Archive | Contributions of Immigrants RSS feed for this section

Feliz cumpleaños abuela

1 May

Today, May Day, would have been my grandmother, Marta Socarras y San Martin’s 94th birthday.  She was born in Havana in 1919 as the world witnessed the violent death of kingly empires and the birth of communism as a state philosophy.  How odd it seems that an ideology that gripped workers and soldiers in Europe would one day take hold on a non-industrial island in the Caribbean.  In many ways, communism was an accompaniment to my grandmother’s life.  Born less than two years after the ten days that shook the world, my grandmother saw the entire arc of communism’s influence from a nascent and vulnerable state to an ideology that gripped much of the world and eventually took over her homeland and to its death whimpers as Russia and China abandoned it.  I smile to think of what my grandmother would have thought of today’s heirs to communism- Chavez, Morales and Maduro. Payasos.

Fidel

My grandmother lived an extraordinary life.  Born to one of the great Latin American families– yes, that San Martin– with roots in the Americas with the first Spanish explorers, my grandmother had many advantages as a young woman in Cuba as many as a woman could have in early Twentieth Century Cuba.  She graduated from the University of Havana with a law degree in 1941, about thirty years before U.S. schools regularly admitted women.  Her diploma hangs on my office wall.  She served as a district attorney in the provinces and carried a revolver on her rounds.  Anyone who thought that they were messing with a defenseless female was in for a rude shock.  Nonetheless, she was always a lady, horrified about the idea of leaving the house without lipstick.  In 1959, she shared the jubilation of all Cubans when Batista was driven from power by these mysterious bearded men from the mountains.  In fact, during the early days of the Revolution, the new regime held a parade.  The column of tanks and soldiers moved down Calle 23, a major thoroughfare.  When the tank carrying Fidel Castro and his leadership passed the home of my grandmother’s uncle, where the whole family had gathered to watch the parade, they lowered the tank’s gun and saluted the home of Manuel Costales, my great grand uncle and a major anti-Batista politician.  Yet, when the nature of the revolution became clear, my family left Cuba one October, never again to stroll the Prado or the Malecon, or the beach at Varadero.

Malecon

Instead, they settled into New Jersey and this was where my grandmother showed what she was made of.  With an elderly mother, two young boys (my father and uncle), an infirm brother and a worthless husband (not my grandfather, her second husband.  After him, she was done with husbands), my grandmother went to work at rebuilding her family and her life in el norte in October 1959.  I always wonder how that first winter must have felt, although most Cuban women of her generation and station had mink coats for their shopping trips to New York.  But living in New Jersey was a whole new life and nothing in her life in Cuba could have prepared her for the new challenges exile would present.  Her education and pedigree meant little in the U.S., and all she had to rely upon was her own ganas, which she had in buckets.  During the early years in the U.S, my grand uncle was often traveling with the U.S. government throughout Latin America discussing the Cuban revolution with intellectuals.  My great grandmother was nearly eighty and my father and uncle were teenagers facing school in a new country and language.  My grandmother was forty, my age, and had to reinvent herself.  At that point, my family history turns from pedigree and privilege to struggle and striving.  Fluent in English, my grandmother found work as a Spanish teacher at Verona High School and also taught Berlitz after school (“they had one chair- for the student”).  White and educated, I can not say that my grandmother’s experience is the typical immigrant experience (as a friend says “Cubans get a green card and a parade in Miami when they come.”)  However, the need to reinvent oneself to support a family, the need to pursue opportunity where it may lie, and to find shelter from persecution are universal themes of the immigrant story.

Like most immigrants, my grandmother worked her hands to the bone while supporting her sons, brother and mother.  At one point, both my grand uncle and my great grandmother were simultaneously hospitalized with heart attacks and neither knew about the other.  Imagine the strain that put on my grandmother.  She put my father into the position to earn his Ph.D. and become an internationally celebrated scientist, which gave me the chance to do the work I do with immigrants.  In an irony on par with my grandmother’s birth on May Day, I was the first family member born in the U.S., and I was born on July 26, the symbolic starting date of the Cuban Revolution.  I don’t know whether that even registered at the time with my grandmother who was too busy flush with joy and excitement over her first grandchild.  Always, family and love were more important than politics to my grandmother.

My grandmother outlived communism and has left a legacy of four grandchildren and three great grandchildren, who were lucky enough to share a little time on earth with her.  I thought about putting a photo of my grandmother up in this blog, but she hated photos of herself.  Like her immigrant life in America, she kept the focus off herself and gave her all to her family, who she carried on her back into this new world without Castros, Maos, Stalins and Ches.

STEM Sells: But the U.S. Economy Depends on the Arts and Humanities Too

22 Mar

Increasing the number of immigrant and non-immigrant visas available to highly-skilled workers – particularly in the fields of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) – currently appears to be the least controversial and most bipartisan aspect of the various immigration reform proposals being discussed, debated, and leaked to the public, even if the discussion about how to increase the number of STEM visas remains unclear. If certain U.S. industries – particularly tech industries that could easily pull the plug and set up shop elsewhere – contend that they cannot hire enough qualified workers because of visa limits, who is to argue in response that the U.S. does not need more engineers and rocket scientists? Everyone can get behind increasing STEM jobs. However, when we propose stapling a green card only to those diplomas earned in STEM fields, and when visas available to artists, writers, educators, historians, and musicians are limited to those who demonstrate “extraordinary” ability in their field, we risk losing the contributions of those who can demonstrate only “high skill” in non-STEM fields. We risk the imbalance that comes with planning to “overbuild” in one area only.

The focus on highly-skilled STEM workers, to the exclusion of those highly skilled in the arts and humanities, misses a critical component of a lasting healthy economy: across a range of industries, long-term career success requires both in-depth knowledge and skills that apply to a specific field or position and a broad range of skills and knowledge that apply to a range of fields and positions. A 2009 survey of more than 300 employers (conducted by Hart Research Associates on behalf of the Association of American Colleges and Universities) demonstrates that a high percentage of employers want colleges and universities to place more emphasis on written and oral communication (89%), critical thinking and analytic reasoning (81%), complex problem solving (75%), teamwork skills in diverse groups (71%), creativity and innovation (70%), information literacy (68%), and quantitative reasoning (63%) – the skills that are the hallmarks of a liberal arts education.

There is no doubt that American culture benefits from the contributions of those foreign-born workers educated and skilled in the arts and humanities, but the U.S. economy benefits as well, not only in the arts and entertainment industries, but even in STEM fields. In a September 21, 2011 opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, Norm Augustine, the former CEO of Lockheed Martin, argued that the long-term success of the U.S. economy requires those educated in historical literacy: “In my position as CEO of a firm employing over 80,000 engineers, I can testify that most were excellent engineers — but the factor that most distinguished those who advanced in the organization was the ability to think broadly and read and write clearly.”

In an acceptance speech at the Academy Awards in 1988, the Austrian-born screenwriter, producer, filmmaker, artist, and journalist Billy Wilder thanked the unnamed American consul officer in Mexicali, Mexico who permitted Wilder to enter the United States in 1934 despite a lack of proper documentation – because Wilder told the officer that he wrote movies – stating simply “write some good ones.” Wilder became one of the most successful filmmakers in the entertainment industry, in addition to shaping American film culture. Immigration reform of course must prioritize the needs of certain growing U.S. industries, but those industries in turn must recognize that the long-term success of the U.S. economy depends on a broader spectrum of qualifications than the singular focus on highly-skilled STEM workers permits. Like Billy Wilder’s consul officer, immigration reform must have the foresight to recognize that those who enrich our lives through the arts and humanities contribute to both the culture and to the economy.

BR Eats Tacos and Thinks About Immigration

26 Feb

el sol

I had the best tacos I have ever had this weekend in Harrisonburg, Virginia.  The whole Benach Ragland attorney gang headed out to the country to meet in the quiet of the mountains.  And, of course, in the middle of rural America, we found tacos.  Delicious tacos.

I used to work with a colleague who used to discuss the virtues of America’s unique immigrant history by pointing out the benefits to American cuisine.  “Have you ever tried to get good Mexican food in Rome?” he would bellow.  And it was true.  In many cities in the U.S., you could go a month and not eat the same cuisine twice.  Many of us, especially those of us who live in coastal American cities, believe that this is the sole domain of the urban dweller.  However, the modern American reality is that immigrants are everywhere in America and bringing their cuisine and their vitality with them, restoring fading American towns.

Harrisonburg is in the middle of Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley.  The valley is a rural swath of land wedged between the Blue Ridge Mountains to the East and the Appalachian mountains to the West known for its fertile soil and large agricultural output.  The Shenandoah Valley has been a quiet place since it was a center of attention during the U.S. Civil War, when multiple armies chased each other and clashed over its rolling farmland.  The destruction of Virginia farmland caused by the intense campaigning was one consideration that persuaded Robert E. Lee to invade the North in 1862 before he was check by the Army of the Potomac at Antietam Creek.  Since the last troops pulled out of the valley in 1865, it has returned to peace and quiet.

It is still heavily agricultural.  A large chicken processing plant is in Harrisonburg.  The plant has attracted thousands of undocumented workers who have had to do the gruesome work of turning birds into poultry.  These immigrants have done the dirty work of America’s need for cheap food for decades.  Their children, often American citizens, are now finding their own success in America in ways that don’t involve plucking chickens.  The sacrifice of the parents and their own stunted dreams bear fruit in the lives of the children.

What does this have to do with tacos??  Well, the children of one of these poultry factory workers have opened El Sol, a tiny little taqueria in Harrisonburg.  The menu is small.  They make tacos, quesadillas, and some fine Mexican stew.  But by keeping their menu small, they have adopted a leading principle of business- do one thing better than all others and you will be rewarded.  And, boy, do they.  El Sol’s tacos are the freshest and tastiest we have ever had.  Each of the tacos ($1.25 each!) is simple, as they are in Mexico.  A piping hot fresh corn tortilla filled with pork, steak or beans and cheese.  And, yes, they presumably have local chicken!  The fillings of shredded pork or chicharrones, fried pork skin, are delicious and topped with fresh cilantro and onions.  A Mexican coke washes it down nicely.  My partners also really enjoyed the carne asada, but I was too busy with the pork to notice.

The delightful Isabel Castillo works the front room, bringing hot plates of tacos to the Mexican families who pour in for a taste of home.  Her brother, Luis, does the cooking.  El Sol is a delightful, sunny café that brightens a street that would otherwise be a dreary monument to the better yesterday of Harrisonburg.

The Immigration Industrial Complex

9 Jan

5a6cb_man-shocked-at-billThe Migration Policy Institute recently released a study documenting that the U.S. government spent $18 billion on immigration enforcement, dwarfing the $14 million spent on other federal law enforcement agencies. The FBI, the DEA and the ATF, combined, received $14 billion.  Immigration & Customs Enforcement’s budget, alone, is $6 billion.  Something is seriously out of whack here.

None of this is surprising to immigration attorneys.  ICE runs a gulag archipelago of detention centers across the country, holding immigrants who have overstayed visas, entered without inspection, seek asylum, and  committed minor offenses.  ICE has continued to push in the federal courts for expansive definitions of mandatory detention, even if it means detaining people for offenses committed decades ago.  In 2011, ICE detained over 429,000 people, more than any other single government entity.  More than the Bureau of Prisons, the States of California, Texas, Florida, and New York.  ICE operates in its own jails, rents out space at local jails and contracts with private companies like the GEO corporation to manage this enormous population.  In addition, ICE has contracts with BI Incorporated to monitor individuals with final orders of removal.  This often involves ankle bracelets with GPS, telephonic and in-person reporting.  BI officials also monitor an individual’s efforts to obtain passports and plane tickets to depart the U.S. under an removal order.  In other words, they do ICE’s job.  And, frankly, they are pretty good at it.  Over 400,000 removals in 2011 shows how good BI is.  If budget hawks are serious about making government run like a business, how about saving money by eliminating the middleman?

