High deportation figures are misleading

[Newsjock]

Source: Los Angeles Times

Immigration activists have sharply criticized President Obama for a rising volume of deportations, labeling him the "deporter in chief" and staging large protests that have harmed his standing with some Latinos, a key group of voters for Democrats.

But the portrait of a steadily increasing number of deportations rests on statistics that conceal almost as much as they disclose. A closer examination shows that immigrants living illegally in most of the continental U.S. are less likely to be deported today than before Obama came to office, according to immigration data.

... On the other side of the ledger, the number of people deported at or near the border has gone up — primarily as a result of changing who gets counted in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency's deportation statistics.

The vast majority of those border crossers would not have been treated as formal deportations under most previous administrations. If all removals were tallied, the total sent back to Mexico each year would have been far higher under those previous administrations than it is now.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deportations-20140402,0,545192,full.story

[treestar]

1. I'm bothered by the idea it is wrong to enforce the law as is

We would not like a Republican deciding not to enforce the environmental laws, for example.

In the Obama years, all of the increase in deportations has involved people picked up within 100 miles of the border, most of whom have just recently crossed over. In 2013, almost two-thirds of deportations were in that category.
At the same time, the administration largely ended immigration roundups at workplaces and shifted investigators into targeting business owners who illegally hired foreign workers.
"If you are a run-of-the-mill immigrant here illegally, your odds of getting deported are close to zero — it's just highly unlikely to happen," John Sandweg, until recently the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in an interview.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deportations-20140402,0,3514864.story#ixzz2xhnYEqYt

[MADem]

3. It's a complex issue.

When Republicans wanted cheap labor, because they didn't want to pay "American" prices, they left the gate open and allowed people from south of the border to stream in. They're human, these folks--they worked hard, earned money, invested in homes, many of them, married, made lives, sent for relatives, started/added to families. Now they're bi-national. What do you do if you're a Born in the USA english speaking kid in grammar school, and they want to send your mother who has been living here under the radar for a decade or two home?

A lot of this is "our" (and I don't take blame for it, I wasn't a cheerleader for Reagan or Bush) problem, because you can't treat people like commodities and throw them away when they're no longer useful.

[treestar]

5. I agree. I think they should all get amnesty

Republicans when convenient don't enforce the laws. Maybe the only decent thing Reagan did was allow the amnesty back then.

Now the tea partiers have brought the Republicans into xenophobe mode. I don't think there is gong to be any immigration reform without a Democratic Congress and President.

[MADem]

13. During WW2, when we needed more labor, we at least screwed people over "up front."

They instituted a program called "Bracero," and they bussed in migrants to do the work that people called to service weren't home to do. There was none of this "look the other way, the door is open, sneak on in" stuff, the poor working stiffs (and I imagine they were quite stiff after working those miserable hours in those dreadful conditions) were hauled in, they worked a harvest, were put up in substandard housing, paid a pittance, and hauled home. In fact, the braceros didn't put up with the worst of the crap, and engaged in strikes on occasion, not that they ever were paid well or even fairly. The program stuttered along for twenty or so years after WW2. It was not our finest hour by a long shot, but certainly less hypocritical than giving people the hope that they could start a better life and then yanking the rug out from under them...!

There's a lot of interesting info on this old program scattered around the web.

[treestar]

14. At least with that, there was not the danger of coyotes

and the trip across the border. Or the threat of deportation. I actually would advocate simply letting people in and if they can get a job, fine, let the job market take care of it. Americans have the advantage already knowing language, etc. My theory is if they were legal the employers would have to pay minimum wage and obey labor laws the same for them as for Americans - that would take away the motive to hire them before Americans.

[Le Taz Hot]

4. Yeah, well,

unfortunately, the Latinos in my area, whose family members ARE being deported where they weren't before, aren't buying it. They can play with the numbers and rationalize all they want but these deportations are affecting real lives here. I know it's not what you guys want to hear but that's the reality.

[treestar]

6. Well one knows one is here illegally

I am for amnesty for them, but on the other hand, if you came illegally it's not like you can expect not to be deported. As the article said, the ones being deported are those just arriving and the chances of someone with roots in the US getting deported is low.

[Le Taz Hot]

7. Yeah,

I challenge you to come here to the Central San Joaquin Valley and tell that to the people who pick/pack your fruits & veggies. Some are here legally some not. Then give your pitch on how those who are registered to vote should vote Democrat because the Democrats are so much different than the Republicans on this issue and see how far you get.

[treestar]

9. They are not likely to be deported

As the article says, the numbers are for those just getting in.

[Le Taz Hot]

11. They HAVE been deported.

I don't know how else to say it. Again, I think you and PS should come here and tell them, in Spanish, that their family members really aren't being deported. Tell me how that works out for you.

[treestar]

15. Read the article

It says they are very unlikely to be deported and the bigger numbers are from people getting caught as they come in. The article link is there for you to read.

[Le Taz Hot]

16. Article vs. reality.

You believe in an article, I believe what people tell me when they say they actually experienced family members being deported DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION.

[ProSense]

8. From the OP

Until recent years, most people caught illegally crossing the southern border were simply bused back into Mexico in what officials called "voluntary returns," but which critics derisively termed "catch and release." Those removals, which during the 1990s reached more 1 million a year, were not counted in Immigration and Customs Enforcement's deportation statistics.

The same people were being deported before, just not counted or recorded as a deportation.

Among those traditionally counted as deported, the numbers are down significantly.

Deportations of people apprehended in the interior of the U.S., which the immigration agency defines as more than 100 miles from the border, dropped from 237,941 in Obama's first year to 133,551 in 2013, according to immigration data. Four out of five of those deportees came to the attention of immigration authorities after criminal convictions.

[Le Taz Hot]

10. Apparently they're not reading your articles.

Families HAVE been broken apart by deportation. I understand it's not what you want to hear but it is the reality.

[ProSense]

12. I understand

"Families HAVE been broken apart by deportation. I understand it's not what you want to hear but it is the reality."

..."the reality," which the article also acknowleges. A 45 percent drop in the number of traditionally counted deportations still means that "Families HAVE been broken apart."

The "reality" is why immigration reform is needed.

Having said that, "reality" doesn't prevent one from acknowledging the facts and the relevant statistics.

[Behind the Aegis]

2. Very interesting.

This is ties in with the recent article about Latinos not wanting to vote. It just goes to show how stats can be played with if not properly viewed. There still needs to be some serious reform to the immigration laws, especially for those who already live here. In a country built on immigration, it seems very odd we are now closing ranks.

[dnelsonh]

17. No one nationality, political viewpoint, religion should become a majority

This is what our immigration policy used to look like. there were 3 standards applied. 1. needs of the nation's workforce, 2. most favored nation status, 3. humanitarian/refugee status. the goal was that No one nationality, political viewpoint, religion should become a majority.
It is a fallacy that immigrants are needed for some types of work. If corporations hired Americans first, the minimum wage would increase by necessity to an economically correct level to insure sufficient work force. the only people benefiting from illegal immigration are democrats, big business and rich people who can afford to have their lawns "done". big businesses can hire cheaper labor and the building trades have been decimated.
These are the immigration standards for most of the developed countries. esp Germany where if you are given a work visa it must be because there is not one German who can fill the position and you must be proficient in the German language within 6 months or you are escorted to the border.
Where I grew up in NJ we had diversity. next door was from Cuba. behind them. Mexico. across the street Bavaria, around the corner Poland,. two doors down Italy and down the street Ireland. the only person who did not speak English was the Italian grandmother and she would bring one of the kids with her when she went to the grocery store. OH, and my friends parents where from Soviet Georgia.