Welcome! Please watch this introduction video before you explore our website.
Nov 2, 2010
Nov 1, 2010
Conclusion
Humans have always been protective of territory, the earliest human skeletons have been found with arrowheads in them. Wars have been fought, empires have been toppled by invading neighbors, and governments have been endangered from mounting political pressures of immigrating peoples. The Germanic immigrants of the Roman Empire and their political involvement are argued to be a major contributor to the demise of their regional control. But whatever the reason, immigration was a heated debate then, and it is now.
The wealth of nations and proximity are the largest contributors to immigration, so the debate continues in America and abroad. The promise of prosperity and the romantic deception of capitalism and free markets to those who are willing to work for it is a compelling reason to jump boarders. But these undocumented workers cost American jobs and tax revenue. Many questions arise of what to do about the immigrant situation.
“Should we just grant them amnesty”? We could, and at least then they could be documented for tax purposes. But the problem of job availability still remains, business owners want to open up boarders because it makes the work force more competitive, but carries the unintended consequences of depreciating the quality of life for the American working family.
“Should we create laws that allow us to profile in the interests of deportation”? Although an aggressive and effective plan, it is not a permanent fix to a persistent problem. Plus the problems of legality come into question.
Whatever the case it is easy to see how there are multiple angles and viewpoints of what to do and how to do it. Both positive and negative impressions of policies in place, and future
The wealth of nations and proximity are the largest contributors to immigration, so the debate continues in America and abroad. The promise of prosperity and the romantic deception of capitalism and free markets to those who are willing to work for it is a compelling reason to jump boarders. But these undocumented workers cost American jobs and tax revenue. Many questions arise of what to do about the immigrant situation.
“Should we just grant them amnesty”? We could, and at least then they could be documented for tax purposes. But the problem of job availability still remains, business owners want to open up boarders because it makes the work force more competitive, but carries the unintended consequences of depreciating the quality of life for the American working family.
“Should we create laws that allow us to profile in the interests of deportation”? Although an aggressive and effective plan, it is not a permanent fix to a persistent problem. Plus the problems of legality come into question.
Whatever the case it is easy to see how there are multiple angles and viewpoints of what to do and how to do it. Both positive and negative impressions of policies in place, and future
Theories of Political Cartoons
Framing of Immigration through Political Cartoons A "Breaking Borders" Production
2010
As a group, we wanted to make a focus of the cartoons from this year that most recently depict the immigration debate. These contemporary cartoons feature President Obama many times, and often have a pro-immigration sentiment. However, the other side is portrayed as well. Contemporary immigration cartoons are just as hot a commodity as current cartoons about the battles in the Middle East, the recession, the election Nov. 2, and the debate about the Park51 Islam community center two blocks from Ground Zero, in New York City. View examples of these current cartoons on the first tab, titled "2010."
Other cartoons that we analyzed frame Pres. Obama as one who may be against undocumented workers, but is willing to let them in if it helps to further his political platform and earn him votes. Obama was framed as the Statue of Liberty, a donkey, and a magician, to name a few, as can be seen in the "Obama" tab.
Historical
Although plenty of cartoonists are feasting on the current debate, especially because of the passion on either side, and framing it in different ways, this isn't the first time that a similar debate has raged- and that includes the youthful 200-plus years of this country. This "Historical" tab will show examples of how other nationalities have faced similar struggles in entering the country, whether it be the Chinese, Irish, or an array of others. A particular point of notice is how the immigrants are portrayed as pesky and oftentimes, quite evil, suggesting that these new members of the country will do nothing but bring problems and sorrow to a country founded on courage and righteous principles.
International
The United States is not the only nation to struggle in determining whether or not to permit immigrants to enter their country without legal documentation. On this tab can be found plenty of examples of especially-European countries who have faced similar crises. Many of these nations are framed as power-hungry and domineering through drawings of their fine attire and condescending attitude.
Pro-Immigration
Many political cartoons that we have researched and analyzed have a pro-immigration flavor. Cartoonists used emotional empathy with scenes like undocumented workers building a fence that will eventually keep them out of the United States, all for five bucks an hour. Many pro-immigration cartoonists framed the government to be evil and self-serving to invoke further empathy for the undocumented and their desperate plea to gain greater freedoms in this country. Others used iconic symbols like the State of Liberty and Uncle Sam, framing them as tyrants, to try to display the idea that cruel treatment from those who are supposed to represent the ideals of the country are the ones who are cutting the undocumented workers short of rights that they deserve. Examples can be viewed in the "pro-immigration" tab.
Anti-Immigration
On the other hand, there were some anti-immigration cartoons framed to make the undocumented workers seem lazy, pesky, or leeches of the benefits of the United States. In this kind of framing, everything was done to cause the reader to view those who crossed the border as annoying to invoke the thought that they aren't worth being here, especially because they broke the law to do it. See examples in the "anti-immigration" tab.
2010
As a group, we wanted to make a focus of the cartoons from this year that most recently depict the immigration debate. These contemporary cartoons feature President Obama many times, and often have a pro-immigration sentiment. However, the other side is portrayed as well. Contemporary immigration cartoons are just as hot a commodity as current cartoons about the battles in the Middle East, the recession, the election Nov. 2, and the debate about the Park51 Islam community center two blocks from Ground Zero, in New York City. View examples of these current cartoons on the first tab, titled "2010."
Other cartoons that we analyzed frame Pres. Obama as one who may be against undocumented workers, but is willing to let them in if it helps to further his political platform and earn him votes. Obama was framed as the Statue of Liberty, a donkey, and a magician, to name a few, as can be seen in the "Obama" tab.
Historical
Although plenty of cartoonists are feasting on the current debate, especially because of the passion on either side, and framing it in different ways, this isn't the first time that a similar debate has raged- and that includes the youthful 200-plus years of this country. This "Historical" tab will show examples of how other nationalities have faced similar struggles in entering the country, whether it be the Chinese, Irish, or an array of others. A particular point of notice is how the immigrants are portrayed as pesky and oftentimes, quite evil, suggesting that these new members of the country will do nothing but bring problems and sorrow to a country founded on courage and righteous principles.
International
The United States is not the only nation to struggle in determining whether or not to permit immigrants to enter their country without legal documentation. On this tab can be found plenty of examples of especially-European countries who have faced similar crises. Many of these nations are framed as power-hungry and domineering through drawings of their fine attire and condescending attitude.
Pro-Immigration
Many political cartoons that we have researched and analyzed have a pro-immigration flavor. Cartoonists used emotional empathy with scenes like undocumented workers building a fence that will eventually keep them out of the United States, all for five bucks an hour. Many pro-immigration cartoonists framed the government to be evil and self-serving to invoke further empathy for the undocumented and their desperate plea to gain greater freedoms in this country. Others used iconic symbols like the State of Liberty and Uncle Sam, framing them as tyrants, to try to display the idea that cruel treatment from those who are supposed to represent the ideals of the country are the ones who are cutting the undocumented workers short of rights that they deserve. Examples can be viewed in the "pro-immigration" tab.
Anti-Immigration
On the other hand, there were some anti-immigration cartoons framed to make the undocumented workers seem lazy, pesky, or leeches of the benefits of the United States. In this kind of framing, everything was done to cause the reader to view those who crossed the border as annoying to invoke the thought that they aren't worth being here, especially because they broke the law to do it. See examples in the "anti-immigration" tab.
Introduction
Film has been a medium for propaganda for years, but animated editorial cartoons are a brand new genre. Due to advances in technology and a wide reach that not even newspapers can reach, animating political cartoons is becoming a mainstay in America.
There have not been enough studies on whether these cartoons affect their intended audience like cartoons from a newspaper, but such research is in the works. Reports like this one are forthcoming. However the fact is that the Internet is far cheaper and more available than any newspaper.
Mark Fiore, one of the main animated cartoonists featured on our blog, worked at the San Jose Mercury News before feeling stifled and setting off on his own. You can read more about him and explore his webpage here.
Also included in our selection of video clips is footage from Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Glenn Beck. Each newscast covers a slightly different point of view.
There have not been enough studies on whether these cartoons affect their intended audience like cartoons from a newspaper, but such research is in the works. Reports like this one are forthcoming. However the fact is that the Internet is far cheaper and more available than any newspaper.
Mark Fiore, one of the main animated cartoonists featured on our blog, worked at the San Jose Mercury News before feeling stifled and setting off on his own. You can read more about him and explore his webpage here.
Also included in our selection of video clips is footage from Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Glenn Beck. Each newscast covers a slightly different point of view.
Arizona Immigration Law Divides Latinos, Too-Published: October 30, 2010
Arizona Immigration Law Divides Latinos, Too
By MARC LACEY
Published: October 30, 2010
PHOENIX — Arizona’s immigration law, which politicians have debated in the Legislature, lawyers have sparred over in the courtroom and advocates have shouted about on the street, has found its way up a driveway in central Phoenix, through the front door and right onto the Sotelo family’s kitchen table.
That is where Efrain Sotelo, 49, a process server, and his wife, Shayne, 46, an elementary school teacher, sat and argued on a recent Friday night. He drank beer. She sipped wine. Like many residents across the state, they differed on State Senate Bill 1070, as the immigration law is known.
“I try not to engage in arguments with my wife,” Mr. Sotelo said, looking across at her. “When we talk about this, we both know what’s going to happen. I can’t convince her, and she can’t convince me.”
On that much, they seemed to agree. “He’s much more conservative than I am,” she said. “He can’t be changed. I can’t be changed. We both know that. But that doesn’t mean we don’t try.”
That such a divisive social issue would divide some families is not surprising. But what makes the Sotelos stand out is that they are both Latinos, he a Mexican immigrant who was born in the northern state of Chihuahua and she a descendant of Spanish immigrants who grew up in Colorado.
While polls show that a vast majority of Latinos nationwide side with Mrs. Sotelo in opposing Arizona’s law, that opposition is not uniform. “All Latinos are not opposed to this law — that’s too simplistic,” said Cecilia Menjivar, anArizona State University sociologist. There are other Mr. Sotelos out there, including an Arizona state legislator, Representative Steve B. Montenegro, a Republican who immigrated from El Salvador and became the only Latino lawmaker to vote in favor of the bill.
Since Gov. Jan Brewer signed the legislation in April, polls have found that about 70 percent of Latinos nationwide oppose the law, which allows the police to arrest people they suspected of being illegal immigrants, a provision blocked by a federal judge at the request of the Justice Department.
Mr. Sotelo, who said he would be following Arizona’s appeal of that ruling on Monday, realizes that his views are not popular among immigrants. He was hesitant to reply when a woman in the country illegally asked him recently what he thought of the law.
“I said, ‘I don’t think you want to hear what I have to say,’ ” he recalled.
He thinks his adopted state has been unfairly maligned since the law passed. “I’m a Hispanic, and I don’t have any issues walking the streets,” he said. “They make it seem like the police or sheriff are out there checking everyone’s papers, and that’s not so.”
But his wife, who was thrilled by President Obama’s challenge to the law, has a different view of her adopted state. “It’s more of a racist state after 1070,” she said. “We are a magnet for neo-Nazis.”
Mr. Sotelo, who came here in 1972 after his father obtained a green card, is unswayed by the fierce objections of the Mexican government to the legislation. He still recalls bitterly when he was stopped at a checkpoint inside Mexico with his two children some years ago. The official was checking his paperwork and, Mr. Sotelo said, clearly angling for a bribe. Mr. Sotelo was so furious at the encounter that he turned around and crossed back home to the United States.
Mr. Sotelo does not believe that the bulk of illegal immigrants are criminals, as some advocates of the law have argued. But some percentage of them are dealing in drugs, he said, and those lawbreakers “make the rest of us look bad.”
Mrs. Sotelo scoffs at that. “It’s not a perfect world, and in all groups you’ll have people who abuse the system,” she said. “When you’re dealing with individuals, there has to be flexibility.”
Because he serves summonses for a living, owning his own business, Mr. Sotelo tends to be the law-and-order type. Because she has taught the children of illegal immigrants and sees how hard-edged policies affect real people, Mrs. Sotelo tends to be more willing to give.
“As a teacher, when the law passed, I had kids crying,” she said. “They felt they had to uproot themselves from the life they had known all their lives. I saw total pain. I couldn’t believe it was 2010. It was almost as if I were living through the civil rights era again.”
Her husband shook his head.
Back and forth they went, with Mr. Sotelo endorsing a get-tough approach to illegal immigrants and his wife talking of the need for compassion.
“Phoenix is the No. 1 city in the country for kidnappings,” he said at one point, citing the large number of illegal immigrants who have been held against their will by smugglers.
“That’s false,” she shot back.
“O.K., but there’s a lot of kidnappings in Phoenix,” he said.
“You and I are not being targeted,” she said.
“Right now, it may not be us,” he said.
Her: “I’ve never feared being kidnapped.”
Him: “I do.”
Her: “You can sincerely say you have a fear of being kidnapped?”
Him: “I do. Who knows?”
And so they continued in what was for the most part a good-natured exchange, although with a third party there to intervene when the debate heated up. There was no storming off, which is not always the case, they said.
Trying to convince Mr. Sotelo of the error of his ways can frustrate Mrs. Sotelo. The same goes for him, when he tries to convince his wife how wrong she is.
In one sense, Mrs. Sotelo has come out on top. She has won over their two children with her arguments, her husband said, leaving him with plenty of conservative company once he heads out the front door but isolated in the confines of their home.
Report: Foreign-born workers gained jobs while native-born lost them-Published: October 30, 2010 09:12PM
Report: Foreign-born workers gained jobs while native-born lost them
Washington • Native-born Americans lost more than a million jobs while foreign-born workers gained hundreds of thousands of jobs as the country emerged from a painful recession, according to a new analysis of economic trends.
In April, May and June of this year, compared with the same period last year, foreign-born workers gained 656,000 jobs, while native-born workers lost 1.2 million jobs, according to a report issued Friday by the Pew Hispanic Center.
“There is a substantial difference in how the economic recovery is working out for the native-born and the foreign-born,” said Rakesh Kochhar, associate director of the center and co-author of the new report. He added that “only the immigrant experience has been a positive one. The native-born experience — the best that can be said is, ‘They bled less than in the last year.’ “
The report looks at a period where about 100,000 native-born workers were temporarily employed by the 2010 Census — meaning that the true effects of the recession were probably worse for native-born workers than the numbers suggest.
Based on a detailed analysis of Labor Department statistics, the report is sure to inflame the already charged national debate over immigration. It also adds fuel to a growing fire over the larger question of whether immigration is a fundamentally good thing or bad thing for the American economy.
“Our government has continued to bring in more foreign workers the entire time the economy was losing jobs,” said Roy Beck, president of Numbers USA, a group that seeks to reduce immigration.
As with the larger story of the effect of immigration on the economy, the data in the new report are complex. The report does not explain why foreign-born workers are doing so much better than native-born workers. It is possible, for example, that sectors of the economy that typically employ more foreign-born workers are rebounding faster than sectors that typically employ native-born workers.
Foreign-born workers also did significantly worse than native-born workers as the recession began, so it is possible they represent a warning system for other workers.
© 2010 The Salt Lake Tribune
Utahns of two minds on immigration reform-Published: November 1, 2010 12:33PM
Utahns of two minds on immigration reform
Chris Detrick | The Salt Lake Tribune Washington County Sheriff Kirk Smith speaks during a roundtable discussion on immigration reform at the Utah State Capitol on Tuesday. Gov. Gary Herbert invited 31 community leaders to the summit in order to hear their viewpoint on immigration reform.
Attitudes about illegal immigration reflect a conflicted Utah — tough but sympathetic, worried yet pragmatic — according to a new poll commissioned by The Salt Lake Tribune.
Perhaps that discord is best illustrated by polling numbers that show 59 percent support legislation that would give those already here the opportunity to stay and apply for citizenship while at the same time, 47 percent believe immigrants have had an adverse effect on crime in their community. And 60 percent support requiring police officers to check legal residency when there is reasonable suspicion that a person arrested or pulled over is undocumented.
Consider Ramon Campbell, a 39-year-old Republican from Draper who prefaced his thoughts to each question with either “I’m split on that question” or “I struggle with this one.”
Campbell said the question of immigration in Utah is so complex at times, he can actually contradict his feelings within one answer.
He did just that when contemplating the question of whether babies born on American soil should be granted automatic citizenship (the law of the land since 1868) or if that so-called birthright clause should be eliminated.
“It’s a double-edged sword. I think if people could get here and have a child, that child is a U.S. citizen,” he said. “But if a woman is preparing to have a baby and they manage to get across the border, here lies the problem. They rush to the hospital, the taxpayers pay the bill and the parents are illegal but the baby is a citizen. They should be deported, but then the baby stays? My thought is the child should stay with the parents.”
A plurality across the state supports amending the U.S. Constitution to eliminate the birthright clause, 45 percent to 37 percent who oppose such a measure, according to the poll.
That question and the answers are reflective of a darkening mood toward immigrants during a tough economic climate.
—
Scapegoats • Pam Perlich, senior research economist at the University of Utah, said the cycle of scapegoating and seeking to limit immigrants’ access to rights and benefits within the country — including through eliminating the birthright clause of the 14th Amendment — appear regularly throughout the nation’s history.
She said, however, any sort of removal of the birthright clause could carry with it serious consequences.
“The kids of immigrants have kids and they fully assimilate. What changing the amendment does is keep those children from being fully participating members of society and it would keep their children from fully participating in society,” Perlich said. “You end up setting up an apartheid system for a group of people who don’t have access to our system.”
There has been a call for repealing the first portion of the 14th Amendment — mostly among a group of tea party candidates. And at least one Utah lawmaker, Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, is looking to author a resolution that asks Congress to change that birthright clause by statute or repealing that clause outright.
Ray and those tea party candidates — largely Republicans — line up with the poll results within the party. Fully 57 percent of Republicans support eliminating the birthright clause through a repeal, according to the poll.
That includes Mary Grange, a 64-year-old beekeeper in Taylorsville.
She said she is frustrated with illegal immigration and said removing the birthright clause is just one step in the solution. She also advocates an Arizona-style law and considers the issue of immigration one of the most serious matters facing both Utah and the rest of the country.
“Think of your own household,” she said. “You wouldn’t want a bunch of people barging into your house and then they’re expecting you to support them.”
Grange is among the 31 percent polled who believe immigrants from south of the border have an overall negative effect on life in Utah.
But she’s in the minority when it comes to that question.
—
Impact • Across the state, 37 percent believe immigrants have a positive effect on society while 32 percent say they are unsure of the impact.
The poll shows the numbers split roughly into thirds across all groups identified in the poll — men, women, Democrats, Republicans, Mormons and non-Mormons. The highest positive number — 50 percent —appears among Democrats, who view immigrants having a positive effect.
Michael Clara, state chairman of the Utah Republican Hispanic Assembly, said the results were good news.
“I love those numbers and I love that question,” Clara said. “I think the numbers are reflective of overall attitudes. We have three different camps, and people are split almost evenly in thirds. It certainly reflects what I hear in my community.”
Clara said LDS leadership at the ward level has had an impact in shaping those views and in the community where he serves, it is part of an attitude shift toward humanizing the issue of illegal immigration.
Humanizing the immigration issue doesn’t trump the rule of law, according to the coordinator of the anti-illegal immigration group, Save Utah.
Bill Barton said people break the law when they cross the border illegally and they shouldn’t be rewarded for it. For the former GOP state senator, that’s where the conversation ends. He was also surprised by the number of Republicans who seemed to support some measure of a so-called path to citizenship.
“I thought most Republicans felt they were lawbreakers and shouldn’t be able to gain citizenship,” he said. “I’ve had some pretty hot discussions with more moderate or liberal Republicans I know and I just think it brings many negative impacts to many facets of our society by being soft on them.”
—
Economy • The debate on immigration centers mostly on the economy, according to Perlich. She points to the poll results that reveal 42 percent of those surveyed say undocumented workers who come to Utah aren’t taking jobs from Americans — but 33 percent do subscribe to that view. A fourth of those surveyed were undecided on whether immigrants take jobs that others won’t work.
Perlich said the number of those who blame immigrants for taking jobs tends to rise as the economy falters.
“Economists have studied this to death,” she said. “Immigrants have not been the source of unemployment in our communities. This Great Recession was a financial phenomenon as a result of the run-up of the real estate market and the collateralizing of mortgages and banking mess. That’s a lot more complicated story than simply saying it’s immigrants’ fault.”
The poll, conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling and Research Inc. surveyed 625 registered Utah voters between Oct. 25-27. The margin of error is four percentage points.
dmontero@sltrib.com
© 2010 The Salt Lake Tribune
Introduction to Historical Cartoons
Though the issue of immigration is being fiercely debated across the United States, fear and hatred of non-hostile immigrants is nothing new. Documents and political cartoons keep a record of racism that has been going on since at least the 1800s if not longer. Though Mexican immigrants seem to be the target of today's focus, in the past the Chinese, Irish and other Europeans have been attacked for coming to the United States. Many of the insults and derogatory comments made currently were used against foreigners from the past.
Despite having arguably different issues and occurring in different times, the complaints of early Americans are relatively the same. During times of economic difficulty, U.S. citizens blame immigrant workers for "stealing" jobs. We constantly blame others for our problems, discriminate against people who look different, and complain about their culture. This is an interesting trend, considering that all citizens of the U.S. were at one time or another immigrants to this land. The Declaration of Independence states that we are all entitled to "unalienable rights," and I find it ironic that undocumented immigrants are often referred to as "aliens."
The issue remains a popular topic of discussion, but the U.S. has yet to find a solution to the challenge.
