Matching Grant Challenge
alexPureWhen I met Alexander Cockburn, one of his first questions to me was: “Is your hate pure?” It was the question he asked most of the young writers he mentored. These were Cockburn’s rules for how to write political polemics: write about what you care about, write with passion, go for the throat of your enemies and never back down. His admonitions remain the guiding stylesheet for our writers at CounterPunch. Please help keep the spirit of this kind of fierce journalism alive by taking advantage of  our matching grant challenge which will DOUBLE every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, CounterPunch will get a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate. –JSC (This photo of Alexander Cockburn and Jasper, on the couch that launched 1000 columns, was taken in Petrolia by Tao Ruspoli)
 Day 19

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

A Human Rights Crime?

Obama’s Mass Deportations

by TANYA GOLASH-BOZA

The United States has witnessed a tremendous rise in the number of people detained and deported since 1997.

Between 1892 and 1997, there were 2.1 million deportations from the United States. Since then, there have been nearly twice as many: the sum total of deportations between 1998 and 2012 is over 4.1 million. At current rates, President Obama is on track to deport more people in his first six years as President than all deportations prior to 1997.

Alongside deportation rates, detention rates have skyrocketed, from a daily average of 5,532 in 1994 to upwards of 30,000 today.

Mass deportation and detention has cost the United States billions of dollars a year. It has taken a budget crisis for the federal government to reconsider its policies. In light of impending budget cuts, the federal government is considering releasing thousands of detainees.

The federal government should reconsider its entire detention and deportation regime because it is misguided and costly.

The most recent escalation in deportations has not been because of a new influx of undocumented immigrants. In fact, fewer people are crossing the border illegally now than when mass deportation began in 1997. The primary reason we are seeing unprecedented numbers of deportees is that the federal government is spending extraordinary amounts of money on immigration law enforcement. And, it is doing that in the name of keeping the United States safe from terrorists and criminals.

There is very little evidence that mass deportation is making the country safer. There may be some credence to the appeal to public safety, but the appeal to terrorism is entirely unfounded. When the government finds terror suspects, it does not deport them. They may be sent to Guantanamo or prosecuted, but they are not among the 400,000 deportees sent almost exclusively to Latin America and the Caribbean each year.

According to U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) removal data, 97.5 percent of deportees are sent to the Americas. DHS almost never deports people to countries that the U.S. Department of State identifies as sponsoring terrorism: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, and Sudan. In 2010, for example, 387,242 people were deported. Among these were 55 Iranians, 54 Iraqis, 48 Syrians, 95 Cubans, and 21 Sudanese.

President Obama often touts the fact that he is deporting criminals. However, according to ICE removal data, less than 10 percent of deportees are sent to their countries of birth after being convicted of a violent offense. The other 90 percent either have no criminal conviction or have been convicted of a non-violent offense.

Deportation does not make us safer, but it does destroy families. Last year, 100,000 parents of U.S. citizens were deported – representing a ten-fold increase over the previous decade. Vern, a Guatemalan citizen, is one example. Vern entered the United States in 1991 and applied for political asylum. He received a work permit while waiting for his case to be processed. He found a job in a frozen food processing plant in Ohio where he met Maria, a Honduran woman who was also applying for political asylum. Each year, they received work permits that allowed them to continue working. Hopeful their cases would eventually be resolved, Vern and Maria married, and had their first child in 1996. In 1998, Vern received notice he should leave the United States – his asylum application had been denied. Vern was devastated – he had established a life in the United States, and had few ties to Guatemala. He decided to stay, hoping his wife’s application would be approved, and that she could apply for him to legalize his status. However, before that could happen, in 2009, immigration agents raided his home, took him to detention, and he was deported to Guatemala, leaving behind his wife and two children. Because Vern ignored his deportation order, he was a fugitive alien and thus subject to a raid on his home.

removals

Americans may find comfort reading headlines that criminal, fugitive, and illegal aliens are being deported.  But, the government does not have unlimited resources and deporting people is tremendously expensive. Thus, we must ask: at what cost?

Mass deportation may seem to be the logical solution when we have large numbers of undocumented immigrants. However, it is not the way the country has usually dealt with this issue. It has been much more common historically to find ways to legalize undocumented immigrants. Mass deportation has been the exception. Why now? Why is the United States spending so much money on immigration law enforcement? The reason is that immigration law enforcement has been wrongly conceived of as part of the War on Terror.

The federal government has an enormous budget, and the citizenry has given the government authorization to spend a substantial proportion of it on national security. So, it has – primarily through one government agency: DHS.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created in 2003. Since then, it has grown into a massive government agency. The FY 2011 budget for DHS was $56 billion.  To put this $56 billion in perspective, the Department of Education FY 2011 budget was $77.8 billion, and the Department of Justice $29.2 billion. The rise in detention and deportation over the past decade primarily stems from Executive Branch decisions to expand immigration law enforcement, as part of the broader project of the War on Terror.

Fully 30 percent of the DHS budget in FY 2011 was directed at immigration law enforcement through Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Patrol (CBP). Another 18 percent of the total went to the U.S. Coast Guard and five percent to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services—meaning over half of the DHS budget is directed at border security and immigration law enforcement.

A recent report by the Migration Policy Institute found that the U.S. government spends more on federal immigration enforcement than on all other principal federal criminal law enforcement agencies combined. My calculations confirm this: immigration enforcement spending heavily outweighs domestic law enforcement spending. In FY 2011, the U.S. government spent $27 billion on ICE, CBP, and the U.S. Coast Guard. In contrast, the U.S. government spent a total of $13.7 billion on domestic law enforcement, including the FBI, the DEA, the Secret Service, the U.S. Marshal, and Alcohol, Firearms, and Tobacco.

Thus, while some detractors may shout: “deport them all,” we have to realize that the United States is spending unprecedented amounts of money and we still have ten million undocumented immigrants in this country. A much saner approach would be to legalize undocumented immigrants. This is what was done historically, and it is the right thing to do.

The federal government has made it clear what they are capable of: they can set a quota of 400,000 deportees a year and meet it. They can detain over 400,000 people a year.

Now that we have seen that they can do this, it is time to stop. Zealous enforcement of immigration laws over the past decade has barely put a dent in the population of undocumented immigrants in the United States. This population has declined from 11 million to 10 million people, yet most experts attribute this decline to the economic recession.

With projections for immigration reform this year, it is time to stop mass deportation. Instead of detaining and deporting people who are in the country without authorization, DHS could redirect its resources towards legalization programs.

A recent report from the Cato Institute found that “comprehensive immigration reform would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs, and generate additional tax revenue.” The author, Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda, estimates that “comprehensive immigration reform would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) over 10 years.”

Continuing to enforce immigration laws at the current rate is a colossal waste of resources. In a time of budget crisis, the best thing to do is to stop deporting and detaining people and work on legalization.

Thousands of immigrant detainees awaiting their hearings can be put on supervised release until their hearing happens. Advocates such as Human Rights First have long fought for more alternatives to detention. Cost-saving is one reason.  ICE spends $2 billion a year on detention. Human Rights First calculates that “ICE’s alternatives to detention programs cost 30 cents to $14 per day, as compared to $164 per day for detention.”

The good news here is that the federal government can easily stop detaining immigrants and quickly save a lot of money. This is because the vast majority of immigrant detainees are not held in federal buildings. Instead, they are held in private detention centers and in county jails which contract out bed space to the federal government. Relying on private prisons has made it more feasible for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to achieve its quota of 34,000 beds a day.

There are many critiques one could make of the privatization of prisons. However, the upside of privatization is that the federal government could cancel its contracts with these detention centers and save a bundle of money. Leslie Berestein calculates that the federal government could save $3.4 million a month for each 1,000 detainees it releases.

Since 84 percent of ICE’s detained immigrants are housed in either contracted facilities owned by private companies or in state or local facilities where ICE rents space on contract, it should be relatively seamless for ICE to release them.

Of course, this will be bad news for Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) and the GEO Group – the two private prison companies that hold the largest numbers of immigrant detainees. However, that is their problem, not the problem of the federal government.

Mass detention and deportation are costly, ineffective, and harmful policies and must stop.

Tanya Golash-Boza is an Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Merced. She is the author of: Yo Soy Negro Blackness in PeruImmigration Nation: Raids, Detentions and Deportations in Post-9/11 Americaand Due Process Denied: Detentions and Deportations in the United States. She blogs at: http://stopdeportationsnow.blogspot.com

 

Potential graphic: