Essay: Immigration systems affect on Texas

AP Seminar
October 3, 2018
Immigration systems affect on Texas
Immigration is a large issue in the United States of America, it is an even bigger issue closer to the boarder. One of the boarder states boarder issues and immigration  has been absolutely veritably in is Texas. The overall approximate population of Texas is 28.3 million, as stated by the “United States Census Bureau”. The United States has an estimated 11.4 million illegal immigrants from Spanish countries which is a whopping 62 percent of all immigration coming from other entities , Texas has 1.47 million of those immigrants (Migration policy institute: profile of unauthorized population: Texas). Politically Texas Delegators and Politicians have been working to find solutions on how we can lower the number of illegal immigration and how to improve the system at hand.
Sanctuary policies while there are no legal definitions for the word, this is a jurisdiction based precedent in cooperation with federal immigration authorities, at least 37 states including Texas and the District of Columbia have been considering more than 120 bills this year regarding noncompliance with immigration detainers. Texas in 2017 enacted laws that were opposing to sanctuary policies (.  ).as far as education 14 states have now started using federal naturalization exams. They also have allowed kids to get help if they aren’t legal for in state tuition.
Politicians choose to handle this in many ways that can be bombastic or very perfusley small.constitutes a drain on national resources.  But this assumption flies in the face of experience, and actually contradicts much scholarship on the subject.  Unless costs and benefits are calculated in a ridiculously narrow (and economistic) fashion, communities mostly benefit from immigration—both documented and undocumented.  Consider the recent writings of three very different commentators.  A one-time journalist for The Economist magazine, Phillipe Legrain, argues in his recent (2006) book, Immigrants: Your Country Needs Them, that the free movement of people is just as beneficial as the free movement of goods and capital.   How odd, then, that a country which has (for so long) embraced the free flow of international trade and capital, and whose own remarkable economy was built with the sweat and foresight of immigrant labor, should today spend so much money and energy keeping immigrant labor out!
Many politicians are worried about the ever going debate on boarder control and war terror which have only have been more heavily considered since 2001 (journals.openedigion 2018) Terrorism is one obvious touchstone for any future debate about US immigration reform.  In an era of Homeland Security, there is a common perception that foreign terrorists exploited America’s porous borders to attack the country in 2001.  In light of this perception, the country circled its bandwagons: beefing up the monitoring of its international borders and hermetically sealing off the rest of the world.  Only an imminent threat to the security of the country could justify the phenomenal cost of such a (pointless) feat.But this fear-based perception tends to ignore the fact that most of the September 11 terrorists entered onto the United States via legal channels.  Indeed, existing border controls have not been effective at stopping other attempts at terrorist infiltration into the US (or other countries, for that matter).  Most suspected terrorist arrests are made by local police authorities, not border guards.Of course, none of this has stopped politicians from linking Homeland Security and border control under the Bush administration.  This connection is especially clear in Catherine Lejeune’s contribution, which examines how a new National Security State, borne of 11 September, has been used to intimidate immigrant workers. Lejeune’s examination is done by way of a detailed survey of recent immigration legislation in the US, and the sundry political motivations that lie behind them.  The picture that Lejeune paints is a disturbing one, where the Bush administration’s War on Terror has slowly spread to a subsequent War on Immigrants.It is in light of this sort of detailed, and up-to-date, survey of recent immigration legislation that we can clearly see how rapidly the political ground was changing prior to the recent presidential election.  Lejeune provides us with a fascinating glimpse of the complicated ways that US immigration policy is infused with party politics.  There are few other political issues that create stranger political bedfellows in the United States—as is evidenced by the co-authorship of the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (S. 1033), a bill proposed in May 2005 by Senators Ted Kennedy and John McCain.  Indeed, there are few other issues that are better-suited to splitting today’s Republican Party (as witnessed early-on in the race for the Republican Party nomination).  Immigration policy is the venue for Super Bowl Politics.It is because of the high-stakes nature of immigration policy that America finds it so difficult to secure the sort of considered and thoughtful legislation it deserves.  It is also the reason that immigration policy lends itself so readily to political grandstanding.  As Lejeune’s contribution hints (and as the contribution by Frederick Douzet examines in more detail), the result of this political stalemate has been a rise in local responses that borders on the vigilante.  Border state residents have been encouraged to organize in armed groups that informally patrol the borders, wrapping themselves in patriotic sentiment while promising to compensate for what they see is an inadequate federal response at the borders.Finally, Lejeune’s contribution points to a very interesting development, which I hope might be the subject of further study: the distributional range of cities that support immigrant sanctuaries.  In light of the above-mentioned (and often misleading) assumptions about the costs of immigration to local political authorities, it is rather remarkable to find several of America’s largest cities willing to provide sanctuary to undocumented workers.12  This observation reveals two puzzles worthy of further study.  First, what is the motivation driving so many cities to protect these undocumented workers if they represent such a phenomenal drain on their resources? More importantly, why do some local authorities embrace and protect these undocumented workers, while others spend scarce local resources to hunt them down and throw them out? This second question lends itself to a promising comparative research project for some enterprising scholar.
