LWVMP Consensus on Immigration Policies
Compiled by Janet Brennan & Dennis Mar
After two general meetings providing background information on immigration issues, League members came together to determine areas of agreement on an topic that is at the center of a national debate. The national LWV divided the issues into a list of questions.
Our response to the questions will be combined with responses of local leagues throughout the U.S. and developed into a national position for adoption by the LWVUS Board of Directors and reaffirmation by delegates to our national convention in Portland, Oregon in June 2008.
The following represents consensus of LWVMP members who participated in the January Unit Meeting.
Federal immigration laws should take into consideration criteria such as the following:
We gave our strongest support to the following criteria: (1) Economic, Business and Service Employment Needs; (2) Humanitarian Crises/Political Persecution in Home Countries; and (3) Family Reunification. We also supported (1) Rights of all Individuals in the U.S. to Fair Treatment under the Law; (2) Education and Training; (3) Ethnic and Cultural Diversity. We disagreed with (1) Rights of All Workers to Safe Working Conditions and (2) Livable Wage (these are already required). There was no consensus on (1) Environmental Impact/Sustainability; (2) History of Criminal Activities; and (3) Immigrant Characteristics (health and age) as criteria.
Unauthorized immigrants currently in the U.S. should be treated as follows:
We disagreed with (1) Deporting Unauthorized Immigrants; (2) Assessing Fines Before Possible Re-Entry if deported; and (3) Assessing Fines Before Allowed to Earn Legal Adjustment of Status. We had no consensus on (1) Deporting Some Unauthorized Immigrants and Provisions for those Remaining to Gain Legal Status or (2) Allowing All Unauthorized Immigrants to Earn Legal Status.
- Federal immigration law should provide an efficient, expeditious system for legal entry into the U.S. for immigrants who are:
We gave high priority to following: (1) Immediate Family Members Joining Family Member Already Admitted for Legal Permanent Residence in the U.S; (2) Entering the U.S. to Meet Labor Needs; (3) Entering the U.S. as Students; and (4) Entering the U.S. because of Persecution in Home Country.
- In order to deal more effectively with unauthorized immigrants, Federal immigration law should include Social Security Card or other National Identification Card with Secure Identifiers for all persons residing in the U.S.
We had no consensus on the need for a Social Security Card or Other National Identification Card with Secure Identifiers for All Persons Residing in the U.S.
- Federal immigration law dealing with unauthorized immigrants should be enforced by including:
We assigned a high priority to (1) More Effective Tracking of Persons with Non-Immigrant Visas Until They Leave the Country; (2) Verification Documents, such as Green Cards and Work Permits with Secure Identifiers; (3) Improved Technology to Facilitate Employer Verification of Employee Visa Status; (4) Improved Technology for Sharing Information Among Federal Agencies; and (5) A Program to Allow Immigrant Workers to Go in and Out of the U.S. to Meet Seasonal and Sporadic Labor Needs. We disagreed with Physical Barriers and Surveillance at Borders and had no consensus on (1) Increased Personnel at Entry Points or (2) Significant Fines Proportionate to Revenue for Employers Who Fail to Take Adequate Steps to Verify Work Authorization of Employees.
We agreed both that (1) federal immigration law should address and balance the long-term federal financial benefit from immigrants with the financial costs borne by states and local governments with large immigrant populations and (2) federal immigration law should be coordinated with U.S. foreign policy to pro-actively help improve economies, education and job opportunities, and living conditions of nations with large emigrating populations.
We had the following comments:
(1) The federal immigration process needs to be streamlined.
(2) A study on population growth under which immigration can be addressed is needed. The study should address the impact of population growth on the environment.
(3) LWVUS immigration policies should be consistent with international trade, natural resources, and agriculture positions. A description of the synergism among LWVUS positions should be included (e.g., Agricultural position: "U.S. efforts should be directed toward expanding export markets for our agricultural products while minimizing negative effects on developing nations' economies. Consistent with the League's trade position, multilateral trade negotiations should be used to reduce other countries' barriers and/or subsidies protecting their agricultural products.")
(4) The wording of the questions was confusing often leading to no consensus, i.e., impact of immigration on the environment had only two choices - high or low priority rather than an option indicating that it should be one of the criteria.
Questions? Email