# data[].attributes.body
US citizens think that more immigrants come but really more immigrants leave, if Trump put his wall he wont let many mexicans out

# data[].attributes.body
This note shows how much money immigrants spend in taxes and how it contributes to US economy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What are immigrants contributing in your congressional district?

A new tool developed by New American Economy, a bipartisan immigration reform advocacy group, shows that immigrants are contributing billions of dollars in taxes and spending power to congressional districts across Dallas, North Texas and the rest of the state.

Andrew Lim, New American Economy's director of quantitative research, said that he hopes putting this data into the context of congressional districts makes it useful for representatives to better understand the dynamics of their districts.

"This is data that is tailored to their districts, which we know vary greatly from city and county boundaries. We hope that this data gives a better picture of what constituents look like in a given district," Lim said.

New American Economy used American Community Survey data from the U.S. Census Bureau through 2017 and looked at the spending and voting power of immigrants as well as other characteristics like home ownership, taxes paid and how many immigrants are entrepreneurs by district.

The data shows that immigrants in the five congressional districts that include portions of the city of Dallas have a joint spending power of about $18.3 billion:

$1.9 billion in District 5.

$4.2 billion in District 32.

$2.6 billion in District 30.

$3.8 billion in District 33.

$5.8 billion in District 24.

Across the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area, New American Economy's analysis shows that immigrants:

Make up almost 19% of the population

Pay about $10.6 billion in taxes

Have a spending power of about $33.2 billion

And that 102,884 own businesses

Immigrants own about 40% of businesses and hold upwards of $13.4 billion in spending power in Dallas County alone, a separate New American Economy analysis from earlier this year found.

Lim said that compiling this data from the national to the local level is necessary to show how demographics and electorates are changing.

"The idea is to show that immigrants at the most familiar level are making giant contributions. This data tells the story of how immigrants are living and that the conversation around immigration isn't an abstract but is relevant to our everyday lives," Lim said.

Across Texas, immigrants:

Have about $109.9 billion in spending power

Make up about 17% of the population

Pay close to $35 billion in taxes

Want to know about your congressional district? Here's what immigrants are contributing in North Texas' 11 districts:
Correction, 12:15 p.m. Oct. 25: An earlier version of this article referred to New American Economy as a nonpartisan organization. It is a bipartisan organization.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Here's what immigrants contribute to your congressional district

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What are immigrants contributing in your congressional district? A new tool developed by New American Economy, a bipartisan immigration reform advocacy group, shows that immigrants are contributing billions of dollars in taxes and spending power to congressional districts across Dallas, North Texas and the rest of the state.

# data[].attributes.body
Most US citizens think immigrants don't pay taxes, when actually they paid 10.6 billion dollars in 2010.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump suspends entry of immigrants who cannot pay for healthcare

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Donald Trump on Friday signed a proclamation suspending entry of immigrants who cannot pay for their healthcare costs and will not be covered by health insurance within 30 days of entering the United States.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Washington - A coalition of immigration advocacy groups and legal organizations on Wednesday mounted the first legal challenge against a sweeping proclamation President Trump issued earlier this month that would allow the government to reject visa applications from immigrants it determines will not be able to pay for health insurance or cover medical costs in the U.S.

The organizations asked the U.S. District Court in Oregon to block the Trump administration from implementing the new policy, which is slated to take effect Sunday. According to an estimate from the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute, the new requirements could deny entry to approximately 375,000 would-be immigrants each year.

In their lawsuit, the groups, which include the American Immigration Lawyers Association, Innovation Law Lab and the Justice Action Center, accused the administration of trying to "unilaterally rewrite" the nation's immigration laws.

"Based on the latest data, up to an estimated 375,000 immigrants are at risk each year of being banned due to a lack of "approved" health insurance coverage, or close to two-thirds of all qualified immigrant visa applicants, many of whom are people of color," the groups wrote in their filing. "This is repugnant not only to our values, but also our nation's laws and Constitution."

The lawsuit lists as plaintiffs several U.S. citizens sponsoring visas for family members abroad who may be denied entry into the U.S. under the stringent requirements of the president's proclamation.

Under the order, State Department consular officers would only accept immigrant visa petitions made abroad if the applicants demonstrate they will have the ability to secure health insurance within a month of their arrival in the U.S. If that's not possible, then petitioners would need to prove they have the financial resources to pay "reasonably foreseeable medical costs" - a standard not defined in the proclamation.

Although tasked by the order to establish "standards and procedures" for U.S. consular offices to determine whether applicants satisfy the new requirements, the State Department has yet to release public guidance for applicants.

The order, issued late on a Friday evening, is just one of several major polices the administration has rolled out in recent months to overhaul the nation's legal immigration system and dramatically slash admissions of foreigners looking to move to the U.S.

In August, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) published the final version of the long-waited "public charge" rule that would allow the government to deny visas and green cards to people who use or might use certain public benefits like food stamps and government-subsidized housing. The USCIS rule is currently held up in court, while a companion State Department regulation has not been implemented because the agency has yet to clear a new form to be used by visa applicants.

Doug Rand, an Obama White House official who founded a firm to help immigrants navigate the U.S. immigration system, believes the lawsuit is likely to succeed in court, just like the challenges to the "public charge" regulation.

"It's pretty clear just from the text of the proclamation that it is highly vulnerable. It was clearly written in haste and without an immense amount for interagency consultation," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Groups sue to block administration from denying visas to immigrants who can't afford health care

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Washington - A coalition of immigration advocacy groups and legal organizations on Wednesday mounted the first legal challenge against a sweeping proclamation President Trump issued earlier this month that would allow the government to reject visa applications from immigrants it determines will not be able to pay for health insurance or cover medical costs in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
Thats not true because the immigrants takes jobs in US like waiters,gardeners, security guard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Trump and his allies continue to assail immigrants and perpetuate the myth that U.S. immigration is inherently detrimental to the health of the economy and society at large. From wage depletion and unfair job competition to violent crime and acts of terror, Trump's "America First" mantra turns on the narrative that all immigrants are antithetical to Americans' well-being.

The academic literature on the impact of immigration is clear: immigrants help - not harm - the U.S. economy as a whole and commit crimes at lower levels than do native-born Americans. But the impacts of immigration in communities across the country gets muddled; some Americans don't see the positive benefits of immigration. While it's accurate that more than half of America's billion-dollar startups have an immigrant founder, the truth is that an economy is more than just the Fortune 500.

The U.S. has just 5 percent of the world's population; like a sports team, the U.S. must recruit talent from outside to promote its prosperity and maximize the contributions of all on the team, or the country. Immigrants continue to serve the American people well, despite the deep, structural flaws in a U.S. immigration system that hasn't been modernized in decades. By fixing that system, we can leverage immigration policy even more effectively to directly aid Americans.

Here are six innovative strategies to better utilize the levers of immigration policy to improve well-being, economic growth, and law and order in the U.S.
#1: Uncap the 'law & order' visa
Local law enforcement depends on the cooperation of community members to help them target and prosecute criminals. However, many undocumented residents and their family members are afraid to interact with law enforcement out of fear that they will be punished for immigration violations. The U visa is a tool that encourages victims and witnesses of crimes like domestic abuse, smuggling, and homicide to work with law enforcement and testify against perpetrators. Recipients of this visa gain legal status, work authorization, and a pathway to permanent residency in exchange for testimony that puts criminals behind bars.

Unfortunately, widespread processing delays now mean petitioners often have to wait three years before getting approved to eventually receive a visa, which leaves them in a perilous state when working with law enforcement. The visa that incentivizes victims of crime to come forward to aid local law enforcement in building cases against criminals should not have a cap and should not subject petitioners to huge processing delays. Congress should remove the cap, streamline the program, and improve public safety.
#2: Relaunch the MAVNI program
According to the Pentagon, a majority of U.S. citizens between the ages of 17 and 24 fail to meet the educational, criminal background, and physical fitness requirements to serve in our armed forces, which has led to shortages in key aspects of the military.. America's foreign-born population represents a tremendous source of knowledge and talent to draw from.

Allowing noncitizens to fill this gap and supplement our armed forces with specific medical, language, and cultural skills was the basis of the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MAVNI) program. After completion of service, non-citizens could then apply for citizenship.

In spite of the crucial skill gaps that MAVNI recruits fill, recent policy changes have resulted in high numbers of service members being flagged as security risks - simply for contacting a family member living abroad. Such extreme and arbitrary vetting standards have caused significant delays and canceled enlistments for numerous international recruits.

The MAVNI program should target individuals who present a genuine security risk for heightened vetting, and allow others who honorably served our country - and their families - to become citizens. Additionally, the program should be expanded beyond the 1,000 slots allotted for each military branch and should also be utilized to attract individuals skilled in cybersecurity.
#3: Leverage the "extraordinary ability" visa
The O visa is issued to immigrants of "extraordinary ability," which can include celebrities and artists as well as Nobel Prize winners and internationally renowned scholars. The O visa should be made more appealing though, either by extending its current three-year term or by creating an expedited pathway towards permanent residency for people who hold it.

Moreover, the U.S. should offer additional special visa programs for certain high-value occupations and national priorities to reduce the strain on other skilled visa categories, such as the H-1B. An "AI Visa" would do just that, funneling elite talent into a separate visa category that is flexible and nimble enough to evolve as new research sectors blossom.

Oren Etzioni argued for a special visa program for AI students and experts to "revitalize our country's research ecosystem, empower our country's innovation economy, and ensure that the United States remains a world superpower in the coming decades." Remco Zwetsloot of the Georgetown Center for Security and Emerging Technology writes, "tightening immigration policies is inconsistent with wanting to lead in AI." It's common sense for the U.S. to roll out the red carpet for the most sought-after brainiacs the world has to offer.
#4: Create a startup visa
Immigrants and their children are responsible for starting 43 percent of Fortune 500 companies, which employ millions of Americans today. Yet the United States is still one of the few industrialized countries that lacks a startup visa. That causes many foreign entrepreneurs to relocate outside the United States and move north to Canada, and U.S. companies are following them.

America should launch its own entrepreneurship visa for immigrants who receive a certain level of investment in their ventures and offer renewals and an eventual pathway to citizenship for owners of well-performing businesses. An estimate by the Kauffman Foundation found that an entrepreneurship visa would create anywhere from 500,000 to 1.6 million jobs between 2014-2024.
#5: Use the investor visa for infrastructure
There is bipartisan agreement that the U.S. needs to improve our infrastructure. With shoddy mass transit systems, outdated ports, and a lack of broadband access in certain regions, we are in desperate need of more innovative ways to fund infrastructure improvements. One idea is to use the EB-5 visa investments, which currently provides green cards to foreign nationals who invest in U.S. businesses. The program, however, could be expanded to help finance infrastructure projects.

Since 2008, the United States has received $27.5 billion from EB-5 investors. This investment comes with only 10,000 green cards issued annually due to a mandated cap. As of May, roughly 34,000 EB-5 applicants were waiting in line for visas.

The EB-5 program could be altered to provide a major funding stream for national infrastructure improvements by granting approved applicants who choose to invest in critical public infrastructure projects an exemption from the cap. Not only would this finance enhanced infrastructure across the nation, it would provide thousands of jobs for Americans.
#6 Let foreign doctors practice in the U.S.
The United States faces a projected shortage of between 46,900 and 121,900 doctors by 2032. As more Americans approach retirement age, they will increasingly need to entrust their primary care to geriatricians - a specialty that few Americans are interested in pursuing. Americans are also facing shortages of lung doctors due to a resurgence of black lung in Appalachia and an exacerbated shortage of forensic pathologists due to the opioid epidemic.

Typically, foreign doctors who complete their medical residency in the United States must return to their home country for two years before they can return to America, but the Conrad 30 program relieves them of this requirement if they practice in a health care-shortage area for at least three years. Legislation to extend and expand the program has been introduced in both the House and the Senate. Foreign doctors can provide a dynamic surge of physicians and health care professionals to rural America, which is particularly strapped for providers.

Incentivizing foreign doctors and health care professionals to settle and remain in rural America helps plug the dramatic shortage of American workers in these fields and provides necessary variety and increased access to individuals looking for health care options. The current visa regime is inadequate (see my colleague Kristie De Peña's policy brief here).

A new health care visa would modernize the current process, better recruit foreign providers, and retain them in areas of need: low-income neighborhoods, rural communities, and other places with underserved populations.

We can make the immigration system work better to serve all Americans, from incentivizing immigrant investors to fund critical infrastructure updates and immigrant innovators to create jobs to recruiting international doctors to rural hospitals. We can better advance national priorities by reforming U.S. immigration policy to benefit more Americans more directly.

Immigration is good for America, and we can amplify that benefit by instituting these six reforms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Six Ways Immigration Reform Can "Make America Great" - Niskanen Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Trump and his allies continue to assail immigrants and perpetuate the myth that U.S. immigration is inherently detrimental to the health of the economy and society at large. From wage depletion and unfair job competition to violent crime and acts of terror, Trump's "America First" mantra turns on the narrative that all immigrants are antithetical to Americans' well-being.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON - A new independent report out says immigrants to the U.S. are an economic benefit and should not be stopped from coming here by the Trump Administration's public charge proposal.

That policy would make it more difficult for immigrants to get Green Cards if they can't prove they won't become dependent on government assistance.

The new report, published Tuesday by the pro-immigrant One Nation Commission, said immigrants use fewer public benefits than native-born citizens and complement the nation's existing workforce. "This report actually illustrates the vital and exponential returns that immigrants bring to our economy and our society," said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Ca.).

The report wasn't sanctioned or funded by Congress but has the support of several Democratic House lawmakers. "The report conclusively shows that Trump must stop his assault on immigrant communities and abandon his cruel, and it is cruel, public charge proposal," Lee said.

Under the Public Charge rule, immigrants have to prove they can come to the U.S. without relying on public benefits like Medicaid or food assistance. "If implemented, this rule will make it significantly more difficult for individuals to get green cards," said Rep. Judy Chu (D-Ca.).

Earlier this month, the proposal was blocked by a federal court injunction and will likely be decided by the Supreme Court next year. "I can't think of a situation where we didn't ultimately prevail," said Ken Cuccinelli, acting director of U.S. Customs and Immigration Services, earlier this month about the injunction.

When asked for a response Tuesday, a USCIS official said the agency doesn't comment on pending litigation. "It is Congress' constitutional duty to write our immigration laws and to ensure that they are equitable to all individuals," Lee said.

But until the White House and Congress agree to address the issue, any movement is unlikely.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Report: Immigrants benefit the US economy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON - A new independent report out says immigrants to the U.S. are an economic benefit and should not be stopped from coming here by the Trump Administration's public charge proposal. That policy would make it more difficult for immigrants to get Green Cards if they can't prove they won't become dependent on government assistance.

# data[].attributes.headline
Myth 1- Immigrants take good jobs from U.S. citizens

# data[].attributes.subject
Myth 1- Immigrants take good jobs from U.S. citizens

# data[].attributes.body
I do not believe that immigrants steal the jobs for Americans because I think that jobs are made for anyone who is willing to put in the work towards it. If immigrants do get jobs in America, then they have earned it because they are probably working harder than U.S. citizens because not a lot of Americans accept immigrants anyway.

# data[].attributes.headline
myth 1.- Immigrants take good jobs from U.S citizen.

# data[].attributes.subject
myth 1.- Immigrants take good jobs from U.S citizen.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants only come to the United States to steal the jobs that are for the Americans

# data[].attributes.body
Thats flase buecuse the IIPE the immigrants pay 11.74 miilions of taxes anually

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants don't "steal" good jobs from U.S. citizens, and steal is stating it harshly. Immigrants often take jobs that require less education, and they often don't have the social connections or social background with people(since they just moved in) to get "good" jobs. And even if they do ""steal"" the job you wanted, maybe they deserve it and will be better than you.

# data[].attributes.headline
Myth 2.- "The worst" people from other countries are coming to the United States and bringing in crime and violence.

# data[].attributes.subject
Myth 2.- "The worst" people from other countries are coming to the United States and bringing in crime and violence.

# data[].attributes.body
The criminals and gangs of other countries only come to the United States to Bring crime and violence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Visa applicants will have to prove they have insurance or the financial resources for medical costs.

"Immigrants who enter this country should not further saddle our health care system, and subsequently American taxpayers, with higher costs," President Trump wrote on Friday. Credit... T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times

WASHINGTON - The Trump administration will deny visas to immigrants who cannot prove they will have health insurance or the ability to pay for medical costs once they become permanent residents of the United States, the White House announced Friday in the latest move by President Trump to undermine legal immigration.

Mr. Trump issued a proclamation, effective Nov. 3, ordering consular officers to bar immigrants seeking to live in the United States unless they "will be covered by approved health insurance" or can prove that they have "the financial resources to pay for reasonably foreseeable medical costs."

The president justified the move by saying that legal immigrants are three times as likely as American citizens to lack health insurance, making them a burden on hospitals and taxpayers in the United States. Officials cited a Kaiser Family Foundation study that said that among the nonelderly population, 23 percent of legal immigrants were likely to be uninsured, compared with about 8 percent of American citizens.

"The United States government is making the problem worse by admitting thousands of aliens who have not demonstrated any ability to pay for their health care costs," Mr. Trump wrote, adding, "immigrants who enter this country should not further saddle our health care system, and subsequently American taxpayers, with higher costs."

The president's proclamation, which has been in the works for several months, is aimed primarily at immigrants seeking to join their families in the United States, according to a White House official who spoke under condition of anonymity to more openly discuss the new policy. It does not affect refugees, asylum seekers or students seeking to attend college in the United States, according to the White House.

Immigrant visas are the vehicle for receiving a green card in the United States for people who are processing their paperwork abroad. Once the policy is in place, people seeking those visas would be asked by consular officers to show how they intend to be covered by health insurance within 30 days of arriving in the United States. That could include proof that they will have health care through a job or will be covered under a relative's insurance.

If they cannot show that to the satisfaction of the consular office, their visa will be denied, the White House official said. The State Department will develop standards and rules that consular officials will follow in making the determination, the official said.

Thousands of people annually would be denied green cards if the executive order takes effect, said Steve Yale-Loehr, an immigration scholar at Cornell Law School.

"President Trump has failed to build a physical wall along the U.S.-Mexico border to deter illegal immigrants," he said, "but he has effectively built an invisible wall to keep out legal immigrants."

The surprise order is the latest step in a long effort by Stephen Miller, the president's top immigration adviser, and others in the administration, to limit what they consider the financial burdens of allowing immigrants into the United States.

After years of effort by Mr. Miller, the administration issued a regulation in August that would allow officials to deny permanent legal status to immigrants who are poor. The regulation, which imposes an aggressive wealth test on legal immigrants, has faced several legal challenges but will go into effect on Oct. 15 unless it is blocked by a court.

That policy, known as the "public charge" rule, says immigrants seeking to live permanently in the United States could be denied if officials deem it is likely they will be a burden on society by, for example, being unable to pay for health care or seeking food and housing assistance.

Under the new proclamation, which was earlier reported by The Wall Street Journal, officials are directed to use a similar approach in determining whether to grant immigrant visas to people seeking to live in the United States.

Immigration advocates were taken aback by the proclamation, noting there are already several steps that applicants for a green card must take to qualify, including passing background checks and health examinations.

Elizabeth Jamae, an immigration lawyer at Pearl Law Group in San Francisco, said she doubted the assertion in the proclamation that lawful immigrants were about three times as likely as United States citizens to lack health insurance.

"Most people who are receiving green cards already have a job waiting or have a spouse that is employed," Ms. Jamae said. "When you apply for a green card you already have to meet certain financial requirements."

People coming to the United States who are sponsored by companies for a specific job are likely to have insurance through their employer, and are unlikely to be affected. But many adults who are not immediately eligible for employment-based health insurance or who cannot afford private health insurance will be denied entry.

"Without the power to change U.S. law on his own, Trump is trying to find end runs around Congress and the legislative process to impose his will by fiat," said Julie Dinnerstein, an immigration lawyer with CUNY Citizenship NOW, which provides free legal services to the public.

The president's proclamation relies on the same immigration laws that he used in issuing his travel ban shortly after taking office. In that case, Mr. Trump asserted that the threat of terrorism required a ban on entry from certain majority-Muslim countries.

He cited the same code in Friday's proclamation, writing that allowing immigrants without health care into the United States would "be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions."

Doug Rand, a former White House official who worked on immigration in the Obama administration, predicted that the president's proclamation would be met by legal challenges.

"This came out of the same authority as the Muslim ban and the asylum ban," said Mr. Rand, who co-founded Boundless, a technology firm that helps immigrants apply for visas.

Both bans were met with immediate litigation that was partly successful. A watered-down version of the Muslim ban was approved by the Supreme Court after several lawsuits. The asylum ban, which would have excluded most asylum seekers, was blocked by the courts.

The latest proclamation also has logistical obstacles, Mr. Rand said, noting that the State Department has a brief window to teach thousands of consular officers how to determine whether prospective immigrants can pay for their medical care.

"If this is not going to be enjoined by a court in the next month," Mr. Rand said, "it will cause complete chaos."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump Will Deny Immigrant Visas to Those Who Can't Pay for Health Care

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Visa applicants will have to prove they have insurance or the financial resources for medical costs. WASHINGTON - The Trump administration will deny visas to immigrants who cannot prove they will have health insurance or the ability to pay for medical costs once they become permanent residents of the United States, the White House announced Friday in the latest move by President Trump to undermine legal immigration.

# data[].attributes.headline
Immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native Americans. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native Americans. 

# data[].attributes.body
The true is that in reality, the people that immigrate are not "The worst" as many would believe to think, they are the contrary, just like any normal person who wants to live a good life for himself or his family.

# data[].attributes.body
In reality, the immigrants take care about the jobs that the U.S citizens don't want to take, they don't steal jobs in the contrary, they complement the American Workforce

# data[].attributes.body
A new that search for the answer to the myth about the immigrants stealing jobs from the U.S citizens

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Do immigrants "steal" jobs from American workers?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A motivating factor behind Trump's proposed policies-including the construction of a new U.S.- Mexico border wall, more border patrol agents, and stricter deportation policies--is his belief that immigrants are stealing job opportunities from American workers. As he said in July 2015, "They're takin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Trump signed three executive orders the week of January 23 which offend the dignity and threaten the rights of immigrants and refugees both in the United States and globally. On January 25 at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Trump signed executive orders on border security and interior enforcement. On January 27, he signed an executive order at the Pentagon on refugees and visa holders from designated nations.

Executive Order on Border Security

The executive order on border security, entitled " Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements," contains several sections which undermine human rights, including the expanded use of detention, limits on access to asylum, enhanced enforcement along the US-Mexico border, and the construction of a 2,000 mile border wall.
Construction of a Border Wall and Additional Border Patrol Personnel
Section 4 of the border security executive order directs DHS to take steps to obtain operational control of the US-Mexico border by planning, designing and constructing a wall along the length of the border. It also directs DHS to allocate unused funding for the purpose of constructing a wall and to undertake a comprehensive study on the security of the southern border within 180 days. Section 8 directs DHS to hire an additional 5,000 Border Patrol agents "as soon as practicable."

Response: The construction of a border wall was a main promise of Trump's presidential campaign, despite concerns by experts that the wall would be expensive, difficult to construct, ineffective in deterring illegal migration, harmful to the environment on the border, offensive to personal property rights, and a threat to the economic and social well-being of border communities. President Trump's promise to force Mexico to pay for a wall has created intense tensions in the relationship between these hitherto allied nations.

Adding 5,000 more Border Patrol agents along the border would increase the number of agents to about 25,000, more than triple the number of agents in 2000. The executive order does not explain why the additional agents are needed.
Increased Construction of Detention Facilities and Detention of Immigrants
Section 5 of the order directs DHS to immediately construct detention facilities at or near the southern border and to assign asylum officers and immigration judges to the facilities to conduct asylum interviews and hearings. Section 6 directs DHS to detain noncitizens to the extent permitted by law and to issue guidance on detention authority to terminate "catch and release."

Response: The executive order does not specify the source of funding for the construction of detention facilities, which can cost tens of millions of dollars, money which will go to private detention companies.

The use of detention for asylum-seekers has been shown to limit their access to due process. This policy would also require the detention of women and children, which has been challenged in court. The use of alternatives to detention, particularly community-based models involving nongovernmental organizations, has proven to be more humane, cost-effective, and beneficial to the court system. These programs also afford immigrants better access to counsel and to know your rights presentations.
Limiting Access to Asylum
Section 11 of the order directs DHS to expand expedited removal throughout the country, as opposed to within 100 miles of the border; to apply humanitarian parole authority only on a "case by case" basis; to train all DHS personnel on the unaccompanied alien children section of the Trafficking Victims Protection and Reauthorization Act (TVPRA); and to ensure that credible fear determinations for those in expedited removal or "reasonable fear" determinations for those in reinstatement of removal proceedings are conducted within the "plain language of the provisions."

Response: Studies have shown that expedited removal is often applied incorrectly by enforcement personnel and that asylum-seekers are not allowed to adequately communicate their fear in such situations or, even if they do express fear, are simply denied a credible fear interview, leading to their return and peril. The training of DHS personnel on child provisions is needed, but should be conducted by child welfare experts, who also should assist border patrol in making those determinations. Assessments should be made of all children, including Mexican children.

Executive Order on Interior Enforcement

The second immigration-related executive order, entitled, " Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States," focuses on such issues as sanctuary cities and local-federal immigration enforcement cooperation, enforcement priorities, the reinstatement of the Secure Communities program and Section 287(g) agreements, and an increase in the number of ICE agents.
Sanctuary Cities and Local-Federal Immigration Enforcement
Section 9 forbids "sanctuary" jurisdictions from receiving federal grants, except those that are necessary for enforcement purposes. It directs DHS to designate jurisdictions as "sanctuary" jurisdictions, although there is no definition of what constitutes a "sanctuary." Section 8 directs DHS to enter into Section 287(g) agreements, which permit state and local law enforcement to act as immigration agents and to apprehend and detain immigrants. Section 10 terminates the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP), instituted by the Obama Administration, and re-institutes the Secure Communities program, which would require local jurisdictions to issue "detainers" on unauthorized immigrants in their custody.

Response: Many large cities, such as New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago, as well as smaller cities and communities, have chosen not to cooperate with federal authorities in enforcing immigration laws, including participation in the Secure Communities and Section 287(g) programs. The executive order will penalize these jurisdictions if they continue not to participate by withholding federal grant money, except money for "enforcement" purposes. This presumes that other funding, such as Community Block grants, could be withheld. To date, cities such as Chicago and New York have stated that they will continue to not cooperate with federal authorities on immigration enforcement because they have no legal grounds to hold apprehended person beyond a limited period and because they depend upon the cooperation of immigrant communities to "protect and serve" the public.

Secure Communities and Section 287(g), launched during the George W. Bush administration, have been criticized as eroding cooperation between local law enforcement officials and immigrants and their communities, which would be hesitant to report crimes to law enforcement officials who could detain and deport them. Under the Secure Communities program, immigrants with minor offenses, such as loitering, have been deported. Under Section 287(g), local enforcement officials, untrained in immigration law, have repeatedly violated the civil rights of legal residents.
Enforcement Priorities
Section 5 expands the priority list of noncitizens subject to deportation to anyone charged of a criminal offense, who committed acts that constitute a criminal offense, who engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation, who has abused any program related to public benefits, who is subject to a final order of removal, but has not departed, or who otherwise poses a risk to public safety.

Response: Despite the vow by President Trump to prioritize criminals for deportation, the executive order is so broad that anyone who committed even a minor offense, such as a traffic violation or jaywalking, could be deported. The order also applies to those who may have misrepresented their status to obtain work. In order to carry out the president's pledge to deport 2-3 million persons he deems as criminals, the Trump administration would need to significantly increase the number of ICE agents and conduct nationwide raids and sweeps.
Increase in ICE Agents
Section 7 authorizes an increase of 10,000 additional ICE agents.

Response: Such an increase would triple the number of ICE agents at a cost of $3.9 billion, likely in anticipation of the launching of more aggressive enforcement activity throughout the country, including raids, which spread fear in immigrant communities.

Combined, the two executive orders on immigration enforcement provide a blueprint to use all available resources and authority to deport as many undocumented persons as possible. This would no doubt lead to an unprecedented separation of families, including families with US-citizen children.

Executive Order on Refugees

On January 27, President Trump signed an executive order entitled, " Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by Foreign Nationals." The order suspends the issuance of visas to nationals from Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen; shuts down the US refugee program for 120 days; reduces the number of refugees to be admitted to the United States in FY 2017 from 110,000 to 50,000; halts the resettlement of Syrian refugees indefinitely; launches a screening mechanism for the entry of foreign nationals; and requires DHS to expedite completion of an entry-exit tracking system.
Suspension of Visas to Certain Countries and Extreme Vetting
Section 3 of the executive order suspends the issuance of visas to countries designated as being detrimental to the interests of the United States for 90 days, listing Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. Section 4 requires implementation of uniform screening standards for all immigration programs, to include assessments such as whether an individual is a risk, will be a positive contributor to the nation, and has the ability to make contributions in the national interest.

Response: The countries listed for suspension of visas are Muslim-majority, while other nations that have experienced terrorism have not been listed. This suggests that the executive order is targeting Muslim immigrants. While some countries are listed, others, such as Saudi Arabia, are excluded, even though the 9/11 hijackers originated from that country. The implementation of a screening program in Section 4 is subjective and could lead to discrimination against certain religions and persons of certain income levels.
Suspension of the US Refugee Program and the Ban on Syrian Refugees
Section 5 of the executive order suspends the US resettlement program for 120 days while a review is made to ensure that refugees are being adequately screened for national security purposes. The program will be restored only if the Secretary of State, the Secretary of DHS, and the Director of National Intelligence agree that sufficient safeguards are in place. The order also reduces the number of refugees admitted into the United States to 50,000 for FY 2017, down from 110,000 set by the Obama Administration. It allows the continued processing of refugees on a "case-by-case" basis and individuals with religious-based persecution claims, who would receive priority once the program is resumed. In addition, it suspends the resettlement of Syrian refugees indefinitely.

Response: According to security experts, refugees who enter through the US Refugee program are the most vetted entrants into the United States, going through multiple security screenings before entry into the country, a process that can take as long as two years. Since the 9/11 attacks, the US has resettled nearly 800,000 refugees through the resettlement program and none have launched a terrorist attack on US soil. The conflation of refugees as threats to national security is a tactic used to reduce the number of refugees admitted to the United States. This decision will have grave ramifications worldwide, as other nations will follow the US' lead in abdicating their legal and moral responsibilities to refugees in the name of national security.

Banning Syrians from resettlement and suspending visa issuance to nationals of Muslim-majority nations will also certainly be used as a recruiting tool by terrorist groups, who will claim these measures prove that the United States is hostile to Islam. Syrian refugees are fleeing the persecution of extremist groups like ISIS and require protection as much as any refugee group at this time.

The exception for those who face religious persecution, according to President Trump, applies to Christian minorities in the Middle East, but also, given the language, could apply to other religious minorities, such as Rohingya in Myanmar, who are Muslim in a majority Buddhist country. While Christian refugees in the Middle East should be protected, either in the region or in a third country, it should not preclude the resettlement of Muslims, who also are top targets of extremist groups. Some faith leaders in the Middle East, including Catholic bishops, oppose the resettlement of their Christian populations, because they fear it will lead to a diminishment of their local Christian communities.

The executive order on refugees, wrapped in national security language, will make the United States less secure. It will give extremist groups a propaganda tool for recruitment; encourage other nations to abdicate their responsibilities to refugees and other vulnerable populations; and will alienate millions of Muslims, both in the United States and abroad, who otherwise would be allies and important sources of counter-terror and law enforcement intelligence.

The three executive orders indicate that the United States is turning its back on its heritage as an immigrant nation and a safe haven for the world's persecuted. This stance will harm its moral standing in the world, and limit its ability to influence other nations to collaborate with it on humanitarian and other initiatives. It will also harm US relations with long-term allies. Congress should resist these orders and deny funding to implement them.
The following are important CMS analyses and resources on these issues, which offer an important, evidence-based counter-narrative to the policies set forth in these executive orders.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
President Trump's Executive Orders on Immigration and Refugees - The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Trump signed three executive orders the week of January 23 which offend the dignity and threaten the rights of immigrants and refugees both in the United States and globally. On January 25 at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS),...

# data[].attributes.body
A news that shows how the american president think about the immigrants.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Trump suggested shooting migrants in the legs to slow them down once they cross the southern border, according to a new book. The president reportedly made the suggestion in March during a meeting where he also called for the entire border with Mexico to be closed. The New York Times printed an excerpt of the book, called "Border Wars: Inside Trump's Assault on Immigration," Wednesday morning.

The Times reporters say this happened during a week when the president was growing increasingly frustrated. The president, intent on keeping campaign promises of building a wall and stopping illegal immigration, was fed up with no results and throwing out a range of ideas.

In late March, President Trump publicly threatened to close the U.S.-Mexico border. But according to the Times reporters, in a March meeting, the president's advisers tried to turn him away from such a drastic move. He allegedly said, "You are making me look like an idiot!" and shouted "I ran on this. It's my issue."

Michael Shear and Julie Hirschfeld Davis are the reporters and authors of the book.

"Administration officials were constantly trying to walk him back from the precipice, walk back from the edge of what could be a crisis," Shear said.

The article also details the president's other suggestions to stem migration.

Last November, Mr. Trump said, "They want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back. We're going to consider it, and I told them consider it a rifle." And while he said he didn't mean to shoot migrants if they threw rocks at border patrol agents, the New York Times reports that the president later suggested "they shoot migrants in the legs to slow them down."

They write he also privately "talked about fortifying a border wall with a water-filled trench, stocked with snakes or alligators" and "he wanted the wall electrified, with spikes on top that could pierce human flesh."

The White House responded to the report stating in part, "President Trump has clearly and publicly stated many times that he wants to make American communities safer by building a wall, closing dangerous loopholes that incentive child smugglers and drug cartels, and implement a merit based immigration system."

As of August, 57 miles of the border wall have been built but thousands of miles remain and costs are mounting. The Pentagon has diverted $6.1 billion to the project. The president has also faced multiple legal challenges against his immigration policies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
border wars: inside trump's assault on immigration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump suggested shooting migrants in the legs to slow them down, according to new book

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Trump suggested shooting migrants in the legs to slow them down once they cross the southern border, according to a new book. The president reportedly made the suggestion in March during a meeting where he also called for the entire border with Mexico to be closed.

# data[].attributes.body
A video that shows how the myth about stealing jobs is wrong

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Debunking myths around migrants ‘stealing’ jobs

# data[].attributes.headline
Actual facts about economy and immigrants

# data[].attributes.subject
Actual facts about economy and immigrants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As U.S. immigration reform moves forward in 2013, a variety of facts and figures continue to be presented around immigrants and their current and potential contributions to the U.S. economy. This fact sheet-the first in our series on immigrants and the economy-provides key data points on why immigrants are vital to the U.S. economy and why comprehensive immigration reform is necessary for future U.S. competitiveness.
Download a PDF of the fact sheet. Five Reasons Why the U.S. Economy Needs Immigrants 1. Immigrants are more likely to be entrepreneurial and to start new businesses, which, in turn, create jobs for U.S.-born workers.
2. Both high- and low-skilled immigrant labor creates additional jobs across the U.S. economy. Access AS/COA's Get the Facts series at: www.as-coa.org/immigration-facts 3. Immigrants boost tax revenue, enlarge the taxpayer base, and help to keep down the price of goods.

Immigrants started 28 percent of all new U.S. businesses in 2011, employing one in 10 U.S. workers.

Immigrants represent 18 percent of small business owners in the United States-exceeding their share of the overall population (13 percent)-and are more likely than those born in the U.S. to start a small business. Immigrant-owned small businesses employed an estimated 4.7 million people and generated an estimated $776 billion in receipts in 2007. More small business owners are from Mexico than any other country.

Over the past two decades, immigrants made up 30 percent of the growth in small business creation.

Immigrants founded 18 percent of 2010 Fortune 500 companies, creating jobs for 3.6 million people. When including immigrants and their children, the number of Fortune 500 companies with immigrant roots jumps to 40 percent, employing more than 10 million people.

4. As baby boomers retire, immigrants will increasingly be critical for continued economic growth and for ensuring a steady flow of new workers.

With immigration reform, newly authorized immigrant workers would produce enough new consumer spending to support 750,000 to 900,000 jobs.

Every additional foreign-born student who graduates in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) and remains in the U.S. creates an estimated 2.62 American jobs.

Every low-skilled, non-agricultural, temporary worker who comes to the U.S. to fill a job that may otherwise be left open creates an average of 4.64 U.S. jobs. These low-skilled jobs are the necessary backbone to support higher-skilled positions.

Passage of the DREAM Act would add $329 billion to the U.S. economy and create 1.4 million new jobs by 2030.

5. The majority of immigrants in the U.S. today are from Latin America, representing a huge potential economic opportunity due to the region's burgeoning economic standing.

On average, immigrants, including the undocumented, pay nearly $1,800 more in taxes than they receive in benefits.

Households headed by undocumented immigrants paid $11.2 billion in state and local taxes in 2010. That included $1.2 billion in personal income taxes, $1.6 billion in property taxes and $8.4 billion in sales taxes.

Immigrants lower the price of products used by highly educated consumers by 0.4 percent of GDP and for less-educated consumers by 0.3 percent.

Did you know?

Without immigrants, the U.S. will not have enough new workers to support retirees. Seventy years ago, there were 150 workers per 20 seniors; 10 years ago, there were 100 workers per 20 seniors. By 2050, there will be only 56 workers for every 20 seniors. The U.S. needs new taxpayers to help fund Social Security and Medicare and new workers to fill retirees' positions and provide their health care services.

Current levels of immigration will temper the aging of the U.S. population over the next two decades, slowing the increase in the old-age dependency ratio by more than one-quarter.

Nearly 65 percent of Latino immigrants in California who stayed more than 30 years are homeowners, making them a critical pool to buy the homes of baby boomers as they downsize.

This fact sheet is a product of the AS/COA Hispanic Integration and Immigration Initiative, which advances the integration of immigrants and promotes positive dialogue around the economic contributions of immigrants and Latinos overall across the United States, and was produced by Jason Marczak, Director of Policy, in collaboration with Leani García. For more information, visit AS/COA Online at: www.as-coa.org. For media inquiries or to speak with an expert on this topic, please contact Adriana LaRotta in our communications office at: alarotta@as-coa.org.

Immigrants are a vital link with their home countries and offer new prospects for the U.S. to capitalize on Latin America's economic expansion, which saw 3 percent growth in 2012-double the 1.5 percent growth in the United States. In addition, 11 of the 20 U.S. free-trade agreements in force are with Latin American countries. Immigrant-owned small businesses have a unique opportunity to connect to the global marketplace.

Immigrant-owned small businesses are more likely to be able to connect to the global marketplace. Over 7 percent of immigrant firms export their goods and services, whereas just over 4 percent of non-immigrant firms export.

Mexico boasts the second largest economy in Latin America and grew at a rate of 4.0 percent in 2012, with a projected 3.5 percent growth in 2013. With 29 percent of all immigrants and 58 percent of undocumented immigrants coming from Mexico, this demographic represents a human gateway to one of Latin America's fastest-growing economies.

The 40 million immigrants in the U.S. today-of which 29 percent are from Mexico-represent 13 percent of the U.S. population. In addition, the 53 million Latinos in the U.S. account for about 17 percent of the population and 10 percent of voters in the 2012 election. However, the demographics of new immigrants have changed in recent years, with Asians having overtaken Latinos as the largest group of new immigrants.

Google, Procter & Gamble, Kraft, Colgate Palmolive, Pfizer, and eBay are among companies with immigrant founders.

Hispanic immigrants help revitalize communities across the U.S., including Ottumwa, Iowa, a 30,000-person city southeast of Des Moines, which according to The Wall Street Journal, saw its taxable property value double in the last 10 years after making a concerted push to bring in new immigrants who opened up shops to replace shuttered storefronts.

Related: United States, Immigration, Articles & Op-Eds U.S. Policy | More In:

More from this expert: Jason Marczak

Related

Events

Upcoming
View All
Past
View All

Featured Event

Join AS/COA for a discussion on Mexico's political and economic scenario during AMLO's first year as president on November 13.

Learn More

Featured Content

AS/COA plays a crucial role in promoting dialogue and strengthening hemispheric ties. Find out more from our 2018 Annual Report.

Learn More

As U.S. immigration reform moves forward in 2013, a variety of facts and figures continue to be presented around immigrants and their current and potential contributions to the U.S. economy. This fact sheet-the first in our series on immigrants and the economy-provides key data points on why immigrants are vital to the U.S. economy and why comprehensive immigration reform is necessary for future U.S. competitiveness.
Download a PDF of the fact sheet. Five Reasons Why the U.S. Economy Needs Immigrants 1. Immigrants are more likely to be entrepreneurial and to start new businesses, which, in turn, create jobs for U.S.-born workers.
2. Both high- and low-skilled immigrant labor creates additional jobs across the U.S. economy. Access AS/COA's Get the Facts series at: www.as-coa.org/immigration-facts 3. Immigrants boost tax revenue, enlarge the taxpayer base, and help to keep down the price of goods.

Immigrants started 28 percent of all new U.S. businesses in 2011, employing one in 10 U.S. workers.

Immigrants represent 18 percent of small business owners in the United States-exceeding their share of the overall population (13 percent)-and are more likely than those born in the U.S. to start a small business. Immigrant-owned small businesses employed an estimated 4.7 million people and generated an estimated $776 billion in receipts in 2007. More small business owners are from Mexico than any other country.

Over the past two decades, immigrants made up 30 percent of the growth in small business creation.

Immigrants founded 18 percent of 2010 Fortune 500 companies, creating jobs for 3.6 million people. When including immigrants and their children, the number of Fortune 500 companies with immigrant roots jumps to 40 percent, employing more than 10 million people.

4. As baby boomers retire, immigrants will increasingly be critical for continued economic growth and for ensuring a steady flow of new workers.

With immigration reform, newly authorized immigrant workers would produce enough new consumer spending to support 750,000 to 900,000 jobs.

Every additional foreign-born student who graduates in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) and remains in the U.S. creates an estimated 2.62 American jobs.

Every low-skilled, non-agricultural, temporary worker who comes to the U.S. to fill a job that may otherwise be left open creates an average of 4.64 U.S. jobs. These low-skilled jobs are the necessary backbone to support higher-skilled positions.

Passage of the DREAM Act would add $329 billion to the U.S. economy and create 1.4 million new jobs by 2030.

5. The majority of immigrants in the U.S. today are from Latin America, representing a huge potential economic opportunity due to the region's burgeoning economic standing.

On average, immigrants, including the undocumented, pay nearly $1,800 more in taxes than they receive in benefits.

Households headed by undocumented immigrants paid $11.2 billion in state and local taxes in 2010. That included $1.2 billion in personal income taxes, $1.6 billion in property taxes and $8.4 billion in sales taxes.

Immigrants lower the price of products used by highly educated consumers by 0.4 percent of GDP and for less-educated consumers by 0.3 percent.

Did you know?

Without immigrants, the U.S. will not have enough new workers to support retirees. Seventy years ago, there were 150 workers per 20 seniors; 10 years ago, there were 100 workers per 20 seniors. By 2050, there will be only 56 workers for every 20 seniors. The U.S. needs new taxpayers to help fund Social Security and Medicare and new workers to fill retirees' positions and provide their health care services.

Current levels of immigration will temper the aging of the U.S. population over the next two decades, slowing the increase in the old-age dependency ratio by more than one-quarter.

Nearly 65 percent of Latino immigrants in California who stayed more than 30 years are homeowners, making them a critical pool to buy the homes of baby boomers as they downsize.

This fact sheet is a product of the AS/COA Hispanic Integration and Immigration Initiative, which advances the integration of immigrants and promotes positive dialogue around the economic contributions of immigrants and Latinos overall across the United States, and was produced by Jason Marczak, Director of Policy, in collaboration with Leani García. For more information, visit AS/COA Online at: www.as-coa.org. For media inquiries or to speak with an expert on this topic, please contact Adriana LaRotta in our communications office at: alarotta@as-coa.org.

Immigrants are a vital link with their home countries and offer new prospects for the U.S. to capitalize on Latin America's economic expansion, which saw 3 percent growth in 2012-double the 1.5 percent growth in the United States. In addition, 11 of the 20 U.S. free-trade agreements in force are with Latin American countries. Immigrant-owned small businesses have a unique opportunity to connect to the global marketplace.

Immigrant-owned small businesses are more likely to be able to connect to the global marketplace. Over 7 percent of immigrant firms export their goods and services, whereas just over 4 percent of non-immigrant firms export.

Mexico boasts the second largest economy in Latin America and grew at a rate of 4.0 percent in 2012, with a projected 3.5 percent growth in 2013. With 29 percent of all immigrants and 58 percent of undocumented immigrants coming from Mexico, this demographic represents a human gateway to one of Latin America's fastest-growing economies.

The 40 million immigrants in the U.S. today-of which 29 percent are from Mexico-represent 13 percent of the U.S. population. In addition, the 53 million Latinos in the U.S. account for about 17 percent of the population and 10 percent of voters in the 2012 election. However, the demographics of new immigrants have changed in recent years, with Asians having overtaken Latinos as the largest group of new immigrants.

Google, Procter & Gamble, Kraft, Colgate Palmolive, Pfizer, and eBay are among companies with immigrant founders.

Hispanic immigrants help revitalize communities across the U.S., including Ottumwa, Iowa, a 30,000-person city southeast of Des Moines, which according to The Wall Street Journal, saw its taxable property value double in the last 10 years after making a concerted push to bring in new immigrants who opened up shops to replace shuttered storefronts.

Related: United States, Immigration, Articles & Op-Eds U.S. Policy | More In:

More from this expert: Jason Marczak

Related

Events

Upcoming
View All
Past
View All

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Get the Facts: Immigrants and the Economy - Five Reasons Why the U.S. Economy Needs Immigrants | AS/COA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As U.S. immigration reform moves forward in 2013, a variety of facts and figures continue to be presented around immigrants and their current and potential contributions to the U.S. economy. This fact sheet-the first in our series on immigrants and the economy-provides key data points on why immigrants are vital to the U.S.

# data[].attributes.headline
Actually, immigrants don't compete with Americans for jobs, they complement them.

# data[].attributes.subject
Actually, immigrants don't compete with Americans for jobs, they complement them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Even some US citizens think immigrants belong to the US

# data[].attributes.subject
Even some US citizens think immigrants belong to the US

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
3 myths about Mexico and migration, debunked

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
US President Donald Trump says Mexico isn't doing enough to stop immigration. Mexico says it's been working to respond to a regional crisis. Here's a look at what's actually happening south of the US-Mexico border.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Obama is taking executive action to protect millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation.

His plan has been a tough sell to the American people, especially with the new Republican-controlled Congress. But many experts agree that some of the arguments against immigration are based on misguided information.

Here are 5 myths about undocumented immigrants, and why they're wrong.

Myth # 1: They don't pay taxes

Undocumented immigrants are already U.S. taxpayers.

Collectively, they paid an estimated $10.6 billion to state and local taxes in 2010, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), a research organization that works on tax policy issues. Contributions varied by state. In Montana they contributed $2 million. In California, more than $2.2 billion. On average they pay about 6.4% of their income in state and local taxes, ITEP said.

A 2007 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on the impact of undocumented immigrants on the budgets of local and state governments cited IRS figures showing that 50% to 75% of the about 11 million unauthorized U.S. immigrants file and pay income taxes each year.

A 2013 CBO analysis of the failed bipartisan bill introduced by the so-called "gang of 8" that would have created a path to legal status for many undocumented immigrants found that increasing legal immigration would increase government spending on refundable tax credits, Medicaid and health insurance subsidies, among other federal benefits. But it would also create even more tax revenue by way of income and payroll taxes. That could reduce deficits by $175 billion over the first 10 years and by at least $700 billion in the second decade.

ITEP estimates that allowing certain immigrants to stay in the country and work legally would boost state and local tax contributions by $2 billion a year.

Related: America's most dangerous jobs.

Myth # 2: They don't pay into Social Security

The truth is that undocumented immigrants contribute more in payroll taxes than they will ever consume in public benefits.

Take Social Security. According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), unauthorized immigrants -- who are not eligible to receive Social Security benefits -- have paid an eye-popping $100 billion into the fund over the past decade.

"They are paying an estimated $15 billion a year into Social Security with no intention of ever collecting benefits," Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the SSA told CNNMoney. "Without the estimated 3.1 million undocumented immigrants paying into the system, Social Security would have entered persistent shortfall of tax revenue to cover payouts starting in 2009," he said.

As the baby boom generation ages and retires, immigrant workers are key to shoring up Social Security and counteracting the effects of the decline in U.S.-born workers paying into the system, Goss said.

Without immigrants, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects that the system will no longer be able to pay the full promised benefits by 2037.

Myth #3: They drain the system

Undocumented immigrants do not qualify for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and most other public benefits. Most of these programs require proof of legal immigration status and under the 1996 welfare law, even legal immigrants cannot receive these benefits until they have been in the United States for more than five years.

Related: Part-time jobs put millions in poverty or close to it.

Non-citizen immigrant adults and children are about 25% less likely to be signed up for Medicaid than their poor native-born equivalents and are also 37% less likely to receive food stamps, according to a 2013 study by the Cato Institute.

Citizen children of illegal immigrants -- often derogatorily referred to as "anchor babies" -- do qualify for social benefits. Also, undocumented immigrants are eligible for schooling and emergency medical care. Currently, the average unlawful immigrant household costs taxpayers $14,387 per household, according to a recent report by The Heritage Foundation. But in its 2013 "Immigration Myths and Facts" report, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says most economists see providing these benefits as an investment for the future, when these children become workers and taxpayers.

A CBO report on the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 concluded that a path to legalization for immigrants would increase federal revenues by $48 billion. Such a plan would see $23 billion in increased costs from the use of public services, but ultimately, it would produce a surplus of $25 billion for government coffers, CBO said.

Myth # 4: They take American jobs

The American economy needs immigrant workers.

The belief that immigrants take jobs that can otherwise be filled by hard-working Americans has been disputed by an overwhelming number of economic research studies and data.

Related: Four immigration fixes that could turbo-charge tech.

Removing the approximately 8 million unauthorized workers in the United States would not automatically create 8 million job openings for unemployed Americans, said Daniel Griswold, director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, in his 2011 testimony before the House Judiciary Sub-committee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.

The reason, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is two-fold. For one, removing millions of undocumented workers from the economy would also remove millions of entrepreneurs, consumers and taxpayers. The economy would actually lose jobs. Second, native-born workers and immigrant workers tend to possess different skills that often complement one another.

According to Griswold, immigrants, regardless of status, fill the growing gap between expanding low-skilled jobs and the shrinking pool of native-born Americans who are willing to take such jobs. By facilitating the growth of such sectors as retail, agriculture, landscaping, restaurants, and hotels, low-skilled immigrants have enabled those sectors to expand, attract investment, and create middle-class jobs in management, design and engineering, bookkeeping, marketing and other areas that employ U.S. citizens.

America's unions support the president's executive action. "For far too long, our broken immigration system has allowed employers to drive down wages and working conditions in our country," the AFL-CIO says on its website. "The brunt of the impact has been born by immigrant workers, who face the highest rates of wage theft, sexual harassment, and death and injury on the job."

Myth # 5: It's just a matter of following the law

Many Americans want immigrants to enter the country legally.

But under current immigration laws, there are very few options for legal immigration, the costs are increasingly prohibitive and the wait for any kind of status can be long and frustrating.

Related: I created 7 jobs and the US tried to deport me.

According to the State Department, that imaginary "immigration line" is already 4.4 million people long and depending on the type of visa sought and the country of origin, the wait can be years to decades long. In some countries, such as the Philippines and Mexico people have been waiting over 20 years for approval of a family-sponsored visa.

Immigrants can legally get to the U.S by being sponsored by an employer or a family member, they can enter the country as refugees, or they could receive one of the selectively distributed professional or diversity visas. The Diversity Visa Program makes 55,000 green cards available to persons from countries with low rates of immigration to the U.S.

According to the State Department, the fees to obtain permanent U.S. visas can range from $200 to over $700, excluding legal fees. Plus, there are visa quotas which limits immigration from any given country.

In many poor, violence-ridden countries, or in cases where parents are separated from their children, immigrants say the wait is unbearable, leaving many to resort to illegal border crossing.

That journey can be expensive and deadly.

Smugglers charge anywhere from $3000 to upwards of $70,000 depending on country of origin, mode of transport and distance travelled according to the Mexican Migration Project, a multidisciplinary research effort between investigators in Mexico and the U.S.

Many don't make it. According to federal records, more than 6,000 immigrants have died crossing the southern border since 1998

CNNMoney (New York) First published November 20, 2014: 5:49 PM ET

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
His plan has been a tough sell to the American people, especially with the new Republican-controlled Congress. But many experts agree that some of the arguments against immigration are based on misguided information. Here are 5 myths about undocumented immigrants, and why they're wrong. Myth # 1: They don't pay taxes Undocumented immigrants are already U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants imprve the GDP of US

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fariborz Ghadar says if America is to succeed in the next century, we need to base our immigration policies on facts rather than fiction.

# data[].attributes.body
The amounts of immmigrants that are in the U.S.A ilegally is around 7% Most of the inmmigrants have permission by the countrie ti live there

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Trump Administration has relied on the false argument that immigrants bring crime into America to drive its immigration policies: restrictions to entry, travel and visas; heightened border enforcement; plans for a wall along the border with Mexico. We showed that these claims are not accurate.

In a large-scale collaboration across four universities, a team of researchers led by Robert Adelman of the State University of New York at Buffalo studied 200 local metropolitan statistical areas across the country over four decades, concluding that there is no correlation between higher immigrant populations and higher crime rates. Building upon the data from this report, The Marshall Project collaborated with the authors to extend the data to 2016, and then used that data as a basis for a further in-depth time-series analysis and visualization of trends in immigrant populations versus violent crime rates.

The Marshall Project analysis found that a large majority of the metro areas studied have more immigrants today than in 1980, and fewer violent crimes. As of 2016, the latest year data was available, crime fell more often than it rose even as immigrant populations grew almost across the board. The top ten places with the largest increases in immigrants all had lower levels of crime in 2016 than in 1980.

Our reporting also took a close look at violent crime, breaking it down into its components to find that growth in immigrant population again failed to produce increased rates of assaults, robberies or murders. Most areas experienced drops in all types of violent crime, accompanying widespread increases in immigrant population.

The Marshall Project then built a visual story to communicate these findings and expose the underlying data city-by-city. The project goal was to not simply ask readers to believe the statistical results of the original academic paper, or the results of our further time-series analysis - but to give them the tools to see the data for themselves, from their own cities, and make up their own minds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Myth of the Criminal Immigrant - Data Journalism Awards

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Trump Administration has relied on the false argument that immigrants bring crime into America to drive its immigration policies: restrictions to entry, travel and visas; heightened border enforcement; plans for a wall along the border with Mexico. We showed that these claims are not accurate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A House Judiciary subcommittee holds a hearing on the impact of immigration on veterans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
404 Error Page | Berkshire Immigrant Center

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are less likely to comit any crimes in comparison with the native residents in U.S.A

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Economic Growth
Without young workers, the economy can't grow.

In times of economic trouble-and with gross domestic product (GDP) growth still below 2 percent in the United States, today surely qualifies-many Americans instinctively become more cautious about immigration. If we let in more workers, they fret, the newcomers will be a drain on the economy, dragging down wages and gobbling up services.

In fact, precisely the opposite is true. The National Academy of Sciences recently released a comprehensive report finding that immigration has an overall positive impact on economic growth. Moreover, while new immigrants may have a slight depressing effect on the wages of prior immigrants, they have small to no effects on wages and employment for the native-born population.

If we want our economy to grow, what America needs more than anything is workers. Domestic fertility rates are plummeting even as the boomers are rushing into retirement. The U.S. birth rate hit an all-time low in 2017: 1.7 children per woman, well below the "replacement rate" of 2.1. At the same time, the number of immigrants entering the country has slowed considerably, thanks in part to the Great Recession of 2007-09. Not only do these trends put enormous pressure on the country's entitlement system, they are already causing a drag on the economy. And this problem will only get more serious in the decades to come. Unless the U.S. finds a way to welcome more foreigners, and quickly, it is headed for a demographic crisis.

The concerns are understandable-but if we use them to justify constricting immigration, we'll be doing a devastating disservice, not just to outsiders who want to start a life here, but to those of us who are already here.

Anti-immigration politicians and activists often paint a picture of America as a place where immigrants are pouring across our southern border, where the overall number of outsiders is exploding, and where illegals dominate the foreign-born population. The reality couldn't look more different. As fertility rates have crept downward in Mexico and Latin America, far fewer young people have been trying to enter the United States.

It's true that since the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act began allowing family unification, the number of foreign-born people in the country has greatly expanded. As a share of the U.S. population, it rose from 4.7 percent in 1970 to over 13 percent in 2015. That is higher than it has been at any time since the early 20th century, when immigrants reached almost 15 percent. In 2015, more than a quarter of all immigrants living in the U.S. were of Mexican origin, four times as many as from any other country.

Yet the total volume of new immigrants has fallen off in the last few years. In the two decades from 1980 to 2000, the share of foreign-born residents in the U.S. nearly doubled, from 6.2 percent to 11.1 percent. In the next decade and a half, from 2000 to 2015, it rose only from 11.1 percent to 13.4 percent.

Far from being out of control, the number of net new migrants to the U.S. has been falling. Out of a U.S. population that totaled 323 million in 2016, the annual increase in the foreign-born population from 2000 to 2010 was only 878 thousand per year. And that dropped to 648,000 per year, or about two-tenths of a percent of U.S. population, from 2010 to 2015.

Today, Latin America contributes little to U.S. immigration. Since 2009, more Mexicans living here have returned to that country than new Mexican immigrants have arrived. Although migration to the U.S. from the smaller Central American states has increased, the overall fraction of immigrants arriving who are Hispanic has dropped from more than half in 2001 to just over one-quarter in 2015. Asians, coming mainly from China, India, and Pakistan, now far exceed Hispanics among new immigrants.

Finally, it's important to observe that the vast majority (76 percent) of immigrants in the country are legal. Of 44.7 million foreign-born residents of the United States, only about 11 million are unauthorized; 19.8 million have become naturalized citizens, 11.9 million are legal permanent residents, and 2 million are here on valid temporary (student or work) visas. Moreover, the reverse flow of Mexican migrants in the aftermath of the Great Recession means that the total number of illegals in the U.S. has recently dropped. After hitting about 12.2 million in 2007, it has been holding steady at 11 million for the last seven years.

If this strikes you as good news, think again. For an economy to grow, the average worker must produce more output over time and/or more workers must be employed in productive jobs over time. Since 2005, U.S. labor productivity (that is, real GDP per employed worker) has grown slowly if at all, averaging under 1 percent per year and even turning negative in 2016. The number of employed workers, meanwhile, has also been rising by just 1 percent per year. As a result, real GDP growth, somewhat disappointingly, has remained stuck at around 2 percent per year, rather than the 3-4 percent typical from 1960 to 2000.

America's working-age population is about to put a further brake on that expansion. The baby boomers are retiring, and while the millennials-now the largest living generation-are entering the labor force, the cohorts coming up behind them are getting smaller. In 2015, the population of 15- to 24-year-olds in the U.S. was 44.2 million. That's twice what it was in 1955. Yet in 2050, even assuming immigration increases to 1 million per year, that age group will be about 46.4 million, or just 5 percent higher. The strong growth in the number of young people entering the U.S. labor market essentially ended three years ago.

If not for immigrants and the children of immigrants, the size of the American labor force (that is, residents between 25 and 64) would decline over the next 20 years. From 2015 to 2035, the number of working-age Americans who are U.S.-born and who have U.S.-born parents will fall by 8 million workers. Without an influx of foreigners, we're in for a bad time: Even if the rate of productivity growth doubled overnight, real GDP growth would be less than 1.6 percent per year.

We currently expect to gain, on net, 18 million immigrants in the next two decades. Assuming that's correct, the total workforce will still grow by only 0.3 percent per year, thanks to retirements. Again, even if the productivity growth rate doubles, the small increase in the labor force will limit real GDP growth to less than 2 percent per year during that span.

Far from overwhelming the U.S. economy, Hispanic immigration is being lost as a driver of the economy. Before the recession of 2007, the U.S. Census Bureau predicted that the country's population would reach 439 million by 2050. By contrast, the latest forecast, issued in 2017, is that U.S. population will reach only 388 million by that date-a difference of 51 million people. That means fewer workers and fewer taxpayers.

Where did those 51 million people go? They're the immigrants and children of immigrants, mostly Hispanic, who would have materialized if immigration rates had continued as they were in the lead-up to 2007. But as we have noted, immigration has dropped sharply. Even more important, the fertility of Hispanics within the U.S. has also dropped by about a quarter since 2007.

As the Hispanic population becomes more like the native population in terms of education and employment, it also comes to resemble the rest of the population in terms of fertility. In the 1990s, Hispanic women in the United States had almost twice as many children as non-Hispanic whites. By 2016, the number was only 20 percent higher-70.6 births per 1,000 Hispanic women between 15 and 34, compared to 58.8 for non-Hispanic white women of the same age range.

While immigration rates have declined and the growth in the working-age population has slowed to a crawl, elderly Americans are the demographic sector that is truly exploding. The number of people aged 65 and older in the United States is projected to grow from 49 million to 80 million by 2040, an annual rate of increase of 2 percent. The costs of providing pensions and health care for this group will rise at least as quickly as their numbers, but likely even more, as health care costs continue to go up faster than inflation.

Earlier, we allowed the rate of worker productivity to double overnight so projected GDP growth could remain at 2 percent per year. Yet that estimate assumed immigration would continue at current rates, providing 18 million new U.S. residents from 2015 to 2035. And despite our allowance, productivity growth is not likely to double. More realistically, it would do well to rise from 0.8 percent to 1.2 percent per year, resulting in annual GDP growth of 1.5 percent. While technology will continue to improve, the workforce is getting older. The number of young workers is going to be virtually flat for the foreseeable future, and workers over 40, whose productivity is usually stable or declining, will provide the bulk of the increase in the labor force. This means that the population of nonworking seniors is likely to grow faster-and the cost of their health care is likely to grow much faster-than GDP will.

The current rate of growth puts the United States squarely on track to exhaust the Social Security and Medicare trust funds in less than two decades. The best hope for stimulating faster growth to prevent this fiscal meltdown is to add more workers. To simply restore the U.S. population in 2050 to where we expected it to be a decade ago, America would have to admit at least an additional 1 million immigrants per year from now until then, for a total of 53 million over that period. This would raise the foreign-born population of the United States to 26 percent. If that seems like an intolerably high number, observe that it's less than Australia has today.

It is also the price of America's success in extending the life spans of its seniors and in enabling women to gain education and enter more professions. These achievements, while wonderful in their own right, have helped create the current problem: too few young workers and many more people surviving long years after retirement.

From 2010 to 2040, just two regions of the world are likely to enjoy increasing labor forces: India and Africa. After 2040, sub-Saharan Africa is projected to become the only region in the world with a growing workforce.

This is where many of our workers will need to come from. Imposing extra barriers on people from regions that are seen as "undesirable" is therefore a catastrophically bad idea. But it's also a mistake to create strong preferences for skilled as opposed to unskilled migrants.

Anticipating a future driven by robots and artificial intelligence, some may think there is no point worrying about America's future labor needs; the problem will be too many workers rather than too few. And some jobs may indeed disappear, such as taxi drivers, production line workers, and cashiers. Yet skilled workers-whether with craft skills in carpentry, masonry, or plumbing; with advanced technical skills such as writing computer code or welding complex alloys; with human skills such as caring for the elderly, troubled youth, children, or those with disabilities; or with creative skills in the arts, literature, or basic science, not to mention the professions of law, medicine, teaching, and religious ministries-will remain essential to the growth and functioning of modern economies. Robots are not likely to replace workers in these fields within the next two or three decades, while the growth of America's young labor force has ended right now.

But unskilled immigrants too will be vital-for elder care (much of which is labor intensive), for craft and construction work, for landscaping and maintenance work, and for service work in the hospitality and tourism sectors.

Even more important than all that, however, are the incredible contributions of the children of immigrants, which are often impossible to predict. Almost half of the companies in America's Fortune 500 today were founded by immigrants or their children. Eight U.S presidents had at least one parent born in another country, including both Barack Obama and Donald J. Trump (whose mother was an unskilled domestic servant from Scotland).

America's main allies and adversaries-Europe, Japan, South Korea, Russia, and China-are facing even more severe problems of falling youth and rapidly increasing aging populations. They will need to bring in young people from elsewhere in the world to refuel their economies. Whether they accept migrants and train them or seek to recruit the most skilled workers from abroad, they will be looking to scoop up talent. If the U.S. instead shuts its doors to immigration, it will inflict upon itself the severe shrinkage in the number of new workers that is challenging other developed countries. The economy will grind nearly to a halt as more and more resources are devoted to taking care of the aging rather than improving the productivity of the young.

The solution is to substantially increase immigration from today's diminished levels. To be sure, we will want many of our new workers to be trained to be productive. But many of the most valuable immigrants will be those who come to the U.S. and gain skills here, as college students or as children of immigrants who then go to school in America. Inevitably, most of them will come from India and Africa.

These young workers are the key resource of the 21st century. If we welcome them, we can unlock faster economic progress. If we disdain them, we condemn the nation either to slower growth and higher taxes or to major cuts in pensions and health care benefits for our native-born population.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Economic Growth In times of economic trouble-and with gross domestic product (GDP) growth still below 2 percent in the United States, today surely qualifies-many Americans instinctively become more cautious about immigration. If we let in more workers, they fret, the newcomers will be a drain on the economy, dragging down wages and gobbling up services.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
En una época de desinformación e intolerancia, las ideas erróneas sobre los inmigrantes y el odio a los inmigrantes se han difundido en la política y la sociedad estadounidenses. Como resultado, el país ha visto un preocupante aumento de la retórica, las políticas y los movimientos sociales que amenazan o perjudican directamente a los inmigrantes y refugiados. Este documento ofrece información y fuentes que aclaran las cosas y esperamos ayude a mitigar el daño causado por la desinformación sobre los inmigrantes.
Los siguientes son hechos básicos bien documentados sobre los inmigrantes y cada uno se discute más detalladamente a continuación: Hecho: Los inmigrantes no ponen en peligro la salud pública.
Las personas que denigran a los inmigrantes y los culpan de los problemas de Estados Unidos alegan que traen enfermedades a Estados Unidos desde más allá de nuestras fronteras. No existen pruebas de que los inmigrantes hayan sido el origen de ningún brote moderno de enfermedades en Estados Unidos.

Cuando estalló la pandemia del COVID-19 en 2020, las políticas que buscaban prohibir la entrada de inmigrantes y refugiados a Estados Unidos se basaban en motivos infundados de preocupación por la salud pública y el miedo a la propagación del COVID-19. A medida que la pandemia se afianzaba, expertos en salud enfatizaron que la continuación de los trámites de inmigración y asilo no propagaría aún más el coronavirus y, por el contrario, que el cierre de la frontera en realidad afectaría negativamente a la salud pública al contribuir al hacinamiento en ambos lados de ella. Además, antes de entrar a Estados Unidos, los inmigrantes deben someterse a un examen médico para detectar ciertas enfermedades transmisibles.
Hecho: los inmigrantes no pueden votar hasta convertirse en ciudadanos.
Los políticos y otros que quieren restringir la inmigración afirman que los inmigrantes indocumentados pueden votar. Los inmigrantes -incluidos los indocumentados- no pueden registrarse para votar antes de obtener la ciudadanía estadounidense, independientemente de que un estado les expida una licencia de conducir. Dieciséis estados y el Distrito de Columbia permiten a los inmigrantes indocumentados obtener tarjetas de identificación estatales en forma de licencias de conducir y todos los estados expiden documentos de identificación a los inmigrantes que tienen visas temporales y permanentes. Estas licencias constituyen una identificación válida y promueven la seguridad pública, pero no dan derecho a los inmigrantes a votar en las elecciones.

Para votar, todos los estados -a excepción de uno- exigen que la persona se registre primero y, para ello, el solicitante debe obtener y confirmar su ciudadanía estadounidense. Existen muchas y serias medidas para garantizar que solo los ciudadanos puedan votar; que cualquiera que intente subvertir esta norma sea sometido a un severo castigo y que un intento de este tipo nunca dé lugar al recuento de votos no autorizados.
Hecho: los inmigrantes crean empleo y mejoran la economía de Estados Unidos.
Algunas personas buscan explotar los malentendidos sobre el mercado laboral y el sistema fiscal de Estados Unidos fomentando la idea de que más inmigrantes significan menos puestos de trabajo y menos acceso a los programas sociales para los ciudadanos. De hecho, los inmigrantes ayudan a crear nuevos empleos. Además de comprar productos estadounidenses y locales -lo cual contribuye a crear puestos de trabajo-, los inmigrantes suelen establecer sus propios negocios. Los estados con un gran número de inmigrantes registran tasas de desempleo más bajas para todos.

En 2019, los inmigrantes pagaron conjuntamente más de $492 mil millones de dólares en impuestos, incluyendo más de $30 mil millones de dólares en impuestos pagados por los inmigrantes indocumentados. Todos pagan impuestos sobre los bienes que compran e impuestos sobre la propiedad de las casas que compran, y más de la mitad de los hogares de inmigrantes indocumentados presentan declaraciones de impuestos sobre la renta utilizando Números de Identificación Personal del Contribuyente (TIN, por sus siglas en inglés).
Hecho: la mayoría de los inmigrantes en Estados Unidos tienen un estatus legal.
Algunos individuos y activistas antiinmigrantes afirman que la mayoría de los inmigrantes en Estados Unidos no se sometieron a un proceso legal para vivir aquí. De hecho, la gran mayoría de los inmigrantes (77%) tienen un estatus legal.

En 2017, el 45% de los inmigrantes eran ciudadanos naturalizados y el 27% eran residentes permanentes legales (a veces denominados titulares de Tarjeta Verde o Green Card). El 28% restante de los inmigrantes son refugiados y solicitantes de asilo, personas que están en Estados Unidos con visas temporales (incluyendo visados de estudiante y de trabajo) e inmigrantes indocumentados.

En 2019, se calcula que había entre 10,5 y 12 millones de inmigrantes indocumentados viviendo en Estados Unidos, es decir, menos del 4% de la población del país.
Hecho: a lo largo de la historia de Estados Unidos, el porcentaje de inmigrantes se ha mantenido estable.
Quienes pretenden propagar el miedo sobre el creciente número de inmigrantes en Estados Unidos, suelen citar estadísticas engañosas y fuera de contexto. Aunque hoy hay más inmigrantes viviendo en Estados Unidos que nunca antes, también hay más personas viviendo en Estados Unidos que nunca antes. El porcentaje de inmigrantes respecto a la población total no es muy diferente al de muchas otras épocas a lo largo de nuestra historia.

De hecho, el porcentaje de inmigrantes hoy en Estados Unidos es más o menos el mismo que hace más de cien años. En la actualidad, los inmigrantes representan aproximadamente el 13,7% de la población total de Estados Unidos. Entre 1900 y 1930, los inmigrantes representaban entre el 12% y el 15% de la población, y picos similares se produjeron en las décadas de 1850 y 1880. Durante esos periodos, los inmigrantes se integraron con éxito en la sociedad estadounidense, ayudando a construir el próspero y diverso país que tenemos ahora, y este proceso siempre ha sido así, independientemente del país de origen, la raza o la religión de los inmigrantes. No hay ningún motivo para creer que los inmigrantes de hoy sean diferentes.
Hecho: los inmigrantes tienen menos probabilidades que los ciudadanos nacidos en Estados Unidos de cometer delitos o ser encarcelados.
Algunos afirman que los inmigrantes no cumplen la ley. Citan pruebas anecdóticas o casos individuales en los que los inmigrantes han hecho algo ilegal y utilizan estos casos para señalar a todos los inmigrantes como delincuentes. Un estudio tras otro ha demostrado que los inmigrantes -independientemente de su lugar de origen, su estatus migratorio y su nivel educativo- tienen menos probabilidades de cometer delitos o ser encarcelados que los ciudadanos nativos.
Hecho: los inmigrantes no suelen tener derecho a prestaciones sociales.
Algunos sugieren que los inmigrantes utilizan demasiados beneficios públicos o se aprovechan de la red de seguridad social a disposición de los ciudadanos. De hecho, la mayoría de los inmigrantes que llegan a Estados Unidos trabajan duro para cuidar de sus familias y de sí mismos. Además, muchos estudios han demostrado que, en promedio, los inmigrantes pagan más en impuestos que los beneficios que reciben.

Con muy pocas excepciones (como el caso de acceso a atención médica para las víctimas de la trata de seres humanos), los inmigrantes indocumentados, residentes temporales e incluso los residentes permanentes recién llegados no tienen derecho a las prestaciones públicas federales tales como Seguridad Social, Medicaid, Medicare y cupones de alimentos. Los titulares de la Tarjeta Verde o Green Card no suelen tener derecho a estas prestaciones hasta que llevan cinco años o más en el país en calidad de residentes permanentes. Esto significa que a muchos inmigrantes se les deducen de sus sueldos las contribuciones a estos programas, pero no pueden acceder a los beneficios. Según un estudio de 2018 del Instituto CATO, los inmigrantes que cumplen los requisitos utilizan un 27% menos prestaciones en comparación con las personas de ingresos y edades similares nacidas con la ciudadanía estadounidense.

La Ley CARES 2020, de 2 billones de dólares, que dio un alivio financiero a causa del COVID-19 a la mayoría de los contribuyentes, excluyó a millones de inmigrantes sin número de Seguro Social de recibir los cheques de estímulo -aunque muchos inmigrantes pagan impuestos y siguen trabajando en empleos esenciales, incluyendo la asistencia sanitaria.
Hecho: los terroristas rara vez han entrado ilegalmente al país por la frontera entre Estados Unidos y México.
De acuerdo con un informe publicado por la Oficina de Contraterrorismo del Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos en 2019, "la cooperación antiterrorista entre México y Estados Unidos se mantuvo fuerte en 2019. No hubo evidencia creíble que indicara que los grupos terroristas internacionales establecieran bases en México, trabajaran directamente con los cárteles de la droga mexicanos o enviaran operativos a Estados Unidos a través de México".

Una excepción reciente fue el arresto de dos individuos bajo vigilancia terrorista que intentaron cruzar la frontera a principios de 2021. Ambos individuos fueron capturados y se les impidió cruzar la frontera.

Fuentes
Hecho: los inmigrantes no ponen en peligro la salud pública
https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/public_health_experts_letter_05.18.2020.pdf
https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugeehealth/exams/medical-examination-faqs.html#3 Hecho: los inmigrantes no pueden votar hasta convertirse en ciudadanos. https://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/states-offering-driver-s-licenses-to-immigrants.aspx
https://www.uscis.gov/forms/explore-my-options/proof-of-citizenship-for-us-citizens#:~:text=You%20are%20a%20U.S.%20citizen,%2D550%2C%20Certificate%20of%20Naturalization%3B&text=Form%20FS%2D240%2C%20Report%20of,of%20United%20States%20Citizen%3B%20or
Hecho: los inmigrantes crean empleo y mejoran la economía de Estados Unidos. https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/immigrants-to-the-u-s-create-more-jobs-than-they-take https://www.newamericaneconomy.org/locations/national/ https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/cares https://immigrationforum.org/article/immigrants-as-economic-contributors-immigrant-entrepreneurs/ https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/14132832/Immigrant-Entrepreneurs-Financial-Capital-Full-Report.pdf https://itep.org/undocumented-immigrants-state-local-tax-contributions-2017/ Hecho: la mayoría de los inmigrantes en Estados Unidos tienen un estatus legal. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/
https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/how-many-undocumented-immigrants-are-in-the-united-states-and-who-are-they/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/12/how-pew-research-center-counts-unauthorized-immigrants-in-us/ https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2018/11/27/u-s-unauthorized-immigrant-total-dips-to-lowest-level-in-a-decade/ Hecho: a lo largo de la historia de Estados Unidos, el porcentaje de inmigrantes se ha mantenido estable. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/ https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/ft_2020-08-20_immigrants_01/ Hecho: los inmigrantes tienen menos probabilidades que los ciudadanos nacidos en Estados Unidos de cometer delitos o ser encarcelados. https://news.wisc.edu/undocumented-immigrants-far-less-likely-to-commit-crimes-in-u-s-than-citizens/ https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/605/ https://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/documents/files/022851_mythsfacts_2016_report_final.pdf https://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Immigration-and-Public-Safety.pdf https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/03/30/the-myth-of-the-criminal-immigrant
https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/601/#:~:text=Most%20Detained%20Immigrants%20Have%20No,by%20no%20means%20an%20anomaly.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/20/facts-about-crime-in-the-u-s/ Hecho: los inmigrantes no suelen tener derecho a prestaciones sociales. https://www.cato.org/publications/immigration-research-policy-brief/immigration-welfare-state-immigrant-native-use-rates https://www.uscis.gov/news/public-charge-fact-sheet https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/02/24/dhs-implements-inadmissibility-public-charge-grounds-final-rule#:~:text=WASHINGTON%20%E2%80%94%20The%20U.S.%20Department%20of,Public%20Charge%20Grounds%20final%20rule.&text=%E2%80%9CThis%20rule%20enforces%20longstanding%20law,hard%20work%2C%20perseverance%20and%20determination. https://immigrationforum.org/article/immigrants-as-economic-contributors-immigrant-tax-contributions-and-spending-power/ Hecho: los terroristas rara vez han ingresado ilegalmente al país por la frontera entre Estados Unidos y México.Fact: Immigrants cannot vote until they become citizens. https://www.cato.org/blog/terrorists-are-not-crossing-mexican-border https://www.adl.org/news/press-releases/right-wing-extremism-linked-to-every-2018-extremist-murder-in-the-us-adl-finds https://www.adl.org/murder-and-extremism-2020 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/homeland-security-says-terrorists-havent-crossed-us-mexico-border/ https://www.adl.org/news/press-releases/us-citizens-responsible-for-vast-majority-of-islamist-extremist-terror-plots-in https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Country-Reports-on-Terrorism-2019-2.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Eight Facts about Immigrants and Immigration (In English and Español)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
En una época de desinformación e intolerancia, las ideas erróneas sobre los inmigrantes y el odio a los inmigrantes se han difundido en la política y la sociedad estadounidenses. Como resultado, el país ha visto un preocupante aumento de la retórica, las políticas y los movimientos sociales que amenazan o perjudican directamente a los inmigrantes y refugiados.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ever since the 2016 US presidential election, Donald Trump has exploited unfounded fears of immigrants for political gain, declaring an "emergency" and demanding funds for a border wall. But the real threat is not from immigrants; it is from xenophobic politicians whose policies would severely weaken the economy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Truth vs. Trump on Immigration | by Anne O. Krueger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ever since the 2016 US presidential election, Donald Trump has exploited unfounded fears of immigrants for political gain, declaring an "emergency" and demanding funds for a border wall. But the real threat is not from immigrants; it is from xenophobic politicians whose policies would severely weaken the economy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
U.S. Immigrant Population and Share over Time, 1850-Present

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This chart displays both the number of immigrants residing in the United States and their share of the total U.S. population over time.