The large budgetary excess for immigration enforcement also provides an explanation for the massive ICE resistance to immigration reform.  After all, if undocumented youth are getting DACA rather than being detained and deported, bed spaced is being underutilized and removals may go down.  In our current economic environment, it won’t be long before some budget-cutting legislator begins to question the excess of the the immigration enforcement budget.  If ICE were to exercise discretion and not detain and deport everyone that they possibly could, can they fulfill their contracts with the private companies that have built jails throughout the country.  If ICE were to take a more reasonable approach to enforcement, would they need to send out 20 agents before dawn to arrest four plumbers working a contract at Dulles because they are working on fake green cards?

The large amount of money at stake for immigration enforcement makes it clear that the efforts of some ICE bureaucrats to derail common-sense immigration reform is a result not of a principled belief in our national security and public safety, but rather to protect their exalted place at the public trough.

As we spend months debating the economic future of this country and what immigration reform will look like, it is worth contrasting the unproductive use of $18 billion tax dollars that ICE has commanded on an enforcement roid rage with the agreed-upon economic stimulus that would be provided by an immigration reform package.

The STEM Jobs Act: More of the Same From the House Republicans

25 Nov

The House of Representatives is moving quickly to give the appearance that they have changed their tune on immigration.  The House is scheduled to vote this week on the STEM Jobs Act, sponsored by the anti-immigrant Lamar Smith (R-TX).  The STEM Jobs Act would provide 55,000 additional visas for foreign nationals receiving advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.   Supporters of the STEM Jobs Act argue that it addresses an acknowledged problem area in U.S. immigration law- the difficulty that many needed and valued graduates have in securing residence.  In light of the many technology companies founded by foreign students, the cumbersome path to residence has caused many of these graduates to flee the U.S. and begin building their businesses in other countries.  There is widespread agreement that those graduating with advanced degrees in the STEM fields ought to be given enhanced opportunities to seek residence in the U.S.

The STEM Jobs Act would make 55,000 visas available to graduates who have received Ph.D. or master’s degrees in science, technology, engineering or mathematics.  According to the House Committee on the Judiciary, STEM graduates with Ph.D.s can receive residence if they:

  • have received a doctorate from an eligible U.S. university in computer science, mathematics, engineering, or the physical (excluding biology) sciences.
  • agree to work for the petitioning employer for at least five years in a STEM field.
  • have taken all their course work while physically present in the U.S.
  • are petitioned for by an employer who has gone through the labor certification process to demonstrate that there are not qualified or available U.S. workers for the position.

If there are visas left over after the Ph.D. visas are given out, graduates with STEM master’s degrees will be able to seek their residence on similar terms.

The House voted on the STEM Jobs Act earlier this year.  However, it failed for two reasons: (1) the House leadership used a procedure that required a 2/3 vote; and (2) only 20% of the Democratic caucus supported the Act.  The reason for the lack of Democratic support was because the bill does not increase the total number of visas available.  The bill eliminates the 55,000 diversity visas (visa lottery), so that the total number of visas issued in any given year is unchanged.  As the diversity visa remains one of the few ways that an individual with no family or employment ties to the U.S. can immigrate, many Democrats opposed its elimination.

The new STEM bill also eliminates the diversity visa.  Yet, the Republicans have sweetened the deal by providing for a temporary visa for the spouses and children of permanent residents.  This visa would allow the approximately 320,000 spouses and children of permanent residents waiting for immigrant visas to enter the U.S. and await their residence in the United States.  It would have the effect of uniting couples separated due to the backlog of visas in the category of spouses and children of permanent residents.  Currently, there is a two year backlog to receive residence as the spouse of a permanent residence.  Individuals receiving green cards today would have had to marry and file prior to July 2010.  The new law would allow people in that queue to enter the U.S. one year after filing an immigrant petition and then could wait out the queue in the U.S. with their families.  Something similar  has been done before in 2000, when V visas were given to those waiting in the backlog.  According to press reports, individuals entering to wait out the family based queue would be ineligible for employment authorization.

In summary, the STEM bill seems to be a non-serious effort to reform our immigration laws.  It is acknowledged that the process of obtaining residence for highly educated and skilled immigrants in the STEM fields is highly cumbersome and onerous.  Yet, STEM fails to fix that.  The cumbersome and onerous part is the labor certification, which requires employers to jump through a variety of hoops to petition for residence for foreign nationals.  Yet, STEM leaves that process intact.  Moreover, by tying a STEM graduate to an employer for five years, the STEM Jobs Act places more restrictions on a STEM graduate than on an individual who received her PH.D. in literature, who does not need to remain with her employer for five years.  If the goal of this bill is to unleash the creative and entrepreneurial talent of the STEM graduates, why are they tied to a specific employer for five years?  If, as the House Judiciary Committee states, STEM graduates are behind many of the innovations and new businesses, why does the STEM Jobs Act shackle them?

The STEM Jobs Act uses a lot of words to create exactly what already exists.  It is called the second employment based preference where an employer may sponsor an individual with an advanced degree through the labor certification process.  However, the current law provides visas for all types of graduates and employees who help the economy.  Those visas, except for India and China, are already current.  The India and China backlog is disgraceful and should be remedied, but it can be done in a far more pithy way than the STEM Jobs Act does.  Add 55,000 visas to the second preference.

This also raises the question of whether those visas should be taken from the diversity visa.  I am no fan of the diversity visa.  It seems silly for a country to give out residence based upon a lottery.  Immigration should be about filling the needs of American families and business.  A lottery strikes me as a very unsophisticated way to give out a very valuable benefit.  That being said, I do not think that the diversity visa should be traded for the STEM Jobs Act.  If the STEM Jobs Act eliminated the need for a labor certification and allowed STEM graduates freedom to work for themselves or traditional employers, the STEM Jobs Act could certainly make better immigration policy.  However, the STEM Jobs Act continues on the same bureaucratic path that has caused the problem we have now and does very little to unleash the forces of STEM graduates.  As immigration law becomes a topic of legislative inquiry, those interested in serious reform should make it clear that the same old ways of doing things must come to an end.

Even the sweetener of uniting families is fairly sour.  Applicants would have to have their I-130 petitions pending for a year before they could seek their visas.  This is roughly half of the current backlog.  Once here, they spouses of permanent residents could not work.  This restriction on employment authorization serves no rational purpose other than to stoke marital discord and financial hardship.
The STEM Jobs Act is not an opening bid in the new immigration reality.  It is a last gasp of the dinosaurs who have strangled and stymied meaningful reform of our immigration laws.  We won the election.  Our ideas should be the starting point.

The Perspective of a First-Time Voter

12 Nov

After years of statelessness, asylee and friend of Benach Ragland LLP, Sonya Kay (alias), kindly shares her thoughts and memories from her first time voting as a United States citizen:

“I think I will remember the day I became a U.S. citizen, October 21, 2010, for the rest of my life.  I will remember that lump in my throat, tears pouring down my face when I took the oath of allegiance, the thought that I could apply for jobs that I couldn’t before, that I would finally be able to travel to the country that I came from–and the hope that I might not have to go through secondary inspection at the airport after visiting my siblings or friends in Europe–and that I would finally be able to participate in presidential elections in this country. When I look back now, after ten years of my life in the U.S., I think it was really hard to earn my citizenship.  It took me eight long years, because my citizenship was based on asylum.  There were years of sadness, desperation, loss of loved ones, and times of bitterness that I lived with here.

Well, it turned out that becoming a citizen didn’t end my struggle magically.  It didn’t make me richer, nor did it change my employment situation, and I was humiliated by a CBP officer in Philadelphia so badly after coming back from a trip to Europe (where I went to celebrate my citizenship) that I sobbed in a bathroom for almost an hour, thinking that I should never have sought asylum in this country.  Thankfully, that feeling didn’t last for a long time, but it did make me write a two-page complaint to the U.S. Homeland Security CBP headquarters. I received a three-page response to my complaint with sincere apologies for the misconduct by their employee.

When I was finally able to book my trip for a memorial service dedicated to my parents this October (both of my parents died three years and three days apart in the month of October), I made sure that I would be able to return to the U.S.  before election day.  Of course, I could have taken advantage of early voting, but it was really important to me to cast my vote on election day: to experience that right, to sense that feeling, and most importantly to hope that my vote would be counted so that my candidate would be able to continue to reform this country, which is far from perfect, as I originally thought.  Growing up in a communist country, my parents didn’t vote, and after the collapse of the communist regime and the establishment of the institution of president, elections were never really free.

How did I feel on election day? Butterflies in my stomach and worries that something might go wrong with the voting machines, that people would not come to the polls, and that conservatives would win.  I live in a swing state, which didn’t vote democratic for decades before 2008. So I joked that I very much hoped that my ballot would help to win, as the race was so close.  On election day, I ended up waiting for one hour and 20 minutes in line to vote.  I was overwhelmed in a good way to see how people were pouring into the polling place to cast their ballots: old couples, young couples with little children and toddlers, students, people with accented English like me, labor workers, clerks, and people who looked like officials – all in the same line with the same purpose – hope for a better future for their country…

When I finally left my voting booth, I felt the appreciation of freedom once again.  The feeling that so many in this country take for granted:  that no one would force me to go or not to go to a polling place, that no one would harass me if I mentioned whom I voted for, that my vote would be counted whether my candidate lost or won, that I could write a complaint I was unfairly treated, that I would receive and have the right to appeal a response to my complaint, that I would be free to march if I disagreed with some policies of my adopted country, that I wouldn’t be jailed  and tortured, either for expressing my  political opinion or for filing cases on behalf of victims whose basic human rights have been violated,  and that even if conservatives won and reforms initiated by my presidential candidate came to a halt, I could be sure that the presidential term limit guaranteed by the constitution would not be exchanged for forty years of reign, as it happens in some countries.

It turned out that my state did vote democratic, and my vote was counted, and my hope that the country will continue with reforms is still there.”

Thank you, Sonya, for sharing this important perspective with us and for serving as a constant reminder of what we at Benach Ragland LLP are fighting for.  Your story will continue to serve as a source of inspiration to those whose immigration cases have not yet reached completion.

No more “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” but “Common Sense Immigration Reforms.”

11 Nov

As the prospects of serious immigration reform have exploded over the past week, we propose a change to how advocates of immigration reform call it.  For years, we have called it comprehensive immigration reform (CIR).  This formulation has gotten us nothing.  Why is that?  Perhaps it is because very few people, not steeped in the legal mumbo-jumbo of immigration, have any idea what it means.  It sounds complex and challenging and like something designed by the social engineers to radically change America.  While “comprehensive immigration reform” sounds cumbersome, the ideas underlying CIR are simple and appealing.  Americans overwhelmingly favor comprehensive immigration reform even if they do not know exactly what it means.  Poll after poll shows that Americans support providing some sort of amnesty, yes, amnesty, for undocumented immigrants in the U.S.  Polls show that Americans want to allow immigrants who work hard, stay out of trouble and support their families to be able to obtain residence.  Most Americans support such common-sense rules that are neither unnecessarily harsh or absurdly lenient.

Therefore, we propose that the term “comprehensive immigration reform” be allowed to die a dignified death.  In its wake, we propose that advocates push for “common-sense immigration reforms.”  For years, Republicans have been successful in distilling complex issues to overly simple soundbites.  Think of “death taxes,” “drill, baby drill,” “family values.”  Think what you may of these terms and the policies they represent, but you can not deny that they have been effective at distilling complex issues into easily comprehensible terms for public consumption.  This has been the genius of Republican electoral success.  That may not seem apparent in the aftermath of Tuesday’s historic election, but, for decades, the Republicans have used these terms to brand their party as the party of main street, common sense solutions.  It is time to recognize the genius of that approach.  While “comprehensive immigration reform” sounds like something created by lobbyists and special interests in Washington, “common-sense immigration reform,” sounds more like bringing mainstream American values of fairness, compassion and reward for hard work to the nation’s immigration laws.

One other reasons to support the shift- it has the advantage of also being true.  It does not take a law degree or a lobbyist to convince the American people that immigrants deserve a fair shake.  It is common sense.

Meet a DREAMer- Roxana and Silvana Bedia

6 Nov

We are starting a new series here at Benach Ragland to introduce our readers to some of our clients who have sought and obtained Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) benefits.  We profile these extraordinary young people who make up our community, contribute to its richness and have exemplary talents to offer to demonstrate the many good reasons to support the DREAM Act and common sense immigration reform.

Over the summer, all of us here at Benach Ragland were lucky to meet a couple of outstanding DREAMers, when Roxana and Silvana Bedia visited our offices from West Palm Beach, Florida with their parents.  They were doing the obligatory trip for all American families- trudging through the muggy heat of a Washington summer to visit the monuments and memorials to American history.  They made time to visit us.  For the first time in their twenty years in the United States, Roxana and Silvana had hope that this country would accept them, if not as quite completely as they have accepted their adopted homeland.

Their father was an economist in Peru, when things went off the rails there.  Eager to give his family a chance at a future without the Shining Path, the Tupac Amaru and Alberto Fujimori, the Bedia family made the great leap to el norte.  Silvana was just six years old, and Roxana, three.  They barely have memories of Peru.  Their parents struggled to build a life for them in the United States.  Their mother left a professional career at a bank in Peru.  The only one in the family with English skills, Mrs. Bedia became the breadwinner, working all day as a secretary and late into the night at a grocery store.

The sacrifices made by their parents paid off as Roxana and Silvana thrived in the U.S.  They gained admittance to a magnet school in law enforcement.  Both women intend to pursue careers in law enforcement.  Roxana attended the University of Florida and got a degree in Political Science/ Criminology with a minor in American history.  She wants to go to law school to become a prosecutor.  Silvana went to the University of Central Florida, where she majored in Criminal Justice- Crime Scene Investigation.   Silvana also wants to go back to school—not to become a lawyer, but to deepen her understanding of forensic science.

As Roxana and Silvana have waited for relief from their immigration status, they have put their talents to good use.  They both work at a rural health clinic where they help deliver medical care to a highly vulnerable population.

Roxana and Silvana have a lot to offer this country.  Both women have outstanding potential to contribute to their community and both have sought a life of public service.  With the recent approval of their DACA applications, Roxana and Silvana will be given the tools they need to make their contribution.  We have been honored to have the opportunity to get to know the fabulous Bedia sisters.

I Can See Maryland from My House

29 Oct

As Hurricane Sandy crawls through the Washington, DC area, and the kids clamor for yet another game of Who Shook Hook?, now seems as good a time as any to prepare a thoughtful post on the Maryland Dream Act.  As a Washington DC resident, I don’t get a vote in Maryland even though, to paraphrase the former Alaskan governor, “I can see Maryland from my house.”  Of course, that has never stooped us from having an opinion and I hope that all of my Maryland friends support Question 4, the so-called Maryland Dream Act next Tuesday.

The Maryland Dream Act, if passed, would allow certain undocumented youth resident in Maryland to pay in-state tuition at public universities and institutions in the state of Maryland.  According to the Washington Post, “Under Maryland’s Dream Act, students who can prove that they have attended Maryland high schools for at least three years and that either they or their guardians have filed state taxes would be allowed to enroll at community colleges at in-state rates.  Those who attain an associate’s degree or 60 credit hours could transfer to a four-year institution. At the University of Maryland, annual tuition is $7,175 for in-state students, compared with $25,554 for out-of-state students.”  Obviously, the savings for undocumented youth is substantial.

The Maryland legislature passed the Maryland Dream Act in April 2011 and Governor O’Malley signed the bill.  However, opponents gathered sufficient signatures to put the law to a referendum.  That effort created Question 4 on the ballot next Tuesday.

Opponents believe that, by offering undocumented youth in-state tuition, more undocumented youth will attend public institutions, which will lead to fewer American citizens getting coveted spots at those universities.  True enough- if this passes, more undocumented youth will attend public institutions and, yes, it is possible that some number of American citizens will get the limited slots for admission.  It strikes me, however, as profoundly un-American to suggest that American citizens are bound to lose in any competition with undocumented youth.  After all, they have been competing with them all their lives.  These undocumented youth did not just spring out of Mexico.  They grew up here, attended Maryland schools, pledged allegiance to our flag alongside their native born classmates, played on their soccer teams, and danced at their proms.  Every step of the way, they competed with their classmates.  This is something that every kid growing up in a multicultural Maryland is already used to.

