scholarly journals Moving beyond Comprehensive Immigration Reform and Trump: Principles, Interests, and Policies to Guide Long-Term Reform of the US Immigration System

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 541-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Kerwin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigrant Integration ◽  
Immigration Policies ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Immigration

This paper introduces a special collection of 15 papers that chart a course for long-term reform of the US immigration system. The papers look beyond recent legislative debates and the current era of rising nationalism and restrictionism to outline the elements of a forward-looking immigration policy that would serve the nation's interests, honor its liberal democratic ideals, promote the full participation of immigrants in the nation's life, and exploit the opportunities offered by the increasingly interdependent world. This paper highlights several overarching themes from the collection, as well as dozens of proposals for reform. Together, the papers in the collection make the case that: • Immigration policymaking should be embedded in a larger set of partnerships, processes, and commitments that respond to the conditions that force persons to migrate. • The US immigration system should reflect liberal democratic values and an inclusive vision of national identity. • It is incumbent on policy and opinion makers to publicize the broad national interests served by US immigration policies. • Policymakers should, in turn, evaluate and adjust US immigration policies based on their success in furthering the nation's interests. • The United States should prioritize the gathering and dissemination of the best available evidence on migration and on the nation's migration-related needs and programs, and should use this information to respond flexibly to changing migration patterns and new economic developments. • Immigrant integration strengthens communities and represents an important, overarching metric for US immigration policies. • The successful integration of the United States' 43 million foreign-born residents and their progeny should be a national priority. • An immigration federalism agenda should prioritize cooperation on shared federal, state, and local priorities. • An immigration federalism agenda should recognize the federal government's enforcement obligations; the interests of local communities in the safety, well-being and participation of their residents; the importance of federal leadership in resolving the challenges posed by the US undocumented population; and the need for civil society institutions to serve as mediators of immigrant integration. • Immigration reform should be coupled with strong, well-enforced labor standards in order to promote fair wages and safe and healthy working conditions for all US workers. • Fairness and due process should characterize US admission, custody, and removal decisions. • Family unity should remain a central goal of US immigration policy and a pillar of the US immigration system. • The United States should seek to craft “win-win” immigration policies that serve its own interests and that benefit migrant-sending states. • US immigration law and policy should be coherent and consistent, and the United States should create legal migration opportunities for persons uprooted by US foreign interventions, trade policies, and immigration laws. • The United States should reduce the size of its undocumented population through a substantial legalization program and seek to ensure that this population never again approximates its current size.

scholarly journals National Interests and Common Ground in the US Immigration Debate: How to Legalize the US Immigration System and Permanently Reduce Its Undocumented Population

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Kerwin ◽  
Robert Warren
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Illegal Migration ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The Us ◽  
Immigration Debate ◽  
Legal Immigration ◽  
Us Immigration

The conventional wisdom holds that the only point of consensus in the fractious US immigration debate is that the system is broken. Yet, the US public has consistently expressed a desire for a legal and orderly immigration system that serves compelling national interests. This paper describes how to create such a system. It focuses on the cornerstone of immigration reform,1 the legal immigration system,2 and addresses the widespread belief that broad reform will incentivize illegal migration and ultimately lead to another large undocumented population. The paper begins with an analysis of presidential signing statements on seminal immigration legislation over nearly a century. These statements reveal broad consensus on the interests and values that the United States seeks to advance through its immigration and refugee policies. They constitute additional common ground in the immigration debate. To serve these interests, immigration and refugee considerations must be “mainstreamed” into other policy processes. In addition, its policies will be more successful if they are seen to benefit or, at least, not to discriminate against migrant-sending states. Not surprisingly, the US immigration system does not reflect the vast, mostly unanticipated changes in the nation and the world since Congress last meaningfully reformed this system (27 years ago) and last overhauled the law (52 years ago). The paper does not detail the well-documented ways that US immigration laws fall short of serving the nation's economic, family, humanitarian, and rule of law objectives. Nor does it propose specific changes in categories and levels of admission. Rather, it describes how a legal immigration system might be broadly structured to deliver on its promises. In particular, it makes the case that Congress should create a flexible system that serves compelling national interests, allows for real time adjustments in admission based on evidence and independent analysis, and vests the executive with appropriate discretion in administering the law. The paper also argues that the United States should anticipate and accommodate the needs of persons compelled to migrate by its military, trade, development, and other commitments. In addition, the US immigration system needs to be able to distinguish between undocumented immigrants, and refugees and asylum seekers, and to treat these two populations differently. The paper assumes that there will be continued bipartisan support for immigration enforcement. However, even with a strong enforcement apparatus in place and an adaptable, coherent, evidence-based legal immigration system that closely aligns with US interests, some (reduced) level of illegal migration will persist. The paper offers a sweeping, historical analysis of how this population emerged, why it has grown and contracted, and how estimates of its size have been politically exploited. Legalization is often viewed as the third rail of immigration reform. Yet, Congress has regularly legalized discrete undocumented populations, and the combination of a well-structured legalization program, strengthened legal immigration system, and strong enforcement policies can prevent the reemergence of a large-scale undocumented population. In contrast, the immense US enforcement apparatus will work at cross-purposes to US interests and values, absent broader reform. The paper ends with a series of recommendations to reform the legal immigration system, downsize the current undocumented population, and ensure its permanent reduction. It proposes that the United States “reissue” (or reuse) the visas of persons who emigrate, as a way to promote legal immigration reform without significantly increasing annual visa numbers.

Intergenerational Mobility of Immigrants in the United States over Two Centuries

2021 ◽  
Vol 111 (2) ◽  
pp. 580-608
Author(s):  
Ran Abramitzky ◽  
Leah Boustan ◽  
Elisa Jácome ◽  
Santiago Pérez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Intergenerational Mobility ◽  
Upward Mobility ◽  
The United States ◽  
Children Of Immigrants ◽  
Us History ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Immigration

Using millions of father-son pairs spanning more than 100 years of US history, we find that children of immigrants from nearly every sending country have higher rates of upward mobility than children of the US-born. Immigrants’ advantage is similar historically and today despite dramatic shifts in sending countries and US immigration policy. Immigrants achieve this advantage in part by choosing to settle in locations that offer better prospects for their children. (JEL J15, J18, J62, K37, N31, N32)

scholarly journals The Politics of Skilled Immigration: Explaining the Ups and Downs of the US H-1B Visa Program

2018 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 346-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Skilled Immigrants ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Us ◽  
Skilled Immigration ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Us Immigration

The United States has long been a magnet for skilled immigrants, but its openness to these immigrants has varied considerably over time. Focusing on the H-1B visa program, this article explains why the program’s annual cap has risen and fallen from the mid-1990s to the present. Whereas recent studies of skilled immigration policy have focused on struggles between capital and labor, this article contends that US policy also reflects a struggle between capital and citizen groups — one that has changed considerably over the past two decades. The findings challenge recent work on skilled immigration and US immigration policy.

From Start-Up to Scale-Up

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilles Duruflé ◽  
Thomas Hellmann ◽  
Karen Wilson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Public Policies ◽  
Scale Up ◽  
The United States ◽  
Smart Money ◽  
Start Up ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Creation

This chapter examines the challenge for entrepreneurial companies of going beyond the start-up phase and growing into large successful companies. We examine the long-term financing of these so-called scale-up companies, focusing on the United States, Europe, and Canada. The chapter first provides a conceptual framework for understanding the challenges of financing scale-ups. It emphasizes the need for investors with deep pockets, for smart money, for investor networks, and for patient money. It then shows some data about the various aspects of financing scale-ups in the United States, Europe, and Canada, showing how Europe and Canada are lagging behind the US relatively more at the scale-up than the start-up stage. Finally, the chapter raises the question of long-term public policies for supporting the creation of a better scale-up environment.

scholarly journals US Immigration Policy and the Case for Family Unity

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoya Gubernskaya ◽  
Joanna Dreby
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Family Separation ◽  
The Us ◽  
Family Based ◽  
Mixed Status Families ◽  
Mixed Status ◽  
Family Unity

As the Trump administration contemplates immigration reform, it is important to better understand what works and what does not in the current system. This paper reviews and critically evaluates the principle of family unity, a hallmark of US immigration policy over the past 50 years and the most important mechanism for immigration to the United States. Since 1965, the United States has been admitting a relatively high proportion of family-based migrants and allowing for the immigration of a broader range of family members. However, restrictive annual quotas have resulted in a long line of prospective immigrants waiting outside of the United States or within the United States, but without status. Further policy changes have led to an increasing number of undocumented migrants and mixed-status families in the United States. Several policies and practices contribute to prolonged periods of family separation by restricting travel and effectively locking in a large number of people either inside or outside of the United States. On top of that, increasingly aggressive enforcement practices undermine family unity of a large number of undocumented and mixed-status families. Deportations — and even a fear of deportation —cause severe psychological distress and often leave US-born children of undocumented parents without economic and social support. A recent comprehensive report concluded that immigration has overall positive impact on the US economy, suggesting that a predominantly family-based migration system carries net economic benefits. Immigrants rely on family networks for employment, housing, transportation, informal financial services, schooling, childcare, and old age care. In the US context where there is nearly no federal support for immigrants' integration and limited welfare policies, family unity is critical for promoting immigrant integration, social and economic well-being, and intergenerational mobility. Given the benefits of family unity in the US immigrant context and the significant negative consequences of family separation, the United States would do well to make a number of changes to current policy and practice that reaffirm its commitment to family unity. Reducing wait times for family reunification with spouses and children of lawful permanent residents, allowing prospective family-based migrants to visit their relatives in the United States while their applications are being processed, and providing relief from deportation and a path to legalization to parents and spouses of US citizens should be prioritized. The cost to implement these measures would likely be minor compared to current and projected spending on immigration enforcement and it would be more than offset by the improved health and well-being of American families.

scholarly journals Immigration and the War on Crime: Law and Order Politics and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrisia Macías-Rojas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Illegal Immigration ◽  
Mass Incarceration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Enforcement ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
War On Crime ◽  
Policy Arena

The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) was a momentous law that recast undocumented immigration as a crime and fused immigration enforcement with crime control (García Hernández 2016; Lind 2016). Among its most controversial provisions, the law expanded the crimes, broadly defined, for which immigrants could be deported and legal permanent residency status revoked. The law instituted fast-track deportations and mandatory detention for immigrants with convictions. It restricted access to relief from deportation. It constrained the review of immigration court decisions and imposed barriers for filing class action lawsuits against the former US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). It provided for the development of biometric technologies to track “criminal aliens” and authorized the former INS to deputize state and local police and sheriff's departments to enforce immigration law (Guttentag 1997a; Migration News 1997a, 1997b, 1997c; Taylor 1997). In short, it put into law many of the punitive provisions associated with the criminalization of migration today. Legal scholars have documented the critical role that IIRIRA played in fundamentally transforming immigration enforcement, laying the groundwork for an emerging field of “crimmigration” (Morris 1997; Morawetz 1998, 2000; Kanstroom 2000; Miller 2003; Welch 2003; Stumpf 2006). These studies challenged the law's deportation and mandatory detention provisions, as well as its constraints on judicial review. And they exposed the law's widespread consequences, namely the deportations that ensued and the disproportionate impact of IIRIRA's enforcement measures on immigrants with longstanding ties to the United States (ABA 2004). Less is known about what drove IIRIRA's criminal provisions or how immigration came to be viewed through a lens of criminality in the first place. Scholars have mostly looked within the immigration policy arena for answers, focusing on immigration reform and the “new nativism” that peaked in the early nineties (Perea 1997; Jacobson 2008). Some studies have focused on interest group competition, particularly immigration restrictionists’ prohibitions on welfare benefits, while others have examined constructions of immigrants as a social threat (Chavez 2001; Nevins 2002, 2010; Newton 2008; Tichenor 2009; Bosworth and Kaufman 2011; Zatz and Rodriguez 2015). Surprisingly few studies have stepped outside the immigration policy arena to examine the role of crime politics and the policies of mass incarceration. Of these, scholars suggest that IIRIRA's most punitive provisions stem from a “new penology” in the criminal justice system, characterized by discourses and practices designed to predict dangerousness and to manage risk (Feeley and Simon 1992; Miller 2003; Stumpf 2006; Welch 2012). Yet historical connections between the punitive turn in the criminal justice and immigration systems have yet to be disentangled and laid bare. Certainly, nativist fears about unauthorized migration, national security, and demographic change were important factors shaping IIRIRA's criminal provisions, but this article argues that the crime politics advanced by the Republican Party (or the “Grand Old Party,” GOP) and the Democratic Party also played an undeniable and understudied role. The first part of the analysis examines policies of mass incarceration and the crime politics of the GOP under the Reagan administration. The second half focuses on the crime politics of the Democratic Party that recast undocumented migration as a crime and culminated in passage of IIRIRA under the Clinton administration. IIRIRA's criminal provisions continue to shape debates on the relationship between immigration and crime, the crimes that should provide grounds for expulsion from the United States, and the use of detention in deportation proceedings for those with criminal convictions. This essay considers the ways in which the War on Crime — specifically the failed mass incarceration policies — reshaped the immigration debate. It sheds light on the understudied role that crime politics of the GOP and the Democratic Party played in shaping IIRIRA — specifically its criminal provisions, which linked unauthorized migration with criminality, and fundamentally restructured immigration enforcement and infused it with the resources necessary to track, detain, and deport broad categories of immigrants, not just those with convictions.

How Prevalent is Performance-Related Pay in the United States? Current Incidence and Recent Trends

2013 ◽  
Vol 226 ◽  
pp. R4-R16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maury Gittleman ◽  
Brooks Pierce
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
High Wage ◽  
Potential Explanation ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Recent Trends ◽  
Current Incidence

We address basic questions about performance-related pay in the US. How widespread is it? What characteristics of employers and jobs are associated with it? What are recent trends in its incidence? What factors are responsible for these trends? Nearly two-fifths of hours worked in the US economy in 2013 were in jobs with performance-related pay, but this share has been declining. We consider several possible causes for this trend and find that they do not have much explanatory power. We do establish, however, that any potential explanation must also account for a long-term shift in the relative incidence of performance-related pay away from low-wage and toward high-wage jobs.

Acculturative Stress and Bicultural Stress

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Romero ◽  
Brandy Piña-Watson
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Acculturative Stress ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Conflict ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Policy Context ◽  
The Us ◽  
Bicultural Stress

This chapter discusses the concepts of acculturative and bicultural stress, the theory and method behind the measurement, and the implications of the US immigration policy context for stress. The central sources of acculturative and bicultural stress are reviewed, including intergroup discrimination, language stress, intragroup marginalization, and family cultural conflict. In particular, literature is reviewed that examines the association between mental health and acculturative or bicultural stress. Extant research does demonstrate that degree of stress varies for individuals and that acculturative/bicultural stress is experienced not only by immigrants but also by minorities in the United States. Therefore, the present chapter reviews literature that connects the acculturative/bicultural stress process across generations. The immigration context is considered for future research in the area of acculturation and stress.

Waiting Games: The Politics of US Immigration Reform

2009 ◽  
Vol 108 (717) ◽  
pp. 160-166
Author(s):  
Susan F. Martin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
Comprehensive Reform ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Us Immigration

What the United States needs now is comprehensive reform achieved incrementally to ensure the effectiveness and test the impact of new approaches. Such a strategy has a better chance of convincing skeptics on both sides of the debate.

Globalization and growth of US university patenting (2009–2014)

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 257-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loet Leydesdorff ◽  
Henry Etzkowitz ◽  
Duncan Kushnir
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
University Patenting ◽  
Flat Rate ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
University Patents ◽  
The Us ◽  
The University ◽  
Us University

Following a pause, with a relatively flat rate, from 1998 to 2008, the long-term trend of university patenting rising as a share of all patenting has resumed, driven by the internationalization of academic entrepreneurship and the persistence of US university technology transfer. The authors disaggregate this recent growth in university patenting at the US Patent and Trademark Organization (USPTO) in terms of nations and patent classes. Foreign patenting in the United States almost doubled during the period 2009–2014, mainly due to patenting by universities in Taiwan, Korea, China and Japan. These nations compete with the United States in terms of patent portfolios, whereas most European countries – with the exception of the United Kingdom – have more specific portfolios, mainly in biomedical fields. In the case of China, Tsinghua University holds 63% of the university patents in USPTO; followed by King Fahd University with 55.2% of the national portfolio.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document