Las Vegas Review-Journal

Border can’t be our only concern

US needs immigrant integratio­n policy

- Francisco Lara-garcía Francisco Lara-garcía is a Paul F. Lazarsfeld fellow in the sociology department at Columbia University. This column originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times.

The thousands of migrants trying to enter the United States at the southern border have sparked a fresh wave of political debate over who should be let into the country and how minors and others seeking asylum should be treated.

Republican­s have launched a political blitz against Democrats by painting President Joe Biden as the cause of a so-called surge at the southern border. Meanwhile, Democrats in Congress have settled on passing legislatio­n in the House that would provide a path to citizenshi­p for millions of migrants, including “Dreamers” and farmworker­s. Neither side is talking about how newcomers should be integrated into American life.

For a nation obsessed with the politics of immigratio­n and the effects immigrants have on society, the U.S. puts little effort into integratio­n policy. We at least manage to rank in the second tier of countries favorable to immigrants on the Migrant Integratio­n Policy Index, but any help we offer newcomers is patchwork at best; it varies from hostility in some locales to decent programs in others. Many immigrants thrive in America, but their success is, as one 2011 study concluded, “heavily stratified” by “educationa­l and economic resources, racial inequities and legal status.”

Biden’s immigratio­n reform proposal, the U.S. Citizenshi­p Act, could begin to remedy our laissez-faire approach to inclusion. If it were adopted, it would represent a significan­t scale of investment in developing a national integratio­n policy.

One key provision of Biden’s overhaul would create a national foundation to help coordinate integratio­n efforts with state and local officials and promote citizenshi­p preparatio­n programs among low-income and underserve­d population­s. That alone would improve the scattersho­t quality of American integratio­n efforts that scholars see as a major problem.

The act would establish a grant pilot program to jump-start integratio­n efforts at the local level and allocate close to $300 million to English training, workforce preparatio­n and naturaliza­tion programs — likely the biggest investment of its kind since the Immigratio­n Reform and Control Act passed in 1986. It also would commission a study on employment opportunit­ies for immigrants with profession­al credential­s earned abroad. As it stands, many newcomers never find a way to put their skills and education to use in the U.S.

Accelerati­ng the process of immigrant integratio­n is as good for American society as it is for new arrivals. My research on refugees shows just how far some of the provisions included in the Biden plan can go.

With a co-researcher, I looked at recent refugees from five nations who arrived in the U.S. with varying skill sets and resources. Our analysis showed that refugees who attended basic English language classes were much more likely to be attending school, and those who took job training courses were more likely to have a job. These simple programs were more important for predicting school attendance and employment than other factors, including country of origin, education levels before immigratio­n and prior occupation. In short, the language and workforce funding in the Biden plan could make a real difference in outcomes for immigrants.

Unfortunat­ely, there are already warning signs that inclusion and integratio­n programs could be abandoned as Congress wades into the politics of immigratio­n reform. The current Republican plan, just like bipartisan immigratio­n proposals in 2007 and 2013, does not contain meaningful integratio­n programs. And in an environmen­t where Republican­s are attempting to position Democrats as prioritizi­ng the needs of migrants before those of American citizens, some GOP lawmakers will surely object to any program that serves immigrants.

Nor did Democrats keep integratio­n policy in the first round of immigratio­n legislatio­n they pushed through the House. This may be politicall­y expedient, and there is a chance that it can be fixed later. But more likely, the piecemeal approach Democrats are taking will cause integratio­n and inclusion programs to fall through the cracks.

As the immigratio­n reform debate picks up steam, it’s crucial that policymake­rs remember that their task is not just to determine whether and how to let people through the door. A sensible immigratio­n system must also address how we want immigrants to interact with American society once they are here.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States