Immigration

What it’s like to be shipped home

The one-way flight back to Guatemala is a trip no unauthorized immigrant wants. But some take it over and over

  • more
    • All Share Services

What it's like to be shipped homeGuatemalans deported from the United States are escorted by an immigration official upon their arrival at La Aurora International Airport in Guatemala City. (Credit: AP/Moises Castillo)

GUATEMALA CITY — “No one will throw you out of here,” says the woman with the jaunty ponytail and the cheer of a motivational speaker. “Here we’ll give you affection.” Then she sends some love in the direction of Guatemala, the ostensible home of the bleary-eyed deportees who have just descended from U.S. government-funded flights a few feet away. “Our volcanoes! Our mountains! Everything we have!”

By the time she gets to the tortillitas and tamales and call-and-response, the deportees — the vast majority of them young men, a handful of them minors — are smiling. Some of them even wink and flirt. This may well be the least exhausting part of their journey.

“Together, we’ll work to do what we can to help the country rise,” continues the greeter, a Guatemalan government employee meeting her third plane of deportees today. She’s poised with a wireless mic before a banner reading, “You’re already in your country with your people” in Spanish and Kekchi, a Mayan language.

But any enthusiasm transmitted to the deported, who then shuffle out the door carrying their earthly belongings in thin, transparent plastic bags, is often temporary.

“Some of them get on a bus here and go right back to the border with Mexico to cross again,” says Jorge, one of the employees here with the International Organization for Migration, which has a table set up just outside the holding room with telephones and transportation assistance. He is standing by the first of a series of one-way doors, handing out energy drinks. “Some of them have never been to the capital, or they don’t know how to speak Spanish because they’ve spent their lives in the U.S.” There are usually familiar faces among the pack; he saw one man who claimed to have been deported seven times.

Their initial needs are practical: changing Mexican pesos or U.S. dollars, figuring out if their families are on the other side of the iron door being guarded by a baby-faced, heavily armed soldier, getting a ride. After that, reintegrating from one of the wealthiest countries in the world to a country where 51 percent of the population lives on less than $2 a day, one beset with violent crime, is more complicated.

But more than ever, this return trip is the reality for migrants. Last year, the United States deported more undocumented migrants than ever in history, nearly 400,000 of them, a number that has skyrocketed from a mere 7,029 in 2004. After Mexicans, Guatemalans made up the largest group of deportees, with about 29,000 “forced returnees” by air. Another 28,000 were deported overland from Mexico. An estimated 1.3 million Guatemalans live in the United States, equal to about 10 percent of the Central American country’s population, and remittances – money sent home by migrants – regularly make up about 10 percent of GDP.

The surge in immigration enforcement, and in tools designed to ramp it up, began under President George W. Bush but has expanded under Barack Obama’s administration, a fact not lost on pro-immigration advocates, some of whom are refer to it in Spanish as the “deportation administration.” The strategy has been to target “criminal aliens,” rather than, as Obama himself put it, “folks who are just looking to scrape together an income.” In fiscal year 2011, 55 percent of deportees had been convicted of a crime, compared to 31 percent when Obama assumed office. That said, the Association of Immigration Lawyers of America (AILA) has pointed out that the Department of Homeland Security “made no distinction between people convicted of petty misdemeanors and violent felons, putting a person convicted of loitering on par with a drug kingpin.”

In a June memo, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton said that pending deportation cases would be subject to “prosecutorial discretion,” meaning that special consideration would be given depending on family situation, length of time in the U.S., and so on. And President Obama also supports the DREAM Act, which would give a path to citizenship to young immigrants who were brought to the country as minors and are enrolled in the military or college but has repeatedly failed in the Senate. Meanwhile, intra-Republican discussions on the topic have in the past year ranged from Herman Cain suggesting Great Walls with alligator-filled moats, to Rick Perry coming under fire for supporting a Texas version of the DREAM Act, to Mitt Romney advocating “self-deportation.”

The Obama position seems to be trying to have it both ways: seeming tough on enforcement while suggesting humane, if narrow, accommodations. But according to a November survey AILA conducted of its members, “the overwhelming conclusion is that most ICE offices have not changed their practices since the issuance of these new directives.” Indeed, a recent report by the Applied Research Center estimated that 5,100 children are in foster care because their primary caregivers were deported; another report by the University of California at Berkeley Law School found that about one-third of the 226,000 immigrants deported under “Secure Communities,” a program that links local law enforcement to immigration status, had spouses or children who are U.S. citizens.

That includes men like the one who gave his name as Armas, deported from the last plane this February afternoon. It’s his first time back in Guatemala in 17 years. He’s left a wife and five children, including a newborn, back in New Jersey, all U.S. citizens. He thinks he was either 15 or 17 when he left, he isn’t sure. He says he was deported because in 1995, he was “drunk and stupid” and got a criminal record, though he declines to elaborate. What waits for him outside the gates, he isn’t sure – and anyway, he plans to be back in the U.S. soon.

Anastasio, 21, says he managed to stay in the U.S. for four years, working as a cook in a Mexican restaurant in Virginia until getting deported last summer. In December, he decided to make the crossing again. “I didn’t need a coyote, because I remembered the way,” he says. It was much harder the second time, he said. And that time, he was deported on the same day he entered the United States, after getting caught in a convenience store in Tucson, Ariz. He spent Christmas in detention. “I love Guatemala, but I had to get out for a better future,” he shrugs. His girlfriend is waiting for him back in Virginia, he says.

Anastasio can’t find the phone numbers for his family, who live in the northern lowlands of El Peten – he had them pinned to his pants, he says, but they didn’t make it through detention — and he has no idea where to reach them. So today he’s going to hop in the van for Casa del Migrante, a Catholic shelter in Guatemala City’s Zone 1 that hosts the most desperate cases.

*

If migrants come legless, says Father Francisco Pellizari, the Argentine-born priest who runs the shelter, they can stay a few months at Casa del Migrante. Train accidents in crossing Mexico are common enough that the center has a prosthesis expert on call. More often, the migrants get psychological counseling and legal counseling. Migrants can arrive traumatized, he says, either from harrowing experiences, like rape, assault, or being trafficked, during the crossing, or from the shock of their detention and deportation. (The consensus, unsurprisingly, is that it’s better to be detained in the U.S. than in a Mexican prison.) Migrants will often mortgage whatever possessions they have – usually land in the countryside, or their home – on the informal market at usurious rates, and if they get deported before they can earn much money, they return facing not just a sense of failure but also an enormous debt.

Casa del Migrante opened its receiving program in the Guatemala City airport last April in response to the jump in deportations; it works with the IOM, which in turn gets USAID funding for some of its reintegration programs. There are three Casas del Migrante in Mexico, and one more in Tecun Uman, a Guatemalan border town. (The organization publishes a magazine, the most recent issue of which contains a stinging critique of Obama administration policies and, in the back, a word puzzle — you have to find words like “crisis” and “security” — and a maze in which you “help a lost migrant” – a silhouette with a backpack –  “find the way home.”)

Pellizari spent 14 years in the Mexican shelter, but says, “Here in Guatemala it’s worse, because there are even fewer opportunities. There are no jobs.” They can help with the first few weeks or months, but the long-term is beyond the resources of either the first-aid nonprofits or the existing Guatemalan governmental efforts. An IOM official told me they have helped 3,000 migrants with “social reintegration,” but said job placement services had so far managed to help only about 20 people find jobs, though more may have found employment on their own.

From what Pellizari is seeing, the migrants are undeterred by increased deportations or a tougher economic situation in the United States. Sometimes, he says, migrants’ families in Guatemala will even send what money they can to an unemployed relative in the U.S., a remittance in reverse to help them hang on until things improve.

Meanwhile, this month the IOM is collaborating on an ad campaign, mostly on local radio stations, in Guatemala and Mexico, trying to discourage people from migrating by discussing the significant risks and dangers in crossing the border. It can understandably be a touchy subject, not just with the government but with the average Guatemalan.

Miguel, a Guatemalan working in the tourism industry, told me he welcomed the spike in deportations. “They belong here with their families,” he said. “Only the greedy migrate.” In some towns, he claimed, men were marrying two women to meet the shortage of available husbands.

