SEN jeff flake (deserving of his last name) r tb AZ feeds the hysteria over the invasion of children from Central America, undocumented, and so illegal immigrants under the current law. This is a problem, but one that needs to be dealt with with compassion and through the Immigration and Justice systems and not with lies, deception, racism and manipulation of fear, especially in these tough economic times. It is sad Sen flake has to resort to such tactics, one would think the people of Arizona would expect better of one of their Senators. It is even sadder if he is actually expressing their views. From +PolitiFact and +PBS NewsHour
Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., discussed the
surge of unaccompanied children coming to the United States' border
with Mexico. One of the statistics he cited raised our eyebrows.
Two girls watch a World Cup soccer
match from their holding area in Nogales, Ariz., where hundreds of
mostly Central American immigrant children are being processed and held.
GWEN IFILL: For another point of view, we turn now to Republican Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.Senator Flake, thank you for joining us.
You signed a letter recently, late last month, in which you urged the government not to give special treatment to these children coming across the borders. Does the president’s proposal, his request today, does it satisfy your concerns?
SEN. JEFF FLAKE, R, Ariz.: Well, no, it doesn’t.
But let me first say I wrote a letter with Senator McCain and then Senator Feinstein, and I wrote a letter encouraging the president and the administration to make clear that those who are coming now, these unaccompanied minors, would be unlikely to qualify for deferred action or any legislation proposed by Congress.
And I applaud the president for making that statement and his administration. The problem I see with this — with this proposal before Congress is, the bulk of the money, $1.8 billion of it, will go to the Department of Health and Human Services. That’s not money that goes to deport anyone or to provide border enforcement.
That’s money to actually settle these children with families or a guardian somewhere in the country. And so at best it’s a very, very mixed message, and at worst, it’s telling the cartels and the human smugglers that the same situation we have now is going to continue and to keep the kids coming.
GWEN IFILL: Let me get this correct. You believe that that money is going to keep the children in the country, rather than to care for them while they’re here before they are returned?
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: Well, if you look at what HHS, their role when these kids are handed off from the Border Patrol, their role is to actually place those children in the care of a guardian or a family member.
And then what the records shows is that they’re told to appear later in court, where their case will be adjudicated. But 90 percent of them, 90 percent, do not then show up in court later. And so what you’re really saying to the cartels and the smugglers is that the same situation is going to continue.
Now, the administration makes the point that that’s a requirement of the current law. That’s why we need to change the current law. The anti-smuggling law passed in 2008 says that children from Central America, if you’re in a noncontiguous country, then we — have to be treated differently. And you have to have a day in court with a judge, rather than be handled administratively, like we do with kids from Mexico or from Canada.
GWEN IFILL: And if I recall correctly, in 2007, when were you in the House, you actually opposed the original law.
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: I did. I should say I opposed it on budget reasons. I didn’t foresee this happening.
But, certainly, we ought to change it now, and I think the president initially said that it did need to be changed, and now perhaps has backed off a little. But we have got to change that, because, until we do, as long as these kids are placed with HHS, HHS does no due diligence.
It’s not their job, they will tell you, to determine who they’re placing these kids with. Once they’re placed somewhere in the country, 90 percent of them don’t show up for a court date. And so the message is clear, very clear, to the cartels and human smugglers and the families to go ahead and continue to send your kids here, because, although we can say until we’re blue in the face most of them won’t qualify for programs here in the U.S. to have some kind of treatment, they will get treatment or they will simply disappear into the population.
GWEN IFILL: So you don’t believe that — in any way that children should be treated differently?
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: Well, what I believe is that children, whether they’re from Mexico or whether they’re from Honduras or El Salvador, should be treated the same. The problem is, it’s a loophole in the law. We didn’t foresee what would happen when this anti-smuggling law was passed in 2008.
And people very wise to this have taken advantage of this law to get kids into the country and then, knowing that they have to appear in court, and the court system is so backed up — and that I should point out that the money here for judges to expedite the court process is very minimal.
It’s just I think about $50 million, compared to $1.8 billion to HHS to actually place these kids in homes. So it’s — the message is actually quite bad here.
GWEN IFILL: You are among the members of the Senate who has suggested there should be some sort of broader immigration reform, yet you have also said that there will be no appetite for that in the House, that it will be next to zero chance of that happening this year. Given that, do you think there’s a chance at all for the House and the Senate to agree on even the legislative fix that you’re suggesting here?
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: Well, I hope so. And I’m glad you made that point.
I am a member of the gang of eight. I believe in immigration reform. I agree with the president that we need it. And part of the problem here is we will never get there as long as this crisis persists. I do think there’s appetite in the House and in the Senate on a bipartisan basis to actually fix this problem.
And I should mention, in 2005, we had a big problem with the so-called OTMs, or other than Mexicans, coming, and largely from Brazil. They found — Brazilians, it’s a tight-knit community. They found that they could exploit our law, and we had a large number coming. And so there was a program called Texas Hold ‘Em actually where they caught them all, didn’t release them, and within 30 days, the number of Brazilians coming actually dropped by 50 percent.
And, within 60 days, it dropped by 90 percent. And so we need to treat this the same way.
GWEN IFILL: I guess my — pardon me. My question was whether Congress has the will to do anything like that right now.
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: I do think so. This is such a crisis.
And keep in mind, this is a horrible humanitarian crisis. These kids are being put in the hands of smugglers that don’t have their best interests at heart. But I can tell you that we won’t stem the tide until people in Honduras and El Salvador and Guatemala actually see a plane coming back with children on it, and those parents say, I spent $5,000 to send that child to the States, and now they’re coming back.
That’s when you will stem the tide. That’s when you will do something that is good on a humanitarian basis. And so we have got to change that law that is allowing the loophole that allows these cartels to exploit these children.
GWEN IFILL: Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, thank you for joining us.
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: Thank you.
We are joined now by Cecilia Munoz, director of the president’s Domestic Policy Council.Thank you so much for joining us.
Could you tell us what in the president’s proposal would slow the flow of immigrants?
CECILIA MUNOZ, White House Domestic Policy Council: Well, there are several things.
First of all, there are number of provisions and resources for our partner countries in Central America to make sure that we’re dealing with the root causes of the migration, that we’re disrupting the smuggling networks, which is an incredibly important factor in this migration, and that we’re actually helping them create centers for the process of repatriation and reintegration of those folks who are going to be returned.
So, that is a really critical element of what we’re seeing here. And then we’re also, as you mentioned, surging things like immigration judges, asylum officers to make sure we can honor any humanitarian claims from children or others that come forward and might qualify for some form of relief.
But then for others who are not going to qualify for relief, we want to make sure that we can get them answers to their cases expeditiously and then they will be removed to their home countries in cooperation with their home countries. But the most important thing here is making sure that we’re focusing on the smuggling networks, that we’re dealing with the root causes and that we’re effectively able to manage the migration that has already reached our border.
GWEN IFILL: What would you say are the root causes?
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, it’s a combination of violence and poverty in Central America, but especially smuggling networks that are actively marketing to people the falsehood that if they spend money to get their children — to put their children in the hands of traffickers and make this incredibly dangerous journey that when then get to the United States, they will be allowed — they will be given permission to stay permanently.
This is incorrect. And it is obviously influencing a decision that parents are making which puts their children in really very grave danger. So we’re working very hard to disrupt those networks, but also to get accurate information to people who might be making this decision to put their kids in this kind of danger.
GWEN IFILL: You must be aware that immigration reform advocates, because you have met with them, think this may be a little too tough, that in fact you’re punishing the children who are trying to escape and should be treated as refugees instead.
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, we’re making it as clear as possible that those who have humanitarian claims, we’re going to do the best possible job of hearing those claims, making sure that we provide relief when it’s available under the law to those who meet the standard.
But it should also be clear that the standard for asylum or other kinds of humanitarian claims is very high. And we think, just given the history of these kinds of claims, that a majority of the folks who are coming forward who are arriving in the U.S. are unlikely to qualify for relief, and so with our responsibility under the law to make sure that we return folks, but understanding especially in the case of children that we will need to be doing this in a way which doesn’t put them in any further danger, that we collaborate with their home countries to make sure that this is done properly.
So, we’re approaching this as an urgent humanitarian situation. But it’s also true that we have to make it clear to any parent who might be making the decision put their child in the hands of traffickers and smugglers that this is an incredibly dangerous thing to do and they shouldn’t do it based on the false premise that they’re guaranteed status in the United States, because that’s simply not true.
GWEN IFILL: Speaking of collaboration, the president when he travels to Texas tomorrow will be meeting with Governor Rick Perry. What is it he is hoping to share with him or too — what kind of support is he hoping to get from him for this proposal?
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, he’s invited the governor to join him in meeting with advocates and faith leaders that are working to do something about the problem, that are working to help open facilities for some of these children in Texas.
So he’s hoping for a bipartisan collaboration, not only with the governor, but with the Congress. The president, as you mentioned, sent up a request for emergency funds to make sure that we have the resources to deal with this situation effectively and expeditiously. We have people on both sides of the aisle talking about how serious this problem is. We’re hoping for cooperation on both sides of the aisle in addressing it.
GWEN IFILL: Should the president be going to the border to see the conditions for himself?
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, the president is focused, as he has been throughout this situation, on making sure that the government all across the federal government is doing everything that we can to deal with the situation effectively.
So that includes making sure that the various agencies of the federal government, from DHS to DOJ to HHS and the Defense Department, are working collaboratively to provide shelter for these kids, to surge our resources, to make sure we can handle these cases expeditiously, to make sure we’re doing what we ought to be doing to disrupt these smuggling networks.
The president is focused on what’s going to be most effective in dealing with a problem and he’s urging others to do the same.
GWEN IFILL: Speaker Boehner has suggested that the president should be empowering the National Guard to go to the border to help with border security. What do you say to that?
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, it’s not clear what kind of role the National Guard would play.
The issue is not that we are not apprehending people. We are in fact apprehending large numbers of people. The issue is having the facilities to manage those cases properly, to make sure that children are receiving the appropriate kinds of care, and to make sure that we have the capacity to surge judicial resources, asylum officers to make sure we’re hearing humanitarian claims where they’re being made.
Those are not things that the National Guard can do. And we have already got the Defense Department engaged. They have provided so far three facilities where we’re housing children.
GWEN IFILL: How do you know that these children who you are now basically saying will have to go home once they have gone through this judicial process, how do you know they’re — how will you be able to tell that they’re not being trafficked, in fact, that they’re not refugees?
CECILIA MUNOZ: So this is a process which already exists.
You have to make sure that there are — that there’s representation for the kids, which has been a challenge. We in fact announced a new justice corps where we’re trying to recruit volunteer lawyers to help provide representation for these kids.
We have trained asylum officers, trained officers that are part of the DHS system whose job it is to make sure that they can have these kinds of conversations in a way which elicits the information which might highlight this kind of humanitarian claim. We need more of those officers. That’s part of what was — part of the immigration reform that the president has been pushing forward.
We have a backlogged immigration court system. The immigration reform included more resources, so that we can bring more judges to these kinds of cases. So, we’re going to surge the resources that we have got to make sure that we’re dealing with these new entrants at the border, but we need some cooperation in Congress to make sure that we can bring additional resources to bear to do this more effectively.
GWEN IFILL: Cecilia Munoz, director of the president’s Domestic Policy Council, thank you very much.
CECILIA MUNOZ: Thank you.
The Truth-O-Meter Says:
When undocumented children are picked up at the border and "told to appear later in court ... 90 percent do not then show up."
Jeff Flake on Tuesday, July 8th, 2014 in an interview on the PBS "News Hour"Sen. Jeff Flake says 90 percent of immigrants given court dates fail to show up
Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., discussed the
surge of unaccompanied children coming to the United States' border
with Mexico. One of the statistics he cited raised our eyebrows.
Two girls watch a World Cup soccer
match from their holding area in Nogales, Ariz., where hundreds of
mostly Central American immigrant children are being processed and held.
The surge of unaccompanied children at the U.S. border,
primarily coming from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador, has
overwhelmed the ability of the United States to handle their legal
cases.
A law passed under President George W. Bush and aimed at curbing human trafficking requires that minors from Central America who reach the border must have their cases heard in court before they can be deported. Currently, children wait an average of 578 days before a hearing -- delays that are sure to lengthen if the flow of children continues unabated.
A substantial chunk of the $3.7 billion President Barack Obama is requesting in a supplemental spending bill for the border would be for increasing the courts’ ability to handle the caseload of newly arrived children.
In this context, Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., offered a notable statistic about the judicial treatment of people who arrive at the U.S. border. In a July 8, 2014, interview on the PBS News Hour, Flake outlined the risks of having large numbers of people released in the United States awaiting a hearing -- particularly the risk that they will fail to show up and boost the number of undocumented immigrants in the country.
"When these kids are handed off from the Border Patrol, (the government’s) role is to actually place those children in the care of a guardian or a family member," Flake said. "And then what the record shows is that they’re told to appear later in court, where their case will be adjudicated. But 90 percent of them, 90 percent, do not then show up in court later."
A reader called our attention to this, citing sharply conflicting data, so we decided to take a look.
The reader pointed us to a report from the Bipartisan Policy Center -- a think tank founded by former congressional leaders of both parties -- that cited figures far smaller than 90 percent.
The report used figures from the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which is tasked by the Justice Department with handling immigration court proceedings, appellate reviews and administrative hearings. Between 2003 and 2012, the percentage of all immigrants who failed to appear in court after being released has bounced between 20 percent and 40 percent, settling in at about 30 percent at the end of that time span. (No data for children specifically is available from this long-running data set.)
That’s substantially lower than the 90 percent figure Flake cited.
Meanwhile, in a July 10 hearing of the Senate Appropriations Committee -- which was held two days after Flake’s remarks on PBS -- Juan P. Osuna, the director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, told the panel that his department estimates that 46 percent of children currently fail to show up for their date in court. He told lawmakers that any other numbers are "incorrect."
We checked with immigration policy experts to see whether the federal statistics or Flake’s estimate seemed more accurate, and they agreed that the federal statistics jibed with their long-term understanding of the issue.
"I’m not aware of data that shows a 90 percent no-show rate," said Marc R. Rosenblum, deputy director of the Migration Policy Institute’s U.S. Immigration Policy Program. He added that the long-term range of 20 percent to 40 percent matches what the VERA Institute found between 1997 and 2000 when it studied the issue on a federal contract to track individual immigration cases.
The Bipartisan Policy Center also expressed skepticism about the 90 percent figure. "Based on the federal data we’ve seen, we know that between 2008 and 2012, about 70 to 80 percent of all immigrants showed up for their court appearance," said Rosemarie Calabro Tully, a spokeswoman for the group. She later passed us the estimate Osuna gave to the Senate committee.
When we contacted Flake’s office, they said the senator’s source for the statistic was a comment by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., at a media breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor on June 26. The Monitor didn’t print a direct quote, but here’s an excerpt from the article: "Right now, (Goodlatte) said, the law does not allow minors to be held in a facility, so they are released to relatives or foster care, and then given a court date to reappear. More than 90 percent do not return, he said."
So we contacted Goodlatte’s office. Goodlatte’s office said that while visiting the McAllen Border Patrol Station in the Rio Grande Valley in July, Goodlatte heard from Border Patrol agents that only 26 percent of those who were detained failed to show up for removal proceedings. They said officials didn’t give a percentage for those who had been released and failed to appear.
They cited an article in Newsmax, a conservative online publication, that cited an anonymous "senior Los Angeles County Sheriff's detective who routinely deals with illegal immigrants" who said a "massive number — 80 to 90 percent" do not show up for deportation hearings. However, Goodlatte’s office acknowledged this was anecdotal evidence.
Goodlatte's office also noted that there is already significant pool of immigrants whose final deportation has been ordered but not carried out. At least 858,779 non-detained aliens are deportable but haven’t been deported, many of whom are now off the radar of the authorities, according to calculations by the Center for Immigration Studies based on federal data. This is a related and notable issue, but somewhat different from what Flake or Goodlatte said.
Experts we checked with did note a caveat: There’s no way of knowing if the current group of new arrivals will behave differently in regard to court appearances than their predecessors have. Indeed, due the backlog, it is unlikely that many of the minors apprehended in 2013 or 2014 have had their court date come up yet, and until their court appearance is complete, the government won’t know how many end up coming and how many fail to appear.
Our ruling
Flake said that when undocumented children are picked up at the border and "told to appear later in court ... 90 percent do not then show up."
Historically, the rate has ranged between 20 percent to 40 percent, settling in at about 30 percent in 2012, the most recent full year for which data is available. A more recent estimate for children specifically, made by the director of the office responsible for handling such cases, is that the current no-show rate for children is 46 percent. That’s still quite high, but it’s only half what Flake said. We rate the claim False.
Subjects: Children, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Legal Issues
Sources:
Jeff Flake, interview on the PBS News Hour, July 8, 2014
Bipartisan Policy Center, "Child Migration by the Numbers," June 2014
U.S. Department of Justice, index page for Executive Office for Immigration Review Statistics Yearbooks, accessed July 10, 2014
U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review main page, accessed July 10, 2014
Senate Appropriations Committee, "Full Committee Hearing: President’s Emergency Supplemental Request," July 10, 2014
Christian Science Monitor, "Immigration reform? Here's what Obama must do first, a top Republican says," June 26, 2014
Brookings Institution, "The Surge in Unaccompanied Children from Central America: A Humanitarian Crisis at Our Border," July 2, 2014
Newsmax, "Flood of Illegal Immigrants Coming to a Neighborhood Near You," July 1, 2014
New York Times, "Obama Asks for $3.7 Billion to Aid Border," July 8, 2014
Center for Immigration Studies, "Deportation Numbers Unwrapped: Raw Statistics Reveal the Real Story of ICE Enforcement in Decline," October 2013
Vera Institute of Justice, "The Appearance Assistance Program: An Alternative to Detention for Non-citizens in U.S. Immigration Removal Proceedings," accessed July 10, 2014
Email interview with Rosemarie Calabro Tully, spokeswoman for the Bipartisan Policy Center, July 10, 2014
Email interview with Marc R. Rosenblum, deputy director of the Migration Policy Institute’s U.S. Immigration Policy Program, July 10, 2014
Email interview with Bronwyn Lance Chester, spokeswoman for Jeff Flake, July 10, 2014
Written by: Louis Jacobson
Researched by: Louis Jacobson
Edited by: Angie Drobnic Holan
http://youtu.be/1n20AJi0o0I
A law passed under President George W. Bush and aimed at curbing human trafficking requires that minors from Central America who reach the border must have their cases heard in court before they can be deported. Currently, children wait an average of 578 days before a hearing -- delays that are sure to lengthen if the flow of children continues unabated.
A substantial chunk of the $3.7 billion President Barack Obama is requesting in a supplemental spending bill for the border would be for increasing the courts’ ability to handle the caseload of newly arrived children.
In this context, Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., offered a notable statistic about the judicial treatment of people who arrive at the U.S. border. In a July 8, 2014, interview on the PBS News Hour, Flake outlined the risks of having large numbers of people released in the United States awaiting a hearing -- particularly the risk that they will fail to show up and boost the number of undocumented immigrants in the country.
"When these kids are handed off from the Border Patrol, (the government’s) role is to actually place those children in the care of a guardian or a family member," Flake said. "And then what the record shows is that they’re told to appear later in court, where their case will be adjudicated. But 90 percent of them, 90 percent, do not then show up in court later."
A reader called our attention to this, citing sharply conflicting data, so we decided to take a look.
The reader pointed us to a report from the Bipartisan Policy Center -- a think tank founded by former congressional leaders of both parties -- that cited figures far smaller than 90 percent.
The report used figures from the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which is tasked by the Justice Department with handling immigration court proceedings, appellate reviews and administrative hearings. Between 2003 and 2012, the percentage of all immigrants who failed to appear in court after being released has bounced between 20 percent and 40 percent, settling in at about 30 percent at the end of that time span. (No data for children specifically is available from this long-running data set.)
That’s substantially lower than the 90 percent figure Flake cited.
Meanwhile, in a July 10 hearing of the Senate Appropriations Committee -- which was held two days after Flake’s remarks on PBS -- Juan P. Osuna, the director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, told the panel that his department estimates that 46 percent of children currently fail to show up for their date in court. He told lawmakers that any other numbers are "incorrect."
We checked with immigration policy experts to see whether the federal statistics or Flake’s estimate seemed more accurate, and they agreed that the federal statistics jibed with their long-term understanding of the issue.
"I’m not aware of data that shows a 90 percent no-show rate," said Marc R. Rosenblum, deputy director of the Migration Policy Institute’s U.S. Immigration Policy Program. He added that the long-term range of 20 percent to 40 percent matches what the VERA Institute found between 1997 and 2000 when it studied the issue on a federal contract to track individual immigration cases.
The Bipartisan Policy Center also expressed skepticism about the 90 percent figure. "Based on the federal data we’ve seen, we know that between 2008 and 2012, about 70 to 80 percent of all immigrants showed up for their court appearance," said Rosemarie Calabro Tully, a spokeswoman for the group. She later passed us the estimate Osuna gave to the Senate committee.
When we contacted Flake’s office, they said the senator’s source for the statistic was a comment by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., at a media breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor on June 26. The Monitor didn’t print a direct quote, but here’s an excerpt from the article: "Right now, (Goodlatte) said, the law does not allow minors to be held in a facility, so they are released to relatives or foster care, and then given a court date to reappear. More than 90 percent do not return, he said."
So we contacted Goodlatte’s office. Goodlatte’s office said that while visiting the McAllen Border Patrol Station in the Rio Grande Valley in July, Goodlatte heard from Border Patrol agents that only 26 percent of those who were detained failed to show up for removal proceedings. They said officials didn’t give a percentage for those who had been released and failed to appear.
They cited an article in Newsmax, a conservative online publication, that cited an anonymous "senior Los Angeles County Sheriff's detective who routinely deals with illegal immigrants" who said a "massive number — 80 to 90 percent" do not show up for deportation hearings. However, Goodlatte’s office acknowledged this was anecdotal evidence.
Goodlatte's office also noted that there is already significant pool of immigrants whose final deportation has been ordered but not carried out. At least 858,779 non-detained aliens are deportable but haven’t been deported, many of whom are now off the radar of the authorities, according to calculations by the Center for Immigration Studies based on federal data. This is a related and notable issue, but somewhat different from what Flake or Goodlatte said.
Experts we checked with did note a caveat: There’s no way of knowing if the current group of new arrivals will behave differently in regard to court appearances than their predecessors have. Indeed, due the backlog, it is unlikely that many of the minors apprehended in 2013 or 2014 have had their court date come up yet, and until their court appearance is complete, the government won’t know how many end up coming and how many fail to appear.
Our ruling
Flake said that when undocumented children are picked up at the border and "told to appear later in court ... 90 percent do not then show up."
Historically, the rate has ranged between 20 percent to 40 percent, settling in at about 30 percent in 2012, the most recent full year for which data is available. A more recent estimate for children specifically, made by the director of the office responsible for handling such cases, is that the current no-show rate for children is 46 percent. That’s still quite high, but it’s only half what Flake said. We rate the claim False.
About this statement:
Published: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 6:20 p.m.Subjects: Children, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Legal Issues
Sources:
Jeff Flake, interview on the PBS News Hour, July 8, 2014
Bipartisan Policy Center, "Child Migration by the Numbers," June 2014
U.S. Department of Justice, index page for Executive Office for Immigration Review Statistics Yearbooks, accessed July 10, 2014
U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review main page, accessed July 10, 2014
Senate Appropriations Committee, "Full Committee Hearing: President’s Emergency Supplemental Request," July 10, 2014
Christian Science Monitor, "Immigration reform? Here's what Obama must do first, a top Republican says," June 26, 2014
Brookings Institution, "The Surge in Unaccompanied Children from Central America: A Humanitarian Crisis at Our Border," July 2, 2014
Newsmax, "Flood of Illegal Immigrants Coming to a Neighborhood Near You," July 1, 2014
New York Times, "Obama Asks for $3.7 Billion to Aid Border," July 8, 2014
Center for Immigration Studies, "Deportation Numbers Unwrapped: Raw Statistics Reveal the Real Story of ICE Enforcement in Decline," October 2013
Vera Institute of Justice, "The Appearance Assistance Program: An Alternative to Detention for Non-citizens in U.S. Immigration Removal Proceedings," accessed July 10, 2014
Email interview with Rosemarie Calabro Tully, spokeswoman for the Bipartisan Policy Center, July 10, 2014
Email interview with Marc R. Rosenblum, deputy director of the Migration Policy Institute’s U.S. Immigration Policy Program, July 10, 2014
Email interview with Bronwyn Lance Chester, spokeswoman for Jeff Flake, July 10, 2014
Written by: Louis Jacobson
Researched by: Louis Jacobson
Edited by: Angie Drobnic Holan
Sen. Flake: Obama’s proposal would allow migrant children to ‘disappear into the population’
Published on Jul 8, 2014
Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., joins Gwen
Ifill to share his take on President Obama's $3.7 billion proposal to
tackle the wave of unaccompanied minors crossing the southern border. He
criticizes the proposal for allocating too much money to the Department
of Health and Human Services, and discusses changes to an
anti-smuggling law and the prospect for immigration reform in a divided
House.
TRANSCRIPT
You signed a letter recently, late last month, in which you urged the government not to give special treatment to these children coming across the borders. Does the president’s proposal, his request today, does it satisfy your concerns?
SEN. JEFF FLAKE, R, Ariz.: Well, no, it doesn’t.
But let me first say I wrote a letter with Senator McCain and then Senator Feinstein, and I wrote a letter encouraging the president and the administration to make clear that those who are coming now, these unaccompanied minors, would be unlikely to qualify for deferred action or any legislation proposed by Congress.
And I applaud the president for making that statement and his administration. The problem I see with this — with this proposal before Congress is, the bulk of the money, $1.8 billion of it, will go to the Department of Health and Human Services. That’s not money that goes to deport anyone or to provide border enforcement.
That’s money to actually settle these children with families or a guardian somewhere in the country. And so at best it’s a very, very mixed message, and at worst, it’s telling the cartels and the human smugglers that the same situation we have now is going to continue and to keep the kids coming.
GWEN IFILL: Let me get this correct. You believe that that money is going to keep the children in the country, rather than to care for them while they’re here before they are returned?
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: Well, if you look at what HHS, their role when these kids are handed off from the Border Patrol, their role is to actually place those children in the care of a guardian or a family member.
And then what the records shows is that they’re told to appear later in court, where their case will be adjudicated. But 90 percent of them, 90 percent, do not then show up in court later. And so what you’re really saying to the cartels and the smugglers is that the same situation is going to continue.
Now, the administration makes the point that that’s a requirement of the current law. That’s why we need to change the current law. The anti-smuggling law passed in 2008 says that children from Central America, if you’re in a noncontiguous country, then we — have to be treated differently. And you have to have a day in court with a judge, rather than be handled administratively, like we do with kids from Mexico or from Canada.
GWEN IFILL: And if I recall correctly, in 2007, when were you in the House, you actually opposed the original law.
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: I did. I should say I opposed it on budget reasons. I didn’t foresee this happening.
But, certainly, we ought to change it now, and I think the president initially said that it did need to be changed, and now perhaps has backed off a little. But we have got to change that, because, until we do, as long as these kids are placed with HHS, HHS does no due diligence.
It’s not their job, they will tell you, to determine who they’re placing these kids with. Once they’re placed somewhere in the country, 90 percent of them don’t show up for a court date. And so the message is clear, very clear, to the cartels and human smugglers and the families to go ahead and continue to send your kids here, because, although we can say until we’re blue in the face most of them won’t qualify for programs here in the U.S. to have some kind of treatment, they will get treatment or they will simply disappear into the population.
GWEN IFILL: So you don’t believe that — in any way that children should be treated differently?
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: Well, what I believe is that children, whether they’re from Mexico or whether they’re from Honduras or El Salvador, should be treated the same. The problem is, it’s a loophole in the law. We didn’t foresee what would happen when this anti-smuggling law was passed in 2008.
And people very wise to this have taken advantage of this law to get kids into the country and then, knowing that they have to appear in court, and the court system is so backed up — and that I should point out that the money here for judges to expedite the court process is very minimal.
It’s just I think about $50 million, compared to $1.8 billion to HHS to actually place these kids in homes. So it’s — the message is actually quite bad here.
GWEN IFILL: You are among the members of the Senate who has suggested there should be some sort of broader immigration reform, yet you have also said that there will be no appetite for that in the House, that it will be next to zero chance of that happening this year. Given that, do you think there’s a chance at all for the House and the Senate to agree on even the legislative fix that you’re suggesting here?
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: Well, I hope so. And I’m glad you made that point.
I am a member of the gang of eight. I believe in immigration reform. I agree with the president that we need it. And part of the problem here is we will never get there as long as this crisis persists. I do think there’s appetite in the House and in the Senate on a bipartisan basis to actually fix this problem.
And I should mention, in 2005, we had a big problem with the so-called OTMs, or other than Mexicans, coming, and largely from Brazil. They found — Brazilians, it’s a tight-knit community. They found that they could exploit our law, and we had a large number coming. And so there was a program called Texas Hold ‘Em actually where they caught them all, didn’t release them, and within 30 days, the number of Brazilians coming actually dropped by 50 percent.
And, within 60 days, it dropped by 90 percent. And so we need to treat this the same way.
GWEN IFILL: I guess my — pardon me. My question was whether Congress has the will to do anything like that right now.
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: I do think so. This is such a crisis.
And keep in mind, this is a horrible humanitarian crisis. These kids are being put in the hands of smugglers that don’t have their best interests at heart. But I can tell you that we won’t stem the tide until people in Honduras and El Salvador and Guatemala actually see a plane coming back with children on it, and those parents say, I spent $5,000 to send that child to the States, and now they’re coming back.
That’s when you will stem the tide. That’s when you will do something that is good on a humanitarian basis. And so we have got to change that law that is allowing the loophole that allows these cartels to exploit these children.
GWEN IFILL: Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, thank you for joining us.
SEN. JEFF FLAKE: Thank you.
White House proposal to stem flow of migrant children aims to tackle root causes
TRANSCRIPT
GWEN IFILL: President Obama is requesting $3.7 billion in emergency funds from Congress to deal with the influx of unaccompanied minors crossing the southern border. About half the money would be used on care for the more than 50,000 children who have arrived in the U.S. since October, mostly from Central America. The rest would be spent on Border Patrol agents, additional immigration judges, surveillance and new detention facilities.Could you tell us what in the president’s proposal would slow the flow of immigrants?
CECILIA MUNOZ, White House Domestic Policy Council: Well, there are several things.
First of all, there are number of provisions and resources for our partner countries in Central America to make sure that we’re dealing with the root causes of the migration, that we’re disrupting the smuggling networks, which is an incredibly important factor in this migration, and that we’re actually helping them create centers for the process of repatriation and reintegration of those folks who are going to be returned.
So, that is a really critical element of what we’re seeing here. And then we’re also, as you mentioned, surging things like immigration judges, asylum officers to make sure we can honor any humanitarian claims from children or others that come forward and might qualify for some form of relief.
But then for others who are not going to qualify for relief, we want to make sure that we can get them answers to their cases expeditiously and then they will be removed to their home countries in cooperation with their home countries. But the most important thing here is making sure that we’re focusing on the smuggling networks, that we’re dealing with the root causes and that we’re effectively able to manage the migration that has already reached our border.
GWEN IFILL: What would you say are the root causes?
