Is it true that immigrants don’t pay taxes?

NO. Immigrants do pay taxes: income tax, property tax, sales tax, and taxes at the federal and state level.  In fact, a number of studies have found that immigrants pay between $90 and $140 billion a year in federal, state, and local taxes.  Undocumented immigrants also pay income taxes as evidenced by the Social Security Administration’s “suspense file” (taxes that cannot be matched to workers’ names and social security numbers), which grew by $20 billion between 1990 and 1998

Are immigrants coming to the U.S. to take advantage of the welfare system?

NO. Immigrants come to the U.S. for work and reunification with family members.  Immigrant labor force participation is consistently higher than native-born and immigrant workers make up a larger share of the U.S. labor force (12.4%) than they do the U.S. population (11.5%).  Moreover, the ratio between immigrant use of public benefits and the amount of taxes they pay is consistently favorable to the U.S.  It is estimated that immigrants earn about $240 billion a year, pay about $90 billion a year in taxes, and use only about $5 billion in public benefits. 

Do immigrants send all their money back to their home countries?

NO. In addition to the consumer spending of immigrant households, immigrants and their businesses contribute $162 billion in tax revenue to U.S. federal, state, and local governments.  While it is true that immigrants send billions of dollars a year back to their home countries, this is also one of the most targeted and effective forms of direct foreign investment.       

Do immigrants take jobs and opportunity away from Americans?

NO. The largest wave of immigration to the U.S. since the early 1900s coincided with our lowest national unemployment rate and fastest economic growth.  Immigrant entrepreneurs create jobs for U.S. and foreign workers, and foreign-born students allow many U.S. graduate programs to keep their doors open.  While there has been no comprehensive study done of immigrant-owned businesses, we have countless examples: in Silicon Valley, companies begun by Chinese and Indian immigrants generated more than $19.5 billion in sales and nearly 73,000 jobs in 2000.

Are immigrants are a drain on the U.S. economy?

NO. During the 1990s, half of all new workers were foreign-born, filling gaps left by native-born workers in both the high- and low-skill ends of the spectrum.  Immigrants fill jobs in key sectors, start their own businesses, and contribute to the economy.  The net benefit of immigration to the U.S. is nearly $10 billion annually.  As Alan Greenspan points out, 70% of immigrants arrive in prime working age; that means, the U.S. hasn’t spent a penny on their education, yet they are transplanted into our workforce and will contribute $500 billion toward our social security system over the next 20 years

Do immigrants want to learn English?

YES. Within ten years of arrival, more than 75% of immigrants speak English well; moreover, demand for English classes at the adult level far exceeds supply. 

How are today’s immigrants different than those of 100 years ago?

The percentage of the U.S. population that is foreign-born now stands at 11.5%; in the early 20th century it was approximately 15%.  Similar to accusations about today’s immigrants, those immigrants of 100 years ago initially settled in mono-ethnic neighborhoods, spoke their native languages, and built up businesses that catered to their fellow émigrés.  They also experienced the same types of discrimination that today’s immigrant’s face, and integrated within American culture at a similar rate.  If we view history objectively, we remember that every new wave of immigrants has been met with suspicion and doubt and yet, ultimately, every past wave of immigrants has been vindicated and saluted.   

Do most immigrants cross the border illegally?

NO. Around 75% of today’s immigrants have legal permanent (immigrant) visas; and of the 25% that are undocumented, 40% overstayed temporary (non-immigrant) visas.

Has weak U.S. border enforcement lead to high undocumented immigration?

NO. From 1986 to 1998, the Border Patrol’s budget increased six-fold and the number of agents stationed on our southwest border doubled to 8,500.  The Border Patrol also toughened its enforcement strategy, heavily fortifying typical urban entry points and pushing migrants into dangerous desert areas, in hopes of deterring crossings.  Instead, the undocumented immigrant population doubled in that timeframe, to 8 million—despite the legalization of nearly 3 million immigrants after the enactment of the Immigration Reform and Control Act in 1986.  Insufficient legal avenues for immigrants to enter the U.S., compared with the number of jobs in need of workers, has significantly contributed to this current conundrum. 

Can the war on terrorism be won through immigration restrictions?                  

No security expert since September 11th, 2001 has said that restrictive immigration measures would have prevented the terrorist attacks—instead, the key is effective use of good intelligence.  Most of the 9/11 hijackers were here on legal visas.  Since 9/11, the myriad of measures targeting immigrants in the name of national security have netted no terrorism prosecutions.  In fact, several of these measures could have the opposite effect and actually make us less safe, as targeted communities of immigrants are afraid to come forward with information. 

They broke the law so why should we reward them by allowing them to stay?

Opponents of immigration use the argument, “they broke the law,” as a way of combating any proposals that provide legal status to undocumented immigrants. They also say that the United States should not be “rewarding lawbreakers,” and such phrases as “what part of illegal do you not understand?” Their intent is to stop any discussion of why these persons are outside the law, what consequences or harm come to the United States because of this circumstance, and whether the law they broke is just or in the best interest of the United States and should be changed. In using these arguments, they also imply that undocumented immigrants, being outside the law, are criminals. The first response is to answer the why and harm questions. Migrants and their families, largely, enter the United States to survive by finding jobs. Once they cross the U.S.-Mexico border, 80 percent find employment. Their intent is not to harm the United States, but simply to work and, by doing so, they help our country and the economy. So, because they come here to work and they help our nation by doing so, we must ask whether current immigration law, which causes them to hide in the shadows and offers them no protections, is just in the first place. Moreover, the availability of visas to enter the country through legal channels to either work or reunite with family members are severely limited and do not come close to meeting labor market demands. While the Catholic Church supports the rule of law, there are times when laws should be examined through a justice lens and be changed. In many ways, the current immigration system is broken and contributes to the abuse, exploitation, and even deaths of migrants who otherwise contribute their work and talents to our nation.

While undocumented immigrants are indeed outside the law, and thus “break” the law, the unjust, outdated, and inadequate law also breaks them. Our nation cannot have it both ways. Moreover, undocumented immigrants are not criminals—they have not broken a criminal law. They have only violated civil law, as we do when we violate a traffic ordinance. The United States Supreme Court has held that “a deportation proceeding is a purely civil action to determine the eligibility to remain in this country, not to punish an unlawful entry….the purpose of deportation is not to punish past transgressions, but to put an end to a continuing violation of immigration laws.”

My relatives came here legally so why shouldn’t these new immigrants do the same?

In the history of the United States, immigration law was developed relatively late, in the middle and late stages of the twentieth century. For the first 153 years of our nation, there was no general law barring entry into the United States, unless it was targeted to certain convicts or prostitutes. The Alien Sedition Act, passed early in our history, was seldom enforced. Entering the United States did not become a violation until Congress passed a law on March 4, 1929. Because of the lack of funding, Congress did not authorize or appropriate funds to enforce the law until the late 1940’s. The beginning of our current immigration code, the Immigration and Nationality Act, was enacted in 1965. The INA began imposing

limits on categories of immigration and establishing an immigration enforcement regime which we adhere to, in part, today. Today, our immigration system is ill-equipped to handle the current demand for immigrant labor in our country. According to the 2005 Economic Report of the President, “one of the most pervasive features of undocumented immigration is that it is overwhelmingly driven by supply and demand: immigrants want to work in the United States and American employers want to hire them.” However, current legal limits on both temporary and permanent immigration remain largely unresponsive to changes in labor demand as a result of arbitrary numerical limits. Only 66,000 visas per year are available to low-skilled, nonagricultural workers to enter the country legally and work. The H-2A program for agricultural workers brings in about 30,000 workers a year, yet hundreds of thousands of jobs per year in these

sectors are filled with immigrant labor, including undocumented immigrants.

Doesn’t providing legal status to undocumented immigrants penalize immigrants who play by the rules and wait in line?

The current proposal endorsed by the U.S. bishops, the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act, requires that undocumented workers work six years before applying for permanent resident status. This places them “at the back of the line,” behind immigrants who have petitioned for a green card through an employment-based or family-based petition. In addition, the proposal reduces backlogs in family categories so that waiting times are reduced to six months or less in all categories by 2011. Furthermore, many of the undocumented who are here and immigrants waiting in line are the same people. Because of the long backlogs for family visas and other employment-related visas, many decide not to wait and enter through unauthorized means. By fixing the system, through expanding the number of visas available to work and reunite with families, the incentive to migrate without proper visas will be mitigated.

Why does the Church care about immigration policies?  

The Catholic Church has historically held a strong interest in immigration and how public policy affects immigrants seeking a new life in the United States.   Based on Scriptural and Catholic social teachings, as well as her own experience as an immigrant Church in the United States, the Catholic Church is compelled to raise her voice on behalf of those who are marginalized and whose God-given rights are not respected.

The Church believes that current immigration laws and policies have often led to the undermining of immigrants’ human dignity and have kept families apart.  The existing immigration system has resulted in a growing number of persons in this country in an unauthorized capacity, living in the shadows as they toil in jobs that would otherwise go unfilled.  Close family members of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents must wait years for a visa to be reunited.  And, our nation’s border enforcement strategies have been ineffective and have led to the death of thousands of migrants.

The Church has a responsibility to shine the message of God on this issue and help to build bridges between all parties so that an immigration system can be created that is just for all and serves the common good, including the legitimate security concerns of our nation.

Does the Catholic Church support illegal immigration?

The Catholic Bishops do not condone unlawful entry or circumventions of our nation’s immigration laws.  The bishops believe that reforms are necessary in order for our nation’s immigration system to respond to the realities of separated families and labor demands that compel people to immigrate to the United States, whether in an authorized or unauthorized fashion. 

Our nation’s economy demands foreign labor, yet there are insufficient visas to meet this demand.  Close family members of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents face interminable separations, sometimes of twenty years or longer, due to backlogs of available visas.  U.S. immigration laws and policies need to be updated to reflect these realties. 

Does the Catholic Church support “amnesty”?

The Catholic bishops are proposing an earned legalization for those in this country in an unauthorized status and who have built up equities and are otherwise admissible. “Amnesty,” as commonly understood, implies a pardon and a reward for those who did not obey immigration laws, creating inequities for those who wait for legal entry.  The bishops’ proposal is not an “amnesty.” 

The Bishops’ earned legalization proposal provides a window of opportunity for undocumented immigrants who are already living in our communities and contributing to our nation to come forward, pay a fine and application fee, go through rigorous criminal background checks and security screenings, demonstrate that they have paid taxes and are learning English, and obtain a visa that could lead to permanent residency, over time.