When tourists praise the more lavish houses that dot the side of the road – usually, the ones with more than one story – he says he tells them cheerfully, “That’s your money.” Besides, he says, all of the women who make the crossing get raped. He even knows a Mexican truck driver who smuggles women across the border. He bragged to his Guatemalan friend that he has the best job because he gets to “have sex” with a different woman every night. “He rapes them,” Miguel said, in case it wasn’t clear. (Among deportees, women commonly make up only about 5 percent.)

One 18-year-old Kekchi Mayan girl, Loita, has heard the stories – her parents told her about how women are raped by coyotes and narcotraffickers to try to get her to stay home. She even has a cousin who made it across the border that way. “I asked her how she could sleep with some man she didn’t want to sleep with,” she told me. “She said she just closed her eyes and thought about her family.” But she insisted she would migrate someday anyway. “I want to make my dreams come true,” she said. One American tourist she told this to, she recalled recently, asked her why on earth she’d want to leave. After all, the lake she lived near was so beautiful. Wasn’t that enough?

Back at the airport, another deportee, Oscar Gonzalez Mejia, knows his way around well. He spent eight years working in the United States, mostly in Maryland. But after getting deported last year, he was lucky enough to find a job — working for the IOM, greeting and helping fellow deportees. These days, it’s a growth industry.

Irin Carmon

Irin Carmon is a staff writer for Salon. Follow her on Twitter at @irincarmon or email her at icarmon@salon.com.

Florida purging voter rolls

Governor Rick Scott moves forward with a plan to disqualify thousands of mostly Hispanic and Democratic voters

  • more
    • All Share Services

Florida purging voter rollsRick Scott (Credit: Reuters/Brendan McDermid)

Hated Florida Governor Rick Scott has a great idea: A big, massive purge of the state’s voter roll right before a sure-to-be-close presidential election. The governor ordered his secretary of state to compile a list of registered voters who might not be citizens, based on an unreliable and out-of-date state motor vehicle administration database. The secretary of state made a list and then realized the list was not actually very useful or accurate. Then he resigned, and now Scott is just purging away.

Some people (communists) have noted that the timing of this big voter roll purge is a bit suspect and that it’s also weird that the vast majority of people on the list are Hispanics who are registered Democrats or independents. But as hero-senator Marco Rubio said recently of voter ID laws, “What’s the big deal?” Hundreds of the 1,638 people flagged as ineligible in Miami-Dade County have already offered proof of citizenship, so the system works. Let’s assume the 1,200 people who haven’t responded to the letter are all definitely not qualified.

(If I were an illegal immigrant, do you know what I would definitely not ever try to do? Vote! When you’re evading detection by the government, registering to vote and then casting a ballot — and in the process committing a felony — seems like asking for trouble.)

As must always be pointed out when writing about these sorts of things, there is no voter fraud epidemic. At all. Where there is genuinely illegal voting, it tends to be accidental or so small-scale as to present no challenge to the legitimacy of an election. The liberal position on election security is something like, “Better to let a couple of isolated instances of fraudulent or improper voting happen than to preemptively disenfranchise hundreds or even thousands of perfectly legal voters.” The conservative position tends to be, “We mustn’t let the Mexicans steal the election for the nanny state socialists ACORN ACORN BILL AYERS ACORN.”

Here’s the Tampa Bay Times with more on Florida’s war on (certain people) voting:

This is part of a pattern. Republicans actively gin up voter fraud claims to justify turning voting into an obstacle course to dissuade Democratic-leaning constituencies. It’s what happened in Florida last year when the Legislature used voter fraud as an excuse to cut early voting days and make it harder for renters and college students to vote a regular ballot. The most disgraceful part of the law imposes steep penalties and fines on groups conducting voter registration drives that fail to meet burdensome bureaucratic rules and turn forms in within 48 hours, causing the League of Women Voters to cancel its drive.

But if we let renters vote, why would anyone buy a house? Then how would we save the economy?

Don’t worry, though, it will still be very easy for… certain other kinds of people to cast votes:

Meanwhile, there was no attempt by the Florida Legislature to tighten rules for absentee voting, which is probably the easiest way to produce a fraudulent ballot since there is no way of knowing who fills it out. Maybe this lack of interest stemmed from the fact that absentee voters tend to lean Republican, while early voters typically lean Democrat.

Well. Now that I know how easy it is to absentee vote in Florida, I am off to commit some voter fraud with my illegal immigrant friends. Next stop, Sharia!

Continue Reading Close
Alex Pareene

Alex Pareene writes about politics for Salon and is the author of "The Rude Guide to Mitt." Email him at apareene@salon.com and follow him on Twitter @pareene

Will Latinos elect Obama?

Hispanic voters may not be as decisive a voting bloc as everyone assumes. Just look at the swing states

  • more
    • All Share Services

Will Latinos elect Obama?(Credit: AP/Jae C. Hong)

The conventional wisdom is that the growing Latino vote is key to President Obama’s reelection prospects. By all accounts, Latinos favor the president over Mitt Romney by wider margins than they favored him over John McCain in 2008, when he won two-thirds of the Hispanic vote and captured crucial swing states with large Hispanic populations, including Colorado, Nevada and Florida. Bloomberg reported this week that lower-than-average unemployment in the key battleground states “coupled with the growth of adult minority populations in those states create a higher bar” for Romney in his quest to oust the incumbent.

But a closer look at the numbers is not so reassuring for the president. Much of the growth in the Latino population has occurred in California, Texas, Illinois and New York, which are not likely to be competitive come Election Day. While the Latino population is growing fast, the Latino electorate is not. Compared to other ethnic/racial groups, Latinos are more likely than whites to be under 18 years of age or to be non-citizens. “For every 100 Hispanic residents in the United States, only 44 are eligible voters aged 18 and over and U.S. citizens,” notes William Frey, demographer at the Brookings Institution. “In contrast, 78 of every 100 white residents are able to vote.”

Frey has argued that “minorities will decide” the 2012 election, but he acknowledged in a telephone interview that Latinos, as a group, do not loom large in most of the dozen battleground states. According to his analysis of 2008 and 2012 census data, Latinos comprise less than 2 percent of the voting population in Ohio and Virginia. In North Carolina, New Hampshire and Iowa, they comprise 3 percent or less of the electorate. In Wisconsin, they comprise 3.1 percent of voters, down from 3.7 percent in 2008.  Even if Obama won an additional 10 percent of the Latino electorate in these states over what he did against McCain, the increase would be smaller than his margin of victory in 2008 in every case.

That leaves Florida, Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado, where the Latino vote appears to be large enough to be decisive in a close race. The good news for Obama is that many of those states could make the difference between winning and losing the White House. The bad news is that the outlook is distinctly less favorable to a more decisive Latino role than 2008.

As Frey has noted:

Minorities mattered in 2008 for three reasons: first, their relative sizes compared with whites increased in each state; second, their enthusiasm for the Democratic candidate was greater than in 2004; and third, white support for the Republican candidate (John McCain) waned in comparison to the previous election.

None of those factors appear to hold true in Florida. Latinos comprise about 15 percent of the state’s voters, unchanged from 2008. While a Gallup swing state poll earlier this month found Democrats are more enthusiastic about the president than Republicans are about Romney, they are also less enthusiastic about Obama’s candidacy now than they were in 2008, especially minority voters. As Real Clear Politics  has noted:

Enthusiasm among non-white voters is down from 74 percent at this point in 2008 (vs. 58 percent for whites) to 48 percent today (the same goes for whites). And, indeed, in 2010, African-American turnout reverted to the mean. If this occurs in 2012, Democrats will need a massive surge in the minority population elsewhere to make up for this regression.

The most likely place for this to occur is within the Latino community. That population grew smartly over the 2000s. But — much less remarked upon — the Latino electorate did not. Indeed, since 2004, it has been almost perfectly flat, and it contributed only marginally to the decline of the white vote from 2004 to 2008.

Only in the three swing states of the Southwest — New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado — does the Latino vote seem big enough to be decisive. In New Mexico, Latinos are 38 percent of the electorate, down slightly from 2008. In Nevada, Latinos are now 17.3 percent of all voters, up from 13.3 percent from four years ago. And in Colorado, Latinos are now 12.1 percent of all voters, up from 11.3 percent in 2008.  Only in these states does the combination of the size and growth of the Latino electorate and Obama’s edge on Romney appear capable of giving him a margin of victory he might otherwise lack. In the rest of the swing states, he’s going to need something else.

Continue Reading Close
Jefferson Morley

Jefferson Morley is a staff writer for Salon in Washington and author of the forthcoming book, Snow-Storm in August: Washington City, Francis Scott Key, and the Forgotten Race Riot of 1835 (Nan Talese/Doubleday).

Rep. Steve King: Immigrants are like dogs

Updated: On Monday, the Iowa GOP rep used a degrading metaphor to describe how America should select immigrants

  • more
    • All Share Services

Rep. Steve King: Immigrants are like dogsSteve King (Credit: Reuters/Larry Downing)

[Updated below]

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, compared immigrants to dogs at a town hall meeting yesterday, telling constituents that the U.S. should pick only the best immigrants the way one chooses the “pick of the litter.”

King told the crowd in Pocahontas, Iowa, that he’s owned lots of bird dogs over the years and advised, “You want a good bird dog? You want one that’s going to be aggressive? Pick the one that’s the friskiest … not the one that’s over there sleeping in the corner.”

King suggested lazy immigrants should be avoided as well. “You get the pick of the litter and you got yourself a pretty good bird dog. Well, we’ve got the pick of every donor civilization on the planet,” King said. “We’ve got the vigor from the planet to come to America.” The liberal research group American Bridge captured the comments:

King has long been one of Congress’ most vociferous and toxic opponents of illegal immigration and “amnesty,” often partnering with notorious immigration hawks like former congressman Tom Tancredo and Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In 2010, he took to the House floor to declare that he could detect “illegals” by their footwear and his “sixth sense.”

Lately, however, King has backed off his inflammatory rhetoric, thanks to a tough challenge from Democrat Christie Vilsack. His bird dog comments suggest, however, that his mouth will continue to dog him.

Update: In a statement, Vilsack’s campaign said, “If we’re going to have a real discussion on immigration, we should start by acknowledging that immigrants are human beings. Iowans are taught in their community, in their church, and at the dinner table to respect each other, not to compare people to dogs. People expect a serious discussion between candidates and that’s what we’re committed to.”

Continue Reading Close

Alex Seitz-Wald is Salon's political reporter. Email him at aseitz-wald@salon.com, and follow him on Twitter @aseitzwald.

Mitt’s new Latino hurdle

The conservative Hispanic group Romney will address this week once slammed "right-wing extremists" on immigration

  • more
    • All Share Services

Mitt's new Latino hurdleMitt Romney (Credit: AP)

As part of an effort to win back Latino voters, Mitt Romney will address a conservative Latino business group this week that has advocated immigration policy views in stark contrast to his own. Romney’s “self-deportation” policy put him well to the right of many of his GOP primary challengers, and the Latino Coalition once slammed “right-wing extremists” who opposed comprehensive immigration reform.

The presumed GOP nominee’s Wednesday speech to the Latino Coalition comes as polls show Romney way behind President Obama among Latino voters and with little hope of capturing the 44 percent of the bloc George W. Bush won in 2004, a highwater mark for the GOP.  Even New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R) — whom Romney floated as a potential vice-presidential choice — mocked the presumed GOP’s immigration policy last week.

The Romney campaign’s response has been that immigration is irrelevant to winning over Latino voters — jobs and the economy are the only things that matter. But his speech this week underscores just how difficult an argument that will be for him to make: In the past, the Latino Coalition has argued that immigration reform is part of a pro-business platform, not separate from it.

These days, the only immigration issue the Coalition mentions on its website is the “Mexican Trucking issue.” But the group aggressively advocated for comprehensive immigration reform under President Bush. In 2007, the Coalition’s president slammed “far right extremists” who opposed “common-sense [immigration reform] legislation that is so important for the security and economic vitality of our country.” The group “urge[d] Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the Democratic leadership in the House to demonstrate courage and leadership on this issue and take on immigration reform,” saying Pelosi could pass a bill “without the level of Republican support she is demanding.”

In the 2008 GOP primary, the Latino Coalition favored Rudy Giuliani — a veritable leftist on immigration reform compared to most Republicans — with the former New York mayor capturing 64 percent of the vote in a straw poll of the group’s members. Romney apparently finished behind Sen. John McCain and former Sen. Fred Thompson, as his name was not mentioned in the statement.

Meanwhile, the Chamber of Commerce, whose grand D.C. offices will host the event Wednesday, also supported comprehensive reform under Bush, similarly seeing it as a boon for free market capitalism. The powerful business lobby still calls for “an effective and streamlined temporary worker program so that employers can hire immigrant workers” and “a pathway to legal status for undocumented workers currently in the United States.”

This was essentially Bush’s policy too. But Romney’s infamous immigration advisor, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who authored the draconian anti-immigration laws in Arizona and Alabama, said his candidate would not support any kind of pathway to legalization for undocumented immigrants.

The Romney campaign briefly attempted to disown Kobach after Romney won the primary and the advisor’s utility was spent, but he may have to throw his entire immigration policy under the bus with Kobach if he hopes to win over the Latino business owners on Wednesday, let alone Hispanic voters more generally.

Continue Reading Close

Alex Seitz-Wald is Salon's political reporter. Email him at aseitz-wald@salon.com, and follow him on Twitter @aseitzwald.

Obama’s broken immigration promise

ICE said it would target dangerous immigrants, but it's actually deporting a higher percentage of non-criminals

  • more
    • All Share Services

Obama's broken immigration promiseA man in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, stands next to the border fence as two U.S. law enforcement officers look on from the U.S. side of the fence. (Credit: AP/Raymundo Ruiz)

The Obama administration claims that it is deporting record numbers of illegal immigrants while focusing on those with criminal records. But new data from Immigration and Customs Enforcement shows that the number of deportation orders has declined dramatically since last summer and non-criminals comprise a growing percentage of those expelled from the country.

That wasn’t supposed to happen under a policy of “prosecutorial discretion” announced by ICE director John Morton last June. The goal of the policy, announced with much fanfare in the Spanish language media, was to spare “longtime lawful residents” from deportation and to focus on criminals.

Since then, the adminstration has deported many fewer non-criminal aliens. But non-criminals remain the vast majority of those deported. And those with no criminal record now actually comprise a slightly larger percentage of those forced to leave the country than they did before Morton’s announcement.

In the three months before the policy was announced last summer ICE filed for deportation proceedings against 61,192 people of whom 15 percent had criminal records. In the first three months of 2012, ICE sought 37,659 deportations orders, 14 percent of which involved people with criminal records.

“The agency continues to be headed in the opposite direction of its stated goals,” said Susan Long, co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, which collected the data from ICE via a Freedom of Information Act request.

The goal of prosecutorial discretion, Long said in a conference call with reporters, “was to target and bring before the court those with more serious criminal history. As yet we’re not seeing any change. They have not turned the ship around.”

The administration implemented prosecutorial discretion in response to complaints that young people with no criminal records continue to face deportation. But the new data will come as no surprise to student groups such as United We Dream, National Immigrant Youth Alliance and DreamActivist, which continue to highlight the cases of law-abiding young people facing deportation.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., has championed the case of a South Carolina man, Gabino Sánchez, a married father of two, who was arrested for driving without a license last year and now faces deportation.

“Gabino Sánchez has lived and worked and raised a family here for more than a decade and it is not in anyone’s interest to have him deported,” Rep. Gutierrez told Fox News Latino on Tuesday after a deportation hearing in North Carolina.  ”I do not understand why ICE has not followed President Obama’s guidelines and decided to move on from this case to go after someone else, someone who is a threat to his community or a serious criminal.”

In response to the TRAC findings, Gutierrez  said, “The president should make sure the Department of Homeland Security is actually following its own rules and he should proclaim proudly and loudly that he will not deport another DREAMer or anyone else who fits the prosecutorial discretion criteria.”

Continue Reading Close
Jefferson Morley

Jefferson Morley is a staff writer for Salon in Washington and author of the forthcoming book, Snow-Storm in August: Washington City, Francis Scott Key, and the Forgotten Race Riot of 1835 (Nan Talese/Doubleday).

Page 1 of 69 in Immigration