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, it’s a combination of violence and poverty in Central America, but especially smuggling networks that are actively marketing to people the falsehood that if they spend money to get their children — to put their children in the hands of traffickers and make this incredibly dangerous journey that when then get to the United States, they will be allowed — they will be given permission to stay permanently.
This is incorrect. And it is obviously influencing a decision that parents are making which puts their children in really very grave danger. So we’re working very hard to disrupt those networks, but also to get accurate information to people who might be making this decision to put their kids in this kind of danger.
GWEN IFILL: You must be aware that immigration reform advocates, because you have met with them, think this may be a little too tough, that in fact you’re punishing the children who are trying to escape and should be treated as refugees instead.
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, we’re making it as clear as possible that those who have humanitarian claims, we’re going to do the best possible job of hearing those claims, making sure that we provide relief when it’s available under the law to those who meet the standard.
But it should also be clear that the standard for asylum or other kinds of humanitarian claims is very high. And we think, just given the history of these kinds of claims, that a majority of the folks who are coming forward who are arriving in the U.S. are unlikely to qualify for relief, and so with our responsibility under the law to make sure that we return folks, but understanding especially in the case of children that we will need to be doing this in a way which doesn’t put them in any further danger, that we collaborate with their home countries to make sure that this is done properly.
So, we’re approaching this as an urgent humanitarian situation. But it’s also true that we have to make it clear to any parent who might be making the decision put their child in the hands of traffickers and smugglers that this is an incredibly dangerous thing to do and they shouldn’t do it based on the false premise that they’re guaranteed status in the United States, because that’s simply not true.
GWEN IFILL: Speaking of collaboration, the president when he travels to Texas tomorrow will be meeting with Governor Rick Perry. What is it he is hoping to share with him or too — what kind of support is he hoping to get from him for this proposal?
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, he’s invited the governor to join him in meeting with advocates and faith leaders that are working to do something about the problem, that are working to help open facilities for some of these children in Texas.
So he’s hoping for a bipartisan collaboration, not only with the governor, but with the Congress. The president, as you mentioned, sent up a request for emergency funds to make sure that we have the resources to deal with this situation effectively and expeditiously. We have people on both sides of the aisle talking about how serious this problem is. We’re hoping for cooperation on both sides of the aisle in addressing it.
GWEN IFILL: Should the president be going to the border to see the conditions for himself?
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, the president is focused, as he has been throughout this situation, on making sure that the government all across the federal government is doing everything that we can to deal with the situation effectively.
So that includes making sure that the various agencies of the federal government, from DHS to DOJ to HHS and the Defense Department, are working collaboratively to provide shelter for these kids, to surge our resources, to make sure we can handle these cases expeditiously, to make sure we’re doing what we ought to be doing to disrupt these smuggling networks.
The president is focused on what’s going to be most effective in dealing with a problem and he’s urging others to do the same.
GWEN IFILL: Speaker Boehner has suggested that the president should be empowering the National Guard to go to the border to help with border security. What do you say to that?
CECILIA MUNOZ: Well, it’s not clear what kind of role the National Guard would play.
The issue is not that we are not apprehending people. We are in fact apprehending large numbers of people. The issue is having the facilities to manage those cases properly, to make sure that children are receiving the appropriate kinds of care, and to make sure that we have the capacity to surge judicial resources, asylum officers to make sure we’re hearing humanitarian claims where they’re being made.
Those are not things that the National Guard can do. And we have already got the Defense Department engaged. They have provided so far three facilities where we’re housing children.
GWEN IFILL: How do you know that these children who you are now basically saying will have to go home once they have gone through this judicial process, how do you know they’re — how will you be able to tell that they’re not being trafficked, in fact, that they’re not refugees?
CECILIA MUNOZ: So this is a process which already exists.
You have to make sure that there are — that there’s representation for the kids, which has been a challenge. We in fact announced a new justice corps where we’re trying to recruit volunteer lawyers to help provide representation for these kids.
We have trained asylum officers, trained officers that are part of the DHS system whose job it is to make sure that they can have these kinds of conversations in a way which elicits the information which might highlight this kind of humanitarian claim. We need more of those officers. That’s part of what was — part of the immigration reform that the president has been pushing forward.
We have a backlogged immigration court system. The immigration reform included more resources, so that we can bring more judges to these kinds of cases. So, we’re going to surge the resources that we have got to make sure that we’re dealing with these new entrants at the border, but we need some cooperation in Congress to make sure that we can bring additional resources to bear to do this more effectively.
GWEN IFILL: Cecilia Munoz, director of the president’s Domestic Policy Council, thank you very much.
CECILIA MUNOZ: Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment