From LA TIMES: BOOMERS and IMMIGRANTS

 

Immigrant workers could be crucial to ensuring the security of aging baby boomers

By Jeffrey L. Rabin, Times Staff Writer
February 27, 2007

 

The aging of the baby boom generation is no secret. But Dowell Myers, a professor of urban planning and demography at USC, believes that the boomers' future is directly tied to the economic success of the state's younger immigrant population. His forthcoming book is titled "Immigrants and Boomers: Forging a New Social Contract for the Future of America."

Why should baby boomers care about the state's immigrant population?

It will become totally obvious within 20 years that the baby boomers need the immigrant youth…. Not only will California have a shortage of workers, but the whole country will.

We also know there is a skyrocketing tax burden being imposed by the elderly. We need to have more middle-class taxpayers to shoulder the burden. The trouble is you can't grow a worker overnight. You can't produce a middle-class taxpayer overnight, and you can't produce a home buyer overnight. You have to plan ahead.

The debate about immigration can get hot and heavy politically. How much of it is based on fact and how much on misperceptions?

It's all based on a little bit of facts, but it's largely based on perceptions, and some of those are misperceptions.

Most people don't know, for example, that immigration has leveled off. They continue to assume it's going up…. The real actors in this aren't Californians. They are people who are encountering immigration for the first time, and they are shocked by it. They think an immigrant is a newcomer. They haven't had experience seeing that people settle in and they grow older and they move up the ladder.

Trace for us the phenomenal changes that have taken place in California in the last 30 years in terms of the number of foreign-born residents.

Immigration in America really slowed down through the middle of the 20th century. We had a very high level back in 1910. But after the Immigration Act of 1926 it really plunged through the Great Depression and through the World War II years.

The low point was probably about 1970. The U.S. was down to 4.7% foreign-born, and California was down about 8.5%.

Then, after 1970, California's foreign-born shot upward to 21.7% by 1990. Our level now is up to 27% foreign-born. That's an astounding turnaround.

Has the wave of immigrants abated?

The acceleration of new arrivals has just leveled off…. After 1990, we had our recession, which basically discouraged people from moving to California.

We used to get 38% of all the new arrivals in America…. Now we're down to about 20%, the difference being that they have discovered other destinations across America where they had never gone before that have really cheap housing, decent jobs.

Given a choice between coming to Los Angeles County or going to Gwinnett County, Ga., they are going for Georgia, because it's a lot better deal for them economically.

What drew so many immigrants to California over the last 30 years?

Our economy was booming in the '80s. Much of the rest of the U.S. was not doing so well. Texas had the oil crash in '85, and so [in] the later half of the '80s it was not a great economic destination. California took all those Mexican immigrants because Texas couldn't. The Midwest had its own Rust Belt. So we were the hot spot in the late '80s.

How are the aging baby boomers going to realize this common economic and social interest with the younger immigrant population?

The future is very hard for people to see. They are not going to realize this on their own until it's too late…. So my job is to help them see ahead. The longer we delay, the worse the problem gets.

It just so happens the next president of the United States is going to face this problem dead on, hard, in the middle of their second term — the worker shortages that are going to have states fighting with each other.

For the skilled, qualified workers?

All kinds of workers. The workforce shortages hit the hardest in 2015. The tax crisis will be on us sooner than that. It's already on us…. We already have this huge deficit, and the baby boomers haven't retired yet.

And they are going to be demanding their Social Security and Medicare.

Their entitlements. I think we're going to be cutting those amid great strife…. They are going to be delaying the age of eligibility. They are going to be cutting the levels. They are going to be raising tax rates.

We need to really cultivate the future taxpayers of America. Not the baby boomers, but the immigrant youth today…. The change in thinking seems to be the real barrier.

We've been cutting taxes. We're not looking ahead to this huge problem. When you put everything in the perspective of the baby boom retirement, you realize that this is a monumental crisis.

California has followed the federal government's lead by borrowing heavily in the last five years for its budget deficit and infrastructure needs, without raising taxes. How are we going to be able to reconcile these problems?

First off, the feds have bailed us out in the past with some assistance. But the feds are dying now, because Social Security and Medicare tied to baby boom retirement is going to suck up all the money. There won't be any federal assistance for any of our infrastructure. Nothing. It comes all the way back on the states.

Meanwhile, California has been mortgaging the future. It has passed $20 billion in bonds since 2000 just to cover the current operating deficit…. But it's all being burdened on the next decade, when the heavy crunch is going to come.

You were in Sacramento recently. What message did you carry?

I took a message that said: Here's the story about the immigrant future, and here's the story about the baby boomers…. Their fates are interconnected.

We have to try to shape up the workforce now. Get it ready for what's coming and improve the tax base.

I showed them the evidence [about] … the rate of progress of immigrants…. One number that's most astounding is how many Latino immigrants, who are generally the poorest immigrants, become homeowners.

That shows incredible commitment.

They really are trying to buy the American dream. They are buying at the bottom of the market, but they are buying in against great obstacles.

If they had better education, more income, they could actually buy higher-priced houses. Those are the kinds of houses the rest of us are going to be selling.

You have a difficult job convincing people that their financial self-interest is intimately tied to those who aren't of the same economic group.

I've got a couple of things on my side. The key point being the aging of the baby boomers. We don't like aging. None of us do. But it will happen, and it will happen en masse.

As soon as people look at it and think about the consequences, they begin to realize what's in store.

There is really no place to run, because this is happening nationwide. They can leave the country, I suppose.

 

New Generous Kennedy Immigration Senate Bill covered in Washington Times article

Senate illegals bill near complete

By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published February 22, 2007

---

Senators and lobbyists are putting the final touches on a comprehensive immigration-reform bill that includes an easier citizenship path for illegal aliens and weaker enforcement provisions than were in the highly criticized legislation that the Senate approved last year.     Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat who ardently supports citizenship rights for illegals, will introduce the bill as early as next week, according to Senate sources knowledgeable about the negotiations. If the Senate Judiciary Committee can make quick work of the bill, it could be ready for floor action in April.
    Mr. Kennedy drafted this year's bill with help from Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, and outside lobbyists. Mr. McCain and the outside groups share Mr. Kennedy's support for increased immigration and leniency for illegals already in the country.
    Among the most active participants have been the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Both groups support giving current illegals a path to citizenship and increasing the flow of foreign workers into the country.
    "It's good for the country," EWIC immigration lawyer Laura Reiff said of Mr. Kennedy's bill.
    In particular, EWIC and the chamber have taken a leading role in drafting the section of the bill dealing with work-site enforcement, Senate staffers say. Lobbyists in both organizations have shuttled around Capitol Hill drafts of those provisions, which are supposed to impose sanctions on businesses that hire illegal aliens, according to internal e-mails obtained by The Washington Times.
    "That's putting the fox in charge of the henhouse," one Senate lawyer said about the pro-business chamber's involvement in drafting the punishment of employers.
    One of those e-mails obtained by The Times invited Democratic immigration staffers to a briefing in early January with "key stakeholders" to discuss workplace-enforcement provisions. The invitation listed six such "stakeholders," including the chamber and EWIC. The other groups attending the meeting, according to the e-mail, were the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Immigration Law Center, the National Council of La Raza and the Service Employees International Union.
    Not included in that meeting or any of the early meetings, according to several Senate aides, were key Republican senators or their staff who crossed the aisle last year to support "comprehensive" immigration reform that most Republicans considered a form of amnesty.
    "We have been held out of any discussions," said Sen. Sam Brownback, one of those who supported last year's major immigration bill. "Our staffs have asked to be involved, but they were kept out."
    Even Sen. Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who as chairman of the Judiciary Committee last year ushered the immigration bill through the Senate, has been left out of the process of drafting the bill.
    Mr. Specter said yesterday that he and Mr. Kennedy have discussed the need to get a bill done this year but not any details. Mr. Specter has twice complained to Mr. Kennedy, most recently at a meeting last week, that the Republican senator's staff had been left out of negotiations.
    "I raised the issue again, and a Kennedy staffer said there was nothing in writing" as legislation, he said. "Neither my staff nor I have seen any draft."
    Last week, aides and Republicans said, Mr. Specter, Mr. Brownback and others were invited to a meeting where they got their first briefing on the nearly completed bill. Other Republicans invited included Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Mel Martinez of Florida.
    Laura Capps, a spokeswoman for Mr. Kennedy, said he has been working with "many senators and members of Congress to draft the new bill."
    "The bipartisan coalition behind the bill remains strong and intact."
    The one Republican who all agree has been part of the negotiations from the start is Mr. McCain, who is running for his party's presidential nomination. This worries Republicans who say that Mr. McCain is the last Republican they want representing their interests in negotiations with Mr. Kennedy over immigration legislation.
    Mr. McCain and Mr. Kennedy have long embraced the same goal of giving illegal aliens a direct path to U.S. citizenship despite having broken laws to get here in the first place. Both men also denounce the view held by most Republicans that the federal government should first secure the border with Mexico and begin enforcing current laws before addressing other immigration issues such as what to do with the more than 10 million to 12 million aliens already here.
    Who has been in and out of negotiations this year signals to Republicans that Mr. Kennedy will introduce a bill that more resembles the original McCain-Kennedy bill than the compromise that was ultimately approved last year.
    As much as conservatives dislike last year's compromise bill, they consider it some improvement over the original bill because it lowered the number of new foreign workers permitted into the country each year and slightly narrowed the pool of illegals who would be granted "amnesty."
    "If it's back to the old version without the changes we made last year, I don't think I could support that," Mr. Brownback said.
    Ms. Capps said she expects Mr. Kennedy to introduce his bill "in the next few weeks."
    Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, is "committed to getting something done this year," his spokesman said.

From ACLU.org:Civil Rights Groups File Class-Action Suit Against Government

 

SAN FRANCISCO - Civil rights groups filed a class-action lawsuit today against the federal government for its practice of indefinitely delaying citizenship applications in violation of the Constitution and federal statutes and regulations. 

“There is no point in calling our legal process a path to citizenship, if the government puts up a roadblock to keep you from reaching the goal,” said Cecillia D.Wang, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project.  “We are taking legal action today to reaffirm the promises made to so many patient, hardworking immigrants who want to become U.S. citizens and fully participate in our democracy.”

The first of its kind in Northern California, the lawsuit seeks to enforce federal laws that expect the government to decide a citizenship application within 120 days of the naturalization test. Many of the named plaintiffs have been waiting for several years, a clear violation of the law.

The plaintiffs, long-time legal permanent residents of Northern California, have met all the legal requirements for citizenship, including passing their immigration interview and clearing criminal record checks, but have not been granted citizenship due to a so-called “FBI name check,” a process that has taken years to complete. 

“I was excited when I passed the interview and the immigration officer told me that I would get a final response, at the latest, in three months.  It has been over two years and still no word,” said 25-year-old Sana Jalili who has two American-born children. She immigrated to the United States from Pakistan when she was 15.

The ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, the ACLU of Northern California, the Asian Law Caucus and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter, all jointly filed the lawsuit in federal district court in San Francisco today. 

“This lawsuit deals with the government’s recent attempts to evade the law: moving the unreasonable delay earlier to skirt the letter of law while still violating people’s due process rights,” said Sin Yen Ling, a staff attorney with the Asian Law Caucus. “Our lawsuit specifically addresses the issue by arguing for a time limit within which the government must complete the ‘name check,’ regardless of the stage at which the check is conducted.”

Todd Gallinger, legal counsel with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter, added: “The Council on American Islamic Relations’ Bay Area Chapter (CAIR-SFBA) alone has received more than 65 cases, mostly from people of Middle Eastern or South-Asian origin.  Other civil rights groups are also reporting a disproportionately high number of persons affected among the American Muslim community. Regardless of whether these delays are due to discrimination or incompetence, they are illegal and must be corrected.”

“The government’s failure to process naturalization applications in a timely manner creates terrible hardships for people like Abdul Ghafoor, who has been unable to bring his wife and four young children to the United States for the last several years,” said Julia Harumi Mass, staff attorney for the ACLU of Northern California.  “We are bringing this lawsuit because of the impact on family integrity and civic participation for important members of our community.”  

Defendants named in the lawsuit include the heads of the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, among others.
 
The case is Zhang v. Gonzales.

For a copy of the complaint go to www.aclu.org/immigrants/gen/28285lgl20070208.html

 

Charles M. Miller | Miller Law Offices |12441 Ventura Boulevard | Studio City, California | Tel 818 508 9005
| Fax 818 508 9458 | California State Bar Certified Immigration Law Specialist | www.millerlawoffices.com

This email is confidential, privileged and/or attorney work product for the sole use of the intended recipient.