More Historical Cartoons
Injustice toward Chinese immigrants:
Difficulty of displaced persons immigrating to the United States:
Introduction to Facts
It is difficult in today's society to differentiate between fact and speculation when we have so many biased sources. We need to know the facts about issues in order to understand the different perspectives represented on TV, on the radio, on blogs, in newspapers and in editorial cartoons. If we are uneducated about the issue of immigration, it is easy to misidentify and misinterpret the meanings represented in media. It is also easy to find sources that are bias and ignorant of the perspectives of other people, but if we know the facts, we can deduce the true meaning of what we read. We can make informed decisions and will be able to share our knowledge with those around us. Many of the cartoons we evaluated referenced political parties, politicians, laws and racism. Before understanding the meaning of cartoons, we first must understand how these different structures have an effect on the issue of immigration and what exactly that effect is.
Warnings abound in enforcing immigration job rules- Monday, Nov. 1, 2010 9:17 a.m.
SEATTLE (AP) — They cost clothing chain Abercrombie & Fitch $1 million in fines, tripped up Meg Whitman's campaign for California governor, prompted mass layoffs across the country and have been at the center of countless other workplace immigration disputes.
An obscure federal document called the I-9 form has emerged as a contentious element in the national immigration debate since the Obama administration vowed to go after employers who hire undocumented workers. Employers must fill out and sign the form, which requires them to acknowledge, under penalty of perjury, that they examined documents that allow an employee to work.
But most employers with questionable record-keeping aren't being punished for failing to prove their employees have legal status, an analysis of documents obtained by The Associated Press show.The Obama administration a year ago announced plans to ramp up I-9 audits — a shift from the notorious work site raids common under the Bush administration.
Most receive only warnings if the I-9s turn out to be based on fraudulent documents. Some are fined. Few face arrest. And the AP analysis also shows that many of the employers the government has targeted had no violations.
"The I-9 system is deeply flawed," said Daniel Costas, an immigration policy analyst at Economic Policy Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank. It "relies on employer eyesight for the verification of government identification and documents ... If this is how the system is going to work, then it's a big waste of time and money."
The system is meant to thwart illegal immigrants from working in the U.S., where about 7.8 million illegal immigrants have jobs, according to a 2009 report by the Pew Hispanic Center.
But at its foundation is a law that requires a promise that employers check their workers' eligibility to work. Those forms are never submitted to the government. Employers must simply keep them on hand in case the government decides to audit the business and do a check of its workers' immigration status. All employers are required to keep the forms — no matter the size of the business.
Whitman, the Republican hoping to become California governor Tuesday, has struggled to overcome a scandal over her forced revelation that she had an illegal immigrant housekeeper for nine years. The maid was required to fill out an I-9 form when she was hired, and Whitman says she fired her last year when she learned the woman had lied on the form.
During an audit, ICE agents go through the I-9 forms and check Social Security Numbers to make sure they're real, matching them against copies of other forms of ID.
Early this year, the AP asked for each of the audits conducted since the changes to the system were made. The U.S Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement responded just recently with limited details of a sampling of audits covering a seven-month period.
The AP reviewed summaries of 430 audits conducted between July 1, 2009, and January 31, 2010.
During the seven-month period, ICE agents found 22,000 "suspect" documents among the more than 86,000 I-9s reviewed. Suspect documents mean the person's legal authorization to work in the U.S. is questionable.
Administrative arrests, usually arrests of immigrants without the proper documentation, dropped from nearly 5,200 in the fiscal year 2008 to 765 through August in fiscal year 2010. Criminal arrests of employers rose slightly, from 135 in 2008 to 150 so far in that same time period. Criminal arrests of workers dropped from 968 to 208.ICE audited more than 200 companies with fewer than 25 employees, including 50 businesses agents listed as having fewer than five workers. More than 250 of the companies didn't have a single suspect form.
ICE officials say their I-9 audit efforts are part of a comprehensive strategy.
"We're trying to create a culture of compliance," said Brett Dreyer, the current head of ICE's work site enforcement unit. "We're using the best tool available. We believe in this work site mission as part of the entire strategy."
Dreyer said that in the mid-1990s, immigration agents would target industries known to have a significant number of illegal immigrants. Now, ICE prefers to follow investigative leads to better use their resources, he said.
But without large fines and arrests, it's hard to tell how much effect the audits are having, said Julie Myers, a former Assistant Secretary at ICE during the Bush administration.
ICE reported that it has collected more than $6.9 million in fines this year, up from $1.33 million in 2009. But some of those fines come from cases initiated in previous years, including the $1 million from Abercrombie & Fitch.
More than 200 companies were fined in fiscal year 2010 — some fines were as low as a few hundred dollars. There were also examples of harsher fines. Abercrombie & Fitch will pay more than $1 million for failing to verify the employment eligibility of its workers in stores in Michigan, authorities announced in September, after the company agreed to have the case made public.
