How immigration crackdowns backfire

[scandal 951]

How immigration crackdowns backfire

More myths about illegal immigrants

Steve Chapman

April 22, 2010

Arizona legislators are fed up with being terrorized by illegal immigrants, and they have passed a law to get tough. Under the measure, passed this week and sent to the governor, police would have to stop and question anyone they suspect of being in this country without legal authorization.

The bill passed after the fatal shooting of Robert Krentz, a 58-year-old rancher whose killer apparently entered illegally from Mexico. Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu says police are also under siege: "We've had numerous officers that have been killed by illegal immigrants in Arizona."

Even Sen. John McCain, once a supporter of immigration reform, has called for the immediate placement of 3,000 National Guard soldiers along the border.

It's no surprise that Arizonans resent the recent influx of unauthorized foreigners, some of them criminals. But there is less here than meets the eye.

The state has an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants. But contrary to myth, they have not brought an epidemic of murder and mayhem with them. Surprise of surprises, the state has gotten safer.

Over the last decade, the violent crime rate has dropped by 19 percent, while property crime is down by 20 percent. Crime has also declined in the rest of the country, but not as fast as in Arizona.

Babeu's claim about police killings came as news to me. When I called his office to get a list of victims, I learned there has been only one since the beginning of 2008 — deeply regrettable, but not exactly a trend.

Truth is, illegal immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native Americans. Most come here to work, and in their desire to stay, they are generally afraid to do anything that might draw the attention of armed people wearing badges.

El Paso, Texas, is next door to the exceptionally violent Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, and easily accessible to illegal entry. Yet it is one of the safest cities in the United States.

In 2007, scholars Ruben Rumbaut and Walter Ewing investigated the issue for the Immigration Policy Center and concluded that "if immigrants suddenly disappeared and the country became immigrant-free (and illegal-immigrant free), crime rates would likely increase."

That's not to say Arizonans don't have a right to be upset when Mexicans trespass across private land on a regular basis. But you could solve that problem by making it easier for them to immigrate legally.

It's also worth remembering that this used to be a rare phenomenon. What made it common was not a new avalanche of people coming to the United States without permission. It was a federal offensive to intercept them in major border cities where they used to arrive.

"Closing the old entry points diverted them into places which didn't have many undocumented immigrants before," Princeton University sociologist Douglas Massey told me. Instead of sneaking into San Diego or El Paso, they are prone to entering somewhere else — often in the Arizona desert, where the chance of being caught is lower.

Turning the border into a 2,000-mile replica of the Berlin Wall may sound like a simple cure for the problem. But besides being hugely expensive, it would have effects the advocates would not relish.

How so? Massey says the number of people coming illegally has not risen appreciably in the last couple of decades. But the number staying has climbed, because anyone who leaves faces a harder task returning.

Had the government not cracked down at the border, he says, "the undocumented population would be half what it is now." A fence intended to keep illegal immigrants out is serving beautifully to keep them in.

Assigning local police to enforce federal immigration laws would also have unhealthy side effects. The Major Cities Chiefs Association, representing 56 police departments, says it hinders law enforcement by deterring members of immigrant communities from cooperating with cops.

Last year, Police Chief George Gascon of Mesa, Ariz., (now chief in San Francisco) told a congressional committee that in some cases, this approach "is setting the police profession back to the 1950s and '60s, when police officers were sometimes viewed in minority communities as the enemy."

If there is anything we've learned about getting tough on illegal immigration, it's that it rarely works as intended. Like punching a wall, it may feel good for a moment, but it hurts a lot longer.

Steve Chapman is a member of the Tribune's editorial board and blogs at chicagotribune.com/chapman

[TBoneTX 45,498]

police would have to stop and question anyone they suspect of being in this country without legal authorization.

"Under the Fourth Amendment, I don't have to answer that question, Officer." "Am I under arrest for probable cause?" "I will answer no questions, and I want an attorney." How many ways around this "have to stop & question" are there? Also, how does this dovetail or conflict with the ICE 287g program, which so few local & state police agencies are part of?

And if the glorious Sen. McCain wants National Guard troops on the border, how does that conflict with the Posse Comitatus Act?

Some thought-provoking information in that piece, si man.

Edited April 23, 2010 by TBoneTX

[scandal 951]

And if the glorious Sen. McCain wants National Guard troops on the border, how does that conflict with the Posse Comitatus Act?

Why don't you tell us, since we know you're just aching to?

Some thought-provoking information in that piece, si man.

Yeah, I thought so too.

[TBoneTX 45,498]

Why don't you tell us, since we know you're just aching to?

Actually, I'm NOT that ache-y about it; others here (I'd suggest names but may misremember) know a lot more about it & would be far more qualified to give details. Meanwhile, Google is our friend.

Yeah, I thought so too.

Thanks for posting it -- never would've seen it otherwise, no man.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

1) "if immigrants suddenly disappeared and the country became immigrant-free (and illegal-immigrant free), crime rates would likely increase."

2) That's not to say Arizonans don't have a right to be upset when Mexicans trespass across private land on a regular basis. But you could solve that problem by making it easier for them to immigrate legally.

1) Nice job of blurring the lines again. How about doing a study on what the impact would be if the country would be simply illegal immigrant free? Why do the defenders of illegal migrants always pretend that illegal immigrants are in the same boat as lawful immigrants?

2) Awesome. We could solve burglary problem by making it legal to enter and empty any house anyone feels they want to enter and empty. Grand theft auto? No more. Just make it madatory to leave the car unlocked and the keys in the ignition so anyone may use any car they see.

Edited April 23, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[Niels Bohr 72]

This law is a little off.

There is already a law that convict people that commit crime, right? And we know criminals could be anybody, illegal or legal. Kinda defeat the purpose of that law. There are thousands of legal criminals (oxy-moron) roaming AZ that still haven't been caught.

AZ is turning into East Germany where the gastopo ask questions regardless of the rights.

Edited April 23, 2010 by Niels Bohr

[CDAgirlMI 51]

How immigration crackdowns backfire

More myths about illegal immigrants

Steve Chapman

April 22, 2010

In 2007, scholars Ruben Rumbaut and Walter Ewing investigated the issue for the Immigration Policy Center and concluded that "if immigrants suddenly disappeared and the country became immigrant-free (and illegal-immigrant free), crime rates would likely increase."

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

AZ is turning into East Germany where the gastopo ask questions regardless of the rights.

It was the Stasi in East Germany, the GeStaPo dates back a bit further. Other than that, though, I agree with the statement.

[peejay 327]

AZ is turning into East Germany where the gastopo ask questions regardless of the rights.

The major problem with your analysis is that the people of East Germany wanted to flee their own country while the people of AZ are tired of illegal aliens breaking into our country to flee theirs'.

BTW - There would be no need for AZ to pass these laws if the Federal government did its' job. Mandatory universal E-Verify would cure 99% of illegal immigration in a heartbeat, but it is being held hostage to Democrats' wet dream of millions of future amnestied illegal alien votes.

[Ali G. 37]

1) Nice job of blurring the lines again. How about doing a study on what the impact would be if the country would be simply illegal immigrant free? Why do the defenders of illegal migrants always pretend that illegal immigrants are in the same boat as lawful immigrants?

2) Awesome. We could solve burglary problem by making it legal to enter and empty any house anyone feels they want to enter and empty. Grand theft auto? No more. Just make it madatory to leave the car unlocked and the keys in the ignition so anyone may use any car they see.

Word.

1. The guy clearly illustrates his reasoning when he blurs the lines of legal (legitimate) immigrants with illegal (unlawful) aliens. These guys are not asylum seekers fleeing some sort of horrific lifestyle. They're Mexicans trying to get ahead of Mexicans. Why not ask how it is that the richest man on the planet is from Mexico? Better yet, the son of migrants himself.

2. I was thinking girls should bend over and take it when it comes to rape too. Children should just go with any stranger.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

How about doing a study on what the impact would be if the country would be simply illegal immigrant free? Why do the defenders of illegal migrants always pretend that illegal immigrants are in the same boat as lawful immigrants?

Economic impact? Studies have been done that demonstrate that they have a positive impact on our economy because they consume like the rest of us, pay taxes and work the lowest paying jobs. There have also been studies that show near half of those who are here illegally came here legally but overstayed their visas. From an economic standpoint, there are no substantial differences between the two groups of immigrants.

Our immigration problems are economically driven. If we have stronger unions pushing lower end jobs, particularly service sector jobs up the pay scale, I think we'd see less illegal immigration. On the other side of it, we could better spend the money we have spent on militarizing our border with Mexico on helping our southern neighbor's economy improve.

Edited April 23, 2010 by El Buscador

[Ali G. 37]

The major problem with your analysis is that the people of East Germany wanted to flee their own country while the people of AZ are tired of illegal aliens breaking into our country to flee theirs'.

BTW - There would be no need for AZ to pass these laws if the Federal government did its' job. Mandatory universal E-Verify would cure 99% of illegal immigration in a heartbeat, but it is being held hostage to Democrats' wet dream of millions of future amnestied illegal alien votes.

Context and details are a funny thing hey.

[Ali G. 37]

Economic impact? Studies have been done that demonstrate that they have a positive impact on our economy because they consume like the rest of us, pay taxes and work the lowest paying jobs. There have also been studies that show near half of those who are here illegally came here legally but overstayed their visas. From an economic standpoint, there are no substantial differences between the two groups of immigrants.

Our immigration problems are economically driven. If we have stronger unions pushing lower end jobs, particularly service sector jobs up the pay scale, I think we'd see less illegal immigration. On the other side of it, we could better spend the money we have spent on militarizing our souther border on helping our southern neighbor's economy improve.

Actually there is Steve, thus every other single first world country cracking down on it. We have discussed this before and thrown out a few figures which you refuse to acknowledge. Countless studies illustrate the billions they cost the US taxpayer and the enormous financial burden they place on states that have a large number of them; however, those actual quantifiable studies tend to be ignored by pro illegal aliens folks. You guys prefer the 'it's a good thing because we say it's good'. Otherwise why not let the entire world move here? Hey they will pay their taxes right.

It makes no financial sense whatsoever to allow unskilled and uneducated people to flood the market. Furthermore, it's downright discrimination to continue to allow one region of the world (Latin America), to dominate ~80% of the country's immigration.

Edited April 23, 2010 by Ali G.

[Niels Bohr 72]

If they asked me those questions, I will give them a hell of a time. Trust me. I'll get the taxpayers worked up and they'll think twice before passing these laws.

The major problem with your analysis is that the people of East Germany wanted to flee their own country while the people of AZ are tired of illegal aliens breaking into our country to flee theirs'.

BTW - There would be no need for AZ to pass these laws if the Federal government did its' job. Mandatory universal E-Verify would cure 99% of illegal immigration in a heartbeat, but it is being held hostage to Democrats' wet dream of millions of future amnestied illegal alien votes.

[Ali G. 37]

If they asked me those questions, I will give them a hell of a time. Trust me. I'll get the taxpayers worked up and they'll think twice before passing these laws.

You live in Boston, hardly the same situation as AZ. People along the Southern borders are fed up.

PS It's not Asians, Africans, Europeans, Arabs coming across the border; thus, you will not be asked.