change, there are a range of positive state policies that can improve the lives of immigrants and raise living standards and public safety for everyone, native and immigrant alike. These include:

Wage Law Enforcement as Immigration Policy - Redirect anger at lawlessness in the workplace toward employers who violate wage and other worker rights laws -- an approach that unites all workers, immigrant and native alike.
Immigrant Integration and Naturalization - Highlight policies that help all immigrants to better integrate into society, a broadly popular policy and one that also unites the interests of legal and undocumented immigrants.
Address Debate on Immigrants and Public Benefits - Emphasize the benefits to the public from providing education and preventive care to immigrants. Support resolutions that demand that the federal government, which receives billions in taxes paid by undocumented workers, share those revenues with states to expand services for communities with heavy immigrant populations.
Voting Reform versus "Voter ID" Attacks - Challenge the voter ID requirements that are disenfranchising many legal voters and support anti-voter intimidation policies. Support reforms like same day registration and vote-by-mail to assist citizens forced to overcome any new barriers to voting.
Community Policing and Immigrant Outreach for Public Safety - Support community policing policies that encourage immigrants to work closely with the police when they either see a crime or are victims themselves. Encourage community policing efforts involving undocumented immigrant communities.

Smart state policy proposals that emphasize the areas where the public is supportive of immigrant integration into our communities are both smart policy and smart politics. By better controlling the debate at the local and state level, progressives can help build support for federal reforms to regularize the legal status of undocumented immigrants and build a path to citizenship. Such strategies can isolate those who promote the scapegoating of immigrants and instead emphasize the issues that will benefit everyone, from wage law enforcement to integrating new immigrants into our local economies.

Resources:
Progressive States Network - State Immigration Policy to Promote National Change
Progressive States Network - The Anti-Immigrant Movement that Failed: Positive Integration Policies by States Still Far Outweigh Punitive Policies

SB1070 Deepens the Need for Federal Comprehensive Immigration Reform

If SB1070 accomplishes anything, it will be to focus national attention on why it is critical to revamp and improve federal immigration laws. Those on both sides of the partisan aisle overwhelmingly agree the nation's immigration system is broken, and long overdue for an update.

While federal law essentially decides who can legally enter the US and determines immigrants' eligibility for most services and benefits (according to federal immigration law, undocumented immigrants are ineligible for most public benefits apart from emergency room medical care), states have considerable jurisdiction over immigrants' access to some basic services and programs - such as, for example, New York state's decision to provide basic prenatal health care for women -- regardless of their immigration status -- as well as how state and local government (including law enforcement officers) interact with immigrant residents.

As noted above, most states have engaged immigration in a more positive manner: for example, several states (including Utah and Texas) extend in-state tuition rates to undocumented students who attend state universities and colleges. But given the given the federal vacuum on immigration, some states like Arizona will inevitably take matters into their own hands in a punitive direction.

The last comprehensive immigration reform, enacted in 1986 by Republican President Ronald Reagan, included a large-scale legalization program that allowed roughly 3 million undocumented immigrants to obtain legal status. Despite attempts at immigration reform in 2001, 2006, and 2007, there has been no significant change in the status quo of immigration policy since 1986. The longer the nation is forced to wait for federal immigration reform, the more states will make patchwork attempts to address immigration at the state level and the more opportunities there are for states to take misguided and economically disastrous approaches to immigration policy such as Arizona's.

Proposed Federal Reforms Promote Compromise Solution: The most recent proposal, unveiled by Senators Menendez, Reid, and Schumer, outlines a number of provisions to address the crisis:

On the negative side, it introduces a national identity card and takes a 'zero tolerance' approach with plans to continue to increase deportations of undocumented immigrants who are suspected of committing crimes; it also significantly ramps up militarization of the US-Mexico border.
However, the proposal also dramatically expands the channels for legal immigration into the US and provides an (albeit lengthy) path to legalization, and ultimately citizenship, for the roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the US. The proposal grants provisional legal status (which includes work authorization) to undocumented residents who come forward, register with the federal government, pay a fine, and commit to learning English. After eight years, if border enforcement and surveillance programs are successfully implemented, these individuals are then eligible for permanent resident status, and five years later are eligible to apply for US citizenship.
The Menendez-Reid-Schumer proposal also would grant permanent resident status (known as a 'green card') to every immigrant who earns an advanced degree from an American university, and would end country-based quotas on the number of H1B visas extended to highly-skilled workers who seek to enter the US.
Finally, the proposal would streamline the process for spouses and immediate relatives of those with green cards to enter the US themselves, addressing a backlog of family-based immigration that often requires family members to wait a decade before they can legally join their relatives in the US.

Resource: American Immigration Lawyers Association - Analysis of Senate Democrats Immigration Reform Proposal

The Economic Benefits of Legalization and Positive Immigration Integration Strategies

Several recent academic studies have underscored the economic benefits that a large-scale legalization program would bring to the US economy and households, despite the current flawed conventional wisdom that legalization would cause already-high unemployment rates to rise.

A study by Dr. Raul Hinojosa-Oveda of the University of California - Los Angeles uses the economic impact of the 1986 legalization program (one that also occurred during an economic recession with high unemployment) to forecast how a legalization program would affect the current economy. His analysis found a legalization program would yield at least $1.5 trillion in gross domestic product over a ten-year period. Legalization would allow undocumented workers to emerge from the underground economy, and would, as a result, raise not only their wages but those of their native-born counterparts, raising the wage floor for many workers. Increased wages would, in turn, fuel increased purchasing power and homeownership among newly-legalized immigrants, injecting billions, if not trillions, of dollars into the US economy as a whole.

Libertarians also echo the belief that immigrants, even those working in low-wage sectors, expand the American economy. According to this commentary analysis from the libertarian CATO Institute, "the addition of low-skilled immigrants expands the size of the overall economy, creating higher-wage openings for managers, craftsmen, accountants, and the like." Undocumented immigrants are typically low-income, but they are almost all employed. According to estimates by the Pew Hispanic Center, male undocumented immigrants, ages 18 to 64, had a labor-force participation rate in 2004 of an amazing 92 percent.

Other studies have found wage levels of low-wage immigrant workers increase by as much as 30 percent when they improve their English fluency by just one level, because they are able to advocate for themselves more effectively in the workplace - a powerful testimony to increasing state and federal funding for English as a Second Language classes.

Finally, federal, state, and local tax bases would benefit significantly from the increased earnings and purchasing power of newly-legalized immigrants. The Social Security Administration estimates that roughly 75% of undocumented immigrants pay payroll taxes. In fact, the Drum Major Institute notes that undocumented workers already are largely responsible for the future viability of the Social Security system with their $7 billion in annual tax contributions - most which they will never be able to access. And the President's Council of Economic Advisors found that US natives gain an estimated $37 billion annually from immigrants' economic contributions as a whole.

Resources:
Immigration Policy Center - The Fiscal Bottom Line on Immigration Reform
Immigration Policy Center - Assessing the Economic Impact of Immigration and the State and Local Level
Immigration Policy Center & UCLA: Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Immigration Policy Center - Immigration Reform as Economic Stimulus
Commentary Magazine - Higher Immigration, Lower Crime
Drum Major Institute - Principles for an Immigration Policy to Strengthen and Expand the American Middle Class
America's Voice - Immigrants to Tea Party Protesters: We'll Pay!
America's Voice - Facts at a Glance on Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Progressive Strategy to Address Immigration Policy

To defeat anti-immigrant attacks, the key for progressives is to proactively use smart policy campaigns to change the public debate on immigration both at the state and national level. Globalization is driving economic changes, including immigration, that cause fear and uncertainty for many voters, but if progressives promote economic and social policies that address the broader needs of working families and propose a vision of how to effectively integrate new immigrants into our communities, there is no sustained majority for punitive measures against undocumented immigrants.

Beyond individual policy options, advocates and elected leaders need to emphasize that the coalition in support of humane policies involving new immigrants is diverse and cuts into even many seemingly conservative communities. Elected leaders can build on traditional support from many African-American leaders to labor unions to forge alliances with forward-looking business leaders and religious leaders, including many evangelicals, who recognize that smart, humane immigration policies for our communities is a source of both moral and social strength.

Anti-Immigrant Conservatives Playing a Losing Game: And the dangerous reality for anti-immigrant conservatives is that they are playing a losing demographic game, with new legal immigrants voting in increasing numbers that will punish any party or ideological group that promotes racist approaches to the immigration issue -- one reason many Republican leaders are denouncing SB1070 so quickly.

There were 10 million Latino voters in 2008, an increase of 4 million since 2000. And a May 2009 poll of Latino voters found that 82% of Latino voters felt immigration was important to them and their families. Punitive approaches like SB1070 will inevitably impel a negative reaction, with nearly six-in-ten (57%) Latinos in a 2008 Pew Hispanic Center survey, saying they worried that they themselves or a friend or family member would be deported as a result of similar policies.

Conclusion: Humane immigration politics are also smart politics in the long-term, since the present coalition for progressive immigration policy is rapidly being joined by new citizens who are unlikely to forgive politicians who vote for racial profiling or other attacks on their communities. Ultimately, in an increasingly diverse nation, there is no long-term political future for politicians pushing these anti-immigrant laws. Elected officials who step up with intelligent, humane policies on immigration will both build a stronger economy and society in their states and win politically in the long-term.

Resources:
Progressive States Network -State Policymakers Need to Respond to Growing Clout of Latino Voters Nationwide
Pew Hispanic Center - Hispanics and Arizona’s New Immigration Law
America's Voice - The Power of the Latino Vote in the 2010 Elections: They Tipped Elections in 2008; Where Will They Be in 2010?

Article Images

/sync/images/dispatch/AZandUSFlags.jpg

State Policymakers Need to Respond to Growing Clout of Latino Voters Nationwide

Suman Raghunathan — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:19:43 +0000

A recent report from the advocacy group America’s Voice highlighted the growing power of Latino voters in the upcoming 2010 elections. Latino voters played a critical role in 2008 to propel President Obama to victory in several key swing states that previously trended Republican, including Virginia. Latino voter registration and turnout rates have exploded over the past few years: roughly 10 million voted in the 2008 Presidential election alone, a 2.5 million increase from 2004 and 4 million person increase since 2000. Latino voter registration grew by over 54% between 2000 and 2008, and turnout grew 64% over the same time period.

The shifting composition of the electorate nationwide will increasingly affect state legislators and races. This trend is particularly evident in immigrant ”˜new destination states’ in the South and Southwest, where growing numbers of immigrant residents are expected to translate into new Congressional districts after the 2010 Census. In response, progressive state leaders can take a few key steps:

Take Action on Immigrant Rights, a Defining Issue for Many Latinos: Immigration was not the number one issue for all Latino voters: like most Americans, the economy remains critical for them. Nevertheless, immigration reform remains important to a broad majority of Latinos as they make voting decisions. According to a May 2009 poll of Latino voters, 82% felt the issue was important to them and their families. Foreign-born Latinos (many of whom still have friends or family members who are documented residents but aren’t yet US citizens or who are undocumented) often feel comprehensive immigration reform and immigration policy is a top issue. State leaders can join State Legislators for Progressive Immigration Policy to promote state policies that support immigrants and add their voices to those of other state legislators calling for comprehensive federal immigration reform.
Address Other Key Concerns of Latino Voters: Latino voters need to see progressive state leaders standing up for other key concerns as well, such as health care. A survey last November found Latino registered voters' top concern was health care reform, with 61% saying the government should ensure that all people have health insurance, even if it means raising taxes. Addressing core issues for working families is also key to cementing support from Latino voters.
Support Latino Voter Participation: State leaders can respond to increased Latino voter engagement by continuing to protect their voting rights. State leaders can encourage this trend by introducing and supporting measures to encourage voting such as vote-by-mail, same-day registration and reforms, as well as strengthening civic engagement overall.
Support State-Level Policies and Programs that Integrate Immigrant Residents: Funding immigrant integration measures such as expanded ESL classes is critical for immigrant residents to fully participate in their community, yet demand continues to far outweigh supply for free or low-cost ESL classes. Waiting lists for ESL programs, which often receive some federal funding, remain long nationwide. English proficiency also translates to better wages for immigrant workers, as they can speak up for their rights at the workplace: one academic study found low-wage workers who moved up one English proficiency level saw a 30% increase in their wages.
Reach Spanish-Dominant Latinos: Foreign-born Latinos who predominantly speak Spanish are emerging as swing voters, and are a sizeable share of the Latino electorate: 40% were born outside the US and are naturalized US citizens. According to the New Democrat Network, the GOP more than doubled its share of the Latino vote from 1996 to 2004 by prioritizing outreach to Spanish-dominant Latinos. Both parties are well aware of this dynamic, and continue to step up their outreach: nearly 70% of 2008 immigration-related Presidential campaign ads were in Spanish.

Raising state voices in support of immigration reform is critical, especially in the wake of Congressional inaction on the issue. Despite repeated promises from White House and Congressional leaders to enact comprehensive immigration reform during President Obama's first year in office, momentum on comprehensive immigration reform has slowed in recent months. Yet the current federal vacuum on immigration reform presents an opportunity for states to craft progressive policies that support immigrant integration, such as English as a Second Language (ESL) classes, and protect the rights of immigrant workers. Meanwhile, efforts continue toward comprehensive immigration reform: in an interview last week with Los Angeles’ Spanish-language newspaper La OpiniÃ³n, US House of Representatives Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi reiterated her commitment to enacting comprehensive immigration reform this year — a message she notably has not broadcast in the mainstream media. Pelosi noted she recently raised the issue with President Obama, who said he would work with Congress to develop a bill this year.

Resources:
America's Voice - The Power of the Latino Vote in the 2010 Elections: They Tipped Elections in 2008; Where Will They Be in 2010?
Latino Decisions/UNM RWJF Center/impreMedia - Survey of Latino Registered Voters
Progressive States Network - State Legislators for Progressive Immigration Policy
Progressive States Network - State Immigration Policy to Promote National Change

Article Images

http://progressivestates.org/sync/images/dispatch/LatinoVoters.jpg

Job Creation and State Fiscal Relief Resolutions Moving in the States

Altaf Rahamatulla — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:12:03 +0000

In the State of the Union speech, President Barack Obama stated:

"The devastation remains. One in 10 Americans still cannot find work. Many businesses have shuttered. Home values have declined. Small towns and rural communities have been hit especially hard. And for those who'd already known poverty, life has become that much harder... That is why jobs must be our number-one focus in 2010, and that's why I'm calling for a new jobs bill."

With the fiscal crisis forcing states to layoff hundreds of thousands of teachers, nurses and police officers, the need for more federal job creation and state fiscal relief support is clear. And there is substantial momentum building around this issue in the states.

New Mexico Rep. Eleanor Chavez introduced HJM39, a joint memorial calling on the federal government to pass a jobs creation plan. The memorial passed the House of Representatives last Saturday and will now be considered by the state Senate.
Similar resolutions are likely to be introduced in Illinois, Nevada and Vermont. Members of the Tax Fairness Organizing Collaborative (TFOC), including New Yorkers for Fiscal Fairness (NYFF) and the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada (PLAN), are working with lawmakers in their states to highlight the acute need for increased federal support.
Along with Maine Senate President Libby Mitchell, House Speaker Hannah Pingree held a press conference this past Tuesday to garner awareness of Maine's economic and fiscal situation and highlight the need for another round of federal aid.

If you are a lawmaker interested in introducing a resolution requesting the federal government to move a jobs bill, PSN can assist you in that effort. Please contact us at jobcreation@progressivestates.org for support. General resolution language can be found here.

Additionally, over one hundred legislators from thirty-one states have signed on to Progressive States Network's letter calling on the President and Congress to move swiftly on job creation and state fiscal relief. State lawmakers can sign onto the letter here, while citizens and advocates can use this online tool to contact their state legislators and ask them to add their signature.

The Need and Public Support for Action: As we discussed in January, the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) in early 2009 was critical in preventing a full collapse of the national economy and helping states address huge budget gaps. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the ARRA created or maintained 600,000 to 1.6 million jobs as of September 2009 and found it decreased the unemployment rate by almost one percentage point. Unfortunately, millions of Americans are still out of work and states are struggling to find ways to deal with enormous deficits and plummeting revenue. Projected governors' budgets could lead to layoffs amounting to an additional 900,000 jobs lost in the economy.

There is extensive bipartisan support for federal funding for job creation and aid to states. Winthrop University conducted a poll in late 2009 and found that 71.6 percent of respondents favor funding for jobs (94.5 percent identify as Democrats, 53.4 percent Republican, 68.9 percent Independent) and 62.7 percent support "giving aid to states in serious financial trouble" (80.6 percent Democrat, 50.9 percent Republican, 63.6 percent Independent).

As the U.S. Senate moves on a jobs package within the next few weeks, timing is crucial. State lawmakers must send a strong message to Washington that the country needs jobs and states need relief.

Resources:
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities - Additional Federal Fiscal Relief Needed to Help States Address Recession's Impact
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities - Recession Continues to Batter State Budgets; State Responses Could Slow Recovery
Stateline.org - Economist Mark Zandi: On stimulus, jobs, state finances, inflation and the year ahead
Moody's Analytics - The Case for Another Round of Federal Aid to State & Local Govt
WhiteHouse.Gov - Remarks by the President of the United States in State of the Union Address
Winthrop University - Winthrop Poll Results - November 2009 Findings
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities - Governors’ New Budgets Indicate Loss of Many Jobs if Federal Aid Expires

Article Images

http://progressivestates.org/sync/images/dispatch/JobsVoteYes.jpg

Focus on Jobs: The Next Step in National Economic Recovery and State Fiscal Relief

Altaf Rahamatulla — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:01:45 +0000

On Tuesday, December 8th, President Barack Obama delivered an address to the Brookings Institution on the need for increased focus on the job crisis that is affecting so many working families across the country. His proposals included key programs administered by the states, such as investments in infrastructure, clean energy investments, the extension of unemployment insurance, and ensuring that states are not forced to lay off teachers, police, and other vital service providers. This would be complemented by direct federal help such as tax breaks for small businesses and extension of COBRA subsidies for the unemployed.

The President stated, "[f]or even though we've reduced the deluge of job losses to a relative trickle, we are not yet creating jobs at a pace to help all those families who've been swept up in the flood. There are more than 7 million fewer Americans with jobs today than when this recession began. That's a staggering figure, and one that reflects not only the depths of the hole from which we must ascend, but also a continuing human tragedy." The speech followed a job summit the President convened last week that featured CEOs, small business owners, labor leaders, and nonprofits sharing insights on methods to foster economic growth.

Reports Detail the Jobs Crisis and the Need for Expanded Recovery Programs: While a new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study documents that the recovery plan has created or saved as many as 1.6 million jobs, millions of unemployed Americans are still in need of help.

This need for new jobs highlighted by the President is echoed by a recent analysis by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), entitled Jobs Crisis Fact Sheet. Among their findings:

15.4 million Americans are unemployed;
38.3 percent of unemployed have not had a job in over six months;
8 million jobs were lost during the recession, which includes 1.6 million lost in construction and 2.1 million lost in manufacturing;
1 in 10 Americans are unemployed;
1 in 6 Americans are underemployed;
15 states are experiencing double-digit unemployment.

These bleak figures are exacerbated by state fiscal uncertainty that is forcing lawmakers to consider cuts to vital programs, such as education and health care. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) indicates in Additional Federal Fiscal Relief Needed to Help States Address Recession's Impact, total state deficits in FY2011 and 2012 will likely exceed what can be covered by ARRA funding by over $260 billion. Furthermore, "[p]resuming they will get no more fiscal relief, states will have to take steps to eliminate deficits for state fiscal year 2011that will likely take nearly a full percentage point off the Gross Domestic Product. That, in turn, could cost the economy 900,000 jobs next year."

