UN Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
with support from the UN Population Fund (UNFPA)
|
| UN Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, with support from the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) |
|
This copy of the Migration News was obtained from the Population
Information Network (POPIN) Gopher of the United Nations Population
Division, Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy
Analysis.
*******************************************************************
MIGRATION NEWS
Vol. 1, No. 6 July, 1994
Migration News is a newsletter that summarizes key
developments in immigration and integration issues during the
preceding month. Topics are grouped by region: North
America, Europe, Asia, and Other.
There are three versions of Migration News. The paper copy
is eight pages or about 6,000 words; the email version is
10,000 to 12,000 words; and the gopher version is 12,000 to
15,000 words.
The purpose of Migration News is to provide monthly summaries
of recent immigration developments that can be read in 60
minutes or less. Each issue also offers a special report,
abstracts of selected papers, and articles and information on
recent research publications.
Distribution is primarily by email. If you wish to
subscribe, send your email address to: Migration News
<migrant@primal.ucdavis.edu>. Current and back issues can be
accessed via gopher in the Migration News folder at:
dual.ucdavis.edu
We welcome your contributions: please fax news items of
interest to Philip Martin at (916) 752-5614, or send them to
the email address above. Working papers and other materials
to be listed in the RESOURCES section can be sent to Philip
Martin, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of
California, Davis, Davis CA 95616 USA. Those who contribute
items may request Migration News by mail or fax if email is
unavailable.
NOTE TO READERS: Immigration developments after June 25,
1994 will be covered in the August, 1994 issue of Migration
News.
NOTE TO CGES-CIIP MEMBERS: The Fall meeting will be held
Friday October 7, 1994 at the US-Mexican Studies Center at
UCSD. Those wishing to go on a border tour Thursday or
Friday night can make a reservation at the Summerhouse Inn,
9755 La Jolla Shores Drive, at the UC rate of $59 with
breakfast at 800-666-0261 or 619-459-0261.
___________________________________________
NORTH AMERICA
Welfare and Immigration--AJSpecial Report
Wilson-Clinton Spar over Immigration Monies
First Haitians Processed at Sea
Immigrant Day Laborers
Immigration and the California Election '94
Public Opinion on Immigrants
Immigrant Self-Employment--A Two-Edged Sword?
English-Only Rules in the Workplace
Immigration Enforcement
EUROPE
Border Controls and Foreign Workers in the EU
Immigration in Germany
Immigration in European Elections
Sweden Attracts Illegal Immigrants from Baltic States
No More Seasonal Yugoslavs in Switzerland
Estonian and Russian Migration
ASIA
Taiwan Threatens to Halt Importation of Filipino Workers
Japan
Chinese Illegal Immigrants and Guestworkers
Bangladeshis and Indonesians in Malaysia
OTHER
The US Immigration Lottery
RESOURCES
___________________________________________
.c.NORTH AMERICA
___________________________________________
.c. Welfare and Immigration--AJ Special Report
Between 1971 and 1986, the US debated what to do about
illegal immigration against a backdrop whose metaphor was
that illegal aliens displaced American workers and depressed
their wages by working "hard and scared." This labor market
discussion was inconclusive, largely because case studies
that found that illegal aliens displaced Americans and
depressed their wages could not be confirmed in econometric
studies that found few or no such effects in the cities and
states with the most immigrants, suggesting that any negative
labor market effects of immigrants were very localized.
One reason why there were few negative effects of immigrants
detected during the 1980s was that the economies of the
states that attracted the most immigrants--California, Texas,
and Florida--grew rapidly, taking the edge off of any labor
market effects of illegal immigrants because Americans were
displaced. In the end, the rationale for IRCA in 1986 was
that illegal immigration is illegal, and that the back door
of illegal immigration should be closed in order to keep the
front door open.
Today the debate over illegal immigration has changed. The
new emphasis is on the PUBLIC costs and benefits of legal and
illegal immigrants--how much do the services provided to them
cost (and which level of government pays for them), how much
do immigrants pay in taxes, and to which level of government
do these taxes flow. There is agreement that the taxes paid
by immigrants tend to flow to the federal government, while
the costs of the services they consume are paid for by state
and local taxes (MN, May, 1994).
There is disagreement on the amounts of taxes paid and the
costs of services provided, but, once again, perhaps the most
important question cannot yet be answered--how will the
balance of taxes paid and the cost of services change over
time?
Immigrant Catch-up
The first studies of immigrant economic integration were
generally optimistic. Economist Barry Chiswick found that the
motivation etc that encouraged people to move across borders
also helped them to catch up and earn more within about 15
years than US-born people with similar levels of education .
These studies were based on 1970 and 1980 data, so they
reflected the experiences of immigrants who arrived in the
1950s and 1960s. During the 1980s, studies by economist
George Borjas found that the average level of education of
immigrants was declining and, with less education, their
probability of achieving ever-higher US incomes fell.
The 1990 US Census demonstrated that the immigrants who
arrived during the 1980s were significantly different than
the US population. When ranked by education, the immigrant
characteristic most likely to indicate economic success has a
barbell or hourglass shape--they are more likely than natives
to have a college education, AND they are more likely than
natives to have less than a high-school education. US-born
citizens, when arrayed by their years of education, have more
of a diamond-shape, with most Americans in the middle at the
high-school graduate level.
Immigration and Welfare
According to the 1990 Census of Population, the 20 million
legal and illegal immigrants were 8.5 percent of the US
population. Almost half of these immigrants arrived during
the 1980s, and almost two-thirds of the 1980s immigrants
arrived in the second half of the decade.
The US spent $300 billion on means-tested assistance in 1992,
and an estimated $5 trillion on cash payments (AFDC) to poor
families, food stamps, and similar programs since 1965.
Since not all of these programs determine accurately the
legal status of recipients, it is very difficult to determine
whether a higher percentage of immigrants or natives are and
will be receiving "public assistance." An analysis of 1990
Census data by George Borjas found that slightly more
households headed by foreign-born persons received welfare
assistance, and these immigrant households received a
disproportionate share of welfare payments in 1989.
However, welfare dependence varies between immigrant
subgroups. Only refugees and elderly legal immigrants tend
to go on welfare upon their arrival or as soon as they are
eligible. Relatively few non-refugees who arrived in the
1980s--many of whom were illegal aliens who became legal
residents in the 1986-87 amnesty--received public assistance
in 1989, in part because many were ineligible when the 1990
Census of Population asked them about their income the year
before.
Because so many of the immigrants included in the 1990 Census
of Population were not eligible for welfare assistance,
"snapshot" analysts must be very careful about making over
time projections of welfare dependence on the basis of one-
year's data. For example, it is true that Census data show
that poor Mexican immigrant households in California are much
less likely to be on welfare than poor US-born Mexican-
American households, but it is not clear whether the
immigrants' lower welfare usage in 1989 reflected their
ineligibility OR an anti-welfare immigrant culture, as some
have claimed.
The data support the conclusion of demographer Frank Bean of
the University of Texas --a rising number of poor immigrant
households during the 1980s did NOT translate into a
proportional increase the number of welfare recipients in
1989. Some extend this to argue that the US and California
can receive poor immigrants and not see its welfare rolls
increase. About 41 percent of the native-born poor Mexican
households received public assistance, versus 18 percent of
the poor immigrant households headed by persons born in
Mexico. [The number of poor immigrant households in
California doubled during the 1980s to 509,000, and 20
percent of them (104,000) received public assistance, versus
26 percent (230,000) of the poor non-immigrant households].
However, no one knows whether these "snapshot" studies will
be indicative of the relationship between poor immigrants
and welfare in the 1990s. It seems clear that eligibility
restrictions, among other things, prevented most poor
immigrants from immediately getting public assistance. The
exceptions are refugees and the elderly, who do go on welfare
at relatively high rates when they become eligible.
The effect of newly-legalized aliens on welfare rates may be
significant, since higher percentages of immigrants who
arrived before 1980 are on welfare than 1980s arrivals from
countries in which the largest numbers of persons were
legalized in the 1987-88 amnesty (newly-legalized aliens were
generally not eligible for welfare in 1989, the Census year
for income data). For example, 13 percent of the Mexicans
who arrived before 1980 were on welfare in 1989, versus 11
percent of all Mexican immigrants in the US in 1990, 10
percent of the El Salvadorans who arrived before 1980, versus
seven percent, and 30 percent of the pre-1980 Dominicans,
versus 28 percent.
Countries from which large numbers of refugees came to the US
have a pattern of declining welfare dependence. Refugees are
eligible for welfare upon their arrival, and 26 percent of
all Vietnamese immigrants, but only 16 percent of pre-1980
Vietnamese immigrants, received welfare in 1989.
Snapshot data from the Census cannot answer the really
important question: will poor immigrants get public
assistance after they are in the US long enough to be
eligible for benefits? Americans clearly worry that as poor
immigrants become eligible for welfare, they will apply for
benefits. According to the Los Angeles Times, three-fourths
of California voters support that Save our State initiative
that is likely to go before voters in November 1994--it would
cut off most welfare benefits to undocumented residents.
Half of those polled would support preventing illegal
children from attending public schools.
Poor immigrants are entitled by law and court decisions to a
number of welfare benefits, so that, in many cases, changes
would have to be made in order to deny them benefits. The
major three programs that provide benefits to illegal aliens
are public education (Head Start, public school education
from grades K through 12, and school meal subsidies), WIC
food coupons, and emergency health care. In most studies,
public education, at about $5,000 per child per year,
accounts for two-thirds of the costs of these benefits. Once
aliens achieve a permanent legal status (green card), they
are entitled to AFDC, Food Stamps, and Medicaid.
For example, a profile of a Mexican illegal alien receiving
welfare in Texas indicated that those interviewed--single
mothers--intended to clean houses, not go on welfare. But
after a baby born in the US gave the family a US citizen who
was eligible for welfare, this poor family began receiving
Food Stamps and WIC food coupons available to mothers with
small children. This mother asserted that, even if these
benefits on which her family depends were eliminated, she
would try to stay in the US, largely because the US offered
more opportunities for poor children like hers.
Economist George Borjas believes that immigrants such as this
woman are becoming more dependent on welfare. Among non-
refugees, the more recently-arrived cohorts are more likely
than were earlier immigrants to get some welfare benefits,
and to remain more dependent on at least some means-tested
programs over their lives than were earlier immigrants.
Among refugees, many of whom get welfare upon their arrival,
the rate at which they reduce their welfare dependence seems
to be declining among recent arrivals.
Conclusions
There are two benchmark studies of the public benefits and
costs of immigrants--the Huddle study concluded that the
immigrants who arrived in the US since 1970 impose annual
costs of $70 billion, while the Urban Institute concluded
that these immigrants represent a $30 billion net gain
(Migration News, May 1994). Both look back to see how
immigrants who arrived in earlier years were faring 10 or
more years later, and both make assumptions about the hard-
to-measure effects of immigrants on natives. But neither
tackles the question of how fast immigrant earnings are
likely to rise as they integrate into the US--will they
remain poor and go on welfare as they become eligible, or
will they succeed economically, and avoid applying for
benefits even if they are eligible?
The debate is most heated in California, a high tax and high
service state that is relatively generous with welfare
benefits---it was the only major industrial state to increase
benefits with the cost-of living--and it receives about 40
percent of the nation's immigrants. In the past, California
received immigrants from abroad and migrants from other
states. Today, California is losing older and higher income
residents to other states--between 1990 and 1993, California
lost residents aged 35 and older, as well as those high
school graduates who had not completed college--and gaining
young persons without a high-school diploma.
While no one can predict the future, the Great Migration from
the US South during the 1950s and 1960s may provide some
useful insights. When over one million US citizens annually
left rural and southern homes for northern cities, there were
predictions that these migrants would not seek welfare
because such assistance was not available in the areas from
which they came, and that there were cultural barriers to
dependence on government programs. A combination of residency
restrictions and man-in-the-house rules seemed to prove these
speculations initially correct.
However, as the 1960s unfolded, there was a steadily rising
participation of rural-urban immigrants in a welfare system
that was offering more benefits and easier access to them--
the rate at which those eligible participated resembled the
letter S--initially few participated, then there was a
sharply rising rate of participation, and then participation
leveled off. No one yet knows whether eligible immigrants
will follow a similar path.
Suzanne Solis, "Immigrant Reliance on Welfare Questioned,"
San Francisco Chronicle, June 2, 1994, A3. Gregory Spears,
"Congress Eyes Legal Aliens for Cuts," New York Times, May
30, 1994. "Voters Support Denying Services to Illegal
Immigrants," Washington Post, May 30, 1994; Sam Howe
Verhover, "Stop Benefits for Aliens? It Wouldn't be that
Easy?", New York Times, June 8, 1994, A1, 12. Michael J.
Mandel, "It's Really Two Immigrant Economies," Business Week,
June 20, 1994, 74 and 194.
___________________________________________
.c.Wilson-Clinton Spar over Immigration Monies
California Governor Pete Wilson filed a second suit on May
31, against the federal government in an attempt to recoup
nearly $370 million in costs for providing health services to
illegal immigrants. The first lawsuit filed by Wilson seeks
nearly $2 billion from the federal government to reimburse
costs from incarcerating illegal alien felons.
The $370 million suit seeks to collect funds from the federal
government to pay for the costs of providing "emergency"
medical services to an estimated 309,000 illegal immigrants.
Wilson said, "The federal government can't keep sweeping the
problem of illegal immigration under the rug while sweeping
the costs onto our already overburdened state taxpayers."
The Clinton Administration responded on June 21 with a
proposal to spend $25 billion on immigrants, including $8.4
billion in California, one-third more than the Bush
Administration spent. The Wilson Administration countered
that the Clinton spending promise mixed together funds for
legal and illegal immigrant aid.
The governors of California, Arizona, Florida, who have
already sued the federal government, testified on June 21
before the Senate Appropriations Committee to press their
demand for reimbursement of the costs their states incur to
provide services to illegal aliens. Senators were
sympathetic to the governors descriptions of the influx of
illegal aliens as analogous to a natural disaster or an
invasion, but told the governors that it would be hard to
respond to their pleas for money because of the federal
budget deficit.
It is difficult to get Congress to approve immigrant impact
assistance for a handful of states. The April proposal by
the Clinton Administration to provide $350 million to help
cover the cost of incarcerating illegal aliens in state
prisons was converted in June to an anti-drug program that
would provide benefits to all states.
Press Release of Governor Pete Wilson, May 31, 1994. "Wilson
suing US for Second Time," San Diego Union-Tribune, June 1,
1994. Herbert A. Sample, "State may get more immigrant aid,"
Sacramento Bee, June 15, 1994. James Bornemeier, "Clinton
seeks $24.8 billion for immigration," Los Angeles Times, June
22, 1994, A3. Deborah Sontag, "3 Governors Take Pleas on
Aliens to the Senate," New York Times, June 23, 1994, A10.
___________________________________________
.c.First Haitians Processed at Sea
Six of the 35 Haitians picked up at sea on June 16 and
processed on the ship Comfort, anchored in Kingston Harbor,
Jamaica, were granted refugee status. During the first week
of the program, 226 Haitians who left Haiti in small boats
were picked up by the US Coast Guard and taken to Jamaica to
determine if they were refugees.
These are the first Haitian refugees to be processed at sea
under the new Clinton plan. Previously, the Haitians would
have been immediately returned to Haiti and would have to
apply for asylum from their country regardless of the threat
of persecution. The Haitians will not be allowed to enter
Jamaica, and the operation is scheduled to last for less than
six months. The Clinton Administration is expecting the
number of Haitians to be processed to jump to about 2,000 per
week . That is a dramatic increase over the 130 Haitians
that the Coast Guard has been picked up each week this year.
A representative from the UN Commission for Refugees will be
on board the ship to explain to the Haitians how the
interviews will be conducted and to answer questions. The
UNHCR has said that those rejected for asylum should be sent
to a safe country until the current Haitian government is
removed. The 29 Haitians who were denied asylum on June 16
will be returned to Haiti.
A sympathetic portrait of the 450,000 Haitian-Americans--the
1990 Census Of Population counted only 306,000 in a severe
undercount--emphasizes the diversity of the immigrants from
the nation of seven million (average per capita GNP in 1991
was $380) that shares an island of Hispanola with seven
million Dominicans (average per capita GNP in 1991 was $940).
Haitian-Americans are mostly middle class--in the 1990 COP,
40 percent had at least some college education, while only 10
percent had less than an eighth-grade education. Haitian-
Americans are concentrated around New York City, where they
are 1.5 percent of the population, and Miami (6 percent).
Haitian immigration to the US peaked in 1980-81, when 45,000
Haitians arrived. In 1981, President Reagan ordered that
Haitians be stopped at sea and, through 1991, only 28 of
22,716 Haitians intercepted were admitted to the US. Despite
generally high levels of education--half of the adult
Haitians in New York City have some college education--seven
percent of the Haitian immigrants there, and 25 percent of
second-generation Haitians--are on welfare.
Florida in June deported the first 113 of the 2,700 illegal
aliens who were jailed in the state for committing non-
violent offenses in the US. All but three of the first
prisoners to be deported were convicted of drug trafficking,
and their release is expected to save Florida up to $15,000
per alien per year. Some 4,100 of Florida's 54,000 prisoners
are foreigners and, according to INS, 1,400 of the foreigners
were in the US legally when they committed their crimes.
Deborah Sontag, "Haitian Migrants Settle In, Looking Back,"
New York Times, June 3, 1994, A1, 5; "US to hold Haitian
Refugees in Jamaica for asylum trials," Sacramento Bee, June
2, 1994. Steven Greenhouse, "US Expects Big Jump in Haitian
Applicants," International Herald Tribune, June 8, 1994;
"Florida is First in Deporting Jailed Aliens," New York
Times, June 9, 1994, A8. "Haitians get asylum interviews off
Jamaica," Sacramento Bee, June 17, 1994.
___________________________________________
.c.Immigrant Day Laborers
In many California cities, immigrants congregate in lumber
and hardware stores parking lots and on street corners to
wait for employers to hire them on a daily basis. These
labor shape-ups are considered less-than-satisfactory by
immigrant advocates, who note that unscrupulous employers can
go from one to another cheating the workers they hire; by
local residents, who complain of loitering immigrants; and by
employers, who are not sure if qualified workers will be
available. Union employees complain that the illegal
immigrants hired in such day labor markets are willing to
work for cut-rate wages--from less than half of union rates
to below minimum wage. The undocumented workers are competing
in construction markets that already offer fewer jobs because
of a stall in home building.
Several cities have tried to organize hiring halls--buildings
that offer sanitary facilities and some services, such as
English as a Second Language, for day laborers. Some hiring
centers cater only to undocumented workers, others welcome
all the unemployed, and some screen workers to determine if
they can work legally in the US. However, if the centers do
screen for legal status, then they may duplicate state
Employment Services, an already existing network of offices
that match workers with jobs for no fee. If the centers do
not screen workers for legal status, they may be using public
funds to help unauthorized workers find US jobs.
Hiring centers that are "immigration blind" do not usually
offer specialized services because they serve a diverse
unemployed clientele. Hiring centers that screen for
immigration status offer more services, but only to
documented workers. Some workers avoid the hiring centers
for fear employers will not hire workers who go to them.
Hiring centers have been tried numerous times as substitutes
for curbside hiring in southern California, especially after
communities ban curbside hiring. A University of
California, San Diego study of three such centers concluded
that the one which did not screen workers for legal status
was more successful than the two that did. It also concluded
that hiring centers can not work without community support.
Los Angeles is one of the most recent cities trying to deal
with the problems created by curbside hiring. After protests
by local residents, Los Angeles County on May 24 enacted an
ordinance that bans, effective July 1, 1994, laborers from
curbside solicitation of jobs--curbside job-seeking will be
a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a
$1,000 fine. The three county supervisors who supported the
measure to restrict day laborers said that they were trying
to reduce traffic and sanitation problems, not send an anti-
immigrant message.
Los Angeles' district attorney threatened not to enforce the
ordinance, saying that, "it would be difficult for me to
prosecute someone for simply trying to get a job." The ban
on curbside hiring affects only unincorporated areas of the
county, where about 10 percent of Los Angeles 9.2 million
people live. The city of Los Angeles has opened hiring halls
for immigrants, while nearby Agoura Hills banned curbside
hiring in July 1991 after a worker was killed in the rush to
trucks to find day jobs; its ban was upheld by California
courts in May 1994.
The wealthy Malibu Colony outside of Los Angeles has had a
mixed experience with hiring centers. A hiring center opened
in 1990, but closed four months later. In December 1991, a
task force recommended opening an official hiring center and
passing an ordinance to prohibit employers from hiring at
unauthorized sites. In 1993, the Malibu Labor Exchange
Center opened with support from city and county officials,
and it is credited with reducing the number of places day
laborers congregate. Over 30 workers report to the center
each day, and 20 requests for workers are made by employers.
In the Northern California county of Marin, the INS reports
that legal immigrants are turning in illegal immigrants at
day labor sites because too many workers are competing for
too few jobs. The Canal Area of Marin has an estimated
10,000 residents; since January 1993, the INS has arrested
between 1,000 and 1,500 illegal
immigrants in the area. However, many are set free with
temporary work permits so that they can support themselves
until their deportation hearing--one to 12 months later.
Temporary work permits entitle illegal immigrants to apply
for temporary Social Security cards and work anywhere in the
United States--2,000 are issued each month in the Bay Area.
Frederick Muir, "Supervisor Defends Vote to Restrict Day
Laborers" Los Angeles Times, May 26, 1994, Anna Cearley,
"Hiring Hall may get new test," San Diego Union-Tribune, May
25, 1994. Anna Cearley, "Hiring Hall Advocates runs into
resistance," San Diego Union-Tribune, May 27, 1994. David
LaGesse, "California immigrant issue grows," Dallas Morning
News, May 22, 1994. Kate Taylor, "Immigrants Split over Job
Scarcity," San Francisco Chronicle, May 17, 1994. Todd
Eisenstadt and Cathy L. Thorup, Caring Capacity versus
Carrying Capacity: Community Responses to Mexican Immigration
in San Diego's North County, Center for US-Mexican Studies,
UCSD, Monograph #39, 1994.
___________________________________________
.c. Immigration and the California Election '94
Between 1980 and 1990, California added six million to its
population, bringing it to 30 million, and three million
jobs. The population growth was fueled by natural increase
(births exceeding deaths) and by immigration as well as more
Americans from other states moving to California than left
the state. The job boom was the result of economic growth
nationwide, and especially rising defense expenditures.
Since 1990, population growth has slowed, and California has
lost jobs. Natural increase is about 400,000 annually, and
legal and illegal immigration adds about 300,000. However,
about 250,000 more Americans leave than enter California,
meaning that the state adds only about 450,000 new residents
annually, two-thirds of 1980s levels.
California lost 600,000 jobs since mid-1990, or 200,000 per
year. Many of the lost jobs paid relatively high wages,
since they were associated with defense manufacturing. Many
of the new jobs created, on the other hand, have been lower
wage service jobs.
Immigration was not the cause of the demographic or economic
shifts in California in the 1990s, but the fact that legal
and illegal immigrants continue to arrive in large numbers at
a time when the state budget is strained made immigration one
of the top four issues in the race for Governor --in a Los
Angeles Times exit poll on June 7, the day the political
parties picked their candidates for the November 8 election,
immigration and education joined the economy and crime as the
issues most important to voters. California Governor Pete
Wilson highlighted immigration as a problem for California
and advocated reducing services especially to illegal
immigrants, as well as developing more reliable
identification documents. His Republican challenger did not
make controlling illegal immigration the basis of his
campaign--but he did propose reduced services and preferences
such as bilingual education and affirmative action to turn
off the "social welfare magnet" that allegedly encourages
illegal immigrants to come to California.
The two major Democratic candidates also argued that
something must be done to reduce illegal immigration, but
they favored border and interior enforcement to keep illegal
immigrants out and prevent those who slip in from getting
jobs. Kathleen Brown argued for more federal Border Patrol
agents and a reliable identification system, while John
Garamendi argued for a reliable identification system and
endorsed PRIDE principles--Proponents for Responsible
Immigration Debate and Education--which include continuation
of jus solis, continued immigrant access to health and
education services, and economic assistance for Mexico and
other sending nations.
US Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) reintroduced legislation to
require counterfeit-proof worker ID cards for all workers and
to cut some welfare benefits now available to immigrants.
Feinstein's bill also proposes stiffer penalties for alien
smuggling, streamlines mechanisms for deporting criminal
illegal aliens, and establishes a $1.00 border-crossing fee
to help pay for beefed-up enforcement.
Sacramento Bee, June 5, 1994, A25. Michael Doyle, "Feinstein
gets tougher on immigration," Sacramento Bee, June 16, 1994.
___________________________________________
.c.Public Opinion on Immigrants
A public opinion poll released by the Field Institute on June
9 found that most Californians support measures to slow down
illegal immigration, including a $1 dollar fee for crossing
the border to provide more funds for border enforcement and
deporting illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes.
Proposals to deny services to illegal immigrants vary by the
ethnicity of the respondent. Three-fourths of the
Californians polled believe illegal immigrants should not
receive welfare payments. Among white voters, 85 percent
oppose welfare for illegal immigrants; among Latinos, 50
percent are in favor. Illegal immigrants are not eligible
for US welfare, but their US citizen children are entitled to
benefits.
About 55 percent of whites favor amending the US Constitution
to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the US of
undocumented immigrants, and 59 percent of the whites believe
that the children of illegal aliens should not be allowed to
attend public schools--77 percent of the Latinos, by
contrast, approve illegal alien children in public schools.
Non-voters tend to support public education for illegal alien
children, while voters do not.
Most Californians do not support the creation of special
identification cards to control illegal immigration--49
percent said agreed such a was not a good idea. However, 55
percent of the whites oppose an ID card, while 56 percent of
the Latinos thought it would be a good idea.
A national CBS poll conducted in May found that 29 percent of
those surveyed think immigrants contribute to the US, while
53 percent said they cause problems. Only 16 percent agreed
that immigrants would make American society better, 41
percent said they would make it worse, and 32 percent said
they wouldn't affect American society.
The share of Americans who agree that economic hard times in
the United States make it difficult to continue welcoming
immigrants who arrive with few assets rose to 65 percent, up
from 60 percent in January, and 45 percent in a 1986 poll,
CBS reported that despite these opinions, only 34 percent
said immigration should be stopped, while 19 percent said the
US should always welcome immigrants. Thirty-two percent said
immigrants take jobs from Americans, but 52 percent said they
were jobs Americans didn't want anyway.
The US Conference of Mayors reported the results of a survey
of the leaders of 78 cities at their annual meeting in
Portland on June 13. It found that the benefits produced by
immigrants in these cities are believed to outweigh the
problems associated with the delivery of services to them.
The report found that foreign-born persons represent an average 11
percent of the population in the 78 cities, and more than
one-fourth of the cities believe that their foreign-born population
was undercounted in the 1990 census. Just over two out of three
of the cities reported that they have benefited from the presence
of immigrants, principally through economic development,
increased availability of both skilled and unskilled labor, and
social and cultural contributions to the community.
The major problems were in the delivery and financing of
health, social, language and other services. Fifty-seven
percent of the cities said these problems relate to the
presence of legal immigrants; 56 percent said they relate to the
presence of undocumented persons. City governments in nearly
one-third of the cities help new immigrants to resettle.
Officials surveyed called for increased resources for the
Border Patrol to reduce illegal immigration.
"Huddled masses aren't welcome," Washington Times, May 24,
1994. Amy Chance, "Split on immigrants," Sacramento Bee,
June 10, 1994. Gerry Braun, "Immigration reform favored,
Majority wants to curb welfare, schooling," San Diego-Union
Tribune, June 10, 1994.
___________________________________________
.c.Immigrant Self-Employment--A Two-Edged Sword?
A higher percentage of immigrants (7.6 percent) than natives
(7 percent) were self employed in the 1990 Census Of
Population, and the proportion of immigrants who are self
employed tends to rise with time in the US. Self-employed
immigrants have the highest average incomes of all types of
immigrants--$30,000 in 1989--and they are credited with
revitalizing inner city neighborhoods from Watts to Brooklyn.
However, immigrant revitalization can be a two-edged sword.
Chinese immigrants who created New York's third largest
Chinatown in Brooklyn drove out drug dealers and pushed up
real estate values, but they also brought sweatshops and
Asian gangs into the area. An estimated 10,000 Chinese
immigrants--perhaps one-third illegal aliens--work up to 70
hours weekly for as little as $500 monthly, an hourly wage
that is less than half of the federal $4.25 minimum. It has
proven to be very difficult to enforce labor and other laws
that set minimum standards in neighborhoods with large
numbers of recent immigrants.
Many of the 65,000 Chinese in Brooklyn were legalized under a
provision of IMMACT (1990) that opened slots for those in the
US after the 1989 Tiananmen Square killings.
E.S. Browning, "A New Chinatown Grows in Brooklyn," Wall
Street Journal, May 31, 1994, B1
___________________________________________
.c.English-Only Rules in the Workplace
The US Supreme Court refused to decide on the validity of a
24-year old Equal Employment Opportunity Commission policy
that employer rules which required only English in the
workplace were presumed to be discriminatory. According to
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 120 US employers
have been accused of unfairly imposing English-only rules.
In 1993, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the
EEOC had no authority to issue such a rule prohibiting
English-only in the workplace and, when this ruling was
appealed to the US Supreme Court, the Clinton Administration
urged that the federal appeals court ruling be overturned.
This means that a California company can continue to require
that its employees speak only English on the job. The
Clinton Administration had argued that the appeals court
ruling--which made it more difficult for employees to
challenge English-only workplace rules--makes it too hard for
employees who wish to speak a language other than English at
work to challenge the "business necessity" of such rules.
In one such case in San Francisco, five Filipino-American
security guards were reassigned after a false alarm got
officials out of bed because the guard on duty allegedly had
such a strong accent that his explanation could not be
understood. They were awarded $87,500 from the US
government, and additional funds from their employer, a
private security firm, for discrimination.
Richard Carelli, "Administration argues against English-only
rules in businesses," AP, June 3, 1994; Jane Adams, "5
Filipino-Americans win accent-bias settlements," Sacramento
Bee, June 3, 1994, B5, New York Times, June 20, 1994, A10.
"High court backs 'English only,'" Sacramento Bee, June 21,
1994.
___________________________________________
.c.Immigration Enforcement
Operation Hold the Line has reduced the number of illegal
aliens entering the US near El Paso, Texas from 10,000 to 100
per day, according to the INS.
However, there may be some diversion of aliens attempting
entry to Arizona. The Tucson INS sector, for example,
apprehended an average 6,000 aliens monthly in FY 1992, and
7,700 monthly in FY93. However, in April 1994, apprehensions
rose to almost 15,000, leading some to speculate that aliens
are simply being diverted along the 2000 mile US-Mexican
border.
In a visit to the border region in San Diego, INS
Commissioner Doris Meissner said that over the next six
months, 400 border agents will be added to the San Diego
border area and they will get 222 new patrol cars with
encrypted radios so that alien smugglers can't hear their
conversations. A new computer system called ENFORCE puts 51
INS forms into an integrated computer database and reduces
processing time from 20 minutes to three or four minutes for
each alien apprehended will be tested in San Diego in July.
Reacting to the success of Operation Hold the Line, the House
Appropriations Committee on June 15 approved the addition of
700 Border Patrol agents. The $4.5 million measure must now
be approved by the full House of Representatives and the
Senate before these additional agents can be hired.
The US House of Representatives also authorized the use of
active-duty military personnel to police the Mexican border.
This amendment to the defense authorization bill would
authorize the Secretary of Defense to order military
personnel to assist the Customs Service to inspect cargo,
motor vehicles and aircraft arriving in the country. The
Senate must now approve the measure.
"Flow of Immigrants diverted to AZ," Tucson Citizen, June 5,
1994. John Dillin, "A Big Knock on US Door as Immigrants
Pour In," Christian Science Monitor, June 7, 1994. "Help
coming, INS chief says," Sacramento Bee, June 13, 1994.
Marcus Stern, "Panel OKs 700 new border agents, Action in
House underlines tensions," San Diego Union-tribune, June 16,
1994.
___________________________________________
.c.EUROPE
___________________________________________
.c.Border Controls and Foreign Workers in the EU
The 12-nation European Union promised four freedoms when it
was founded in 1957--the freedom to move goods, services,
capital, and labor across the borders of member nations. The
Single European Act (EC-92) and the Maastricht Treaty
restated the EU's commitment to a border-free Europe, and
nine EU members signed the Schengen agreement (all but
Denmark, Ireland, and the UK), which established the goal of
removing border checks on their common borders by January 1,
1993, meaning that EU nationals, such as Germans and
Frenchmen, as well as third-country nationals such as
Americans and Turks, could move freely from Germany to France
or between Belgium and the Netherlands.
Four deadlines for a border-free Europe have come and gone.
The current target date for a border-free Europe is October
1994. There are today more stories of restoring border
checks and controls than progress toward their elimination.
As one perhaps unanticipated consequence of another EU
agreement--the Dublin agreements that require asylum
applicants to have their cases heard in the first EU country
they reach-- countries such as the Netherlands have stepped
up their use of border checks--including using video cameras
to prove that asylum applicants entered from Germany for
asylum, and thus must be returned to Germany to apply.
In May 1994, Denmark applied to become an observer under the
Schengen convention, a move expected to put pressure on
Britain and Ireland, as well as the other Nordic countries
expected to join the EU in 1995, to take steps toward a
border-free Europe.
The European Parliament will create a European Ombudsman
after June 1994 elections and, according to some observers,
complaints about border controls should keep the ombudsman
busy.
On June 20, 1994 EU Justice and Home Affairs Ministers
approved a resolution that would confirm at the EU level
national restrictions on immigration. Over the protest of
the Belgium minister, a Resolution that national polices
restricting
immigrant workers from entering countries "should be
maintained and where
necessary reinforced" was approved. According to the
resolution, EU member nations should "refuse entry to their
territories of third-country nationals
for the purpose of employment," with "admission for temporary
employment" permitted only as " a very narrow exception" in
cases where there is a vacant job that requires specialized
skills and, if unfilled, the viability of the business is
threatened. There are exceptions for seasonal foreign
workers employed for less than six months, and for trainees
in the host EU country for up to 12 months.
This resolution contradicts the February proposal (COMMA (94)
23) of Padraig Flynn, the European Commissioner with
responsibility for immigration issues, to permit the nine
million legal immigrants living in the EU to move and work in
another Member State.
The ministers also approved a feasibility study of the
EURODAC network. If implemented, the system would
fingerprint asylum-seekers and suspected illegal immigrants
at their first point of entry, and then circulate the
information among member nations.
"EU Ministers to set out foreigners' Work Rules," Reuters,
June 17, 1994. David Gardner, "EU ministers agree on foreign
workers," Financial Times, June 21, 1994. Raphael, "Return
of the Border Guards," Wall Street Journal, May 31, 1994,
A16; The Reuter European Community Report, May 27, 1994;
European Report, June 22, 1994.
___________________________________________
.c.Immigration in Germany
Germany is the major country of immigration in Europe. Over
the past five years, an average 830,000 foreigners annually
arrived in the former West Germany, producing one of the
world's highest rates of immigration. In the former West
Germany, deaths exceed births, so that immigrants who add
about 1.5 percent annually to the 60 million population there
are far more visible than the comparable rate of immigration
to turn-of-the-century US.
Germany's "melting pot" has been marked by violence against
and marches in support of foreigners;
Ueberfremdung(overforeignization) was deemed the "worst" new
word to enter the German vocabulary in 1993. However, there
is still no German immigration or immigrant (integration)
policy. Chancellor Kohl has appealed to his EU partners to
develop an EU-wide immigration policy to deal with
immigration, what he called the central challenge "facing
Europe in the 1990s." However, after 12 years in office, his
coalition government has dealt only with asylum--it has not
so far tackled naturalization or rules for admitting
immigrants.
Naturalization
Germany has a rather difficult naturalization procedure that
includes the requirement that persons wishing to become
German citizens give up their original citizenship. One
proposal to deal with naturalization is to allow dual
citizenship and to allow non-citizen residents to vote in
local elections. At its three-day congress in early June,
1994, the FDP (Free Democratic Party) pledged to introduce
legislation that would reform Germany's 1913 citizenship laws
and permit foreigners to vote in local elections if
Chancellor Helmut Kohl's governing coalition is returned to
power in the October 1994 election.
Cornelia Schmalz-Jacobsen, Commissioner for Aliens Affairs,
was elected to the FDP presidium at the Congress. She has
been championing dual citizenship and similar reforms to
promote the integration of foreigners in Germany.
President Demirel of Turkey in April 1994 appealed for Turks
living in Germany to give up their Turkish citizenship and
become naturalized Germans so that they could become a more
effective "lobby for Turkey" in Europe.
Asylum
The number of asylum seekers in Germany continued to fall in
1994. After averaging 12,000 monthly between January and
April, the number of asylum seekers fell to 9,300 in May.
There has been a great deal of speculation about how illegal
attempts to enter Germany would respond to the July 1, 1993
changes in German asylum laws and procedures. On the German-
Polish border, apprehensions have decreased, from an average
1,500 monthly--two-thirds Romanians-- in 1993 to 1,200
monthly in April and May 1994. In 1992, there were 46,200
foreigners apprehended on the job in Germany, and there were
5,200 preliminary proceedings initiated against contract
workers suspected of working illegally.
About 86,000 Germans emigrated in 1992; two-thirds of them
remained in Europe.
Almost 50,000 Aussiedler (ethnic Germans), most from the
Asian republics of the former USSR, arrived in Germany
during the first three months of 1994. Under a 1993 revision
of the German law, a maximum 225,000 Aussiedler are permitted
to enter Germany each year from the former USSR.
In April 1994, the German Parliament amended its Employment
Promotion Law (Beschaeftigugngsforderungsgesetz) to permit
private employment agencies to match even unskilled workers
and jobs. This reform also permits unemployed workers
drawing UI benefits to be placed for up to three months in
seasonal agricultural jobs for which they will receive 25DM
($15) daily. In 1993, most of the 200,000 seasonal foreign
workers employed in Germany worked in agriculture.
David Gow, "A Cold and Wet Reception For Illegals On The
Union's Eastern Frontier," The Guardian, June 3, 1994, p.
11. The Economist, May 14, 1994, p. 55; May 21, 1994, p.
S5. Judy Dempsey, "Pledge on German immigration laws,"
Financial Times, June 6, 1994; This Week in Germany, April
22, 1994, p. 4.
___________________________________________
.c.Immigration in European Elections
Immigration was an issue in recent elections across Europe.
Voters in European Union nations went to the polls on June 9
and 12 to choose members for five-year terms in the European
Parliament. The Greek chair of the EU's Council for Foreign
Ministers says that employment and migration flows will be
the "main economic and social problems for the next decade."
However, local issues rather than overarching issues such as
immigration seemed to influence voting in many countries.
Voter turnout was low--about 50 percent. The Socialists were
rejected by voters in France; Chancellor Helmut Kohl's
Christian Democrats staged a major comeback after a shaky
start; John Major's Conservative Party lost half of its 32
seats in the European Parliament to the Labor Party; and the
governing Spanish Socialists led by Prime Minister Felipe
Gonzalez paid for Spain's 22 percent unemployment rate losing
to the conservative Popular Party.
Hard campaigning by Chancellor Kohl in Germany, as well as a
recovering economy and a strong stand against continued
immigration, helped the CDU widen its lead over the Social
Democrats. A compromise between Kohl's CDU and the Social
Democrats in 1993 sharply decreased the number of asylum
seekers into Germany, and helped to explain why the rightist
Republicans are likely to fall short of the five percent
threshold needed to win seats in the Bundestag in the October
federal elections--they won only 3.9 percent of the vote.
The far-right Nationalist Front in France experienced similar
problems. Instead of an expected 15 percent of the vote, the
Nationalist Front received only 10.5 percent. Analysts say
the conservative government's success in imposing stricter
immigration controls negated the Nationalist Front's hottest
issue--immigration.
On June 12, 1994, Austria said yes to Europe--66 percent of
Austrian voters approved the country becoming the thirteenth
member nation of the EU. A yes vote, which seemed assured
earlier in 1994 when Austria, Norway, Sweden and Finland
scheduled referendums on EU membership, was made uncertain by
fears that Austria would lose its identity and be overrun by
foreigners. The questions directed to the government's "Say
yes to Europe" campaign offices included "Could all
foreigners, including Turks, settle in Austria?" reflecting
fears that foreigners would flood the country due to the EU's
allegedly looser border controls.
Graham Brown, "Unemployment, immigration key issues for Euro-
voters," Agence France Press, May 31, 1994. "The Rumbling in
Europe," International Herald Tribune, May 30, 1994. Roger
Thurow, "Austrians Express last-minute doubts as Vote to Join
European Union nears," Wall Street Journal, June 10, 1994,
A6. Rick Atkinson, "German Far Right Soundly Rejected in
Voter Backlash, International Herald Tribune, June 14, 1994.
William Drozdiak, "European Voters Settle Local Scores;
Election of Continental Parliament Produces Parochial
Results," Washington Post, June 13, 1994.
___________________________________________
.c.Sweden Attracts Illegal Immigrants from Baltic States
Over the past two years, about 870 refugees--many without
passports or documents-- have arrived in Sweden by boat from
Latvia, which is only 90 miles across the Baltic Sea. In
early 1994, the Swedish government attempted to slow the flow
of asylum-seekers by raising the penalty for smuggling aliens
from six months to two years in prison. Sweden also donated
nine retrofitted former coast guard patrol boats to the three
Baltic countries, and helped train customs officers in
Estonia.
Almost all of the boat refugees en route to Sweden come via
Russia. Official Russian estimates are that more than
500,000 foreigners are awaiting onward passage. A Swedish
immigration ministry spokesperson said that Sweden's liberal
asylum laws and generous welfare system attract asylum-
seekers. The Swedish government does not return asylum
seekers to Afghanistan or Iraq, but does return those from
Bangladesh. Sweden would like the Baltic states to improve
border controls and sign the Geneva Convention on Refugees so
that the Swedish government could return asylum-seekers.
The Nordic countries, the United States and Canada will give
the Baltics and Belarus $1.5 million to support their efforts
to prevent illegal immigration and assist refugees. The
program includes assistance to Russian speakers in the
Baltics who want to remigrate to Russia, and also for those
who want to move to Latin America or other regions.
Greg Mcivor, "Trawler Seized as Sweden acts to block Baltic
Refugee Route," The Guardian, June 9, 1994. "Boat carrying 48
Kurds and Bengalis intercepted off Sweden," Agence Press
France, June 8, 1994. "Western Aid for refugees and to
prevent illegal immigration, BNS News Agency, May 31, 1993.
___________________________________________
.c. No More Seasonal Yugoslavs in Switzerland
Switzerland, a country with a per capita GNP 50 percent
higher than that of the US in 1992 ($36,230 vs. $23, 120) has
a mass tourism industry for residents of lower-income
countries staffed largely by seasonal and other immigrants.
Beginning January 1, 1994, the right of seasonal workers who
worked 36 of 48 months in Switzerland to obtain one-year
resident permits was ended. On April 13, 1994, the Swiss
government announced that effective January 1, 1995, no more
seasonal workers from the former Yugoslavia would be admitted
in order "to slow down the increase in the number of foreign
residents" from there.
The number of asylum seekers averaged 1,400 monthly so far in
1994; 5,200 arrived during the first four months of 1994.
Switzerland in May 1994 began to return some of the 22,000
Tamils from Sri Lanka, beginning with the most recently
arrived.
NZZ, April 14, 1994
___________________________________________
.c.Estonian and Russian Migration
The Estonian Interior Ministry has announced that only 1,000
people will be permitted to immigrate in 1994. Under
Estonian law, the annual immigration quota cannot exceed one-
tenth of one percent of Estonia's resident population of 1.5
million, or 1500.
The head of the remigration bureau at the Estonian
Citizenship and Immigration Department reported on May 23
that an average of 12,000 to 14,000 foreigners leave Estonia
every year. Each foreign citizen leaving the country is
entitled to a US$77 to $192 departure bonus.
Discussions are underway to obtain foreign aid to finance the
emigration of Russians from Estonia. Many Russians say they
are compelled to leave Estonia, because Russia supports only
those settlers who claim they have been forced to leave.
The estimated 500,000 illegal immigrants from Asia, Africa,
and the Middle East in Russia--up from an estimated 50,000 in
1992--are blamed for increasing the crime rate. According to
police, foreigners committed 15,000 crimes in 1993, up from
530 in 1992. Many of the victims were other foreigners.
"Immigration of non-Estonians limited to 1,000 people in
1994," BBC, June 3, 1994. " Over 12,000 foreigners a year
level Estonia," BBC, June 3, 1994. The Record, June 22, 1994
___________________________________________
.c.ASIA
___________________________________________
.c.Taiwan Threatens to Halt Importation of Filipino Workers
Taiwan is threatening to halt the importation of Filipino
workers because of new employment requirements placed on the
workers and their Taiwanese employers by the Filipino
government. Taiwan has about 183,000 foreign workers in the
country, including at least 50,000 Filipinos, who work
primarily as domestics and nurses.
The employment requirements are meant to protect Filipinos
working in Taiwan. They require Taiwanese employers of
Filipino domestic helpers and private nurses to provide
workers compensation insurance in the event of on-the-job
injury and advise the worker of their financial status. The
Taiwan government objects to these rules because they
infringe upon its sovereignty. The issues are expected to be
discussed at the annual labor talks later this month.
The Taiwan Association of Employment Agencies supports a ban
on new Filipino workers--it is not submitting requests for
any new workers to Manila. Taiwan labor officials say that
if the additional Filipino workers are banned, they will
allow employers to bring in workers from other countries.
The Taiwan Council of Labor Affairs has considered freezing
the importation of foreign workers because the labor
shortage is "over." The council would make exceptions for
companies investing over NT$100 million, but these companies
would not be allowed to have foreigner workers exceed 30
percent of the company's work force.
Some Taiwanese employers apparently do not treat foreign
workers well--they have been ordered to improve the safety,
health and welfare conditions for their foreign workers or
face penalties. Typical violations include too many overtime
hours, no days off, and failure to provide proper welfare
benefits.
"Taiwan: Labor Council Gives Ultimatum to Philippine
Government on Workers" China Economic News Service, June 8,
1994. "Work Conditions-Regulations," June 7, 1994, China
Economic News Service. "Decision On Filipino Workers Could
Harm Bilateral Relations," China Economic News Service, May
31, 1994.
___________________________________________
.c. Japan: Chinese Illegal Immigrants and Guestworkers
Over 4,000 Chinese entered Japan illegally, primarily to
work, in the past five and one-half years, according the
Justice Ministry's Immigration Bureau. Many of the illegal
immigrants are believed to have been smuggled aboard
freighters and other vessels by the Chinese mafia, called
Snake Head.
The number of migrants being smuggled into Japan in groups is
rising. In 1990, 18 Chinese arrived in two groups; in 1992,
396 arrived in 14 groups; and, in 1993, 335 arrived in seven
groups. Between January and May, 1994, 250 Chinese in eight
groups were smuggled into Japan.
Some Vietnamese set out in boats for Japan, transiting
through Hong Kong, because of a rumor that Japan is welcoming
foreign workers with financial assistance and extended visa
stays. The UNHCR is working in Hue, Vietnam to halt the
spread of the rumor. Last month Japan announced that it
would return any boat people who arrived in the country after
March 5, without screening them for refugee status.
Thirty-one nations agreed at a meeting in Geneva in February
that Vietnamese would no longer be given preferential
treatment over asylum seekers form other countries.
Japanese Guestworkers
Haruo Shimada, Japan's best-known labor economist, recently
released a 220-page book that showcases his proposal to
develop a work-and-learn program through which unskilled
workers could fill vacant jobs, learn skills and, if they
settled, be accepted and integrated into Japanese society.
The book has eight chapters grouped into three parts--
overview, a work-and-learn temporary worker proposal, and
long-term solutions to the problem of illegal immigration and
labor shortages in Japan. Getting the Japanese to accept
foreigners may not be easy--a Tokyo poll reported that 64
percent of residents dislike having foreigners in their
neighborhoods, and 57 percent agreed that the Japanese
discriminate against foreigners.
Most of the book is devoted to explaining why guestworkers
are inevitable, and why the foreigners admitted must have
legal status, be paid appropriate wages and housed and
trained by their Japanese employers, and why Japan must be
prepared to integrate those who will settle after their
three- to five-year work-and-learn programs.
The book provides a valuable summary of recent Japanese
immigration policy and data, and carefully explains a leading
proposal to deal with illegal immigration. It is hortatory,
however, and may not do full justice to those who oppose
foreign workers in Japan. The need or demand for (foreign)
workers depends on their cost, and if EMPLOYERS had to bear
all of the costs that would be implicit in the work-and-learn
proposal--everything from preparatory Japanese language
training to on-the-job training in Japan--they may decide
they do not need many foreign workers--automating, adjusting
workplaces and wages to attract local workers, or investing
abroad might seem more attractive. If society as a whole
bears these costs, then employers who offer 3D jobs--dirty,
dangerous, and difficult--are being subsidized to maintain
such jobs.
The central issue facing countries such as Japan is simple.
Demographics make it clear that the supply of workers in the
future will be limited--even if wages and workplaces were
radically altered, low-fertility Japan would soon run out of
the workers needed for a growing labor force. What is not
clear is how sensitive the demand for additional workers is
to rising wages, i.e., how needed are unskilled foreign
workers? Industrial nations are not testing the sensitivity
of the demand for unskilled foreign workers to labor
shortages because illegal workers are showing up everywhere,
making such tests unnecessary. If their presence is
inevitable, as Shimada asserts, then it is better for legal
and humanitarian reasons that they be legal rather than
illegal, which is what gives rise to proposals for managing
foreign workers.
Neither the traditional immigration countries of North
America nor the guestworker countries of Western Europe have
managed to find a happy compromise between wanting foreign
workers but not foreign residents. This book in several
places says that "just a little more effort" to open the
work-and-learn program to "hundreds of thousands" of
unskilled foreign workers will enable Japan to succeed in
managing migration.
"Illegal Chinese entrants to Japan total 4,132 in 5 years,"
Japan Economic Newswire, June 11, 1994. "False rumor
prompts Vietnamese to set sail for Japan," Japan Economic
Newswire, May 30, 1994. Shimada, Haruo. 1994. Japan's
"Guest Workers:" Issues and Public Policies. Tokyo:
University of Tokyo Press. Wall Street Journal, June 6,
1994, A9.
___________________________________________
.c.Bangladeshis and Indonesians in Malaysia
There are over 200,000 Bangladeshi migrant workers in
Malaysia, half of whom are there illegally. Most of the
Bangladeshis work in plantations and construction.
The Malaysia-Bangladesh Friendship Clinic was set up in
Bangladesh to provide lab tests for communicable diseases
such as hepatitis B, tuberculosis, syphilis and cholera and
to register Bangladeshi workers headed for Malaysia.
There was a 30 percent increase in tuberculosis patients in
Malaysia in 1993, although the disease was thought to be
eliminated in the country. Some blame the increase in foreign
workers on the increasing number of persons with communicable
diseases.
A team of Malaysian doctors inspected 70 clinics in
Bangladesh and found that none were conducting medical tests
that meet Malaysian requirements, and some clinics were
selling medical certificates to prospective job seekers. The
Friendship Clinic is staffed by Malaysians. Since April
1994, the clinic has screened 50,00 workers bound for
Malaysia and found 2,273 to be medically unfit.
According to press accounts "thousands" of illegal Indonesian
workers have set up squatter colonies deep inside estate
plantations in Malaysia, living in tents and moving to where jobs
are available. The National Union of Plantation Workers, the
largest union in Malaysia with 60,000 members, reports that such
migrancy from plantation to plantation is a new phenomonon.
Squatting is a major issue in booming Malaysia--in booming
areas such as Kuala Lumpur and Johore Bahru, as many as one-
eighth of the population are squatters. According to some
reports, Malaysians who move into low-cost government housing
rent out their own squatter housing to Indonesian immigrants.
Some Malaysians argue that the Indonesians do not want to
spend money on housing, since they aim to remit 50 percent of
their earnings to Indonesia.
Dafizeck Daud, "Inflow of Bangladeshis into Malaysia Surges,"
Business Times, June 17, 1994. "Illegal immigrants set up
squatter camps in estates," The Straits Times, May 25, 1994
___________________________________________
.c.OTHER
___________________________________________
.c.The US Immigration Lottery
Lottery fever has hit Bangladesh. Thousands of Bangladeshis
are jamming post offices to apply for the 55,000 "diversity
immigrant" slots--including 6,873 reserved for all Asian
countries except China, India, the Philippines, Vietnam ,
South Korea and residents of Hong Kong--available in the US
immigration lottery in 1995. The US Department of State will
group applications by region, and select the winners at
random.
Five years ago the Bangladesh post office was besieged by
millions hoping to get a US visa. And just because a
Bangladeshi becomes registered for visa eligibility, does not
guarantee they will make to the US. Under that mistaken
impression in the last round, thousands of Bangladeshis left
their jobs and sold their property but were not admitted to
the US.
In the Philippines, hundreds of children attempted to prove
that they had American military fathers and thus qualified
for immediate US citizenship. In an annual one-day ritual,
the mothers of 500 children brought evidence of American
fatherhood to a one-day registration on June 21.
Nadeem Qadir, "'American dream' fever grips Bangladeshis--
once again," Agence France Presse, June 4, 1994; New York
Times, June 22, 1994, A5.
___________________________________________
.c.RESOURCES
Center for Immigration Studies. 1994. Immigration-Related
Statistics-1994. Available for $4 from CIS, 1815 H St NW,
#1010, Wash DC 20006-3604.
There were 261 million American residents in mid-1994,
including 23 million foreign-born persons. Legal immigration
in FY93 was reported to be 972,000, plus an estimated 300,000
illegal aliens who settled--there were 1.3 million illegal
aliens apprehended in FY93.
CIS data differ form INS data because of their treatment of
refugees and asylees. The INS considers to be immigrants
only persons whose status has been so adjusted by the US
government; CIS data are actual refugee entries plus an
estimate of the number of asylum applicants likely to remain
in the US.
The Zentrum fr Sozialpolitik, Uni Bremen, Parkallee 39, D-
28209 Bremen has several working papers on immigration and
integration issues in Germany. Thomas Faist, in How to
Define a Foreigner? The Symbolic Politics of Immigration in
German Partisan Discourse, 1978-1992 (12/93) explains how
German politicians have been able to maintain that the
country was not an immigration country even as immigrants
poured in. If Germans who were expelled from the east are
included, then 18 million "immigrants" arrived in the former
West Germany between 1945 and 1989, versus 16 million
immigrants to the US during this period. Political parties
knew that voters thought too many immigrants were in Germany,
and they advocated hard to enforce symbolic policies to stop
migration and promote returns and at the same time encourage
integration. This turned immigration into a meta issue, in
which immigrants became the symbols of an overstretched
welfare state and high unemployment.
According to Faist, the CDU-CSU began to use anti-immigrant
sentiments to gain votes in the early 1980s. Party
differences were sharpened in 1992, when the SPD agreed with
the CDU-CSU-FDP coalition government that the Constitution
had to be amended in order to reduce the influx of asylees.
The SPD is now pushing for dual citizenship, which the CDU-
CSU-FDP government opposes.
Working paper 13/93, Boundaries of National Welfare States:
Immigrants and Social Rights, includes a useful table
comparing the access of various categories of immigrants to
pensions, welfare, and work-related benefits. Germany
generally provides more access to legal immigrants and
refugees, but fewer benefits to illegal aliens--in Germany,
for example, illegal alien children are not entitled to free
public education as in the US and, since children born in
Germany are not automatically German citizens, they can not
lead to welfare benefits for the family, as in the US.
Other working papers deal with social and employment policies
in comparative perspective.
Morse, Ann and Jonathan Dunlap. 1994. America's Newcomers:
Community Relations and Ethnic Diversity. National
Conference of State Legislatures, Issue Paper No. 2. April.
Available for $10 from the National Conference of State
Legislatures, 444 N. Capitol Street, NW, Suite 515,
Washington, DC 20001.
This 19-page monograph was produced by the Immigrant Policy
Project of the State and Local Coalition on Immigration to
address the role of state and local governments in the
resettlement of refugees and immigrants.
The paper contains sections on immigrant characteristics,
assimilation, and diversity, and explains how several
communities are attempting to deal with immigrant diversity.
The first issue paper, America's Newcomers: A State and
Local Policymakers' Guide to Immigration and Immigrant
Policy, contains a brief background on US immigration law and
the immigration system, the various legal status of
immigrants, and the access of immigrants to social services.
The Gruter Institute for Law and Behavioral Research has
announced it will focus on three issues: human migration,
security and risk, and sex and gender. The Gruter Institute
is a small California foundation whose work is motivated by
the belief that rapid advances in the biology of human
behavior have important implications for the law and the
social sciences.
Evolutionary biology is the basis for the InstituteUs work.
Biology distinguishes between proximate cause--such as how
birds stake out territory for mating--from ultimate cause--
why they stake out territory. The unifying principle is
natural selection--the notion that the goal of all living
organisms is to maximize their Reproductive Success (RS), and
that the species around us reflect the differential success
of individuals in Reproductive Success.
Evolutionary biologists observe the behavior of animals,
insects, and humans, and interpret what they observe under
the assumption that each organism is trying to maximize its
RS. There is thus a deal of interest in territory and
hierarchy--how each individual and group defines its home
space and maintains order. Cooperation and competition can
be observed in the individual and group interactions
observed.
Some economists believe that evolutionary biology may fill an
important lacuna in economic theory--why do individuals have
the tastes that they do? Assuming that social individuals
are in competition to achieve RS, but require cooperation to
survive and prosper, they note that society must develop
rules to identify and remove cheaters, especially in
heterogeneous societies in which there are continuing
interactions.
Evolutionary biologists believe that their theories can
explain complex human behavior, but many of their insights
about human behavior arise from animal observation. RS
strategies can be observed in individual and group
interactions.
There is always uncertainty about how another individual will
react to altruism and stinginess, and most species have
evolved strategies that avoid mutually disadvantageous
behavior. The most common interactive strategy is tit-for-
tat--favors and cooperation are rewarded by more of the same,
and deception or rejection is followed by the same response.
An evolutionary biology approach may help to illuminate why
immigration is controversial in industrial countries. Some
evolutionary biologists consider RS a more fundamental
explanation for migration than the familiar trio of family,
safe haven, and economic opportunity. Evolutionary biology
would add RS--some consider even more fundamental--to this
trio of reasons for migration.
Evolutionary biologists note that uncertainty and insecurity
among natives can lead to anti-immigrant behavior. This
would imply that those who are unemployed and poor would tend
to oppose immigrants more than those who are secure and
affluent, and that anti-immigrant attitudes would be
strongest if the immigrants are different in appearance or
behavior.
Perhaps the best summary statement of the RS approach to
human behavior is that "biology matters." However, just as
in the long-running debate over whether fiscal or monetary
policy is most effective in spurring economic growth, so the
effects of nature and nurture interact in human and social
and political life. An understanding of the biological
imperatives that undergird human behavior should enrich our
understanding of complex human behavior, including migration.
For further information contact Gruter Institute for Law and
Behavioral Research, 158 Goya Road, Portola Valley, CA 94028.
Miller, Mark J.(Ed). 1994. Strategies for Immigration
Control: An International Comparison. The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science. Volume 534
July. Available from Sage Publications, PO Box 5084,
Thousand Oaks, CA 91359-9924.
This issue contains 12 chapters on immigration control
efforts around the world. The chapters include: unwanted
migration (Gary Freeman), employer sanctions (Rosanna
Perotti), IRCA (Philip Martin), minimum wage and employer
sanctions (David North), Haiti's boat people (Christopher
Mitchell), Indochinese refugees in Hong Kong (Ron Skeldon),
and keeping migrants home (Roger Bohning). This is an
excellence source for a variety of articles about immigration
control throughout the world.
Winkler, Beate(Ed). 1994. Was heisst denn hier fremd? (What
does foreigner mean?) Humboldt-Taschenbuchverlag, Munich.
Available from Lengsdorfer Hauptstr 80, D53127 Bonn.
This five-part 160-page book includes addresses the
interaction between the media and attitudes toward foreigners
in Germany. Editor Winkler provides an analysis of how the
media treat foreigners, and a summary of the status of
foreigners.
UNHCR. 1994. Populations of Concern to the UNHCR: A
Statistical Overview. Available from UNHCR, PO Box 2500,
CH1211 Geneva 2. Fax 4122-739-8742.
In December 1993, UNHCR was responsible for the protection
and assistance of 23 million persons in 143 countries,
including 16 million refugees, 2.9 million internally
displaced persons, and 3 million victims of war and
returnees. About 40 percent of these people were in Africa,
and 30 percent were in Asia.