Deportation Facts #2
Deportation Facts #2
Deportation Facts #2
W W W.AMERICANPROGRESS.ORG
Contents
i Fast facts
1 Introduction and summary
4 Calculating the cost of mass deportation
5 Mass deportation by the numbers
6 The costs of apprehension
8 The costs of detention
10 The costs of legal processing
11 The cost of transportation
14 Total deportation costs
Fast facts
The people
Undocumented immigrants in the United States,
according to the latest estimates by DHS
10.8 million
$85
billion
Cost of continuing
enforcement over
a five-year period.
8.64 million
2.16 million
Number subject to
forcible deportation
Estimated number of
undocumented immigrants
that would leave the United
States before any contact
with authorities
The numbers
$285
billion
Total cost to deport
the undocumented
immigrant population and continue
border interdiction
and interior enforcement efforts over a
five-year period (in
2008 dollars).1
$200
billion
Total cost to find
and arrest, detain,
legally process,
and transport the
undocumented
population over a
five-year period.
for 6.22 million people, with the cost per person of $1,000. (In FY 2008, about 28 percent
of deportations were through voluntary departure orders that did not require government
transportation. The same percentage drop was applied to 8.64 million undocumented
immigrants who would be apprehended, reaching a total transportation number of
6.22million people.)
Total cost of deportation campaign: $200 billion, with the cost per deportation
of $23,482 for each person to be apprehended, detained, legally processed, and
transported out of the country.
total cost of mass deportation and continuing border interdiction and interior enforcement efforts would be $285 billion (in 2008 dollars) over five years. 5
Specifically, this report calculates a price tag of $200 billion to enforce a federal dragnet
that would snare the estimated 10.8 million undocumented immigrants in the United
States over five years.6 That amount, however, does not include the annual recurring
border and interior enforcement spending that will necessarily have to occur. It would cost
taxpayers at least another $17 billion annually (in 2008 dollars) to maintain the status quo
at the border and in the interior, or a total of nearly $85 billion over five years. That means
the total five-year immigration enforcement cost under a mass deportation strategy would
be approximately $285 billion.
When viewed through this most narrow but most telling fiscal lens, it should be clear that
a deportation-only strategy is highly irresponsible. In these challenging economic times,
spending a kings ransom to tackle a symptom of our immigration crisis without addressing root causes would be a massive waste of taxpayer dollars. Spending $285 billion would
require $922 in new taxes for every man, woman, and child in this country.7 If this kind of
money were raised, it could provide every public and private school student from prekindergarten to the 12th grade an extra $5,100 for their education.8 Or more frivolously, that
$285 billion would pay for about 26,146 trips in the private space travel rocket, Falcon 1e.9
The worst economic downturn since the Great Depression has clearly diminished the
number of people attempting to enter the country illegallythe absence of jobs eliminates
the predominant incentive to migrate.10 And yet, even with diminished pressure at the
border, the dramatic increases in spending on immigration enforcement have not significantly altered the net number of undocumented immigrants in the country. In fact, the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, reports that the undocumented immigrant
population as of January 2009 stood at 10.8 million,11 or 300,000 more than it was in
2005.12 In other words, the massive outlays in enforcement resources are barely making a
dent in the current population.
That leaves the third course, comprehensive immigration reform, as the only rational alternative. The solution to our broken immigration system must combine tough border and
workplace enforcement with practical reforms that promote economic growth, protect
all workers, and reunite immediate family members. Among other things, that means we
must establish a realistic program to require undocumented immigrants to register with
the government while creating legal immigration channels that are flexible, serve the
national interest, and curtail future illegal immigration.13
Some proponents of the second optiona deportation-only strategycontend that the
Great Recession and heightened unemployment justify mass deportation.14 As if deportation were a panacea for the nations economic woes, the ranking member on the House
Judiciary Committee, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), claims: The single most effective thing
that DHS could do to create jobs for American workers would be to conduct vigorous
worksite enforcement and to actually deport the illegal immigrant workers so they dont
remain here to compete with citizen and legal immigrant job-seekers.15 The patently
erroneous analysis behind this contentionthat unemployed Americans are a perfect
substitute for undocumented workers in the workforceignores the devastating impact
such an approach would have on economic growth.
In fact, a recent study by the Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy
Center demonstrates how legalization of undocumented immigrants and more flexible
immigration channels would significantly expand the economyby a cumulative $1.5
trillion in gross domestic product over 10 yearsthrough increased consumer spending,
higher tax receipts, and other related factors.16 A deportation approach, by contrast, would
have the cumulative effect of draining $2.5 trillion over 10 years from the U.S. economy.17
That is a $4 trillion swing in GDP depending on which policy approach we adopt.
Once policymakers in Congress and their constituents across the country weigh the
unrealistic five-year immigration enforcement costs of pursuing a deportation-only strategy$285 billionagainst the progressive alternative they will recognize once and for all
that mass deportation is fiscally untenable.
This paper will demonstrate in detail the severe consequences of a deportation-only policy
on the nations economy and how the execution of such a policy would require massive
direct expenditures. We analyze publicly available data to assess the costs and the steps
required to carry out such a policyfrom point of arrest through transportation out of
the country. Our report adopts conservative assumptions for key variables to ensure that
the estimated program and spending requirements are realistic and not overstated. Our
findings are not just sobering; they conclusively prove a deportation-only immigration
strategy would be the height of folly.
Second, some diseconomies of scale are already built in to our assessment. For instance, we
do not include capital expenditures to build new facilities to jail these people and then bring
them before judges in the projection. The challenge of detaining and processing massive new
numbers of immigrants in current facilities would create obvious and costly challenges.
Third, the compliance costs of deploying such a program consistent with constitutional requirements would diminish the savings expected from large-scale operations.
Alternatively, the costs of defending against lawsuits alleging rights violations in these
operations would also diminish savings. Given that the size of the economies and diseconomies of scale are uncertain and that the modeling of both would be speculative at best,
we assume for purposes of this report that the costs and savings balance out that there will
be constant returns on enforcement spending.19
and close to the number of everyone living in New England. But casting a dragnet nationwide would obviously be infinitely more difficult than closing the borders of a single state
or region of the country (see box on page 5).
There are four major tasks that would be essential to conducting the kind of mass deportation and removal process advocated by anti-immigration hardliners in the United States.
r ApprehensionArresting all undocumented immigrants currently in the United States
r DetentionHolding in custody (or supervising the interim release of) those who have
been apprehended until their cases are heard and legal deportation orders are issued by
the relevant legal authority
r Legal processingAdjudicating, under the relevant legal authorities, those who have
been apprehended and detained
r TransportationEnsuring that those who have been issued removal orders depart the
United States
Lets consider the costs of each of these tasks in turn.
FIGURE 1
FY 2008 ICE
apprehensions
$1.24 billion
67,728
Number of people
subject to forcible
deportation
Cost to apprehend
8.64 million persons
$18,310
8.64 million
$158 billion
$216 million
Office of Investigations
$421 million
Office of Detention and
Removal Operations
$398 million
Comprehensive ID and Removal
of Criminal Aliens Program
$200 million
this section of the report accounts for prosecutions involving apprehended undocumented immigrants. At the end
of FY 2008, the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor had
handled approximately 129,275 cases, 98 percent of which
related to immigration enforcement. The cost of those
apprehensions in the FY 2008 budget were $216 million.25
Office of Investigations.26 The Office of Investigations spent about 27.5 percent of its
case hours in FY 2008 on drug-related issues, according to DHSs Office of the Inspector
General, which used ICEs Case Management System for its calculation.27 The percentage
of funds dedicated to drug investigations was determined in response to a detailed OIG
analysis that examined case hours related to drug control activities. No similar analysis
was done for immigration-related investigations. Assuming that immigration apprehension would be at least as high on ICEs policy agenda as drug-related issues, the same
percentage of case hours27.5 percentwas applied to the offices $1.53 billion actual
spending totals in FY 2008 to estimate $421 million for immigration apprehensions. The
actual figure is likely considerably higher, but no numbers were publicly available.
Office of Detention and Removal Operations.28 The Fugitive Operations Program
and Criminal Alien Program are the two programs under the auspices of the Office of
Detention and Removal Operations that directly relate to immigration apprehensions.
The FY 2008 funding for these programs totaled $398 million.
Comprehensive ID and Removal of Criminal Aliens Program.29 This program is exclu-
sively dedicated to apprehending undocumented immigrants. This initiative was authorized for two years, beginning in FY 2008 and contributed to the total apprehensions
reported by DHS that year. The appropriations totaled $200 million.
in FY 2008 in the interior of the United States. This included 33,573 administrative
apprehensions by the Office of Investigations and 34,155 criminal apprehensions by the
National Fugitives Operations Program.
FIGURE 2
$111.82
Cost per detainee per day
Nonpersonnel holding costs
$12.82
Cost per detainee per day
Personnel
$99
FY 2008 average
number of days
in detention
Number of people
subject to forcible
deportation
30 days
$3,355
8.64 million
$29 billion
The total incarcerated population for the United States in 2008 was
2.4 million prisoners. That included all inmates held in local, state,
federal (including ICE), military, and juvenile facilities in the United
States, U.S. territories, and Indian tribal lands.34 A deportation
strategy that would take place over five years would add an
additional 1.73 million inmates to those rolls, a 71 percent increase
in the jail population, in each of those five years. In other words,
private or public construction of new facilities would be inevitable.
Nonetheless, because of the difficulty in projecting the capital costs of such a strategy and
in the interest of adopting conservative assumptions in making these calculations, we rely
on the known average detention costs under the current system. As sketched out in the
box calculating the cost of construction of detention facilities, the capital expenditures
alone could be crippling.
10
FIGURE 3
FY 2008 immigration
proceedings initiated
$238.32 million
291,781
Number of people
subject to forcible
deportation
$817
8.64 million
$7 billion
Source: Calculations based on
the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security FY 2008.
As with other areas of the deportation process, immigration courts are structurally
flawed and severely ill equipped to serve the current caseload. It is difficult to fathom
how the immigration legal system would handle 8.64 million new adjudications that
would come from a deportation campaign. The current systems failings were extensively
documented in a February 2010 report prepared for the American Bar Associations
Commission on Immigration.40
Among the reports recommendations are an immediate restructuring to make the immigration courts independent of politics or any administrative agency, and the immediate
hiring of 100 new judges plus necessary law clerks to handle the surge in cases stemming
from current enforcement policies. These recommendations did not take into account
any mass deportation strategy. In 2008, there were 291,781 legal proceedings for undocumented immigrants, or just over 3 percent of the 8.64 million cases necessary to complete
a mass deportation.
To calculate the legal processing costs for EOIR of a mass deportation, we identified the
FY 2008 appropriations dedicated to the processing of undocumented immigrants, which
was $238.32 million. That was applied to the 291,781 legal proceedings for undocumented immigrants to arrive at an average cost of $817 for each legal proceeding. The
average was then multiplied by 8.64 million undocumented immigrants for a total legal
processing cost of more than $7 billion (see Figure 3).
11
rather than the number of completed cases since all filings require handling even if they
are not completed. This lowers the average cost per proceeding, thereby ensuring the most
conservative estimate.42
The number of proceedings used in the calculation does not equal the number of people
removed because some cases require more than one proceeding and some prosecutions
are not successful. There also were 26,656 voluntary departures in FY 2008 after proceedings were initiated. The cost per proceeding ($817) was determined by dividing the FY
2008 appropriated amount of $238.32 million by the 291,781 proceedings.
The $817 cost estimate for one proceeding was applied to 8.64 million people to reach the
total of a little more than $7 billion. This assumes that a removal can be achieved with only
one proceeding even though it took, on average, two proceedings to achieve one removal
in FY 2008. For purposes of this paper, the more conservative estimate of one hearing per
undocumented immigrant was used.
12
10. China
120,000
7. South Korea
1. Mexico
200,000
6,650,000
4. Honduras
2. El Salvador
320,000
530,000
5. Philippines
3. Guatemala
6. India
480,000
270,000
200,000
8. Ecuador
170,000
9. Brazil
150,000
Source:,Michael Hoefer, Nancy Ritina, and Bryan C. Baker, Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2009 (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, January 2010),
available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf.
Currently, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection have different programs for transporting undocumented immigrants. Most
undocumented immigrants from Mexico who are apprehended at the border by CBP are
bused across the border.44 Other undocumented immigrants are transported by plane.
During FY 2008, ICEs Detention and Removal Operations Flight Operations Unit in
partnership with the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System transported almost
200,000 undocumented immigrants. This program operated seven charters outside of the
Americas, returning 495 alien passengers to Albania, Cambodia, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan,
Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Palestinian Authority, and Liberia.45 In FY 2008,
this program had an appropriation of $135 million.46
Additionally, ICE and CBP have transportation programs for certain categories of
undocumented immigrants. The Interior Repatriation Program transports undocumented
immigrants into the interior of Mexico. This program is available for noncriminal Mexican
nationals with final orders of removal, processed by CBP for expedited removal, and
13
FIGURE 4
$1,000
6.22 million
$6 billion
Source: Calculations based on
the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security FY 2008.
deemed at risk from falling victim to heat or border criminals due to age, physical condition, or travel status. In FY 2008, 49,793 people were removed under this program.47
Despite the different countries of origin of undocumented immigrants, and the various
methods and programs of repatriation, little public information is available on actual costs
to transport the average detainee out of the United States. During congressional testimony
in 2007, however, ICE Assistant Secretary Julie Myers estimated a $1,000 per person average transportation cost for deportees.48
The Office of the Federal Detention Trustee also reported a per person transportation cost
for federal detainees, including deportees, of $999 in FY 2008, and projected a $1,190 per
person cost in FY 2011.49 For purposes of this report, the cost was rounded out to $1,000.
That means the total cost to transport 6.22 million people overseas at $1,000 apiece equals
more than $6 billion.
FIGURE 5
Detention
Legal processing
Transportation
Total cost
$158 billion
$29 billion
$7 billion
$6 billion
$200 billion
Source: Calculations based on
the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security FY 2008.
14
15
Enforcement
budgets increased
by nearly 80 percent
to $17.1 billion
in FY 2010, from
$9.5 billion in
FY 2005.
FIGURE 6
18
11.3
11.6
12
$17.1
10.8
+2.9%
16
10.5
10
14
$14.3
+80%
12
$12.4
$10.9
10
$9.5
8
Undocumented immigrant population
6
0
FY 2006
FY 2008
FY 2009
Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Budget-in-Brief, FY 2007, FY 2008, FY 2009, and FY 2010; Michael
Hoefer, Nancy Ritina, and Bryan C. Baker, Estimates of the Unauthoirzed Immigrant Population Residing in the
United States: January 2008 (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, February 2009), available at http://www.dhs.
gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf.
Of course, it is true that the ICE and CBP budgets include more than immigration
enforcement resources. But it is also true that the capital and infrastructural costs needed
to maintain and support contraband smuggling interdiction efforts, for example, cannot
be cleanly divorced from human smuggling interdiction costs. In addition, not included in
this budget calculation are significant immigration enforcement costs borne by other DHS
entities such as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Costs related to two important
USCIS programs, E-verify and US-VISIT, are not reflected in this estimate.
The practical reality is that we will need to maintain the entire ICE and CBP budgets at the
very least in order to retain current enforcement levels over this deportation period and
beyond. If anything, we believe this understates the actual ongoing enforcement costs that
will be required to maintain the status quo.
16
FY 2007
Five-year total
As such, on top of the $200 billion cost of removing all current undocumented immigrants, the government would be required to expend an additional $85 billion ($17billion per year for five years) over that same five-year period. Hence, the sum of the
five-year immigration enforcement costs under a mass deportation strategy comes to a
grand total of $285billion (see Figure 7).
FIGURE 7
$200 billion
$85 billion
$285 billion
$17.1 billion
Annual estimated recurring ICE and
CBP budget (Adjusted to 2008 dollars)
$16.99 billion
17
18
It should be
absolutely clear
that the attrition
strategy is nothing
more than a thinly
veiled variation on
mass deportation.
But enforcement alone will not drive down undocumented immigration, as evidenced by
the hard facts about the current legal status of undocumented immigrants in the United
Statesfacts that our progressive vision of reform confronts directly, humanely, and with
an eye on building a better and more prosperous America in the 21 century in the same
way we have done for more than 400 years.
Most of the 10.8 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States have
been in the country for a long time, are intimately integrated into local communities, and
reside across large geographic areas. Many also have native-born U.S.-citizen children or
spouses. Consider that:
r Almost two-thirds of undocumented immigrants (63 percent) came to the United
States before 200019 percent during the 1980s, 44 percent during the 1990s, and 37
percent after 2000.
r Forty-three percent of undocumented immigrants live in states outside of the traditional
immigrant states of California, Texas, Florida, New York, and Illinoisan indication
that undocumented immigrants are settling in nontraditional immigrant regions.56
r Seventy-three percent of the children of undocumented immigrant parents are U.S. citizens by birth.57 Deportation would mean taking away one or both parents of 4 million
citizen children with unacceptable and incalculable social consequences.
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) finds this last set of facts particularly pertinent to the immigration
debate. When asked during an earlier debate over comprehensive immigration reform and
American-born children of undocumented immigrants, he remarked on the Senate floor:
What shall we do with these Americansand they are Americans by virtue of their
birth herewhen we deport their parents? Shall we build a lot of new orphanages?
Find adoptive parents for them? Deny their citizenship and ship them back, too? We
all know we arent going to find and deport so many millions and suffer the dislocation
and agonizing moral dilemmas that such an impossible task would engender. So lets be
honest about that, shall we?58
As Sen. McCain argued back then, the logical solution for the immigration challenge is a
comprehensive plan that combines tighter border and interior enforcement with a program that would require undocumented immigrants to come forward, pass background
checks, and gain legal status by meeting certain requirements such as learning English and
paying back taxes and fines. Comprehensive immigration reform must create a visa system
that is fair and flexible and can adjust to the needs of the U.S. economy and families.
History shows that not even the hellish Arizona desert will deter immigrants seeking work
when the U.S. demand for labor is high. The existing border fortifications do not keep
19
undocumented migrants out of the United States, notes Wayne Cornelius, director emeritus
of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California in San
Diego. Not even half are being apprehended on any given trip to the border, and of those
who are apprehended, the success rate on the second or third try is upwards of 95 percent.
Cornelius has studied the migration patterns of thousands of undocumented immigrants
from various parts of Mexico who tried and succeeded in entering the country.59
The United States experienced substantial increases in the total number of undocumented
immigrants between 2000 and 2006 but that number began dropping in 2007, coinciding
with the start of a crippling economic recession and the drop in demand for immigrant
labor (see Figure 6).60 Once the economy rebounds and demand for workers eventually
expands, undocumented immigrants seeking work will likely create new pressures on
border and worksite enforcement efforts if we do not reform our current policies today.
Even if we were to continue high levels of border and interior enforcement funding, future
flows of undocumented immigrants cannot be completely prevented under current immigration laws using an enforcement-only strategy. As described above, the federal government would have to spend substantial additional moniesconservatively projected to be
$17 billion annuallyto prevent undocumented immigrants from entering the United
States, track down those who make it in, and identify and remove persons who overstay
their valid entry visas.
Instead of searching for and deporting undocumented immigrants at an astronomical cost,
the taxpayers and the nation will enjoy greater benefits from a 21st century immigration
system that drives workers needed by the U.S. economy into legal channels.61
20
Endnotes
1 U.S. Department of Homeland Security FY 2008 numbers were used because
they are the most complete figures across all categories required to assess
immigration-related costs.
2 Department of Homeland Security, Budget-in-Brief, Fiscal Year 2010, available at
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/budget_bib_fy2010.pdf.
3 Jeffrey S. Passel and DVera Cohn, A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the
United States (Washington: Pew Research Center, 2009), available at http://
pewresearch.org/pubs/1190/portrait-unauthorized-immigrants-states.
4 Indeed, a deportation strategy of this size and scope has never been attempted
in U.S. history. During the Great Depression, an estimated 1 million people of
Mexican descent were pressured to leave the United States, even though about
60 percent were U.S. citizens. This repatriation was concentrated in California,
Michigan, Colorado, Texas, Illinois, Ohio, and New Yorkstates where most
immigrants were concentratedbecause of U.S. natives fears that immigrants
were competing for scarce jobs during the economic crisis. Kevin Johnson, The
Forgotten Repatriation of Persons of Mexican Ancestry and Lessons for the
War on Terror, Pace Law Review 26 (1) (2005), available at http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=lawrev. And then
again in 1954, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service conducted a
quasi-military search and seizure operation of all illegal immigrants in Texas,
resulting in the arrests of tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants
and the voluntary departures of hundreds of thousands more. The short-lived
program ended when funding ran out. Fred L Koestler, Operation Wetback, The
Handbook of Texas Online, March 4-6, 2010, available at http://www.tshaonline.
org/handbook/online/articles/OO/pqo1.html.
5 Since we assume that the mass deportation strategy will take five years to
accomplish, the five-year cost of immigration enforcement would total approximately $285 billion in 2008 dollars$200 billion for the removal program plus
$85 billion (for example, $16.99 billion per year for five years) for continuing
enforcement operations as of FY 2010.
6 Daunting as this number is, it almost certainly understates the actual cost. Given
the inherent uncertainty in this exercise, this report deliberately adopts conservative assumptions and variables to arrive at an uninflated cost projection. For
example, capital expenditures are excluded from cost projections despite the
enormous expansion of detention space and administrative courts that would
be necessary to implement such a strategy. The analysis is based on FY 2008
data, the most complete, publicly available information on unauthorized immigration, to ensure proper comparisons between federal spending and other
important data. The $200 billion cost is in 2008 dollars, unadjusted for inflation.
7 Based on a national population of 309 million.
8 National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Facts, available at http://nces.
ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65.
9 Spacex, Falcon 1, available at http://www.spacex.com/falcon1.php.
10 See, for example, Jeffrey S. Passel and DVera Cohn, Mexican Immigrants: How
Many Come? How Many Leave? (Washington: Pew Hispanic Center, 2009),
available at http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/112.pdf.
11 This population estimate is based on the U.S. Census Bureaus American Community Survey, which changed part of its methodology in 2008. The highly regarded Pew Hispanic Center relies on the Current Population Survey, conducted
by the Census and Labor Statistics Bureaus, which results in a slightly higher
estimate of the undocumented immigrant population. This report adopts the
more conservative estimatefor example, DHSs population countto guard
against overstating the potential costs of a mass deportation program. Michael
Hoefer, Nancy Rytina, and Bryan C. Baker, Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2009 (U.S. Department
of Homeland Security, 2010), available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/
statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf.
21
12 Michael Hoefer, Nancy Rytina, and Bryan C. Baker, Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2008 (U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, 2009), available at http://www.dhs.gov/
xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2008.pdf.
13 Marshall Fitz and Angela Kelley, Principles for Immigration Reform: Guidelines
for Fixing Our Broken Immigration System (Washington: Center for American
Progress, 2009), available at http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/12/
pdf/immigrationreform.pdf.
14 U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Democrat Amnesty
Plan Harms American Workers, Press Release, December 15, 2009, available at
http://republicans.judiciary.house.gov/News/Read.aspx?id=276. U.S. Census
Bureau, U.S. & World Population Clocks, available at http://www.census.gov/
main/www/popclock.html.
15 Rep. Lamar Smith, Enforce immigration laws to create jobs: Smith reacts to
Napolitano remarks at Center for American Progress, Press Release, November
13, 2009, available at http://lamarsmith.house.gov/read.aspx?ID=1275.
16 Dr. Ral Hinojosa-Ojeda, Raising the Floor for American Workers (Washington:
Center for American Progress, 2010), available at http://www.americanprogress.
org/issues/2010/01/raising_the_floor.html; Peter B. Dixon and Maureen T.
Rimmer, Restriction or Legalization? Measuring the Economic Benefits of Immigration Reform (Washington: Cato Institute, 2009), available at http://www.
cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10438.
17 Ibid.
18 See, for example, the Congressional Budget Office analysis of H.R. 4088, the Secure America Through Verification and Enforcement Act of 2007, as introduced
on November 6, 2007. That bill would have made e-verify mandatory. The CBO
and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the legislation would
decrease revenues because it would increase the numbers of undocumented
workers being paid outside the tax system, available at http://www.cbo.gov/
ftpdocs/91xx/doc9100/hr4088ltr.pdf.
19 The authors of this report strongly believe that, on balance, this calculations
significantly understates the actual costs of such a strategy.
20 Hoefer, Ritina, and Baker, Estimates of the Unauthoirzed Immigrant Population
Residing in the United States: January 2009.
21 U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. & World Population Clocks.
22 This 20 percent attrition rate is a reasonable estimate, given how deeply
embedded so many of these immigrants and families are in their communities.
It is, however, just an estimate since it is impossible to predict the behavioral
response of target communities in the face of a mass deportation program. The
20 percent rate was also used in the 2005 deportation cost study by the Center
for American Progress. Rajeev Goyle and David A. Jaeger, Ph.D., Deporting
the Undocumented: A Cost Assessment (Washington: Center for American
Progress, 2005), available at http://www.americanprogress.org/kf/deporting_the_undocumented.pdf.
23 The costs cited herein do not encompass the entire cost of such an operation.
Moreover, the tactics used in the raid, including the use of a cattle barn for temporary detention space, the separation of families, lack of legal counsel, and the
false imprisonment of some, continue to be studied as a lesson for how not to
conduct an immigration raid. And the devastating costs to the local economy
and to the fabric of the community will continue to reverberate for years.
24 Immigration-related cases included 126,050 removal cases, completed bonds
and motions to re-open or reconsider; plus 1,076 worksite enforcement cases
for a total of 127,126 cases related to immigration. U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, Fiscal Year 2008 Annual Report: Protecting National
Security and Upholding Public Policy (2009), p. 28-29, available at http://www.
ice.gov/doclib/pi/reports/ice_annual_report/pdf/ice08ar_final.pdf.
25 The funding for the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor in FY 2008 was $220.6
million. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Title VFY 2010 Explanation
of Changes General Provisions, available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs_congressional_budget_justification_fy2010.pdf.
26 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Inspector General, Independent Review of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcements reporting of
FY 2008 drug control obligations (2009), available at http://www.dhs.gov/xoig/
assets/mgmtrpts/OIG_09-19_Jan09.pdf; U.S. Department of Homeland Security,
FY 2009, Budget Details, available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/budget_fy2009.pdf.
43 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Fiscal Year 2008 Annual Report:
Protecting National Security and Upholding Public Policy, p. iii.
44 Emily Blass, After deportation, migrants are determined to return, USA Today,
March 24, 2008, available at http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-0323-deportees_N.htm.
45 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Congressional Budget Justification FY
2010, p S&E 41, available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs_congressional_budget_justification_fy2010.pdf.
46 Blass, After deportation, migrants are determined to return.
27 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Inspector General, Independent Review of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcements reporting of FY
2008 drug control obligations, p. 1.
47 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States and Mexico resume voluntary interior repatriation program for the fifth consecutive year, News Release,
July 21, 2008, available at http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/0807/080721washington.htm.
48 CNN, Tab to remove illegal residents would approach $100 billion, September 12,
2007, available at http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/09/12/deportation.cost/.
31 ICE received a doubling of funding for detention bed space in the last five years.
In FY 2003, capacity was 18,500 beds and in FY 2008, capacity was 32,000 beds.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Fiscal Year 2008 Annual Report:
Protecting National Security and Upholding Public Policy, p.19.
32 Department of Homeland Security, Immigration Detention Overview and
Recommendations (2009), p. 2, available at http://www.ice.gov/doclib/091005_
ice_detention_report-final.pdf.
33 Nina Bernstein, Officials Hid Truth of Immigrant Deaths in Jail, The New York
Times, January 9, 2010, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/
us/10detain.html.
34 Bureau of Justice Statistics, Bulletin: Prisoners in 2008, Table 9, p. 8, available at
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p08.pdf.
35 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Fiscal Year 2008 Annual Report:
Protecting National Security and Upholding Public Policy, p.20.
36 Department of Homeland Security, FY 2009 Budget: Congressional Justification
(Program Justification of Changes: Additional bed space and staffing) (2008), p.
S&E 45, available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/budget_fy2009.pdf.
51 Hoefer, Rytina, and Baker, Estimates of the Undocumented Immigrant Population, Residing in the United States: January 2008.
52 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Budget-in-Brief, FY 2007, FY 2008, FY
2009, and FY 2010, available at http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/budget/; Hoefer,
Rytina, and Baker, Estimates of the Undocumented Immigrant Population,
Residing in the United States: January 2008.
53 Department of Homeland Security, Budget-in-Brief, Fiscal Year 2010.
54 Hinojosa-Ojeda, Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits
of Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
55 Rep. Lamar Smith, Enforce immigration laws to create jobs; Andrea Nill, Dick
Armey Wants Tom Tancredo Out of His Tea Party Tent, The Wonk Room, March 8,
2010, available at http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/03/08/dick-armeytom-tancredo/.
56 Hoefer, Rytina, and Baker, Estimates of the Undocumented Immigrant Population,
Residing in the United States: January 2008, p. 4.
57 Passel and Cohn, A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States, p. i.
37 MSNBC, Immigrants face long detention, few rights, March 15, 2009, available at
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29706177/.
38 U.S. Department of Justice, Fact Sheet: EOIRs improvement measures
Update (2009).
39 U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Office of the
Chief Immigration Judge, available at http://www.justice.gov/eoir/ocijinfo.htm.
40 Arnold and Porter LLP, Reforming the Immigration System: Proposals to Promote
Independence, Fairness, Efficiency and Professionalism in the Adjudication of
Removal Cases (2010), available at http://www.abanet.org/media/nosearch/
immigration_reform_executive_summary_012510.pdf.
41 U.S. Department of Justice, Budget Summary, FY 2010, p. 38, available at
http://www.justice.gov/jmd/2010summary/pdf/eoir-bud-summary.pdf.
42 Executive Office for Immigration Review, FY 2008: Statistical Year Book (U.S. Department of Justice, 2009), available at http://www.justice.gov/eoir/statspub/
fy08syb.pdf.
22
Acknowledgements
This publication was made possible by a grant from Carnegie Corporation of New York.
The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the author.
23
The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute
dedicated to promoting a strong, just and free America that ensures opportunity
for all. We believe that Americans are bound together by a common commitment to
these values and we aspire to ensure that our national policies reflect these values.
We work to find progressive and pragmatic solutions to significant domestic and
international problems and develop policy proposals that foster a government that
is of the people, by the people, and for the people.