A Picture of Immigrant Children in Utah
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
1
Acknowledgements An initial advisory meeting was held prior to beginning research for this Issue Brief. Thank you to the following individuals who helped give the research direction: Dee Rowland, Catholic Diocese; Guido Arochi, Mexican Consulate; Agnes Chiao, United Way; Barbara Szweda, ACLU; and Isabel Rojas, Communidades Unidas. Thank you to the following individuals who were interviewd: Father Clarence Sandoval, Catholic Church; Darrin Burdett, Dept. Human Services; John Lyon, ICE; Leo Bravo, Multicultural Resource Center; Jackie Yeager, DHS – Logan; Jennifer Sanchez, Salt Lake Tribune; Anna Belle Cruz, DCFS; Teresa Tavares, Centro Hispano Thank you to Communidades Unidas for helping with distributing surveys and to Allison Rowland and Raul Lopez-Vargas for translating the survey to Spanish and distributing surveys to local clubs.
This research was funded by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. We thank them for their support but acknowledge that the findings and conclusions presented in this report are those of the author(s) alone, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation.
2
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
Table of Contents
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4 Demographics ..................................................................................................... 5 A Utah Survey.................................................................................................... 11 A Qualitative Analysis of Immigration Raids in Utah .......................................... 14 Senate Bill 81 - Immigration Reform Takes Form in Utah ................................. 20 Recommendations............................................................................................. 24 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 26 References ........................................................................................................ 27
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
3
Introduction Across the country on any given day you will find articles on immigration; and with good reason. The rise in the immigrant population and the importance they play in our economic environment make immigration reform an issue that must be addressed. The federal government is wrestling with immigration reform, state governments are tackling this thorny issue, and the faith community is chiming in on a variety of levels. Here in Utah, the state has dealt with raids at several job sites, passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill and fought over giving in-state tuition rates to children of undocumented parents. However you look at it, immigration is an issue on the forefront of our society’s radar. There have been several well-done studies about immigrants in Utah including Pam Perlich’s Immigrants Transform Utah: Entering a New Era of Diversity, from the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Utah1, and Utah Foundation’s research brief Immigration in Utah: Background and Trends.2 Both of these publications focus on immigrants as a whole. Though immigration is a prevalent topic in today’s world, the issue of children in immigrant families is not as apparent. Research from the Population Reference Bureau which looked at 9,000 articles in 20 of the country’s largest newspapers in 2006 showed that only 5% of the articles were concerned with immigrant children and their families.3 Instead, the articles focused on public sentiment (24%), immigrant activism (15%), state policy (14%), border security (11%), and other related topics. For this reason, this Issue Brief is focused on children in immigrant families. In order to have a clear picture of these children, an introduction into the demographics of this unique population is presented as well as an analysis of a survey administered to immigrant families. This is followed by an examination of the immigration raids which have taken place in Utah and a brief examination of Utah’s new immigration reform bill affecting immigrant children and their families.
4
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
Demographics
Figure 1
The American Community Survey conducted by the U. S. Census Bureau is the source for much of the country’s data on children in immigrant families. The Census Bureau defines children in immigrant families as those children under 18 who are foreign-born or have at least one foreignborn parent. Foreign-born is defined as either a U.S. citizen by naturalization or not a citizen of the United States. The figures include both documented and undocumented children. The number of children in immigrant families has risen from 93,000 in 2001-2003 to 132,000 by 2007. As a percentage of the child population these figures indicate a rise from 13 percent in 2001-2003 to 16 percent in 2007. Data for the graphs and tables on pages 4-6 are from the KIDS COUNT Data Center and represent the Population Reference Bureau’s analysis of data from the U. S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Supplemental Survey, 2001 Supplemental Survey, and the 2002 through 2007 American Community Survey. While there are over 130,000 Utah children living in immigrant families there are only 27,000 who are foreign-born, indicating that the majority of these children were born in the U.S. and are citizens. (see Table 1 below)
Table 1
Nativity Native-born Foreign-born
Child population by nativity 2001-2003 2002-2004 2005 699,000 708,000 717,000 22,000 20,000 22,000
2006 770,000 24,000
2007 791,000 27,000
The percent of Utah children who are foreign-born has remained the same at 3 percent.
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
5
There has been a slight rise in the number of children in immigrant families in which their parents are not U.S. citizens. In 2001-2003 almost 40,000 immigrant children lived in households where the parents were not U.S. citizens, or 42% of children in immigrant families. By 2007 this figure had jumped to 58,000, or 44% of children in immigrant families. (see Figure 2)
Figure 2
While there has been a slow, steady rise in the number of children in immigrant families, most live in households where the parents have been in the country more than 5 years. In 2007, only 5,000 immigrant children or 4% had parents who had lived in the country less than 5 years. Children in immigrant families in which parents have been in the country five years or less 2001-2003 2002-2004 2005 2006 2007 Number 3,000 2,000 2,000 4,000 5,000 Percent 3 3 2 3 4 So how does Utah compare to neighboring western states? With 16% of its children living in immigrant families, Utah falls in the middle when compared to 5 other western states. Nevada, with 36% of their children living in immigrant families is the highest, while Wyoming has the fewest immigrant children with only 5%. Other states include Colorado with 21% and Idaho with 12% (see Figure 3).
6
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
Table 2
Figure 3
The map below shows the percent of children in immigrant families for the nation. As can be seen, Utah falls within the second highest range.
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
7
Results from the American Community Survey, 2005-2007, Utah Percent of Children Who... are bilingual
Children in Children in native-born immigrant families families 2.7
67.2
100.0
56.9
0.0
37.0
100.0
71.2
live in a two-parent household
84.4
86.8
have 4 or more siblings ages 0-17
28.6
25.6
live in a mother only household
12.7
10.6
live in a father only household
2.9
2.6
have a grandparent living in the home
6.0
7.3
have children 0-17 other than siblings in the home
3.1
5.5
have a father who is not a high school graduate
4.7
30.1
have a mother who is not a high school graduate
4.6
31.5
have a father who is a college graduate
39.9
24.5
have a mother who is a college graduate
26.9
18.4
have a father working
97.8
96.8
have a mother working
65.7
65.8
have a father working full-time
85.0
80.2
have a mother working full-time
26.1
32.3
have a father earning below 100% of minimum wage
1.8
4.1
have a mother earning below 100% of minimum wage
10.7
14.3
live in official poverty (below 100% of poverty)
8.3
18.2
live in deep poverty (below 50% of poverty)
2.7
5.4
live in near poverty (below 200% of poverty)
30.3
54.2
are age 3 and enrolled in pre-school
26.2
18.9
are age 4 and enrolled in pre-school
56.0
38.2
have at least one parent a U.S. citizen have at least one parent naturalized have at least one parent in U. S. 10 years or more
8
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
Table 3
Because the American Community Survey (ACS) is such a wealth of data regarding children in immigrant families, the Annie E. Casey Foundation commissioned Dr. Donald J. Hernandez to complete an analysis of the 2005 to 2007 ACS. Dr. Hernandez is Chair of the Sociology Department at the University of Albany and a researcher at the Center for Social and Deomographic Analysis. The table on page 8 is a compilation of numerous cross tabulations that compare children in native-born families to children in immigrant families on a wide range of social indicators.4 There are many preconceived notions about immigrant families. The data sometimes tells a different story. Several key points about Utah’s children in immigrant families compared to native-born can be derived from the data in Table 3. •
Children in immigrant families are more likely to live in a two-parent household (87% compared to 84%).
•
Children in immigrant families are less likely to have 4 or more siblings (26% compared to 29%).
•
Children in immigrant families are less likely to live in a mother only household (11% compared to 13%).
•
Children in immigrant families are more likely to have parents who are not high school graduates (31% compared to 5%).
•
The percentage of children who have working parents is the same for both children in immigrant families and children in native-born families, but children in immigrant families are more likely to have their mother working full-time (32% compared to 26%).
•
Children in immigrant families are over twice as likely to live in poverty (18% compared to 8%).
•
Over half of children in immigrant families live in near poverty or 200% of the federal poverty level (around $44,000 for a family of 4 in 2009).
•
Children in immigrant families are less likely to be enrolled in pre-school.
Over half (57%) of the children in immigrant families have at least one English fluent parent and 82% of the children themselves speak English exclusively or very well. Dr. Hernandez found controlling for English fluency made a significant difference in several of the indicators. For example, there is little difference between children in native-born or immigrant families with English fluent parents in terms of the percentage with fathers who earn less
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
9
than 200% of the minimum wage (10% for native-born and 14% for immigrant children). However, the proportion of children in immigrant families whose fathers earn less than 200% of minimum wage rises to 30% for those children with mixed-fluency parents and rises again to 44% for immigrant children who live with English language learner parents only. Official poverty rates for children in immigrant families with English fluent parents only and mixed-fluency parents are essentially the same as the rate for children in nativeborn families (9% and 9% vs. 8%), but the rate rises to 31% for those with English language learner parents only. Similar results can be seen in the percentage of children living 200% below the poverty line. Among children of immigrants with English fluent parents only, 32% live below 200% of poverty, which is similar to the proportion for children in native-born families (30%), but the proportion rises to 58% for children of immigrants with mixed-fluency parents and to a very high 74% for children of immigrants with English language learner parents only. These statistics have very real policy implications. The data speaks loudly to the fact that immigrants must be provided with English language learning opportunities to provide for their children.
10
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
A Utah Sur vey Although the American Community Survey is an accurate, reliable source for demographic data, it lacks in some of the more qualitative variables concerning children in immigrant families. To supplement this source, Voices for Utah Children conducted its own survey of immigrant families in the spring of 2009. The survey instrument was distributed in three ways: •
•
•
Surveys were distributed during training events sponsored by Communidades Unidas. These training events were aimed at helping immigrants understand their rights, to help prepare their families in case of deportation, and to educate them on the new immigration laws taking effect in Utah July 1, 2009. Surveys were given to participants and were filled out on a volunteer basis. An intern working for Communidades Unidas distributed surveys to households where immigrants where known to reside. He gave out the survey, answered any questions participants had and then collected the survey. Finally, there are several “hometown” clubs throughout the Salt Lake Valley whose membership is based on the hometown from which individuals came from in Mexico. Surveys were distributed at several of these hometown club informal meetings.
For all the above methods, Spanish speakers distributed the surveys in case there were questions. The surveys were written in both English and Spanish. Also, participation was voluntary, individuals could choose not to take the survey. A total of 80 surveys were collected. The results are based on a small sample of immigrants and are not representative of all immigrants in Utah.
Demographics of respondents •
52.5% male, 47% female
•
Age breakdown - 1.5% 18 - 4.5% 19-21 - 9.1% 22-25 - 16.7% 26-30 - 9.1% 31-35 - 22.7% 36-45 - 21.2% 46-55 - 13.6% 56-65 - over 65 1.5%
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
11
•
60% were married, 15.4% never married, 9.2% divorced, 6.2% widowed and 9.2% were living together
Social Characteristics •
59% of respondents were from Mexico, 20% from Polynesian countries and 21% from other Latin American countries
•
32.6% considered themselves more than one race and 93.5% reported their ethnicity as Hispanic.
•
12.7% of respondents answered that they were U.S. citizens, 28.5% legal residents (green card), 1.6% were students, 17.1% identified as simply immigrant, 20.6% answered illegal or undocumented, and 19% did not respond to this question.
•
When asked how long they had been in the U.S.: 24.3% indicated 0-5 years, 28.6% responded 6-10 years, and 47.1% replied over 10 years.
•
Their reponses to how long they had been in Utah were almost reversed: 55% had been in Utah 0-5 years, 21.7% for 6-10 years, and 23.2% for over 10 years.
•
Most of the respondents had at least a high school education (40.9%), 36.4% had less than a high school education, 18.2% had some college or college degree, and 4.5% had some graduate school.
The Family, the Future and Fears •
When asked why they left their home country (they could choose more than one reason), responses included: - 61.5% responded economic conditions - 23.5% feared that their family was not safe - 39.7% left because they already had family in the states -11.8% gave other reasons which included education, disease, and learning English
•
When asked if they still had family in their home country 6.1% replied they had a spouse still living in their home country, 18.4% said they had children, and 89.8% had left parents behind.
•
Respondents were asked about their plans for the future (again, they could choose more than one answer). The majority (83.3%) would like to remain in the U.S. and become a citizen. Over one-third would like to return to their homeland someday (3% said they would like to return within a year). Finally, 13.6% would like to remain but not become a citizen.
12
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
•
81.4% of the respondents had children living with them. - 52.2% indicated that these children were citizens of the U.S. - The majority of these children were not on either CHIP or Medicaid. (Only 14.9% received CHIP and another 14.8% were on Medicaid)
*
When asked what their biggest concerns were for their children (they could choose more than one answer): - 57.1% worried about their children receiving a good education - 21.4% were concerned about being separated from their children - 14.3% worried that their children did not have health insurance - 7.1% had concerns about their child’s safety - 10.7% replied that economic security was a concern for their family
•
Almost two-thirds of respondents (62.5%) did not have employer supplied health insurance. Over two-thirds (69.1%) had no family coverage.
•
Utah’s new immigration law SB 81 went into effect on July 1, 2009. Over half of the respondents were aware of this law (58.1%). Only a quarter of the respondents answered the question concerning what impact this new law would have on their lives. For those who did answer, concerns about deportation, separation from family, and loss of work were the most frequent. When asked if they were concerned that ICE agents would raid their place of employ ment, 66.7% responded yes.
It is interesting to note that the immigrants we surveyed came to America for many of the same reasons that refugees come here, economic conditions — fear that their family was not safe, education — and yet the societal response to each group is very different. Whereas we welcome the refugee, help them get settled, help them navigate the systems and culture of a new geography, find them work and more; the immigrant is seen as an interloper, a threat to national security, a threat to our way of life, and a threat to our jobs.
“Once I thought to write a history of the immigrants in America. Then I discovered that immigrants were American history.”5 Oscar Handlin
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
13
A Qualitative Analysis of Immigration Raids on Children and Families
The number of undocumented immigrants arrested at workplaces increased nationally more than sevenfold between 2002 and 2006 (from 500 to 3,600). Beyond the broader concern of the raids and above the debate over immigration reform, the effect of these raids on the children of immigrant parents has increasingly become a concern. In 2007 the National Council of La Raza commissioned the Urban Institute to study the impact of immigration raids on children, families, and the institutions that support them.6 The Institute studied three communities where immigration raids had occurred: Greeley, Colorado; Grand Island, Nebraska; and New Bedford, Massachusetts. They found that for every two immigrants detained, one child was left behind. The study also found that two-thirds of the these children were U.S. citizens or legal residents. This study is relevant to Utah in that the Colorado and Nebraska raids were part of an immigration operation involving six Swift & Company meatpacking plants, including one in Hyrum, Utah. Voices for Utah Children undertook a qualitative study to examine two Utah sites where immigration raids occured to determine how children were impacted. The first was in Hyrum, Utah at the Miller Blue Ribbon meatpacking plant (a Swift plant) in December of 2006 and the second in Lindon, Utah at the Universal Industrial Sales plant in February of 2008. Our study involved interviews with Utah Department of Human Services staff, workers from the faith based communities, reporters, and employees of social service organizations. Also included in the analysis is an examination of newspaper articles which reported on the raids. While mindful of the myriad of issues and sides to this story, our analysis focused mainly on the impact of these raids on children.
Hyrum, Utah - The Miller Blue Ribbon Meatpacking Plant On December 12, 2006, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents raided the Miller Blue Ribbon meatpacking plant in Hyrum, Utah. This raid was part of a six state operation dubbed Operation Wagon Train impacting plants in Colorado, Nebraska, Utah, Iowa, Minnesota, and Texas. According to a case study done by the United Way7, this one-day raid resulted in the loss of 40% of the total work force for the combined plants and $20 million in lost production. The Utah raid resulted in 145 workers being arrested and others being detained. Above and beyond the economic cost of lost production and reduced labor force, these raids impacted families and their children in a variety of ways.
14
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
We interviewed a Catholic priest, a Department of Human Services worker, the director of a multicultural center in Logan, Utah (Hyrum is a suburb of Logan), and an adult education teacher at a high school in Logan to get a well-rounded look at what happened through their eyes and how the raid impacted the families and their children. The story below is pieced together from their interviews. The raid took place on December 12th, 2006. Many of the workers were Catholic and for them, this was a holy day. Before the Christmas season “officially” begins, Mexicans join together for the festivities of Our Lady of Guadalupe, one of the most important dates in the Mexican calendar. Many of the workers at the Hyrum plant had been to church before coming to work, they were excited about the day, and the children were looking forward to the holiday. It is unclear if ICE agents knew about the significance of December 12th, but it is clear that a different day would have been more culturally sensitive. According to witnesses, ICE agents arrived with three buses, several transport vans, and approximately 150 agents. The ICE agents came to the plant and separated workers with no papers or forged papers and took them away in buses. In some instances, both parents were taken. The ICE agent interviewed indicated that they did not take both parents if they knew children were involved that needed at least one of their parents to be home. However, given the fear of the parents, some did not indicate they had children because they did not know what the ICE agents would do with their children. At this point the families of those taken away did not have contact with their family members who were removed, some of them for days.
Researchers, advocates, and community agencies are beginning to question the impact of U.S. immigration enforcement strategies on very young children. In particular, immigration raids may suddenly and sometimes violently separate children from their parents, place them in unstable living environments, and create barriers to accessing needed services. Community-based organizations such as child care centers, child welfare systems, and mental health agencies are facing new challenges to provide support and resources to these children, but may not be adequately prepared to meet their complex needs. Although the federal government has issued several new policies to provide greater protection to children during law enforcement activities, many unanswered questions remain about care and protection of the children of immigrant parents during and after the enforcement of U.S. immigration laws.8 Excerpt from: The Impact of Immigration Enforcement Strategies on Infants and Toddlers, Randy Capps, Miriam Calderón, and Ajay Chaudry
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
15
The children of these workers were in school when the raid began. It was announced over the intercom at schools that if your parents worked at the plant you were to report to a certain area of the school. Children were then told about the raid but not given details. Many children waited all day to hear if their families were affected. Some of the students were left at school at the end of the day because no parents were available to get them. Students were unsure of what was going on, many were in tears. Children who did not have parents to go home to were taken in by other family members or friends of the family. Problems arose in a number of areas. Where one parent was deported and the remaining parent worked, child care became an issue. Since many in the community had been deported during the raid, child care resources became scarce. Some children were in households with 8 or 9 kids to be cared for since so many families needed emergency care. Also, for those families who had taken in children, there was the added expense of food, health care, and, if they had small children, diapers or formula. To meet immediate needs, the community and churches (including the LDS church and the Catholic community) came forward to support families with donations of money to help pay rent, clothing and diapers for children, and food. Even though many of the children were citizens, the remaining parent or caretaker was often afraid to accept state assistance for fear that they too would be deported or detained. Where both parents had been taken, preparations to reunite the children with their parents was hampered by the need for passports for the children, which required a parents signature. Since many of their parents were gone within days and the children never got to see them, getting those signatures was impossible. For older children who had been raised in Utah, reuniting with their parents meant the culture shock of returning to areas that were poorer, underdeveloped, and with less technology than the environment where they had grown up. All in all, approximately 150 families were affected and around 300 children. Observers say that during the week after the raid the town looked like a ghost town. People were afraid to leave their house, children didn’t go to school. In addition, other plants in town had to shut down as many of their employees were afraid to come to work because of the uncertainty of “who was next”. Children were suddenly afraid to sleep in their own beds and were afraid of the police. Long term, the Department of Human Services (DHS) set up a response team to deal with helping the families left behind. The team was made up of the Utah Department of Family Services (DCFS), the Utah Department of Workforce Services (DWS), Centro Hispano, and the Catholic Diocese. This crisis response team met with each family and
16
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
arranged long term plans (approximately 3 months). The schools in Hyrum and Logan played a key role in helping families meet with this team; parents trusted the schools. None of the children were removed from homes and none were placed in foster care. Instead, the community rallied around its own and took care of the children as best they could. The experience of putting together this team and how they helped the families was built upon for the next raid in Lindon. In the end, the people interviewed indicated that no one could have prepared the children for the amount of stress they had to endure and the uncertainty of not knowing the location of their parents. Not knowing when they would see them was extremely difficult. One family therapist who counseled children of those arrested, treated many cases of anxiety and depression. The children and their families were hyper-vigilant, suffered severe anxiety and now are suspicious of law enforcement.9
Lindon, Utah - The Universal Industrial Sales Plant On February 1, 2007, ICE agents along with Utah County Sheriff deputies raided the Universal Industrial Sales manufacturing plant at around 8:00 in the morning. About 50 people were taken into ICE custody during the raids. Once again, to piece together a story of what happened, we spoke with DCFS employees, social service directors, and the faith community. Before this raid, the ICE agents gave a heads up to the DCFS workers and they had put together the same crisis team used in Hyrum. They provided services to 19 families during 5 intake sessions. Once again the community came out to support the families affected by the raid. Churches provided food, vouchers for clothing, as well as monetary aid. Though on a smaller scale than the raid in Hyrum, stories from those we interviewed sounded much the same as before. Children began having panic attacks, the need for passports for children had to be dealt with, and schools and churches played a big role in helping the families. Two additional issues were mentioned specific to this raid. First, the day of the raid was payday. However, since most of the spouses did not have powers of attorney, the plant would not give them the paychecks owed to those arrested. This left families with the immediate need of money to pay rent, utilities, and food. As mentioned above, this is where the churches and the community came in, providing money to pay these basic bills for up to three months. Secondly, some of the employees had parked their cars in the employee parking lot. Spouses did not have keys and could not get the cars. This was especially difficult if the car title was only in the husband’s name. As with the passport issue and the payday is-
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
17
sue, a power of attorney would have made things much easier for those family members left behind. The Lindon raid was made easier on both the community and DCFS workers in that they had been discussing what would happen should a raid occur. In 2006, a committee was formed within the DCFS office to address the needs of the Hispanic community. This committee met monthly, so when the raid occurred they were ready to respond. One major difference between the Lindon raid and the Hyrum raid was a human resource manager from the plant was arrested on two counts of encouraging illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. unlawfully. Each count carries up to 10 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. However, he was sentenced to just three years probation.
In the End... In the end, what impact did the raids have on the “problem” of illegal immigrants. It is not known how much the raids cost the ICE agency. A similar raid in Iowa costs taxpayers $13, 396 for each of the 389 illegal immigrants taken into custody.10 While larger than the raid in either Hyrum or Lindon, we can assume that the raids cost a considerable amount of money, not including the cost to the Utah Department of Human Services and the Utah Department of Workforce Services. In addition, the Utah court system was highly impacted by the raids. An article in the Salt Lake Tribune indicated that only 23% of those arrested in the Operation Wagon train raids faced federal or state charges, but about half of those were prosecuted in Cache County. The article states “In fact, while Utah had the second lowest number of Swift arrests nationwide, it had the highest number of cases prosecuted.”11 Though no proof was offered, in both cases, those we interviewed stated that many of the individuals arrested and deported were back in Utah within a month. Was the cost to Utah’s taxpayers worth it?
Speaking on behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishop John C. Wester, Chairman of the Bishops’ Committee on Migration, urged the Department of Homeland Security and President Bush to reexamine the use of worksite enforcement raids as an immigration enforcement tool. “The humanitarian costs of these raids are immeasurable and unacceptable in a civilized society,” Bishop Wester said. “While we do not question the right and duty of our government to enforce the law, we do question whether worksite enforcment raids are the most effective and humane methods for performing this duty.”12
18
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
Other less tangible effects of the raid also make the rationale for the raids questionable. One of the social service employees we talked to indicated that fear and trust issues with law enforcement agents had severe effects on families. For example, immigrants were afraid to report domestic violence or child abuse for fear that they would be deported. One employee told the following story of a woman whose husband had been deported. She and her husband had been making payments on a trailer which was installed in a residential park. After her husband was deported, the park manager (who held the title to the trailer) sent her a notice of eviction. Although the trailer was almost paid for, the wife was afraid of what would happen to her and her two children if she made an issue out of her situation so she lost everything. Fear and distrust created problems in other areas as well. An “All Things Considered” broadcast on NPR in April of 2009 indicated that children in immigrant families are more likely to be poor than those whose parents are born in the United States and that these same children are far less likely to receive public benefits, even though most of them were born in the U.S. and are citizens.13 Many illegal immigrants whose children are citizens don’t get them the benefits they are entitled to because they are afraid to contact government agencies, in spite of the fact that undocumented immigrants are not supposed to be reported to immigration authorities when they apply for benefits for their citizen children. In part because of the raids, citizen children in Utah may not be getting the help they need due to fear on the part of their parents.
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
19
Senate Bill 81 - Immigration Refor m Takes For m in Utah During Utah’s 2008 Legislative Session policymakers passed Senate Bill 81 that dealt with provisions related to the immigration status of individuals within the state. Though controversial, the bill passed. The main provisions of SB 81 are as follows: •
Requires jail officials make a “reasonable effort” to determine the citizenship and legal status of suspects charged with felonies or drunk driving and notify the Department of Homeland Security if status can’t be determined.
•
Creates a “rebuttable presumption” that illegal presence is a flight risk.
•
Prevents undocumented immigrants from obtaining restaurant or private club liquor licenses.
•
Makes citizenship, permanent residency or other legal status, with a few exceptions, a requirement for identification documents by government agencies. Educational institutions are exempt.
•
Requires public employers to use the federal E-Verify program to check the legal status of new hires.
•
Starting July 1, 2009, contractors must use E-Verify to contract with the public employers.
•
Starting July 1, 2009, makes it unlawful for an employer to discharge a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident employee when an undocumented immigrant is performing a similar job.
•
Requires verification of legal status of applicants age 18 or older who apply for public benefits that aren’t required federally to be provided. Exemptions include health care — except organ transplants, in-kind emergency disaster relief, public health assistance for immunizations, testing and treating of communicable diseases, and programs such as soup kitchens that deliver community level services needed for the protection of life or safety.
•
Applicants for public benefits must certify their eligibility with documentations such as a birth certificate or tribal document. A false application would be cause for criminal charges and a false claim of U.S. citizenship would be reported to the Attorney General’s Office.
20
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
•
State agencies or departments that provide public benefits must provide an annual report to the Governor, Senate president and House speaker, on its compliance and ensure it is not denying benefits to legal residents.
•
Subject to availability of funding, the attorney general establishes a Fraudulent Documents Identification Unit to target the sale and distribution of fraudulent documents.
•
Requires the attorney general to enter into a agreement with Department of Homeland Security for “enforcement of federal immigration and customs laws” by some state and local law enforcement personnel. It prevents local governments from prohibiting such an agreement.
•
Prevents local governments from passing ordinances or policies that limit or prevent law officers or public employees from cooperating with federal officials regarding an individual’s immigration status.
•
Creates a Class A misdemeanor for transporting, concealing or harboring an undocumented immigrant “knowing or in reckless disregard” of their status for private commercial advantage or private financial gain.
•
Allows local law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration law.
•
Exempts charitable or humanitarian assistance, if that assistance is provided by a charitable, educational, or religious organization or its employees, agents, or volunteers using private funds. Also exempts religious organizations or members to allow aliens to act as ministers or missionaries, if they’ve been a member of that religious organization for at least a year.
Effects of the Bill - July 1, 2009 and Beyond This fairly comprehensive bill took effect on July 1, 2009. But even before it’s official start day, the immigrant community had concerns. Rumors and misconceptions had many confused and scared and believing that the law would grant police new powers to arrest and deport them, that they would be charged with transporting undocumnented immigrants if they gave rides to friends or relatives to church or the grocery store, or that they would need to prove immigration status to rent an apartment. Many community groups began to hold meetings to try and allay the apprehensions and assure the immigrant community that none of that was true. But the bill does have some very real repercussions in the state.
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
21
State agencies were provided with an eleven page document that spells out the impact and concerns of SB81 on a variety of agencies including Commerce, Corrections, Labor Commission, Health, Human Resource Management, Human Services, Tax Commission, and others. For example, the Utah Department of Commerce will need to hire two additional staff members to deal with verifying licensees’ residence status. Where before applicants could apply on-line, now some will have to apply in person to bring in supporting documentation. This will slow down the approval process for everyone. Also, many of the agencies will have to deal with the administrative and transaction costs of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program and the Status Verification System (SVS). Because SB81 requires a government agency to verify citizenship before granting a license, many childcare providers will lose their license over the next two years. Having a childcare license in the past did require a background check but did not require proof of immigration status. While current childcare providers can continue to operate until their license comes up for renewal, many providers have already said they will be giving up their license. New immigrants often provide in-home childcare as a way of providing for their own family. Before SB81 these individuals could be licensed which meant that the environment passed fire, kitchen, and health and safety regulations and also complied with caretaker/child ratios. With childcare providers either afraid to or refusing to apply for a license, this could mean that more children will be taken care of in unregulated homes which may not be as safe. While SB81 allows for the cross-deputization of local law enforcement officers with federal ICE agents, the bill does specify that participation is optional. Many of the police chiefs across the state including the Salt Lake Police Chief, along with the Utah Highway Patrol have decided against participation. They site several reasons including: • the expense of the cross-training at a time when budgets are already stretched •
the worry that having local officers enforce immigration law would deter victims from coming forward (as we have already discussed in terms of domestic violence and child abuse) or that witnesses to crimes would be reticent to step forward and contribute to police matters
•
the possibiliy of individuals taking action based on immigration status which would lead to enforcement decisions based soley on race or ethnicity
While anti-immigration groups in Utah have protested the decision by many police departments to opt out of the cross-training available through the new law, so far it has not changed the minds of many police chiefs across the state, although at least two counties have cross-deputized officers.
22
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
SB 81 is similar to a law enacted by Oklahoma which is now embroiled in litigation over their statute. The outcome of that lawsuit may lead to a challenge of Utah’s law.
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
23
Recommendations Based on our research for this issue brief, Voices for Utah Children gives the following recommendations: •
Support federal immigration reform - This reform should include earned legalization which balances the right to regulate immigration but provides a path way to citizenship that allows for industries that rely on undocumented workers to get the workforce they need and ensures the well-being of children (many who are U.S. citizens) who are affected by workplace raids and the deportation of their parents.
•
Pass the Dream Act. Under this bill, illegal immigrants who entered the United States as children, defined as age 15 and under, and have lived here for five years could apply to the Homeland Security Department for conditional legal status after graduating from high school. Such legal status would make the immigrants eligible for in-state college tuition rates and some forms of federal financial aid. Then, if they attend college or participate in military service for at least two years, the immigrants would qualify for permanent legal residency and ultimately citizenship. The DREAM Act has been introduced in various forms since 2001.
•
Preserve Utah’s current policy with regards to in-state tuition to undocumented students. This includes the criteria that the student attended high school in Utah for 3 or more years and graduated from a Utah high school.
•
Provide for the education of immigrant parents so they know their citizen children’s rights and how it may or may not affect their own immigration status. This should include making certain that spouses have powers of attorney so if one spouse is deported the remaining partner has access to all funds, paychecks, and property.
•
Support outreach efforts aimed at making sure that eligible children, regardless of their parent’s status, receive the help they need such as food stamps or health care insurance,
•
Create a state task force to monitor the effects of SB 81 and to analyze whether or not the changes inherent in the bill are cost effective and beneficial to the state of Utah.
24
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
•
Increase access to quality English language learning.
•
Pass the Help Separated Children’s Act. This federal legislation would provide critical, nationwide protocols to protect the rights of vulnerable populations and help keep children with their parents or caregivers and out of the foster care system while their parent’s or caregiver’s case is pending by ensuring that vulnerable populations apprehended during immigration enforcement activities are identified, treated with dignity and released or placed into alternatives to detention programs. The bill establishes guidelines to regulate immigration enforcement activities to ensure they do not compromise the well-being and unity of children and families.
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
25
Conclusion Though Americans tend to identify as a nation of immigrants, there continues to be a portion of the nation that is opposed to the continuation of any large scale immigration. According to Charles Hirschman, a professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Washington, this hostility toward immigrants is not new. He claims, “Each new wave of immigration to the United States has met with some degree of hostility and popular fears that immigrants will harm American society or will not conform to the prevailing “American way of life.” In 1751, Benjamin Franklin complained about the “Palatine Boors” who were trying to Germanize the province of Pennsylvania and refused to learn English (Archdeacon 1983: 20). The Immigration Restriction League, founded by young Harvard-educated Boston Brahmins in 1894, advocated a literacy test to slow the tide of immigration (Bernard 1980: 492). It was thought that a literacy test would reduce immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, which was sending an “alarming number of illiterates, paupers, criminals, and madmen who endangered American character and citizenship.”14 Hirschman demonstrates that there has always been a faction of anti-immigration in our nation. The concern today is that this anti-immigration sentiment may keep us from assurring the future of some of Utah’s citizens simply because their parents are immigrants. As the number of children in immigrant families continues to grow, we must institutionalize procedure and programs aimed at making sure the smallest among us have a chance to reach their full potential.
26
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
References
1
Immigrants Transform Utah: Entering A New Era of Diversity, Pamela S. Perlich, Utah Economic and Business Review, May/June 2004, Vol. 64, Numbers 5 & 6.
2
Immigration in Utah: Background and Trends, Utah Foundation Research Brief, August, 2008.
3
Children of Immigrants and the New U. S. Demographic Path, Mark Mather, Population Reference Bureau, Working Paper, August, 2008.
4
Children in Immigrant Families in Utah: Fact Sheet, Donald J. Hernandez, The Center for Social and Demographic Analysis, September, 2009.
5
The Uprooted: The Epic Story of the Great Migration that Made the American People, Oscar Handlin, Second Edition, Boston: Little Brown and company, 1973.
6
Paying the Price: The Impact of Immigration Raids on America’s Children; Randy Capps, Rosa Maria Castaneda, Ajay Chaundry, Robert Santos; A Report by the Urban Institute for the National Council of La Raza, 2007.
7
The Case for Caution: Case Studies on the Economic Impact of State and Local Immigration Reforms; Melinda Gurr, Mary Borrowman, Ken Jameson; A Report by the Department of Economics, University of Utah for the United Way of Salt Lake, February, 2008.
8
The Impact of Immigration Enforcement Strategies on Infants and Toddlers, Journal of ZERO TO THREE, National Center for Infants, Toddlers, and Families, January 2009.
9
The Salt Lake Tribune, February 10, 2008, Year after raid, Cache mightily divided over immigrants, Kristen Moulton.
10
The Des Moines Register, October 14, 2008, Postville raid costs taxpayers $5 million, William Petroski.
11
The Salt Lake Tribune, February 10, 2008, Swift raid aftermath: Success or human tragedy, Jennifer W. Sanchez 12
Concerned over effects on families, communities, Bishops urge President Bush, Homeland Security to drop raids, Press Release from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, quote by Bishop John C. Wester, September 10, 2008.
13
Children of Immigrants Less Likely to Get Benefits, Pam Fessler, NPR, April 16, 2009.
14
The Impact of Immigration on American Society: Looking Backward to the Future, Charles Hirschman, Population Reference Bureau, July 28, 2006.
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
27
747 E. South Temple, Suite 100, Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 T: (801) 364-1182 F: (801) 364-1186
www.utahchildren.org
28
Voices for Utah Children, 2009
