Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Rights and Liberties

How a Dysfunctional Immigration System Keeps Hard-Working Families Apart

By Meredith Higashi and Ronald Lee, Immigration Impact. Posted October 28, 2009.


Those who say the status quo works just don't grasp how damaging it is to the families it tears apart.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The U.S. immigration system has always promoted family unity by awarding the majority of visas to the families of current U.S. residents, which ensures that spouses, children, and parents are not kept apart. The principle of family unity has long been a central tenet of our immigration laws and has contributed to the economic and social prosperity of our country and immigrant populations.

However, the benefits of family-based immigration are undermined by the well-documented backlogs—backlogs caused by quotas in family immigration categories which fall far short of the number of immigrant visa applications. Repeated shortfalls have resulted in increasingly unreasonable wait times. For instance, the average current wait time for spouses and minor children of legal permanent residents (green card holders) is five years, and the wait time for adult children of U.S. citizens is six years for those still single and eight years for those who have married. Siblings of U.S. citizens must wait between ten and eleven years.

These waiting times are even more prolonged for immigrants from certain countries—such as China, India, Mexico and the Philippines—because the quota system is accompanied by per country caps that do not take into account the country’s size or ties to the U.S. For example, an adult child of a U.S. citizen from Mexico currently waits more than fifteen years; and a sibling of a U.S. citizen from the Philippines must wait more than twenty years. The disproportionate impact on Asian and Latin American immigrants is further exacerbated by the fact these countries together account for approximately 75 percent of all family-based immigrant petitions.

Meanwhile, family-based immigrants make vital contributions to the U.S. economy as productive workers and entrepreneurs. They play a key role in industries important to economic growth, start businesses and support communities. Family-based immigrants have a proven record of entrepreneurship and are more likely to be self-employed and to start small and medium-sized businesses than native-born Americans. The number of Hispanic-owned businesses, for example, has grown at three times the national average. Such entrepreneurship has been—and will continue to be—vital to job creation, economic growth and continued neighborhood revitalization across the country.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: immigration

Meredith H.S. Higashi is Staff Attorney and NAPABA Law Foundation Partners and In-House Counsel Community Law Fellow at the Asian American Justice Center. Ronald H. Lee is Senior Staff Attorney in the Immigration and Immigrant Rights Program at the Asian American Justice Center.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
Is America pro-family?
Posted by: carolcsme on Oct 29, 2009 4:49 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With the healthcare debate shifting to a likely gift to insurance companies at the expense of working families, perhaps we do not even need to ask the question.

We seem to have given political control to the haters in our society who would pit us against each other to cream off profits. Where is our moral backbone, where is real faith in something more than mammon? Where is the brotherhood and the good character we claim to have? We fought for a president to lead us with a mandate to give us back our pride in being Americans...while I understand that running for office and being in office are not the same, the man can speak, why doesn't he do so? Asking folks to get along isn't sufficient - any parent knows that as well as Rodney King. Would it were so.

And Congress...is even worse. The Blue Dog Democrats would have been moderate Republicans until a generation ago. Perhaps it is time to let a third party rise...we cannot afford to have independents retire from the field once again. The country has the moral courage of a pea. We would never stand still for another western nation perpetrating torture as official policy, robbing investors and homeowners blind, and simply let them walk away from it.

You take our homes, our savings, our livelihoods, our pride in citizenship and blame our neighbors. Perhaps, just perhaps, we can lay off the neighbors and say 'Enough!'

It isn't all that easy to put the genie back into the bottle, or the people back into servitude. You want a Gilded Age? You may find yourselves in gated communities which are simply ignored while the rest of us resume a barter economy to stay fed, clothed, housed...and neighborly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Immigration Law/Policies Should be About What's Best for the US
Posted by: Paul1939 on Oct 30, 2009 7:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
not what is best for immigrants. Family reunification can take place in the country from which the perspective immigrant lives, not just in the US. The US doesn't require anyone to immigrate here so has zero obligation to reunite a family after it permits someone to immigrate here. There are at least four or five billion people whose lives would be better if they lived in the US, but why should we allow any of them to move here? So where are the rational, as opposed to the silly or emotional, reasons for the 57 to 100+ million immigrants/illegal aliens, living here? The US is already over populated if we would like to a standard of living anywhere close to what we have. Importing poverty to assuage the emotional distress of the naiveté, or the greed businesses is really stupid policy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement