# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
America's exceptional status as a "nation of immigrants" is being challenged by globalization, which is making both migration and terrorism much easier. The biggest challenge for policymakers is distinguishing illusory immigration problems from real problems. One thing is quite clear: The favored approach of recent years-a policy of benign neglect-is no longer tenable. Members of both the Senate and the House of Representatives recognize this and deserve credit for striving to craft a comprehensive law during this session of Congress.

In 2005, immigration policy received far more genuine attention on Capitol Hill, and Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle are now considering what to do about immigration policy. Their various efforts have focused on a wide variety of changes in current policy, including improving border security, strengthening employer verification of employment, establishing a new temporary guest worker program, and offering some level of amnesty to illegal immigrants currently living in the United States. At present, these proposals are working their way through the legislative process.

However, to achieve results, immigration reform must be comprehensive. A lopsided, ideological approach that focuses exclusively on border security while ignoring migrant workers (or vice versa) is bound to fail. If Congress passes another law that glosses over the fundamental contradictions in the status quo, then the status quo will not change. Thinking through the incentives is the key to success.

The Real Problem

Illegal immigration into the United States is massive in scale. More than 10 million undocumented aliens currently reside in the U.S., and that population is growing by 700,000 per year.[1] On one hand, the presence of so many aliens is a powerful testament to the attractiveness of America. On the other hand, it is a sign of how dangerously open our borders are.

Typical illegal aliens come to America primarily for better jobs and in the process add value to the U.S. economy. However, they also take away value by weakening the legal and national security environment. When three out of every 100 people in America are undocumented (or, rather, documented with forged and faked papers), there is a profound security problem. Even though they pose no direct security threat, the presence of millions of undocumented migrants distorts the law, distracts resources, and effectively creates a cover for terrorists and criminals.

In other words, the real problem presented by illegal immigration is security, not the supposed threat to the economy. Indeed, efforts to curtail the economic influx of migrants actually worsen the security dilemma by driving many migrant workers underground, thereby encouraging the culture of illegality. A non-citizen guest worker program is an essential component of securing the border, but only if it is the right program.

It is important to craft a guest worker program intelligently. While there are numerous issues involved in such a program, many of which are beyond the scope of this paper, the evidence indicates that worker migration is a net plus economically. With this in mind, there are 14 principles- with an eye toward the economic incentives involved-that should be included as part of a guest worker program.

Immigration Benefits and Costs

An honest assessment acknowledges that illegal immigrants bring real benefits to the supply side of the American economy, which is why the business community is opposed to a simple crackdown. There are economic costs as well, given America's generous social insurance institutions. The cost of securing the border would logically exist regardless of the number of immigrants.

The argument that immigrants harm the American economy should be dismissed out of hand. The population today includes a far higher percentage (12 percent) of foreign-born Americans than in recent decades, yet the economy is strong, with higher total gross domestic product (GDP), higher GDP per person, higher productivity per worker, and more Americans working than ever before. immigration may not have caused this economic boom, but it is folly to blame immigrants for hurting the economy at a time when the economy is simply not hurting. As Stephen Moore pointed out in a recent article in The Wall Street Journal:

The increase in the immigration flow has corresponded with steady and substantial reductions in unemployment from 7.3 percent to 5.1 percent over the past two decades. And the unemployment rates have fallen by 6 percentage points for blacks and 3.5 percentage points for Latinos.[2]

Whether low-skilled or high-skilled, immigrants boost national output, enhance specialization, and provide a net economic benefit. The 2005 Economic Report of the President (ERP) devotes an entire chapter to immigration and reports that "A comprehensive accounting of the benefits and costs of immigration shows the benefits of immigration exceed the costs."[3] The following are among the ERP's other related findings:

Immigrant unemployment rates are lower than the national average in the U.S.;

Studies show that a 10 percent share increase of immigrant labor results in roughly a 1 percent reduction in native wages-a very minor effect;

Most immigrant families have a positive net fiscal impact on the U.S., adding $88,000 more in tax revenues than they consume in services; and

Social Security payroll taxes paid by improperly identified (undocumented) workers have led to a $463 billion funding surplus.

The macroeconomic argument in favor of immigration is especially compelling for highly educated individuals with backgrounds in science, engineering, and information technology. The increasing worry about outsourcing jobs to other nations is just one more reason to attract more jobs to America by insourcing labor. If workers are allowed to work inside the U.S., they immediately add to the economy and pay taxes, which does not happen when a job is outsourced. Therefore, capping the number of H-1B visas limits America's power as a brain "magnet" attracting highly skilled workers, thereby weakening U.S. firms' competitiveness.

Congress increased the number of H-1B visas by 20,000 in November 2004 after the annual cap was exhausted on the first day of fiscal year (FY) 2005.[4] On August 12, 2005, the U.S. citizenship and immigration Service announced that it had already received enough H-1B applications for FY 2006 (which began October 1, 2005) and would not be accepting any more applications for the general selection lottery.[5] These and other numbers show that more workers from abroad, not fewer, are needed.

Still, critics of this type of insourcing worry that jobs are being taken away from native-born Americans in favor of low-wage foreigners. Recent data suggest that these fears are overblown. While the nation's unemployment rate generally has remained just above 5 percent over the past year, unemployment in information technology now stands at a four-year low of 3.7 percent.[6]

While the presence of low-skill migrant workers can be construed as a challenge to low-skill native workers, the economic effects are the same as the effects of free trade-a net positive and a leading cause of economic growth. A National Bureau of Economic Research study by David Card found that "Overall, evidence that immigrants have harmed the opportunities of less educated natives is scant."[7] The consensus of the vast majority of economists is that the broad economic gains from openness to trade and immigration far outweigh the isolated cases of economic loss. In the long run, as has been documented in recent years, the gains are even higher.[8]

A simple example is instructive in terms of both trade and immigration. An imaginary small town has 10 citizens: some farmers, some ranchers, a fisherman, a tailor, a barber, a cook, and a merchant. A new family headed by a young farmer moves to town. His presence is resented by the other farmers, but he also consumes from the other business in town-getting haircuts, eating beef and fish, having his shirts sewn and pressed, and buying supplies at the store, not to mention paying taxes. He undoubtedly boosts the supply side of the economy, but he also boosts the demand side. If he were run out of town for "stealing jobs," his demand for everyone's work would leave with him.

The real problem with undocumented immigrant workers is that flouting the law has become the norm, which makes the job of terrorists and drug traffickers infinitely easier. The economic costs of terrorism can be very high and very real, quite apart from the otherwise positive economic impact of immigration. In order to separate the good from the bad, there is no substitute for a nationwide system that identifies all foreign persons present within the U.S. It is not sufficient to identify visitors upon entry and exit; rather, all foreign visitors must be quickly documented.

Economic Principles for an Effective Guest Worker Program

To this end, 14 economic principles should be borne in mind in crafting an effective guest worker program:

1. All guest workers in the U.S. should be identified biometrically. Technologically, a nationwide system of biometric identification (fingerprints, retina scans, etc.) for visitors has already been developed for the US-VISIT program. A sister "WORKER-VISIT" program is essential for enforcement efforts and would help American companies to authenticate guest workers efficiently. There is at present no effective system of internal enforcement, but the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has in place a "basic pilot employment verification program"[9] that demonstrates the potential effectiveness of using such technology with guest workers to discourage undocumented work arrangements. Employers who want to hire guest workers should be required to verify electronically that the particular worker has registered with WORKER-VISIT and is eligible to work in the United States.

2. Existing migrant workers should have incentives to register with the guest worker program. A guest worker program that is less attractive to migrant workers than the status quo will fail. Therefore, the new law for guest workers should include both positive incentives for compliance and negative incentives (punishments) for non-compliance. For example, a program that caps the tenure of guest workers at six years can be expected to experience massive noncompliance at the six-year point because a hard cap on tenure is essentially an incentive to skirt the law. If the goal is to limit the number of undocumented foreign workers, then renewable short-term work permits have a greater likelihood of success than a single permit with an inflexible expiration date.

3. U.S. companies need incentives to make the program work. immigration reform will be successful if-and probably only if-American companies support its passage and enforcement. A new law must therefore avoid both onerous red tape (e.g., requiring an exhaustive search of native workers before a job can be offered to migrants) and any provision that would make it easier to hire guest workers than it is to hire natives (e.g., waiving payroll taxes on guest workers that must be paid on native worker payrolls). Perhaps the most important incentive is a negative one: The new law should include funding for a system of internal enforcement to police and prosecute companies that break the law.

4. Guest worker status should not be a path to citizenship and should not include rights to U.S. social benefits. If the incentive to work in the U.S. is artificially enhanced with a promise of potential citizenship, foreign migrants will be oversupplied. citizenship carries with it tremendous benefits (e.g., social spending and entitlement programs) that should be provided only to American citizens. For example, unemployment insurance benefits should never go to foreign visitors. Providing benefits such as unemployment insurance, welfare, Head Start, and other payments to visiting workers will significantly distort the incentives to migrate to the U.S. The legal status equivalent of guest workers is that of tourists-people who reside in America temporarily and are bound by U.S. law but do not have any claim on citizenship or its benefits.

5. Efficient legal entry for guest workers is a necessary condition for compliance. Existing illegal migrants should be required to leave the U.S. and then allowed a system of entry through border checkpoints with strict conditions for identification, documentation, and compliance with U.S. law. If the guest worker program instead involves prolonged waits for reentry or a lottery for work visas, existing migrant workers will have little incentive to comply with the law. Moreover, such reforms will be perceived as attempts to shrink the supply of migrant labor and will be resisted. However, a program of efficient legal entry for migrants who comply with biometric identification will not deter compliance and will encourage migrants to utilize the formal channels of entry rather than jumping the border.

6. Efficient legal entry should be contingent upon a brief waiting period to allow law enforcement agencies the time needed to screen incoming workers. A waiting period of at least a few days will give law enforcement agencies time to screen incoming visitors' biometrics against criminal and terrorist databases.

7. Provisions for efficient legal entry will not be amnesty, nor will they "open the floodgates." Such a system will actually encourage many migrants to exit, knowing that they will be able to return under reasonable regulations. This is in stark contrast to the status quo, in which the difficulty and uncertainty of reentering the U.S. effectively discourage aliens from leaving. Documented migrant workers would enter a new status: not citizen, not illegal, but rather temporary workers.

As for opening the floodgates, the reality is that they are already open. More to the point, labor markets operate effectively to balance supply and demand, and those markets are currently in balance. Creating a new category of legal migrants would not change that equilibrium, provide unfair benefits to undocumented aliens over others, or be tied to citizenship, but it would enhance security.

8. Government agencies should not micromanage migrant labor. Any federal attempt to license migrants by occupation-micromanaging the market for migrant labor-would be a dangerous precedent and would likely fail. Socialized planning of any market is inferior to the free market, and its implementation is dangerous on many levels. First, allowing government management of the migrant labor market would be terrible precedent for later intrusion into all U.S. labor markets. Second, it would be open to abuse, vulnerable to corruption, and inefficient even if run by angels.

For example, in the case of a worker certified as an avocado picker who has carpentry skills that his employer would like to utilize and promote, why should the worker and his employer have to petition a labor Department bureaucrat just to revise the worker'sskill certification? Equally implausible is a program that requires migrants and businesses to know one another prior to entry and file the relevant paperwork. labor markets do not work this way. Such schemes would quickly prove ineffective and lead right back the status quo. Real labor markets work informally, and the power of the market should be utilized to make the guest worker program function efficiently.

9. The guest worker program should not be used as an excuse to create another large federal bureaucracy. The inherent risk of authorizing a new guest worker program is that it will establish a new, unwieldy federal bureaucracy that outgrows its budget and mandate. Critics contend that the federal government is ill-equipped to handle the substantial influx of people who would enter the U.S. through a guest worker program. They further cite the long backlogs that plague other immigration programs, most notably the green card program.

One way to alleviate this problem is to involve the private sector in the guest worker visa process, much as gun retailers are integrated into the criminal background checks of gun buyers. Many parts of the guest worker visa process could be facilitated by contracting out certain parts of the process, including paperwork processing, interviewing of visa candidates (if necessary), coordinating with the DHS and federal law enforcement agencies on background checks, facilitating placement with prospective employers, and facilitating the exit upon expiration of the visa. As long as the private contractor has no conflict of interest in the visa selection or placement process, such a system should be better than another federal bureaucracy.

10. Bonds should be used to promote compliance after entry. There are many smart ways that bonds could be used to manage the immigrant pool. In one system, guest workers would pay upon entry for a bond that is redeemable upon exit. An individual who wanted to recoup the money would comply with the overall guest worker system and other U.S. laws, effectively acting as part of a self-enforcing network that discourages non-bonded, undocumented migrants. An alternative arrangement would have U.S. companies paying for the bonds as a right to hire some number of workers. If Congress felt compelled to cap the number of guest workers, the bonds could be treated like property rights and bid on to establish the market value of a guest worker. In both cases, the dollar value of the bond would be repaid after the migrant exited the U.S. but would be forfeit if the migrant went into the black market economy.

11. Guest workers should be required to find a sponsoring employer within one month (or some other reasonable period of time). The employer would verify via WORKER-VISIT that the particular worker is eligible to be employed in the United States. If the migrant cannot locate an employer within the time frame, the law should require that he or she leave the country. A sponsorship system is an efficient alternative to government management of the supply of and demand for migrant labor. It would be self-checking because employers could be required to submit payroll records regularly for automated review, which would identify the guest workers at each location. If employment with a sponsor ended, the worker would be allowed a similar reasonable period of time to find a new employer. Existing undocumented workers should find it relatively easy to get sponsorship with current employers, so the act of leaving the country and reentering would neither discourage their compliance nor come at the expense of legal migrants.

12. Day laborers should be required to find long-term sponsoring employers. The presence of tens of thousands of day laborers in the U.S.[10] may seem to pose a challenge to immigration reform, but the day labor market should not be given an exemption. A functioning WORKER-VISIT program would likely motivate the creation of intermediary firms that employ day laborers and connect them with customers in a more formal market that develops along the lines of subcontracting firms that are already active in gardening, house-cleaning, janitorial services, accounting, and night security. Intermediary firms could offer day laborers in teams of variable sizes, allowing the hiring firms to avoid the hassles of sponsoring and documentation paperwork. Skeptics might protest that most subcontracted jobs are routine (even regularly scheduled), whereas day labor is by nature last-minute and unpredictable. However, that is not really true in the aggregate, especially when compared with other last-minute industries like plumbing/flood control or emergency towing. Competitive firms can meet demand with very little slack as long as free-market incentives are in place.

13. Migrants and employers who do not comply with the new law should be punished. Migrants who decline to register and are subsequently apprehended inside the U.S. should be punished with more than deportation. Deportation is not a disincentive. The Cornyn-Kyl bill (S. 1438) contains a good proposal along these lines: a 10-year ban on guest worker participation for migrants who do not comply with the new program.[11] Congress should also consider a lifetime prohibition on violators' applying for and receiving U.S. citizenship. The law should introduce steep penalties as well, including prison time and seizure of assets of undocumented workers and their employers. There is no justification for working outside the system, especially a system that allows free entry. The law would establish a date certain after which all migrants in the U.S. must be registered or face these penalties. The lifetime ban on the opportunity to acquire U.S. citizenship would be a strong incentive for undocumented immigrants to enter the process of documentation. Likewise, firm, consistent, enforced penalties against employers would create the proper incentives for compliance.

14. All migrants should respect American law and traditions. The requirement to obey all laws is not optional for new citizens and should not be optional for visitors. While we encourage and insist on the primacy of American values for those who join our workforce, we should also remember the full spectrum of values ourselves. The Statue of Liberty reminds us that we are all equal, regardless of ethnicity, origin, or even state of wretchedness, and that America will continue to be a land of opportunity.

Conclusion

The century of globalization will see America either descend into timid isolation or affirm its openness. Throughout history, great nations have declined because they built up walls of insularity, but America has been the exception for over a century. It would be a tragedy if America were to turn toward a false sense of security just when China is ascending with openness, Western Europe is declining into isolation, and the real solution is so obvious from our own American heritage.
Tim Kane, Ph.D., is Bradley Fellow in Labor Policy and Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D., is a Senior Policy Analyst in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Real Problem with Immigration... and the Real Solution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
America's exceptional status as a "nation of immigrants" is being challenged by globalization, which is making both migration and terrorism much easier. The biggest challenge for policymakers is distinguishing illusory immigration problems from real problems. One thing is quite clear: The favored approach of recent years-a policy of benign neglect-is no longer tenable.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
We stand firmly, strongly, and proudly with the incredible men and women of law enforcement. You do not hear it nearly enough, but Americans across this Country love you, support you, and respect you more than you could possibly know! #PeaceOfficersMemorialDay https://t.co/T0qB5zN7WG

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
We stand firmly, strongly, and proudly with the incredible men and women of law enforcement. You do not hear it nearly enough, but Americans across this Country love you, support you, and respect you more than you could possibly know! #PeaceOfficersMemorialDay https://t.co/T0qB5zN7WG

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
We stand firmly, strongly, and proudly with the incredible men and women of law enforcement. You do not hear it nearly enough, but Americans across this Country love you, support you, and respect you more than you could possibly know! #PeaceOfficersMemorialDay pic.twitter.com/T0qB5zN7WG
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 15, 2019

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
We stand firmly, strongly, and proudly with the incredible men and women of law enforcement. You do not hear it nearly enough, but Americans across this Country love you, support you, and respect you more than you could possibly know! #PeaceOfficersMemorialDay https://t.co/T0qB5zN7WG

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
We stand firmly, strongly, and proudly with the incredible men and women of law enforcement. You do not hear it nearly enough, but Americans across this Country love you, support you, and respect you more than you could possibly know! #PeaceOfficersMemorialDay https://t.co/T0qB5zN7WG

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
We stand firmly, strongly, and proudly with the incredible men and women of law enforcement. You do not hear it nearly enough, but Americans across this Country love you, support you, and respect you more than you could possibly know! #PeaceOfficersMemorialDay https://t.co/T0qB5zN7WG

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is joined by Acting U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner John Sanders, left, as he announces his proposal to revamp laws that affect the increase of Central American migrants seeking asylum to enter the U.S., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, May 15, 2019. (Photo: J. Scott Applewhite, AP)

Washington - After years of setbacks and stalemates, President Donald Trump will lay out yet another immigration plan as he tries to convince the American public and lawmakers that the nation's legal immigration system should be overhauled.

The latest effort, spearheaded by Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, focuses on beefing up border security and rethinking the green card system so that it would favor people with high-level skills, degrees and job offers instead of relatives of those already in the country.

A shift to a more merit-based system prioritizing high-skilled workers would mark a dramatic departure from the nation's largely family-based approach, which officials said gives roughly 66% of green cards to those with family ties and only 12% based on skills.

But the plan, which is set to be rolled out on Thursday but has yet to be embraced by Trump's own party - let alone Democrats - faces an uphill battle in Congress. Efforts to overhaul the immigration system have gone nowhere for three decades amid deeply divided Republicans and Democrats. Prospects for an agreement seem especially bleak as the 2020 elections near, though the plan could give Trump and the GOP a proposal to rally behind, even if talks with Democrats go nowhere.

The plan does not address what to do about the millions of immigrants already living in the country illegally, including hundreds of thousands of young "Dreamers" brought to the U.S. as children - a top priority for Democrats. Nor does it reduce overall rates of immigration, as many conservative Republicans would like to see.

Trump will nonetheless deliver a Rose Garden speech Thursday throwing his weight behind the plan, which has thus far received mixed reviews from Republicans in the Senate.

In briefings Wednesday that attracted dozens of journalists, administration officials said the plan would create a points-based visa system, similar to those used by Canada and other countries.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to outline the plan before Trump's announcement, said the U.S. would award the same number of green cards as it now does. But far more would go to exceptional students so they can remain in the country after graduation, professionals and people with high-level and vocational degrees. Factors such as age, English language ability and employment offers would also be taken into account.

Far fewer green cards would be given to people with relatives already in the U.S. and 57% versus the current 12% would be awarded based on merit. The diversity visa lottery, which offers green cards to citizens of countries with historically low rates of immigration to the U.S., would be eliminated. Officials insisted diversity would be addressed in other ways.

The officials offered fewer specifics on border security, which is expected to remain a key focus for Trump as he campaigns for reelection. Trump has been furiously railing against the spike in Central American migrant families trying to enter the country, and he forced a government shutdown in a failed effort to fulfill his 2016 promise to build a southern border wall.

As part of the plan, officials want to shore up ports of entry to ensure all vehicles and people are screened and to create a self-sustaining fund, paid for with increased fees, to modernize ports of entry.

The plan also calls for building border wall in targeted locations and continues to push for an overhaul to the U.S. asylum system, with the goal of processing fewer applications and removing people who don't qualify faster.

While the officials insisted their effort was not a "political" plan, they nonetheless framed it as one they hoped Republicans would unite behind, making clear to voters what the party is "for."

"I don't think it's designed to get Democratic support as much as it is to unify the Republican Party around border security, a negotiating position," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a close ally of the White House.

Indeed, the plan drew immediate criticism from Democrats as well as immigration activists, who remain deeply skeptical of Trump after past negotiation failures.

Democrats and some Republicans tried crafting a compromise with Trump last year that would have helped young Dreamer immigrants and added money for border security. But those talks collapsed over White House demands to curb legal immigration and a dramatic Senate showdown in which lawmakers rejected three rival proposals that aligned with the "four pillars" immigration plan Trump unveiled that year.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer criticized the White House for failing to engage in talks with Democrats over the latest proposal.

"Don't come up with a plan that Stephen Miller rubber stamps and say, 'Now, pass it.' It's not going to happen," Schumer, D-N.Y., said, referring to Trump's hard-line policy adviser.

Lisa Koop, director of legal services at the National Immigrant Justice Center, also criticized the various planks of the proposal, including its failure to address those brought to the U.S. illegally as children who are currently protected from deportation by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, or DACA, which Trump has tried to end.

"A plan that forces families apart, limits access to asylum and other humanitarian relief, and doesn't contemplate a path to citizenship for DACA recipients and other undocumented community members is clearly a political stunt intended to posture rather than problem-solve," she said.

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for lower immigration rates, applauded a "very positive effort" on legal immigration, but said it was "undermined by the embrace of the current very high level of immigration."

Republicans on the Hill, too, voiced skepticism, even as administration officials insisted the plan had been embraced by those who briefed on it. A PowerPoint presentation shared with reporters Wednesday referred to the plan as "The Republican Proposal," even though many GOP members had yet to see it.

Graham, who rolled out his own proposal Wednesday to address the recent flood of migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border, said he had advised Trump to try to cut a new deal with Democrats and believed Trump was open to that.

"I am urging the president to lead us to a solution," he said.

Read or Share this story: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2019/05/16/trump-immigration/39484735/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New Trump immigration plan would overhaul green card system

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is joined by Acting U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner John Sanders, left, as he announces his proposal to revamp laws that affect the increase of Central American migrants seeking asylum to enter the U.S., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, May 15, 2019.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
May 16 at 12:09 PM
White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Thursday that President Trump's new immigration plan does not address the fate of young undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as children because the issue is too divisive.

Providing protections from deportations for such young immigrants, known as "dreamers," has been a leading priority for Democrats ever since Trump sought to end the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

"Every single time we have put forward or anyone else has put forward any type of immigration plan and it's included DACA, it's failed. It's a divisive thing," Sanders told reporters at the White House, adding that the issue was "left out on purpose."

Her comments came a few hours before Trump was scheduled to use a Rose Garden speech to throw his support behind a plan developed with his son-in-law and White House adviser Jared Kushner to move U.S. immigration toward a "merit-based system" that prioritizes high-skilled workers over those with family already in the country.
[Trump prepares to unveil broad immigration plan but shows no signs of tempering hard-line rhetoric]
The proposal, previewed by Kushner and other Trump aides in private briefings on Capitol Hill over the past week, already is facing skepticism from lawmakers in both parties, and there appears to be no clear path toward advancing the plan through Congress.

But White House aides emphasized that Trump is enthusiastically on board with an effort to demonstrate that he endorses legal immigration to help U.S. companies even as he has railed against other groups, including immigrant families seeking asylum and refugees.

The DACA program, created by President Barack Obama through executive action in 2012, has provided renewable two-year work permits to more than 800,000 immigrants who arrived as children.

Trump moved to terminate the program in fall 2017, calling it unconstitutional, but federal courts have enjoined the administration from stripping the protections from those already enrolled, and the case could come before the Supreme Court in the next term. Trump has said he hopes the court permits him to end DACA, which he believes would give him more leverage to negotiate a broader immigration overhaul with Democrats.

House Democrats have put forward a bill that would offer a path to citizenship for DACA recipients, as well as for immigrants who are living in the United States under Temporary Protected Status, which Trump has also sought to end.

Speaking to reporters, Sanders said protections offered through the DACA program are "certainly something to discuss and look at and address."

"But this plan is focused on a different part of fixing the immigration system, and we'd like for people to not reject it before they even sit down and really learn about it," she said.

Sanders also sought to put Democrats on the defensive ahead of the formal release of Trump's plan, claiming there is "nothing in there that Democrats shouldn't be for."

"We want to move to this merit-based system," she said during an interview on Fox News. "Democrats right now, unless they get on board this, the only thing they've said they want is open borders. I think that is a terrible thing for our country, and I think it's a terrible message for them going into 2020. I think it would be wonderful to watch them get on board with something that helps secure our border."

At a news conference later Thursday morning, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said that she favors bipartisan "comprehensive" reform and that her chamber plans to act on several fronts, including protections for dreamers.

Pelosi said she had yet to be briefed on Trump's plan but took issue with the use of the term "merit."

"It is really a condescending word," she said. "Are they saying family is without merit?"

Pelosi also argued that other Trump administration actions on immigration have contributed to what she called a "humanitarian crisis" at the U.S.-Mexico border.

"When you take children out of the arms of their parents, when you separate families, when you do what the administration has done at the border, you are making matters worse," the speaker said.

Trump's proposal won't advance through Congress without buy-in from Democrats and is instead designed more as a messaging document from the White House that details what immigration ideas Trump can promote beyond his hard-line enforcement tactics.
[Trump's emergency declaration to build border wall faces first court test]
Unlike with previous White House proposals, the administration took pains to ensure that the net number of green cards - which grant foreigners legal permanent residency in the United States - stayed the same as it is currently so that the overall level of immigration would not be cut. About 1 million immigrants are granted green cards every year, with the majority receiving it based on family ties, such as a parent being sponsored by a U.S. citizen.

Trump is seeking to eliminate several family-based avenues that have allowed immigrants to obtain green cards - and allow mainly spouses and children to be sponsored for permanent residency. The administration plans to make up the difference by dramatically increasing the number of green cards based on an immigrant's merit and ability to contribute to the U.S. economy.

The new White House plan would devise a point-based system that would allow applicants to rack up eligibility based on factors such as age, ability to speak English, job offers and educational background. The administration is looking to emulate merit-based immigration laws in Canada, Australia, Singapore and Japan.

The administration also wants to emphasize the concept it has termed as "patriotic assimilation" - giving more credit to green-card applicants who want to integrate into U.S. culture and society.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
White House says DACA protections too divisive to be included in Trump immigration plan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
May 16 at 12:09 PM White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Thursday that President Trump's new immigration plan does not address the fate of young undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as children because the issue is too divisive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Tweets by realDonaldTrump

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Raleigh, North Carolina Population 2019 (Demographics, Maps, Graphs)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Raleigh was chosen as the new capital of North Carolina in 1788. It is one of the few planned cities in the United States, and its site was chosen in a central location to protect it from coastal attacks. From 1810 to 1820, the population grew from just 876 to more than 2,600.

# data[].attributes.body
http://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/raleigh-population/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Raleigh, North Carolina Population 2019 (Demographics, Maps, Graphs)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Raleigh was chosen as the new capital of North Carolina in 1788. It is one of the few planned cities in the United States, and its site was chosen in a central location to protect it from coastal attacks. From 1810 to 1820, the population grew from just 876 to more than 2,600.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Greek roots of the word demographics translate to "measurement of people". This simple idea is a crucial part of effective governance at all scales and especially for the City of Raleigh. It has come to include a range of topics like age, race, employment, household size, and marital status.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sean Gallagher, Atlanta Field Office Director for U.S. ICE, talks about the increased arrests his office is making and attributed it to Mecklenburg County Sheriff Garry McFadden's cancellation of the 287g program at the jai.

Seven North Carolina mayors have a signed a letter condemning the ICE raids in the state that led to the arrest of over 200 immigrants.

In a letter written by Durham Mayor Steve Schewel and signed by six other mayors, they called for the end to Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids.

"The ICE raids have struck terror in the hearts of many of our valued community members. They have broken apart families, separating parents from their children," the letter says.

Along with Schewel, others who signed the letter are Asheville Mayor Esther Manheimer, Burlington Mayor Ian Baltutis, Carrboro Mayor Lydia Lavelle, Chapel Hill Mayor Pam Hemminger, Greensboro Mayor Nancy Vaughan and Fayetteville Mayor Mitch Colvin.

"We cannot stop ICE from operating in our cities, but we can and must speak out against these raids which destabilize neighborhoods, traumatize children, hurt many innocent people, and create distrust of law enforcement. The negative collateral consequences of these raids on our cities is enormous," the letter says.

The mayors said that more than 230 people were arrested during the raids over the past week, calling the raids "detrimental to the welcoming, stable, loving communities that we work every day to build."

In a press conference last week, ICE Atlanta Field Office Director Sean Gallagher called ICE actions the "new normal," The News & Observer previously reported.

"If they're in the wrong place at the wrong time, my officers will take an enforcement action," Gallagher said.

The North Carolina mayors said most of the arrests occurred in counties where sheriffs have ended the practice of ICE detainers - holding immigrants charged with crimes and who are in the country illegally for 48 hours beyond the time they would legally be allowed to be released, such as by posting bail.

"This is the prerogative of our sheriffs, and they have exercised it wisely to help our communities live free from fear," the letter says.

New sheriffs in Durham, Wake and Mecklenburg counties are among those that no longer honor detainers.

Durham County Board of Commissioners Chair Wendy Jacobs read a statement on behalf of the board about ICE on Monday, during the commissioners meeting.

Jacobs said the county strongly condemns ICE's recent action in Durham that affected at least six families.

"These actions by ICE do not serve to make the Durham community safer," she said. "In fact, they serve to terrorize the immigrant and Latinx community in Durham to the point that it makes our community less safe."

The Durham County commissioners' statement also supported Durham County Sheriff Clarence Birkhead's decision to no longer honor ICE detainers or aid in the apprehension of people suspected of being in the country illegally.

In 2018, 17 elected leaders in the Triangle wrote a letter calling for ICE to be abolished.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 NC mayors say 'ICE raids have struck terror in the hearts of many'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sean Gallagher, Atlanta Field Office Director for U.S. ICE, talks about the increased arrests his office is making and attributed it to Mecklenburg County Sheriff Garry McFadden's cancellation of the 287g program at the jai. Seven North Carolina mayors have a signed a letter condemning the ICE raids in the state that led to the arrest of over 200 immigrants.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The national furor over immigration has hit North Carolina hard. Recent clashes between several state sheriffs' departments and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are as severe as anywhere in the country. Yet, as a new study published by Western Carolina University argues, the public controversy over immigration all too often misses the huge opportunity that immigrants offer.

ICE requires local law-enforcement agencies to report the immigration status of inmates, but sheriffs' offices in Mecklenburg, Wake and Buncombe counties have announced they will cease cooperating. Last month, ICE officials responded by conducting random immigration checks in Mecklenburg and Wake counties, arresting 200 undocumented immigrants in a single week.

The arrests have many pro-immigration activists up in arms. Yet immigration opponents applaud ICE's actions as necessary for law and order. But few people dispassionately ask how randomly arresting undocumented immigrants affects the economic welfare of the average native-born North Carolinian.

In fact, North Carolina depends crucially on attracting new workers. The N.C. Department of Commerce projects the need to fill almost 39,000 jobs per year through 2026, yet the native population will grow by only about 21,000 per year, according to the NC Office of Budget and Management. By far the biggest need is to fill the 62 percent of annual new job openings in the state that require no high school diploma.

If more and more immigrants fill those jobs, how will that affect North Carolina? The new WCU study, though mostly focused on the national level, can help shed some light on this question.

Economists agree that free trade in goods generally makes people better off. Immigration is just another form of international trade. Some services must be provided at particular locations. For example, geography and climate often dictate where certain foods are best grown. Free trade in labor - through immigration - fully secures economic benefits by locating workers appropriately.

If the laborers best-suited to agricultural work are not free to move to those locations, or if ICE deports them once they're here, then food will be inefficiently produced with the wrong laborers, with too much capital, and in the wrong places. This makes us all poorer.

Unsurprisingly, immigrants themselves are the biggest beneficiaries of their movement to the United States. The average Mexican sees his or her income improve 150 percent by moving here. Immigrants from poorer countries typically experience even bigger gains.

Contrary to much of the public furor, however, immigrants also benefit Americans. Even conservative estimates say current levels of immigration raise U.S. income by around $50 billion per year. In other words, immigration presents a huge opportunity.

Also, despite popular misconception, immigrants on net do not take "our" jobs. Instead, as the American economy adds more workers, it creates more jobs. The U.S. labor force has grown from around 60 million workers in 1950 to more than 160 million today - without any long-term increase in unemployment.

This does not mean that no native workers suffer, at least in the short run. Those who most directly compete with immigrants can see their wages decrease. As the WCU study reports, wages decrease for native workers without high school diplomas, but the magnitudes are small and the impact is temporary. Workers with high school diplomas or better tend to see their wages rise.

North Carolina's future depends on attracting more immigrant workers. But that opportunity is being held back. Random checks by ICE won't just tear immigrant communities apart; they will also harm the average Carolinian. Like the rest of the country, Carolinians need the federal government to finally work out a deal for comprehensive immigration reform that provides a wider legal path for new workers.
Benjamin Powell is a senior fellow with the Independent Institute and a professor of economics and director of the Free Market Institute at Texas Tech University. Edward Lopez is a professor of economics and director of Western Carolina University's Center for the Study of Free Enterprise, which has just published Powell's new immigration study,"A Case for Free Trade in Labor."
Read or Share this story: https://www.citizen-times.com/story/opinion/2019/03/26/examining-north-carolinas-immigration-opportunity-opinion/3163389002/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Examining North Carolina's immigration opportunity | OPINION

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The national furor over immigration has hit North Carolina hard. Recent clashes between several state sheriffs' departments and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are as severe as anywhere in the country. Yet, as a new study published by Western Carolina University argues, the public controversy over immigration all too often misses the huge opportunity that immigrants offer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get the latest articles, videos, photo galleries and blogposts related to WRAL's coverage of immigration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Several North Carolina organizations spoke out against family separation and in favor of immediate reunification in front of Sen. Thom Tillis' office on Tuesday, June 26, 2018.

Immigration policies will likely be a hotly debated topic in this year's midterm elections.

Debates have been fueled in part by President Donald Trump's zero tolerance policy on immigration, including the separation of thousands of children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border this year.

Trump also has pushed to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, a program that began under the Barack Obama administration that allows some people who entered the U.S. illegally to stay here. An executive order from Trump prohibits travel from several Muslim-majority countries, and he continues to promise a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

There are now threats of shutting down the federal government this fall over immigration and border security.

With so much focus on immigration, The News & Observer looked at the numbers in North Carolina, where 8 percent of the 10 million residents were not born in the United States.

So, how many immigrants live in North Carolina, and where did they come from?

Where are immigrants coming from?

Of North Carolina's foreign-born population, Latin Americans make up the largest share, accounting for 53 percent of immigrants in the state.

Asians are the second-largest share of immigrants in North Carolina, comprising almost 30 percent of the state's foreign-born population.

North Carolina's foreign-born population grew almost 274 percent between 1990 and 2000 when the United States experienced the largest migration of people from other countries. In the following two decades, the foreign-born population continued to grow, but at a much slower rate.

Where are immigrants living?

The largest share of immigrants in North Carolina live in the state's biggest urban areas: Wake and Mecklenburg counties, home to Raleigh and Charlotte. Foreign-born Latinos account for 5 percent of the population in Wake County and 7 percent in Mecklenburg. Foreign-born Asians account for 5 percent of the population in Wake and 4 percent in Mecklenburg.

Guilford, Mecklenburg, Orange, Union, Wake and Wayne counties had the largest proportional growth in foreign-born populations in the state between 2000 and 2016. In Guilford County, home to Greensboro, the foreign-born population was 6.5 percent in 2000; that figure increased to 10.5 percent in 2016.

Immigration in the U.S.

In 2016, about 14 percent of the country's population were immigrants.

Immigrants and their descendants have been driving the country's population growth for the last 50 years and will continue to do so for the next 50, according to the Pew Research Center. Pew predicts that by 2065, there will be 441 million people living in the U.S. - 78 million of them will be immigrants and 81 million of them will be children of immigrants.

By 2065, the non-Hispanic white population is expected to decrease and it will no longer be the majority. However, it will remain the largest racial/ethnic group in the country, according to the Pew Research Center.

Demographic projections in N.C.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Immigration in North Carolina: Where are people coming from, and where do they live?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Donald Trump's immigration and border security policies bring immigration to the forefront of politics. About 8 percent of North Carolina's 10 million residents were not born in the U.S. So, how many immigrants live in North Carolina, and where did they come from?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Officials are considering reopening a private prison in New Mexico to hold immigrants being detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Torrance County commissioners are set to vote Wednesday on whether to sign an agreement with ICE to open the rural county detention facility owned by a Nashville, Tennessee-based private prison operator CoreCivic, the Albuquerque Journal reported .

The prison southeast of Albuquerque closed in October 2017 because of a consistently low number of inmates, county manager Wayne Johnson said. The prison was a large employer for Estancia, so its closure was a blow to the area's economy and the county's tax base, he said.

"Having that 900-bed facility stand empty didn't make sense for anyone involved," Johnson said.

County officials expect the reopened prison to provide more than 200 jobs and house over 700 immigrant detainees as well as some local inmates.

Under the proposed contract, the federal agency would pay the county nearly $2 million per month during the first year of prison use. The price would increase in future years.

ICE would pay a fixed rate for up to 714 immigrant detainees, according to the proposed contract. It would pay extra for each additional person housed in the facility.

The county would then sign a separate agreement with CoreCivic for it to run the facility and hire staff.

The facility would only house men, and the immigrant detainees would be housed separately from other inmates, Johnson said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Officials consider reopening private prison to hold migrants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Officials are considering reopening a private prison in New Mexico to hold immigrants being detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Torrance County commissioners are set to vote Wednesday on whether to sign an agreement with ICE to open the rural county detention facility owned by a Nashville, Tennessee-based private prison operator CoreCivic, the Albuquerque Journal reported .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Wake County's current growth rate is
62 people per day, making it the
most populous county in the United States.

Components of Population Growth

Each day, Wake County experiences an average of 34 births and 12 deaths, or 22 new residents due to natural increase. Since 2010, natural increase has contributed to 35% of Wake County's population growth.

As the home to the state's capital, one of the state's flagship universities (NC State), and many major employers, Wake County receives a steady flow of people into-and out of-the county. On average, 188 people move into Wake County every day and 148 people move out, meaning Wake gains an average of 40 new residents each day due to net migration. Since 2010, net migration has accounted for 65% of Wake County's growth.

Characteristics of Babies Born

53% are to white mothers

22% are to black mothers

7% are to Asian mothers

17% are to Hispanic mothers

1% are to mothers of other racial groups

50% occur Raleigh

12% occur in Cary

5% occur in Apex

4% occur in Wake Forest

3% occur in each of Fuquay-Varina, Garner, Holly Springs, and Morrisville

17% occur elsewhere in the county

Characteristics of Net-Migrants

Origin

31 of Wake County's average daily net migrants are from domestic migration:

9 of Wake County's average daily net migrants come from elsewhere in North Carolina,

5 net migrants come from New York

3 net migrants come from New Jersey

2 net migrants come from each of Pennsylvania and Ohio

1 net migrant comes from each of Virginia, Illinois, Michigan, Connecticut, South Carolina, Georgia, California, Florida, and Massachusetts

1 net migrant comes from another state or U.S. territory

9 of Wake County's average daily net migrants are from international migration:

3 are from India/East Asia

2 are from each of Africa, Central America, and Europe

Top 3 countries: China, India, Mexico (each average about 1 migrant per day)

Destination

3 move to each of Apex, Holly Springs, and Wake Forest

2 move to each of Fuquay-Varina and Morrisville

3 move elsewhere in the county

Generation/Age of Net Migrants

2 net migrants are pre-K (ages 1 to 4)

5 net migrants are K-12 (ages 5 to 17)

5 net migrants are college age (18-24)

Wake County loses 1 recent high school graduate (ages 18 to 19) - likely to attend college elsewhere in the state or country

6 net migrants are young adults (ages 20 to 24) - either transferring to school, starting grad school, or moving to Wake for employment

7 net migrants are between the ages of 25 and 34

11 net migrants are between the ages of 35 and 44

4 net migrants are between the ages of 45 and 54

3 net migrants are between the ages of 55 and 64

3 net migrants are 65 or older

From a generational perspective:

7 children under 18 (not assigned to specific generation)

9 Millennials

13 Gen Xers

8 Baby Boomers

3 Silent Generation

Race & Hispanic Origin of Net Migrants

17 White

10 Asian

8 Black

6 Hispanic

Wake County has a net loss of 1 other or multi-racial individual per day

Marital Status of Net Migrants

Each day, Wake County nets an average of 33 individuals 16 and older (for whom marital status is determined). Among these:

17 are currently married

11 have never been married

3 are divorced or separated

2 are widowed

Educational Attainment of Net Migrants

Each day, Wake County nets an average of 28 individuals 25 and older. Among these:

3 have less than a high school diploma

2 individuals with only a HS diploma or GED move out of Wake County

6 have some college or an associate's degree

14 have a bachelor's degree

7 have a graduate or professional degree

Selected Calculations

Watch the video below to see the formulas in how Average Growth Per Day or AGPD between April 1, 2010 and July 1, 2013.

Date of Arrival of Millionth Resident
The date of arrival of the millionth resident is calculated first by determining the number of additional residents needed to reach one million and dividing by the average growth per day. The video above illustrates this calculation.

At the current rate of growth, it will take 416.52 days-or 1 year and 51.52 days-from July 1, 2013 for Wake County to reach its millionth resident.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Wake County's current growth rate is 62 people per day, making it the most populous county in the United States. Each day, Wake County experiences an average of 34 births and 12 deaths, or 22 new residents due to natural increase. Since 2010, natural increase has contributed to 35% of Wake County's population growth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Throughout the Triangle, organizations are working to help local immigrants and refugees, either through advocacy or legal representation or by connecting them with vital services they need to acclimate to their new communities. If you're looking for a way to help, these are all worthwhile nonprofits that could use your support.
Church World Service-Durham
112 South Duke Street, Durham, 27701

(919) 680-4310, cwsrdu.org

CWS-Durham, which opened in 2009 and helps resettle about three hundred refugees every year, connects incoming refugees with community resources and social services.
CIR (Council on Immigrant Relations)
3033 Stonybrook Drive, #3, Raleigh, 27604

(919) 322-0360, ciraleigh.org

Founded in 2006 as Centro Internacional de Raleigh, CIR seeks to organize and engage churches and community organizations to assist under-resourced international communities.
Come Out & Show Them comeoutandshowthem.com
Raleigh activist couple Tina and Grayson Haver Currin's Come Out & Show Them has broadened its focus from HB 2 to immigrants and refugees through its Welcome to Raleigh, Y'all (and companion Welcome to Durham, Y'all) campaign.
D.E.A.R. Foundation
4917 Waters Edge Drive, Raleigh, 27502

(919) 803-0559, dearfoundation.org

Since 2013, the D.E.A.R. Foundation has sought to protect immigrant rights through legal-empowerment programs and has represented more than one thousand immigrants in court and before boards of appeals and administrative agencies.

El Centro Hispano

2000 Chapel Hill Road, #26A, Durham, 27707

(919) 687-4635, elcentronc.org

Over the last twenty-five years, El Centro Hispano has grown from a small program in a Durham church basement into the largest grassroots Latino organization in North Carolina, providing education, support, and health care services to more than ten thousand community members.
El Pueblo
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Raleigh, 27604

(919) 835-1525, elpueblo.org

For more than fifteen years, El Pueblo has been lobbying the General Assembly on behalf of immigrant communities, advocating for improved farmworker conditions, in-state tuition for certain undocumented immigrants, and access to driver's licenses for DACA recipients, among other things.
The Hispanic Family Center
2013 Raleigh Boulevard, Raleigh, 27604

(919) 873-0094, cpfhraleigh.org

Founded in 1997, the Hispanic Family Center works to develop education, health, and job-training programs to help Hispanic families better integrate into the community.

Montagnard Human Rights Organization

1720 Hillsborough Street, Raleigh, 27605

(919) 828-8185, mhro.org

The MHRO works to promote human rights and self-determination for the indigenous people of the central highlands of Vietnam, and advocates on behalf of refugees and asylum seekers who have fled persecution in Vietnam.
Refugee Community Partnership
110 West Main Street, #2G, Carrboro, 27510

(919) 590-5910
refugeecommunitypartnership.org
The RCP seeks to build a supportive infrastructure for newly relocated refugee families, providing advocacy, education, and food-assistance programs.
Southern Coalition for Social Justice
1415 West N.C. Highway 54, #101, Durham, 27707

(919) 323-3380
southerncoalition.org
Since 2007, the SCSJ has worked with economically disadvantaged communities and communities of color to advance social and economic justice through research and legal advocacy.
U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, North Carolina
3824 Barrett Drive, #200, Raleigh, 27609

(919) 334-0072
refugees.org/field-office/north-carolina
Over the last decade, the USCRI's North Carolina office has resettled some three thousand refugees, connecting them with service providers and programs to help them get on their feet.
World Relief Durham
801 Gilbert Street, Durham, 27701

(919) 286-3496
worldreliefdurham.org
A faith-based organization, World Relief Durham works with churches to "think biblically about refugees arriving to the Triangle," according to its website, as well as support services encompassing everything from greeting incoming refugees at the airport to helping them find apartments to assisting them with getting social security cards.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
u.s. committee for refugees and immigrants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Local Nonprofits Serving Immigrants and Refugees

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Throughout the Triangle, organizations are working to help local immigrants and refugees, either through advocacy or legal representation or by connecting them with vital services they need to acclimate to their new communities. If you're looking for a way to help, these are all worthwhile nonprofits that could use your support.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
North Carolina mayors' letter opposing ICE immigration raids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) -- A group of immigrants and activists rallied in downtown Raleigh Saturday morning against House Bill 370 and House Bill 135.

House Bill 370 would require local law enforcement to honor federal immigration detainment requests. The legislation, which has already passed the House, comes after sheriffs in the state -- including in Wake and Mecklenburg counties -- have withdrawn their departments from the 287 (g) program.

"Many of these sheriffs were elected under those campaign promises. So we see this as not only a violation against the community, but against democracy. People voted for those sheriffs based on those campaign promises, and now the legislature's coming in and stepping in trying to impose their will," said Juan Miranda, a community organizer with Siembra NC.

Protesters also voiced their concerns with House Bill 135, which among other things would stop local authorities from accepting community IDs to determine residency and prevent UNC system campuses from becoming sanctuary universities.

They called on the North Carolina Sheriffs' Association and Gov. Roy Cooper to oppose the proposals.

The rally comes just four days after a news conference at the General Assembly where supporters of HB 829, which would allow undocumented residents to receive a restricted driver's license. So far, no Republicans have publicly supported that legislation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Protesters rally against immigration bills in General Assembly

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) -- A group of immigrants and activists rallied in downtown Raleigh Saturday morning against House Bill 370 and House Bill 135. House Bill 370 would require local law enforcement to honor federal immigration detainment requests.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 14 Most Common Arguments against Immigration and Why They’re Wrong

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These are the main arguments against immigration, my quick responses to them, and links to some of the most relevant evidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Donald J. Trump, New York, NY. 23,966,408 likes · 1,104,497 talking about this. This is the official Facebook page for Donald J. Trump

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Video: Wake County farmer Jackie Thompson has relied the H2-A Temporary Agricultural Workers program for more than 25 years to help harvest crops and run his operation that produces tobacco, wheat, cucumbers and soybeans.

The national furor over immigration has hit North Carolina hard. Recent clashes between several state sheriffs' departments and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are as severe as anywhere in the country. Yet, as a new study published by Western Carolina University argues, the public controversy over immigration all too often misses the huge opportunity that immigrants offer.

ICE requires local law-enforcement agencies to report the immigration status of inmates, but sheriffs' offices in Mecklenburg, Wake and Buncombe counties have announced they will cease cooperating. Last month, ICE officials responded by conducting random immigration checks in Mecklenburg and Wake counties, arresting 200 undocumented immigrants in a single week.

The arrests have many pro-immigration activists up in arms. Yet immigration opponents applaud ICE's actions as necessary for law and order. But few people dispassionately ask how randomly arresting undocumented immigrants affects the economic welfare of the average native-born North Carolinian.

In fact, North Carolina depends crucially on attracting new workers. The N.C. Department of Commerce projects the need to fill almost 39,000 jobs per year through 2026, yet the native population will grow by only about 21,000 per year, according to the N.C. Office of Budget and Management. By far the biggest need is to fill the 62 percent of annual new job openings in the state that require no high school diploma.

If more and more immigrants fill those jobs, how will that affect North Carolina? The new WCU study, though mostly focused on the national level, can help shed some light on this question.

Economists agree that free trade in goods generally makes people better off. Immigration is just another form of international trade. Some services must be provided at particular locations. For example, geography and climate often dictate where certain foods are best grown. Free trade in labor - through immigration - fully secures economic benefits by locating workers appropriately.

If the laborers best-suited to agricultural work are not free to move to those locations, or if ICE deports them once they're here, then food will be inefficiently produced with the wrong laborers, with too much capital, and in the wrong places. This makes us all poorer.

Contrary to much of the public furor, however, immigrants benefit Americans. Even conservative estimates say current levels of immigration raise U.S. income by around $50 billion per year. In other words, immigration presents a huge opportunity.

Also, despite popular misconception, immigrants on net do not take "our" jobs. Instead, as the American economy adds more workers, it creates more jobs. The U.S. labor force has grown from around 60 million workers in 1950 to more than 160 million today - without any long-term increase in unemployment.

North Carolina's future depends on attracting more immigrant workers. But that opportunity is being held back. Random checks by ICE won't just tear immigrant communities apart; they will also harm the average Carolinian. Like the rest of the country, Carolinians need the federal government to finally work out a deal for comprehensive immigration reform that provides a wider legal path for new workers.
Benjamin Powell is a senior fellow with the Independent Institute and a professor of economics and director of the Free Market Institute at Texas Tech University. Edward Lopez is a professor of economics and director of Western Carolina University's Center for the Study of Free Enterprise, which has just published Powell's new immigration study, "A Case for Free Trade in Labor."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NC's economy depends on immigrant workers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Video: Wake County farmer Jackie Thompson has relied the H2-A Temporary Agricultural Workers program for more than 25 years to help harvest crops and run his operation that produces tobacco, wheat, cucumbers and soybeans. The national furor over immigration has hit North Carolina hard. Recent clashes between several state sheriffs' departments and U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Several North Carolina organizations spoke out against family separation and in favor of immediate reunification in front of Sen. Thom Tillis' office on Tuesday, June 26, 2018.

Immigration policies will likely be a hotly debated topic in this year's midterm elections.

Debates have been fueled in part by President Donald Trump's zero tolerance policy on immigration, including the separation of thousands of children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border this year.

Trump also has pushed to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, a program that began under the Barack Obama administration that allows some people who entered the U.S. illegally to stay here. An executive order from Trump prohibits travel from several Muslim-majority countries, and he continues to promise a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

There are now threats of shutting down the federal government this fall over immigration and border security.

With so much focus on immigration, The News & Observer looked at the numbers in North Carolina, where 8 percent of the 10 million residents were not born in the United States.

So, how many immigrants live in North Carolina, and where did they come from?

Where are immigrants coming from?

Of North Carolina's foreign-born population, Latin Americans make up the largest share, accounting for 53 percent of immigrants in the state.

Asians are the second-largest share of immigrants in North Carolina, comprising almost 30 percent of the state's foreign-born population.

North Carolina's foreign-born population grew almost 274 percent between 1990 and 2000 when the United States experienced the largest migration of people from other countries. In the following two decades, the foreign-born population continued to grow, but at a much slower rate.

Where are immigrants living?

The largest share of immigrants in North Carolina live in the state's biggest urban areas: Wake and Mecklenburg counties, home to Raleigh and Charlotte. Foreign-born Latinos account for 5 percent of the population in Wake County and 7 percent in Mecklenburg. Foreign-born Asians account for 5 percent of the population in Wake and 4 percent in Mecklenburg.

Guilford, Mecklenburg, Orange, Union, Wake and Wayne counties had the largest proportional growth in foreign-born populations in the state between 2000 and 2016. In Guilford County, home to Greensboro, the foreign-born population was 6.5 percent in 2000; that figure increased to 10.5 percent in 2016.

Immigration in the U.S.

In 2016, about 14 percent of the country's population were immigrants.

Immigrants and their descendants have been driving the country's population growth for the last 50 years and will continue to do so for the next 50, according to the Pew Research Center. Pew predicts that by 2065, there will be 441 million people living in the U.S. - 78 million of them will be immigrants and 81 million of them will be children of immigrants.

By 2065, the non-Hispanic white population is expected to decrease and it will no longer be the majority. However, it will remain the largest racial/ethnic group in the country, according to the Pew Research Center.

Demographic projections in N.C.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Immigration in North Carolina: Where are people coming from, and where do they live?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Donald Trump's immigration and border security policies bring immigration to the forefront of politics. About 8 percent of North Carolina's 10 million residents were not born in the U.S. So, how many immigrants live in North Carolina, and where did they come from?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Immigration is defined as the intentional movement of an individual to a destination country of which they do not possess citizenship. The reasons for immigration are many. Some travel to a new country to become migrant or foreign workers. Others may wish to settle in as a permanent resident, with the goal of eventually becoming a naturalized citizen.

Only a handful of countries see a net positive migration rate each year. Australia, Canada, the United States, Russia, and most of Western Europe make that list. Those with net migration losses include most of the countries on the continents of South America and Africa.

In 2015, the number of people who participated in immigration opportunities worldwide totaled 244 million. Since 2000, the number of people who are migrating to a new country has risen by 41%. More than 30% of the world's immigrants live in just 20 countries, with the U.S. seeing 19% of the world's international migrants.

In 2012, Gallup took a survey regarding immigration and found that 640 million people would move to a different country if given the opportunity. The United States was the top destination in the survey, with 23% of people choosing it as their top destination choice.

Here are some of the pros and cons of immigration to consider.

List of the Pros of Immigration

1. Immigration diversifies local economies.
Immigrants bring new perspectives, experiences, and ideas to their local communities. With this added diversification, there is more strength to be found within the community. Immigrants start businesses, earn an income, and support others on the local level. This creates an increase in local production, which creates more profits, which further helps the economy. Strong economies that are based on immigrant perspectives tend to find the most success.

2. It increases the population base.
In the United States, about 800,000 people become naturalized U.S. citizens. To achieve this goal, they first had to be a legalized immigrant. Their presence does more than bring an exchange of cultures. It allows for more knowledge and wisdom to be shared with others. By increasing the cultural awareness of everyone, more moments of common ground can be found.

3. Immigration helps to create a global market.
Immigrants do more than create stronger local economies. They also help to contribute to a stronger global economy. Remittances are common in nations that invite immigrants. More than 40% of the GDP of Guatemala, for example, comes through remittances provided by immigrants who have made their way to the United States. Immigrants who have more opportunities to pursue advanced education or high-skill employment can take those skills back to their home country to improve its status as well.

4. It creates a fairer level of population distribution.
People often come from overpopulated countries to find new opportunities for themselves. The idea of the "American Dream" is not present in every country in the world. There are only 33 out of 200+ nations that are considered to be developed. Immigration allows people from under-developed countries to create opportunities for themselves that would normally not be available to them.

5. Immigration promotes lower levels of crime.
Although immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, are often promoted as a precursor for increased local crime, the opposite usually occurs. In Texas, a survey of prisoners within the state's Department of Justice found that illegal immigrants were under-represented in prison populations. Although illegal immigrants make up more than 6% of the state's population, they are just 4.6% of the inmates housed in state-level prisons. Immigrants are 69% less likely to be imprisoned when compared to native citizens.

6. It encourages entrepreneurism.
Many immigrants are natural entrepreneurs. They are often highly educated, extensively trained, and very inventive when establishing a new idea. Immigrants are also highly productive, making it possible to create new jobs, drive innovation, or make existing businesses become more flexible. Their presence makes it easier to establish worker specialization, which makes it easier for all businesses to invest more into their employees.

7. Immigration benefits most families in the country.
Immigration isn't about having one group of people try to take jobs from another. It is the process of a family trying to provide for themselves and contribute to their local community. Even when considering illegal immigration, the average person doesn't come to a new nation because they're looking to cause trouble. Most want to contribute, which is why the presence of immigrants is beneficial to virtually everyone.

8. It raises the GDP.
When immigration occurs at natural levels, it creates a small increase in the national GDP. The productivity of immigrants can boost the GDP by as much as 0.4% in a single year. Although that doesn't seem like much, a one-tenth increase in U.S. GDP equates to $18 billion in economic impacts. That means immigration provides a total annual value to the economy of up to $72 billion each year.

9. Immigration negates gaps that form in certain labor markets.
In low-skill employment areas, it is true that a strong presence of immigrants may depress wages. From a general labor market standpoint, however, immigration helps to fill in the gaps which can form when there is a low unemployment rate. Because immigrants can relieve employment bottlenecks, they reduce the risk of under-performance issues occurring in the local economy. When the income levels of immigrants rise, so do the incomes of every other household.

10. It encourages economic recovery.
Immigrants are more likely to move to a new location to pursue a job opportunity than native citizens. That means places that are struggling economically can begin to experience recovery with greater speed as immigrants come to work. Even when the occupations were high-tech jobs, it was immigrants who kept the labor market moving forward because of their expertise.

11. Immigration encourages lower prices at the point-of-sale.
Immigration workers are not the only ones that benefit from their presence at the local level. The complementary workers involved in each industry benefit as well. That means supervisors, attorneys, and translators all have new opportunities available to them which they may not have had otherwise. As demands for new workers rise, the prices tend to fall for goods and services, which allows everyone to benefit from the lower costs.

List of the Cons of Immigration

1. Immigration can cause over-population issues.
The wealthiest nations of the world tend to be the most popular destinations for immigration. That means there can be over-population issues in wealthy countries, while under-population issues can begin to form in the developing world. When population levels become imbalanced, then it can cause resource access issues at the local level in regions where high levels of immigration take place.

2. It encourages disease transmission.
Many diseases are transferred to new regions because of the processes of immigration. The devastation of smallpox on the local tribal populations of North America is widely documented. Disease-causing agents transfer across borders with immigrants, which can have a negative impact on the local population that may not be regularly exposed to certain conditions. Screening processes can limit this impact somewhat, although there is always the possibility of having something slip through.

3. Immigration can create wage disparities.
When immigrants come from the developing world to the developed world, they may be willing to take employment opportunities for a much lower wage than a local non-immigrant. If there are enough people to work for lower wages, it can create a wage disparity in the local population that can affect job growth. Less income means fewer supportive employment opportunities because less cash is being spent.

4. It creates stressors on educational and health resources.
Immigrants come to make a new life for themselves. Many contribute to their local economies without question. There is an initial investment that communities must make, however, to help these families establish themselves. Children must be educated. Healthcare services must be offered. There is no guarantee that immigrating families will stay in those communities, which means the investments being made may never earn dividends.

5. Immigration reduces the chances of a developing nation.
When a developing country sees its best and brightest immigrate to the developed world, they lose an opportunity to advance. The talents which people bring, especially to a nation that is poor, helps it to become stronger. Immigration gives that strength away to other countries which may not need it. Immigrants do get the chance to plan a better life for themselves, though it comes at the expense of their native country.

6. It is easier to exploit immigrants.
Labor laws have not caught up to the modern practices of immigration. Even when people are in a new country legally, it is easier to report them to the police as a possible illegal immigrant than fulfill an obligation. Filing false charges, refusing to pay owed wages, and even physical abuse is more common within immigrant circles than it is within the native population. The Mercury News reviewed union elections and found that in at least 50% of campaigns involving a majority of undocumented workforces, threats were made to call immigration over the unionizing activities.

7. Immigration activities may create integration difficulties.
Diversity is not something that everyone readily embraces. Bringing in new perspectives, ethnicities, or cultures into an established community can sometimes cause friction. People are often fearful of what they do not know, which means there is a basic fear associated with immigrants when they first move to a community. That can lead to higher levels of security monitoring, negative personal interactions, and even more false police reports being filed in an effort to "prevent" trouble from happening.

8. It can place stress on local social services.
Having a large group of immigrants move into a region can also place stress points on social services related to employment. There may be an increased need for food bank services, food stamps, and basic housing services. That can place stress on the budgets of these services, which may encourage local councils to propose higher tax rates to cover potential shortfalls. Even if immigrants have a positive influence on the economy over time, the short-term costs may be too much for some communities to bear.

9. Immigration can split up families.
Extended immigration is not a common practice. One family is usually permitted to become migrants to a new country destination. That practice creates social problems for children who might be left behind by the rest of their family. It may also reduce their standard of living in their country because there are fewer opportunities available for family employment.

10. It can result in human rights violations.
Immigration, or the desire to become a migrant, can put some individuals into a state of desperation. If it becomes difficult for some individuals to migrate, the development of people trafficking may offer new opportunities that seem positive at first, then turn negative for the individual. These movements can even facilitate organized crime activities in extreme situations.

These pros and cons of immigration show that diversity can be a good thing. If immigration occurs legally, then local communities often see many benefits develop over time. There are certainly some challenges that must be addressed with the practice of immigration, especially when it occurs illegally. Those challenges, however, are often outweighed by the benefits which immigration provides.

Blog Post Author Credentials
Louise Gaille is the author of this post. She received her B.A. in Economics from the University of Washington. In addition to being a seasoned writer, Louise has almost a decade of experience in Banking and Finance. If you have any suggestions on how to make this post better, then go here to contact our team.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Immigration is defined as the intentional movement of an individual to a destination country of which they do not possess citizenship. The reasons for immigration are many. Some travel to a new country to become migrant or foreign workers. Others may wish to settle in as a permanent resident, with the goal of eventually becoming a naturalized citizen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Immigration is important for America's future - to drive work force growth, innovation and entrepreneurship. As someone who has been at the intersection of innovation and venture capital for many years, I am alarmed by current trends in immigration policy and attitudes.

While it may be politically expedient to demonize immigrants, let's use the facts to inform the solutions.

First, simple demographics show that we need more immigrants, not fewer. Our native-born work force is actually shrinking as baby boomers retire. We will need immigrant workers filling jobs and paying income and Social Security taxes to help pay for a larger retiree base. The alternatives are either much higher taxes or a reduction in benefits paid to retirees.

Secondly, as an investor, I can tell you that immigrants are an important driver of our innovation economy. In a recent study by the National Foundation for American Policy, of the 90 private companies with valuations of more than $1 billion, more than half were founded by immigrants. These immigrants created companies that employ on average 760 people in the U.S.

Next, various studies show that automation through technology causes 80 percent-plus of job displacement, rather than immigration or other sources of lower cost labor here or abroad. Technology has been displacing labor in some form for more than 200 years. Now, as robotics and machine learning continue to improve, we must adapt education, training, entrepreneurship, and global trade practices to support the creation of high value jobs. This is not an issue of immigration, but rather the acceleration of change in the world economy.

Lastly, legal (and illegal) immigrants have lower levels of criminal activity than the overall population according to several studies aggregated by the Cato Institute. Yes, there are specific, terrible stories about immigrants and immigrant gangs, but these stories sadly exist about Americans born here too.

Why does this all matter?

It's critically important that we understand the truth, not the myths, about immigrants and their role in our society. For years, our nation has welcomed immigration. Yes, there have been cycles where nativism pushed back against immigration. But, each time this occurred, we eventually embraced and included those who were stigmatized. And, each time, our national wealth increased as did opportunities for all.

We need thoughtful, fact-driven immigration laws. If we want to grow our economy, it becomes apparent that to be "pro-business" in the 21st century is to make investments in the people that are here while we support rational and fact-based immigration policies.

Demonizing immigrants to gain political points is not a strategy for success. The path to economic growth is for our political leaders to understand the facts and be willing to engage citizens on both emotional and factual levels. Only then can leaders help everyone understand what is best for both the country and for themselves.

I fear that the required leadership is lacking. Leading people against a common, but false, enemy has been used for centuries as a weak substitute for the hard work of enabling everyone to have an opportunity to be great.

We are better than that. Let's do the hard work. And let's support candidates for office who share this vision of a dynamic, growing America and are ready to help to make it happen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gene Riechers Viewpoint: Why we need more immigrants - Washington Business Journal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Immigration is important for America's future - to drive work force growth, innovation and entrepreneurship. As someone who has been at the intersection of innovation and venture capital for many years, I am alarmed by current trends in immigration policy and attitudes.