The Fruit of Chain
Migration
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, December 12 ,2017
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/454560/port-authority-bomber-and-chain-migration
Sen. Tom Cotton asked on the floor of the Senate last week, “Shouldn’t we have an immigration system that focuses on the needs of America’s workers and economy, not one that gives out green cards by random chance?”
Yesterday’s bombing in New York highlights the importance of this question. Sure, without any immigration at all we’d still have frustrated losers to deal with, but they’d be our frustrated losers. We chose to add Bangladeshi jihadist Akayed Ullah to our stock of dirtbags through the ridiculous provisions of the federal immigration program.
Ullah came here on what amounts to a nephew visa – as the under-21 nephew of a naturalized citizen who sponsored his sibling (one of Ullah’s parents) for a green card. And Ullah’s uncle (or maybe aunt – we don’t know) only got here in the first place because he or she won the visa lottery.
So, we admitted a random person from Bangladesh without any meaningful consideration of his or her suitability or likelihood to contribute to the national good. And then, once a citizen, that person sponsored a sibling and that sibling’s spouse and children (including a then-20-year-old Akayed), again without any consideration of suitability or likelihood to benefit Americans. As my colleague Andrew Arthur wrote, “No investment in the United States, its systems of beliefs, or its institutions is necessary. Not even support for its economic success is a prerequisite for admission. The only tie and admission requirement is one of blood.” In other words, we leave it to yesterday’s immigrants to determine tomorrow’s immigration flow.
There was nothing in Ullah’s immigration backstory that we know of so far that was illegal. Nor is this necessarily a failure of vetting; Ullah and his family were no doubt checked against the usual terrorist databases. As another colleague, Jessica Vaughan, has written, “No matter how much we improve our vetting, the sheer momentum of chain migration-driven immigration from terror-afflicted parts of the world is itself a national security risk.”
Neither higher walls, nor more officers, nor better databases would have made any difference in this case. The problem is too much immigration, selected using flawed criteria.
Luckily, there are several measures before Congress to remedy this situation. The RAISE Act of senators Cotton and Perdue, Rep. Lamar Smith’s House companion Immigration in the National Interest Act, and Rep. Dave Brat’s American LAWs Act all would abolish the visa lottery and eliminate chain migration by limiting special family immigration rights only to spouses and minor (under age 18) children. The first two bills would also change the skills-based portion of our immigration program to better identify top talents.
The debate over a legitimate amnesty for the beneficiaries of Obama’s illegal DACA program should serve as an opening to finally end the visa lottery and chain migration. Let’s hope our representatives don’t squander the opportunity.
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, December 12 ,2017
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/454560/port-authority-bomber-and-chain-migration
Sen. Tom Cotton asked on the floor of the Senate last week, “Shouldn’t we have an immigration system that focuses on the needs of America’s workers and economy, not one that gives out green cards by random chance?”
Yesterday’s bombing in New York highlights the importance of this question. Sure, without any immigration at all we’d still have frustrated losers to deal with, but they’d be our frustrated losers. We chose to add Bangladeshi jihadist Akayed Ullah to our stock of dirtbags through the ridiculous provisions of the federal immigration program.
Ullah came here on what amounts to a nephew visa – as the under-21 nephew of a naturalized citizen who sponsored his sibling (one of Ullah’s parents) for a green card. And Ullah’s uncle (or maybe aunt – we don’t know) only got here in the first place because he or she won the visa lottery.
So, we admitted a random person from Bangladesh without any meaningful consideration of his or her suitability or likelihood to contribute to the national good. And then, once a citizen, that person sponsored a sibling and that sibling’s spouse and children (including a then-20-year-old Akayed), again without any consideration of suitability or likelihood to benefit Americans. As my colleague Andrew Arthur wrote, “No investment in the United States, its systems of beliefs, or its institutions is necessary. Not even support for its economic success is a prerequisite for admission. The only tie and admission requirement is one of blood.” In other words, we leave it to yesterday’s immigrants to determine tomorrow’s immigration flow.
There was nothing in Ullah’s immigration backstory that we know of so far that was illegal. Nor is this necessarily a failure of vetting; Ullah and his family were no doubt checked against the usual terrorist databases. As another colleague, Jessica Vaughan, has written, “No matter how much we improve our vetting, the sheer momentum of chain migration-driven immigration from terror-afflicted parts of the world is itself a national security risk.”
Neither higher walls, nor more officers, nor better databases would have made any difference in this case. The problem is too much immigration, selected using flawed criteria.
Luckily, there are several measures before Congress to remedy this situation. The RAISE Act of senators Cotton and Perdue, Rep. Lamar Smith’s House companion Immigration in the National Interest Act, and Rep. Dave Brat’s American LAWs Act all would abolish the visa lottery and eliminate chain migration by limiting special family immigration rights only to spouses and minor (under age 18) children. The first two bills would also change the skills-based portion of our immigration program to better identify top talents.
The debate over a legitimate amnesty for the beneficiaries of Obama’s illegal DACA program should serve as an opening to finally end the visa lottery and chain migration. Let’s hope our representatives don’t squander the opportunity.
Data to Support Francis Cissna on Chain Migration
The press is gaslighting the American people
By Andrew R. Arthur
CIS Immigration Blog, December 14, 2017
. . .
Additional gaslighting has occurred in recent days. Last week, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Francis Cissna wrote an opinion piece for The Hill captioned: "Break the chain and lose the lottery — America deserves a better immigration system." He stated:
. . .
As if on cue, three days later, "Akayed Ullah, a 27-year-old Bangladeshi immigrant" allegedly carried out a terrorist attack in New York City. Newsweek reports:
The press is gaslighting the American people
By Andrew R. Arthur
CIS Immigration Blog, December 14, 2017
. . .
Additional gaslighting has occurred in recent days. Last week, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Francis Cissna wrote an opinion piece for The Hill captioned: "Break the chain and lose the lottery — America deserves a better immigration system." He stated:
. . .
As if on cue, three days later, "Akayed Ullah, a 27-year-old Bangladeshi immigrant" allegedly carried out a terrorist attack in New York City. Newsweek reports:
According to DHS, Ullah — who authorities say set off a bomb in Times Square in what reportedly was an attack inspired by the Islamic State — obtained the F43 visa to come to the United States by being the son of an F41 visa recipient sponsored by a U.S. citizen sibling.
That is, he was a chain migrant.
Cissna appeared at the White House on December 12, 2017, to discuss the dangers posed by the visa lottery and chain migration. He concluded his prepared remarks with the following:
. . .
The headline in The Hill from that press briefing? "Immigration Services chief: No data to support chain migration, terrorism connection."
Just to recap: On December 8, 2017, USCIS Director Francis Cissna wrote an opinion article in The Hill arguing that ending chain migration, among other steps, will lead to "a more secure homeland". Then, a chain migrant gets charged with an attempted terrorist attack in New York City. Next, Cissna takes to the White House Podium to discuss the national security dangers posed by aliens like that charged terrorist. Then, the press questions whether Cissna's initial theory is correct, and concludes that there is "no data" to support it, despite the aforementioned attack.
. . .
https://cis.org/Arthur/Data-Support-Francis-Cissna-Chain-Migration
Chain Migrant Charged with
New York City Attack
By Andrew R. Arthur
CIS Immigration Blog, December 11, 2017
. . .
These attacks demonstrate an illogical dysfunction at the heart of our immigration system. No connection whatsoever to the United States is necessary for a foreign national to apply for a visa through the visa lottery, and in fact that visa category exists primarily to benefit nationals of countries with low levels of immigration to America. And, respectfully, the nephew of a United States citizen (like Ullah) has only the most tangential of ties to this country before he arrives; even then that tie is only to the sponsoring aunt or uncle. No investment in the United States, its systems of beliefs, or its institutions is necessary. Not even support for its economic success is a prerequisite for admission. The only tie and admission requirement is one of blood.
In Anna Karenina, Leo Tolstoy wrote: "Happy families are all alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." At this point, we know little about the family of Akayed Ullah, whether it was happy or unhappy (and if so in what way), or even whether the sponsoring aunt or uncle was disposed to the ultimate success of the United States. For immigration purposes, these facts are unimportant; the only factor that is important is the willingness of the sponsor to file the petition on behalf of the beneficiary, with the beneficiary's parent.
In a quarter century of immigration practice, I have concluded that a significant portion of the world's population, if given the chance, would immigrate to the United States. This nation has the ability to be selective in granting the benefits of immigrant status to those foreign nationals who will do the most to improve the lives of the American people (both U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents) and to benefit our economy. While it has that ability, however, the immigration laws of the United States are not written in such a way as to achieve those goals.
. . .
https://cis.org/Arthur/Chain-Migrant-Charged-New-York-City-Attack
By Andrew R. Arthur
CIS Immigration Blog, December 11, 2017
. . .
These attacks demonstrate an illogical dysfunction at the heart of our immigration system. No connection whatsoever to the United States is necessary for a foreign national to apply for a visa through the visa lottery, and in fact that visa category exists primarily to benefit nationals of countries with low levels of immigration to America. And, respectfully, the nephew of a United States citizen (like Ullah) has only the most tangential of ties to this country before he arrives; even then that tie is only to the sponsoring aunt or uncle. No investment in the United States, its systems of beliefs, or its institutions is necessary. Not even support for its economic success is a prerequisite for admission. The only tie and admission requirement is one of blood.
In Anna Karenina, Leo Tolstoy wrote: "Happy families are all alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." At this point, we know little about the family of Akayed Ullah, whether it was happy or unhappy (and if so in what way), or even whether the sponsoring aunt or uncle was disposed to the ultimate success of the United States. For immigration purposes, these facts are unimportant; the only factor that is important is the willingness of the sponsor to file the petition on behalf of the beneficiary, with the beneficiary's parent.
In a quarter century of immigration practice, I have concluded that a significant portion of the world's population, if given the chance, would immigrate to the United States. This nation has the ability to be selective in granting the benefits of immigrant status to those foreign nationals who will do the most to improve the lives of the American people (both U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents) and to benefit our economy. While it has that ability, however, the immigration laws of the United States are not written in such a way as to achieve those goals.
. . .
https://cis.org/Arthur/Chain-Migrant-Charged-New-York-City-Attack
Chain Migration: Burdensome
and Obsolete
...And Sometimes Dangerous
By Jessica Vaughan
CIS Immigration Blog, December 11, 2017
. . .
Approximately 90 percent of the immigrants from Bangladesh in the last decade have received green cards through sponsorship by a relative who immigrated earlier. Immigration from Bangladesh has risen noticeably over time; the number of immigrant visas issued to Bangladeshis was about 6,000 in 2000 and was about 12,000 in 2017. Further, there are now more than 175,000 citizens of Bangladesh on the immigrant visa waiting list, of whom just over 165,000 (94 percent) are waiting in the sibling/nephew/niece category.
For many years citizens of Bangladesh were leading participants in the annual Visa Lottery. By 2012, Bangladesh was disqualified based on high annual numbers of green cards awarded, but even without lottery green cards, immigration has continued to rise due to chain migration green card awards.
No matter how much we improve our vetting, the sheer momentum of chain migration-driven immigration from terror-afflicted parts of the world is itself a national security risk. Trying to screen this huge annual number of chain migration applicants is a significant burden on immigration and law enforcement agencies, and causes fiscal and economic problems to boot. Congress should modernize our immigration system by sharply trimming the obsolete chain migration categories, as recommended by the bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform headed by late civil rights icon Barbara Jordan, and as required by several bills pending in Congress.
. . .
https://cis.org/Vaughan/Chain-Migration-Burdensome-and-Obsolete
...And Sometimes Dangerous
By Jessica Vaughan
CIS Immigration Blog, December 11, 2017
. . .
Approximately 90 percent of the immigrants from Bangladesh in the last decade have received green cards through sponsorship by a relative who immigrated earlier. Immigration from Bangladesh has risen noticeably over time; the number of immigrant visas issued to Bangladeshis was about 6,000 in 2000 and was about 12,000 in 2017. Further, there are now more than 175,000 citizens of Bangladesh on the immigrant visa waiting list, of whom just over 165,000 (94 percent) are waiting in the sibling/nephew/niece category.
For many years citizens of Bangladesh were leading participants in the annual Visa Lottery. By 2012, Bangladesh was disqualified based on high annual numbers of green cards awarded, but even without lottery green cards, immigration has continued to rise due to chain migration green card awards.
No matter how much we improve our vetting, the sheer momentum of chain migration-driven immigration from terror-afflicted parts of the world is itself a national security risk. Trying to screen this huge annual number of chain migration applicants is a significant burden on immigration and law enforcement agencies, and causes fiscal and economic problems to boot. Congress should modernize our immigration system by sharply trimming the obsolete chain migration categories, as recommended by the bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform headed by late civil rights icon Barbara Jordan, and as required by several bills pending in Congress.
. . .
https://cis.org/Vaughan/Chain-Migration-Burdensome-and-Obsolete
Chain Migration:
Compassionate Policy or Opening the Immigration Floodgates?
By Andrea Drusch
The Fresno Bee, December 11, 2017
. . .
Immigrants’ rights groups say doing away with chain migration would radically change the nation’s immigration system and reduce the number of people of color coming into the country.
They push back on using the term chain migration, saying it tars a basic cornerstone of the current legal immigration structure: Allowing legal immigrants to bring their family members with them. Efforts to do away with that, they say, mask a greater goal of limiting overall immigration numbers from certain populations.
“This administration is using that term to avoid using the word family, because it sanitizes what is really an attack on families and the immigration system,” said Megan Essaheb, director of immigration advocacy for the group Asian Americans Advancing Justice.
“This, along with all of the [White House’s] other immigration policies, feel like an attack on immigrants and communities of color, and an attempt to keep the numbers of people of color down in the United States,” said Essaheb.
. . .
http://www.fresnobee.com/news/politics-government/article189258854.html
Return to Top
By Andrea Drusch
The Fresno Bee, December 11, 2017
. . .
Immigrants’ rights groups say doing away with chain migration would radically change the nation’s immigration system and reduce the number of people of color coming into the country.
They push back on using the term chain migration, saying it tars a basic cornerstone of the current legal immigration structure: Allowing legal immigrants to bring their family members with them. Efforts to do away with that, they say, mask a greater goal of limiting overall immigration numbers from certain populations.
“This administration is using that term to avoid using the word family, because it sanitizes what is really an attack on families and the immigration system,” said Megan Essaheb, director of immigration advocacy for the group Asian Americans Advancing Justice.
“This, along with all of the [White House’s] other immigration policies, feel like an attack on immigrants and communities of color, and an attempt to keep the numbers of people of color down in the United States,” said Essaheb.
. . .
http://www.fresnobee.com/news/politics-government/article189258854.html
Return to Top
|
|
Study: DACA Amnesty
Would Bring 1.4M Foreign Nationals to U.S., Trigger Never-Ending Chain
Migration
An
amnesty for nearly 800,000 illegal aliens shielded from deportation by an
Obama-created temporary amnesty program may trigger a never-ending flood of
chain migration starting with at least 1.4 million foreign nationals
coming to the United States.
In new research, Center
for Immigration Studies Director of Policy Jessica Vaughan found that should
the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens shielded by the Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program be given amnesty – as a few GOP-led bills
would do – it would usher in at least 1.4 million legal immigrants coming to
the U.S. through chain migration.
The current
U.S. legal immigration system is primarily run off chain migration, where
legal immigrants and newly naturalized citizens sponsor foreign family members
to bring them to the U.S.
Vaughan and fellow
researcher Preston Huennekens discovered that for the past 35 years,
family-based chain migration has been the main source of legal immigration to
the U.S.
“We found that over
this 35-year period chain migration has always been a major share of total
immigration, and averages out to about 60 percent of total immigration,”
Vaughan wrote in the memo. “Out of a total of nearly 33 million immigrants
admitted between 1981 and 2016, more than 20 million were chain migration
immigrants (61 percent).”
Under an amnesty of
DACA recipients, Vaughan’s research found that the nearly 800,000 illegal
aliens would be able to immediately begin bringing in relatives within five
years after the amnesty. Once those chain migrants come to the U.S., they too
can then begin sponsoring more foreign family members after receiving a Green
Card and U.S. citizenship.
Vaughan’s research
found that even illegal alien siblings of DACA recipients, under an amnesty,
could eventually become U.S. citizens.
“The illegally present
siblings of naturalized DACA beneficiaries also could be sponsored for green
cards,” Vaughan noted. “Under the current system, they would face an extended
waiting list, likely 20 years or more, depending on their country of
citizenship. In addition, they would be subject to the bar on admission after
illegal presence, but potentially could find the same ways to get around it as
the parents.”
Previous research on chain migration by Princeton
University researchers Stacie Carr and Marta Tienda brings chain migration
totals under a DACA amnesty to much higher levels, as Breitbart News reported.
Based on the Princeton research, the 618, 342 illegal aliens
from Mexico who are covered by DACA would be able to bring upwards of
four million additional relatives and family members to the U.S. in the
years to come.
If the remaining
estimated 180,000 DACA recipients brought in three family members each
after being amnestied, it would result in additional 540,000 immigrants. Should
the remaining 180,000 DACA recipients bring four family members each to
the U.S., it would result in more than 700,000 new immigrants.
But if the remaining
roughly 180,000 DACA recipients were to bring the same number of family members
as Mexican DACA recipients are expected to bring to the U.S., it would result
in nearly 1.2 million more legal family-based immigrants coming to the country.
Vaughan’s research also
concluded what impact Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Sen. David Perdue’s (R-GA)
RAISE Act would have on chain migration. Under the RAISE Act – endorsed by
President Trump – legal immigration would be cut in half to benefit U.S.
workers, while also transforming the chain migration legal immigration system
into one where only high-skilled immigrants who meet specific requirements are
able to obtain Green Cards.
“If the RAISE Act
becomes law, it would reduce the chain migration impact of a DACA amnesty,”
Vaughan concludes. “The siblings of DACA amnesty beneficiaries would no longer
qualify for green cards based on their family relationship, but some might
qualify under the merit category, particularly any who have attended college
here.”
“The admission of the
DACA parents would not likely be affected in a significant way,” Vaughan
continues. “Presumably these parents would be able to qualify for the long-term
residency visas as easily as they qualify for green cards under the present
system. They will not be able to work legally, but that is unlikely to be a
deterrent to their application. Many are working here illegally already and
probably would continue doing so. Others are at or approaching retirement age
and might drop out of the workforce. However, under the RAISE Act provisions,
the sponsored parents would not be able to sponsor additional family members,
as they would not have green cards or a path to citizenship, except through the
merit category.”
In order to stop the
never-ending chain migration that a DACA amnesty would cause, Vaughan has
recommended that Congress “eliminate entire categories of immigrant visas and
green cards that are now reserved for the extended family members of prior
immigrants (siblings and adult sons and daughters), and thus facilitate chain
migration.”
These two categories
amount to 85,000 legal immigrants entering the U.S. every year, or roughly 8.5
percent of all legal immigration.
Vaughan additionally
recommended eliminating the visa lottery, where 50,000 legal immigrants are
allowed to enter the U.S. every year. By eliminating all of these family-based
immigration categories, Vaughan concluded that it would cut legal immigration
by over 13 percent.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on
Twitter at @JxhnBinder
No comments:
Post a Comment