What follows are three contributions that examine the contentious nature of contemporary immigration policy in the United States.  As we distance ourselves from the horrific events of September 2001, and once the Obama administration and Trump administration is able to clear its crowded desk of pressing problems, the United States will need to re-think its attitude about undocumented workers and immigration as whole. There is much at stake, and many paths from which to choose.  These three contributions, together, provide readers with the sort of information and background that will be necessary to understand the nature of the political struggle ahead. Politics has a really big role in the leadership of politics in America. They will continue to either oppress or enlighten but until then we will continue to be on the search for efficient ways to pursue immigration without ruining bonds and situations between establishments.
Work cited:
Ortmeyer, D.L & Micheal A.Q (2012) “coyotes, migration duration and remittances”
Walsh, M (2012).” Immigration’s Next Chapter: Arizona is et to Tell its Tale of How to Stop Illegal
Oliphant, J.(2012)” A President Power: GRAPHIC .” National  Journal.
Reno, R.R. (2012) “Immigration Reform.” First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public
David Bacon, Illegal People: How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Boston: Beacon, 2008).
Jeffrey S. Passell and D’Vera Cohn, “Trends in Unauthorized Immigration: Undocumented Inflow Now Trails Legal Inflow.” Pew Hispanic Center Report. 2 October2008.  Online at: http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/94.pdf. Accessed 2 December, 2008.
US Department of Labor (2008) “Employment Situation Summary.” Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Economic News Release.  5 December.  Online at: http://www.lbs.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm.  Accessed 5 December 2008.
Jonathon W. Moses, International Migration: Globalization’s Last Frontier (London: Zed, 2006).
Phillipe Legrain, Immigrants: Your Country Needs Them (London: Little Brown, 2006).
Lant Pritchett, Let Their People Come (Washington DC: Center for Global Development, 2006), 2.
Jason L. Riley, Let Them In: The Case for Open Borders (New York: Gotham Books, 2008).
See Jonathon W. Moses, International Migration: Globalization’s Last Frontier (London: Zed, 2006), 111-122) for a review of this literature.
See Jonathon W. Moses, International Migration: Globalization’s Last Frontier (London: Zed, 2006) 118-121) for an estimation of these costs.
The one exception that seems to prove the rule is the Port Angeles (Washington) arrest and later conviction of an Algerian, Ahmed Ressam, in December of 1999, for trying to smuggle bomb-making materials across the Canadian/US border in an apparent attempt to disrupt millennium celebrations on the west coast of the US.
Several major US cities have adopted “sanctuary” ordinances that ban city employees (and police officers) from asking people about their immigration status.  These include, but are not limited to, Washington DC, New York, Los Angles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, Detroit, Seattle, Minneapolis, Miami, and Denver.
Fry, Richard (2008) “Latino Settlement in the New Century.”  Pew Hispanic Center Paper. 23 October.  Online at http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/96.pdf.  Accessed 1 December 2008.
Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas, “The Power of the Latina Vote.” Williamson Daily News 30 November 2008.  Online at http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=print&p_docid=124D66E7C7BE50A8.  Accessed 2 December 2008.
Mark Hugo Lopez and Susan Minushkin, “Latinos Overwhelmingly Support Obama and Democrats in 2008.”  24 July 2008.  Pew Research Center Publications. Online at http://pewresearch.org/pubs/908/obama-latino-voters.  Accessed 2 December 2008.
This is a book-length extension of Huntington’s article, which Douzet refers to in her contribution: Who are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2004) and The Clash of Civilizations (New York: Touchstone, 1996).
Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 1983).
Edward Said, Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. With a new afterword (1978; London: Penguin, 1995).