Opponents seem to be scared of this competition.  For all the rhetoric of free markets and competition, opponents favor stacking the deck.  This belies a disturbing lack of confidence in American born students.  What is truly remarkable about this is that young people overwhelmingly support the Maryland Dream Act.  Those who have the most to lose, so to speak, support the Maryland Dream Act.  This is because they know these undocumented youth and have attended school with them for several years.  They are already used to their presence and see how their lives have been enriched and the competition has been upped.  In America, we have always believed that competition is a good thing, that better competition leads to better results and, as usual, it is the kids who get this better than the adults.

There is also a moral dimension to the legislation.  These kids came to the U.S. through no fault of their own.  They have lived in our communities, attended our schools and have accepted the American Dream.  Providing them with in-state tuition is a recognition that they are part of our lives and our communities.  It is giving them the same rewards for their hard work and achievement that is provided to those who through random luck were born in the U.S.

Finally, the long-term economic benefits are clear.  After these kids graduate from school, they will have better opportunities and better jobs.  Some will start businesses, some will conduct ground breaking research.  All will pay much more back in taxes than the tuition break they received.

The good news is that this message is winning.  The latest Washington Post poll shows that Question 4 is likely to pass with over 58% of the electorate.  This is not to say that anyone should be complacent.  Opponents are determined.  Some may remember that the presidential candidacy of Texas governor Rick Perry was already on the rocks even before his “oops” momentPerry was destroyed in the primaries by his support for in-state tuition for undocumented youth in Texas.  Mitt Romney accelerated his path to the nomination by labeling the Texas Dream Act an “inducement” to illegal immigration.  Opposition to the Maryland Dream Act remains firm and committed and not to be underestimated.

If you live in Maryland, please vote for Question 4.

Re-Connecting with Dariusz Gilman

24 Sep

Every Tuesday, my children’s school publishes a newsletter that includes a number of advertisers.  Tutors, babysitters, coaches all advertise to the parents of the schoolchildren.  Last week, I noticed a different ad from all the others.  Fencing was being offered and I was happy to see that the coach offering fencing was my old client, Dariusz Gilman.  I represented Dariusz a long time ago and was delighted to see that he has opened up his own fencing school in Silver Spring, Maryland, Dariusz Gilman Sabre Fencing.  On Saturday, I took the kids to watch a class and get some tips from Coach Dariusz and I am happy to say that Coach Dariusz has two new pupils eager to learn to fence.

Dariusz is a remarkable individual.  This is not only  because he is willing to spend an hour with a dozen seven-year-olds armed with swords, but because he has made the difficult transition from athletic championship to instilling in American children a love for a fairly obscure sport.  Dariusz is a former Polish national champion and was a European junior champion.  He has over a decade of experience training American kids in fencing and his students have become NCAA and United States Fencing Association champions and finalists.  Dariusz brings energy and joy to his students and, most impressively, holds their attention for a good hour.  Dariusz does not do fifty minute hours.

Watching all these American children learn from Dariusz and his coaches reminds me of why we work in immigration.  Having a fencing school in Silver Spring enriches our community.  Dozens of kids have found a calling or an outlet in fencing and, if it were not for Dariusz’ ambition to bring the sport he loves to America, this opportunity would have been lost.  More practically, I am reminded of the many studies that show that immigrants open businesses at a far higher rate than native-born Americans.  Immigrants start one in four new businesses in America.  It is well known that companies like Google, eBay, Intel, Yahoo and YouTube were all started by immigrants, but the bulk of American business is small business like Dariusz Gilman Sabre FencingRecent reports show that immigrants have started 18% of all small business, way higher than their 13% of the general population.

As DREAMers begin to receive their work permits, we should expect no less of them.  Many DREAMers have worked hard and against the odds to realize the dreams of their parents.  They created a political force, established a constituency, and their fate may turn an election.  With a chance to get jobs, finish school, open bank accounts and start businesses, DREAMers will leave an indelible mark on this country.  They carry with them the energy and belief in the American dream that has always defined immigrants to America.

En garde!

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 295 other followers