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com, expressed a similar sentiment in an interview with Stateline.org: "I think it’s vital states get additional stimulus. If no more aid is forthcoming, then (states will) be cutting jobs, programs and raising taxes”¦ because their fiscal situation continues to deteriorate more rapidly. Tax revenues are still falling at a very rapid clip. So states are going to have a huge hole beginning in 2011 when the current stimulus runs out. I suspect they’ll be cutting spending and raising taxes long before reaching that cliff."

For the unemployed specifically, the National Employment Law Project and the Center for American Progress highlighted in their report Keeping a First Line of Defense for the Jobless that benefits for the unemployed provided by the ARRA recovery plan, from extended unemployment benefits to COBRA health care premium subsidies, have been critical in providing help to jobless individuals and injecting cash into communities hardest hit by unemployment. The report outlines how these programs have helped the economy and why the programs should be renewed.

Renewed Support for States and the Unemployed Needed: Accordingly, any federal job creation and economic growth plan must be accompanied by further fiscal relief for states. Progressive States Network, along with a wide range of allies, have called for a second round of federal stimulus to assist burgeoning state budget gaps.

Resources:
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities - Additional Federal Fiscal Relief Needed to Help States Address Recession's Impact
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities - New CBO Report Finds Recovery Act has Preserved or Created up to 1.6 Million Jobs
The Economic Policy Institute - Jobs Crisis Fact Sheet
The Economic Policy Institute - Plenty of need for a second stimulus
NELP and Center for American Progress - Keeping a First Line of Defense for the Jobless
Progressive States Network - Job Losses and State Fiscal Crises: Time for More Federal Stimulus Spending
Stateline.org - Economist Mark Zandi: On stimulus, jobs, state finances, inflation, and the year ahead
The White House - The Big Picture and Some Next Steps on Jobs
The White House - President Obama Announces Proposals to Accelerate Job Growth and Lay the Foundation for Robust Economic Growth

Article Images

http://progressivestates.org/sync/images/dispatch/UnemploymentLine.jpg

New PSN Report: The Anti-Immigrant Movement that Failed

Nathan Newman — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 10:28:00 +0000

New PSN Report: The Anti-Immigrant Movement that Failed

Today, the Progressive States Network is releasing a new report:

The Anti-Immigrant Movement that Failed:
Positive Integration Policies by States Still Far Outweigh Punitive Policies Aimed at New Immigrants

The Executive Summary is available online, as well as the full report in PDF and HTML format.

As we detail in the report, with most 2008 state legislative sessions at an end, we can take a step back and make a few conclusions about what happened in the states on policies affecting the immigrant population:

In a few states where right-wing conservatives controlled the legislature, they jammed through some laws creating punitive sanctions against undocumented immigrants.
However, in states where moderates or progressives had any significant influence, the momentum for anti-immigration legislation stalled and almost all anti-immigrant legislation failed to pass.
In the states where most undocumented immigrants actually live -- California, Illinois, New York, Texas, and Florida -- no significant anti-immigrant legislation was enacted this session or last.
Largely ignored by the media, over the last few years, quite a few states have pioneered programs and laws to positively integrate new immigrants into our communities and address citizens' economic fears with raise wage standards for everyone, immigrant and native worker alike.
In fact, when you look at what policies states have actually enacted, most undocumented immigrants live in states that have enacted positive programs to integrate new immigrants and rejected punitive approaches to new immigrants.

Tell a Friend About This

Real Solutions, Not Scapegoating, Begin to Win the Public Debate

The current hype around anti-immigrant policies is, unfortunately, about electoral politics. Despite so few states actually passing anti-immigrant legislation, the remarkable thing is how much attention the media has given anti-immigrant politicians. The media largely fell for the tactics of political opportunists who hoped to use the issue of immigration as a "wedge" issue, much as they have used gay marriage and other social issues to undermine progressive coalitions and support right wing politicians during elections. Yet the result has largely been political failure for right wing politicians trying to play the anti-immigrant political card.

The bottom-line is that despite much media hype, the supposed wave of anti-immigrant politics has amounted to a few punitive laws in a handful of states, even as most states have quietly been moving forward with positive, integrative approaches to new immigrants in their communities.

Many states, including those where most immigrants live, now provide in-state tuition (so-called DREAM Acts) for undocumented immigrants going to public universities.
Others are promoting policies to integrate immigrants through English language instruction and assistance in navigating the citizenship process.
A number of states are providing health insurance to undocumented children.
And instead of trying to punish immigrant workers, states are increasingly working with native and immigrant workers to crack down on bad employers who are violating minimum wage, safety and workers compensation laws.

Tell a Friend About This

Integrative versus Punitive Immigrant Policies in the States

The PSN report details what policies, positive and negative, that have been enacted in each state in recent years dealing with new immigrants. States are grouped into six categories, based on whether they have promoted Integrative or Punitive immigrant policies.

What is striking is that, when you create a pie chart grouping these categories of immigration policies by the population of undocumented immigrants in each state, you find that only a small minority of undocumented immigrants are living in the states promoting punitive policies.

In fact, as the chart below from the report shows, only 11% of undocumented immigrants live in states that have enacted comprehensive punitive immigration policies.

Tell a Friend About This

Comparing Individual Policies

When you compare the implementation of individual policies, the dominance of positive state policies to integrate new immigrants over negative punitive policies in the states is even clearer.

For example, the most highly debated punitive state immigration policy has been applying workplace sanctions against employers hiring undocumented immigrants and often criminalizing the undocumented immigrants themselves.

Yet far fewer undocumented immigrants live in states that have enacted workplace sanctions than live in states providing in-state tuition for undocumented immigrant children or in states promoting "New Americans" policies to promote English language instruction and help new immigrants navigate the naturalization process or live in states that have significantly increased their penalties for violation of their wage laws in recent years. As the chart below indicates, where only about 16% of undocumented immigrants live in states with workplace sanctions, over 50% of undocumented immigrants live in a state offering in-state tuition and nearly as many live in states wtih New Americans policies and in states with new, tougher wage law enforcement penalities.

Tell a Friend About This

Conclusion

The main message of this report is that the media and many politicians have been paying too much attention to a few states enacting punitive policies, since they are the aberration, not the norm of policy dealing with new immigrants.

The states with the largest numbers of undocumented immigrants — and notably the states that have the longest history in dealing with multiple waves of immigration over their histories — have been quietly promoting a whole range of policies based on integration of new immigrants, from promoting educational opportunities to expanding the safety net of health insurance to better enforcement of labor laws for all residents of those states. Ideally, both the media and other states will spend more time understanding these positive policies in next year’s legislative sessions and less time buying into the hype of anti-immigrant activists and politicians.

Tell a Friend About This

Article Images

http://progressivestates.org/sync/images/immigrationSept08ReportChart2.jpg

MA to Make Post-High School Education Universal

Adam Thompson — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:39:00 +0000

Massachusetts Governor, Deval Patrick, has announced a far-reaching education reform, including free community college and universal pre-K. Although many details have yet to be worked out, the proposed 10-year Readiness Project, would dramatically increase access to public education and aims to put Massachusetts at the forefront of education policy by making sure high school graduates have the option of either free community college or vocational options to strengthen workforce development for all students.

Gov. Patrick's proposal comes at a time when we are seeing few gains in access to and enrollment in higher education. An annual report on education in the United States - Measuring Up 2006: The National Report Card on Higher Education - found only 8 states improved enrollment in education or training beyond high school and only 1 state improved the affordability of higher education. An even more sobering fact is that 43 states "flunked" with regard to college affordability.

As the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Vocational and Adult Education details, most jobs increasingly require more than a high school degree but not always the training of a traditional college. Making community college more affordable is a critical component to improve local economic job training for all high school graduates.

More Resources

Article Images

http://progressivestates.org/sync/images/dispatch/students.jpg