But most cases go unnoticed. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government can't release the names of the companies that have been fined, unless the companies agree.
The audits don't go unnoticed by the workers.
In September 2009, American Apparel said it laid off 1,600 workers with suspect immigration documents after the company was audited.
Peter Schey, spokesman and attorney for American Apparel, said the audits result in workers being pushed further underground. He said most workers don't leave the United States — life here is still better than in their home countries.
Schey, along with other immigrant-rights advocates, want to see ICE conduct the audits in collaboration with the Department of Labor to hone in on employers that are violating labor laws.
"If they're hitting the right people, why would they have 250 companies in total compliance? Why would they only have arrested 135 criminal employers? They have their targets on the wrong employers," Schey said.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700077951/Warnings-abound-in-enforcing-immigration-job-rules.html?pg=2
What America Believes
*Our View: Americans who get their news from more balanced sources, tend to lean towards a more moderate solution to America's immigration problem. Those who watch and read more bloated news, like Immigration Counters that have no real evidence behind their statistics, lean to more extreme approaches.
Period of Entry of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population
Period of Entry of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population:
January 2009
Estimated population
January 2009
Period of entry Number Percent
All years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,750,000 100
2005-2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910,000 8
2000-2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,040,000 28
1995-1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,080,000 29
1990-1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,670,000 16
1985-1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,190,000 11
1980-1984 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860,000 8
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf
*Our take: Note the significant drop since the early 1990s. This can be attributed to a stronger border patrol and stricter laws. This also contradicts the belief of many American people that more undocumented workers are crossing into our country without legal status.
January 2009
Estimated population
January 2009
Period of entry Number Percent
All years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,750,000 100
2005-2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910,000 8
2000-2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,040,000 28
1995-1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,080,000 29
1990-1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,670,000 16
1985-1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,190,000 11
1980-1984 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860,000 8
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf
*Our take: Note the significant drop since the early 1990s. This can be attributed to a stronger border patrol and stricter laws. This also contradicts the belief of many American people that more undocumented workers are crossing into our country without legal status.
Racism, Prejudice, Fear
Hypocrites like Lou Dobbs, who speak out hatefully against undocumented workers while hiring them, may seem unpleasant, but the nation seems to be paying attention to their words more than actions. Glenn Beck's speeches about immigrants sound similar to speech used about blacks before the Civil Rights Movement. Hate crimes are on the rise, and fear is the source. The lingo used on television is not helping Americans accept and welcome these new faces. Broadcasters and journalists frequently use words like "illegal immigrant" or "alien," which dehumanize these people and are inconsistent with facts. Immigrants who do not have papers should instead be referred to as "undocumented immigrants" or "undocumented workers." Sensitivity should be used when discussing issues that affect so many human lives, regardless of which side a person is on.
Sources:
The Immigration Issue in Utah
Though many people in the state of Utah approach this subject with caution, others like 2007's GOP delegate Don Larsen and Sen. Chris Buttars have strong feelings on the issue. In 2007, Larsen compared undocumented immigrants to a plan of the devil. Buttars, though less blunt (so far), sponsored a bill in March, which he said would force undocumented workers elsewhere. Not many politicians from Utah have come right out to discuss the issue, but Sen. Orrin Hatch, Sen. Bob Bennet and Rep. John Matheson, Rep. Rob Bishop and Jason Chaffetz have all been asked about the issue and though they do not agree on a solution, they do agree that it is an issue that needs to be discussed.
Sources:
The Arizona Law
The Arizona Law about immigration "requires state and local police to investigate the immigration status of anyone they reasonably suspect of being an illegal immigrant." The Obama administration brought a lawsuit against it in July, claiming that the law was discriminatory and unconstitutional. The matter has caused a heated debate across the nation between people who are in favor of or outraged about the law. A federal judge soon ruled that parts of the law that could lead to harassment and issued an injunction. The law is still heavily debated. On Wednesday (10/27/10) the federal appeals court ruled that proof of citizenship should not be necessary when registering to vote, and today (11/1/10) lawyers appealed the ruling of the suit in July.
Sources:
Some Anti-Immigration Cartoons
"I Asked You First"
caglecartoons.com spring 2007
Cartoonist: Matson U.S. Cartoon
The elephant asks the donkey what it takes to solve many different problems relating to illegal immigration, but also allowing for the business community to have enough workers.
negative framing of undocumented immigrants
negative framing of immigration policies
What "reality" is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
Neither political party understands how to ultimately solve the immigration issue while at the same time fulfilling the low-level labor jobs. On top of these conflicting issues, neither the Republican or Democratic parties know how to balance both while finding the correct tightness of the border.
Overall, although it sheds some negative light on undocumented workers, the cartoon is negative on the border policy and the intelligence and problem-solving abilities of the two parties overall.
Broken English
Publication__Independent (blog)__ Date:_Jan. 11, 2009
Cartoonist:__Donar___________ U.S./International
Title of the cartoon:__Broken English ___
What action is taking place in the cartoon?
A redneck drunk approached an immigrant, and whined about how they
have bad English and don’t learn the language right. The immigrant
then corrects the redneck’s English and gives him help on how to
improve it.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) positive or negative framing of undocumented immigrants (circle answer)
2) positive or negative framing of immigration policies (Circle answer)
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
The issue that the cartoonist is trying to address is that many immigrants do learn the language and speak it quite fluently, even better than some Americans. The stereotype of people with different colored skin and who look like immigrants make viewers think from the start that the Mexican one can’t speak English very well, but he proves that stereotype wrong by correcting the hick’s language. Immigrants in this cartoon are framed as intelligent, professional citizens who deserve equal rights or are perhaps more deserving of rights than white American bigots.
Legal & Illegal Immigration Labor
Publication__United Feature Syndicate___ Date:_2010_
Cartoonist:__Bill Day_______ U.S./International
Title of the cartoon: __Legal and Illegal Immigration Labor__
What action is taking place in the cartoon?
Two men complain about immigrants, but then the one man compliments
the other’s home. It then shows the home and what both illegal and
legal immigrants have done to make U.S. houses and yards look good.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) positive or negative framing of undocumented immigrants
2) positive or negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
Americans complain about how immigrants are horrible to have in America; they are lazy, steal, deal drugs, kill cops, only speak their native language, have too big of families, and are a threat to American lifestyles. The two American men are framed to be the bad guys because of their hypocrisy. They complain about how horrible immigrants are, yet they benefit from the labor of both documented and undocumented workers. It shows that despite our stereotypes for Mexicans, they really do benefit our society and generally help more than hurt. It depicts Americans as whiners who sit around, while immigrants get things done. Though the view of these American characters is stretched, it does reflect the extreme views of many Americans in real life.
Obama & Immigrants
Publication__MSNBC_______________ Date:__2010__
Cartoonist: __Daryl Cagle____________ U.S./International
Title of the cartoon:__No Title_________
What action is taking place in the cartoon?
Obama is telling the immigrants to leave the U.S. after closing down their corporate employers but asks them to have their children to come back and vote for the Democrats because the Democrats were against the Arizona law the whole time.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) positive or negative framing of undocumented immigrants
2) positive or negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
Democrats are pro-immigration but do not back up employers who hire immigrants for low wages and the hard labor. Obama wants immigrants to stay but can’t do anything about the law in Arizona. He is framed to look like someone without backbone to fight the Arizona law, but he still is selfish and power-hungry enough to ask for votes from children of undocumented immigrants. The cartoonist stereotypes the immigrants by giving them all the same clothing and expression. It mocks the way Americans dehumanize immigrants by stereotyping and putting them in the same category. They are depicted as emotionless and don’t seem to have opinions. This also expressed the view of many Americans who think undocumented workers don’t deserve rights.
Arizona 2010
Publication_Orlando Sentinials____ Date:April 27, 2010
Cartoonist:_Dana Summers________ U.S./International
Title of the cartoon:__Arizona-2010____________
What action is taking place in the cartoon?
A couple watches immigrants, who have disguised themselves as white Americans, do their yard work.
Tone of the cartoon:
1) positive or negative framing of undocumented immigrants
2) positive or negative framing of immigration policies
What “reality” is constructed/framed about immigration/immigrants?
The Law in Arizona will cause immigrants to do everything in their power to get into the U.S. and live here. The immigrants are framed as people who just want a job to support their family and gain a better lifestyle for themselves. The caption of the cartoon suggests that in Arizona, immigrants must do everything in their power to appear to be in the right place, working as white Americans. The white couple does not know the workers are immigrants because of the paint and wigs. This shows that many Americans are guilty of profiling and are used to Mexican workers doing jobs like yard work. The immigrants are whistling and being inconspicuous, trying not to draw attention to themselves. It’s as though they are afraid to be themselves, and they try to hide it.
Oct 30, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)