In the New York Times’ article “Asylum Fraud in Chinatown: An Industry of Lies“, brings light to the vast application for asylum by Chinese immigrants. That is, more Chinese immigrants apply for asylum in the United States, more specifically in New York, than any other group of immigrants. In fact, more than 62 percent of asylum cases presented in New York have come been filed by Chinese immigrants in 2012 alone. It must be noted, however, that the asylum application have become a problem due to the fact that in many cases Chinese immigrants present fake stories of persecution in order attain asylum.
A CUNY professor, Peter Kwong, has said that it is openly known within the Chinese community that the majority asylum applicants falsify documents and create fictitious stories in order to make their case seem more factual. That is, it has become so common to fabricate stories and counterfeit documents that this phenomenon is even called an asylum industry. For example, in 2010 federal officials, who were conducting an extensive investigation on immigration fraud, secretly recorded a conversation between a Chinese immigrant and her lawyer. The recording revealed that the lawyer urged his client to lie about being forced to abort in order to get asylum. From these findings a total of 30 people, including the lawyer, paralegals, interpreters and a church employee were accused of coaching Chinese asylum applicants on how to accurately lie about their reason for applying. This particular group of “coaches” trained the applicants in the basic doctrines of Christianity in order for the applicants to use religious persecution as an excuse.
A possible explanation for this fast-growing industry is that Chinese immigrants are increasingly trying to attain permanent immigration status in New York. This is due to the fact that immigrants who receive asylum are immediately allowed to work and within a year are able to apply for a greencard.
Kenneth Kowald’s editorial, “People in America need to learn how to speak English,” brings up immigrants’ levels of English and how their ability to be a part of society is affected by it. Long story short, their proficiencies aren’t very high. As citizens, they have all passed an English examination, yet, like the man in the editorial who claimed he wouldn’t be able to understand a court case, many can’t have a voice in the general society. But why is this? Are there not enough immigrants taking ESL classes? Are they not trying hard enough? Perhaps, they feel that learning English isn’t actually necessary to live in America?
Being born in the United States, I’ve never seen the citizenship test, but I have heard about it from others. I particularly remember one story my fifth grade history teacher shared about her family, and how they had to write a sentence in English to prove their proficiency. What sentence did they write? “I love America!” What sentence did everyone else in the room write? “I love America!” And with that, these people all passed the English portion. But let’s be honest. I doubt I could make my way around Paris only knowing how to say, “I love France!” and just the same way, many of these people really couldn’t communicate in English. This remains the case for many new immigrants today, who “prove” their “English know-how,” and then situate themselves in an ethnic neighborhood where everyone speaks their native language—never once needing to voice their, “I love America.” However, many of these people are forced to look for jobs outside of their familiar neighborhoods, places where English is the spoken language. What can these immigrants do to learn the language? Take ESL classes on the weekends and then return to their exclusively Polish-speaking neighborhood for the other 98% of the week?
Sadly, attempting to learn English this way will probably not increase any immigrant’s language proficiency very much or very time efficiently. Let’s look at one typical type of adult English learner, such as the hypothetical Polish speaker I brought up before. They will spend a few hours a week memorizing grammar rules and vocabulary, only having these few class hours to test out their spoken English. But for the rest of the time, they are only using Polish, and not exercising their English language knowledge. Unfortunately, there are no shortcuts to language learning, with daily practice being the only way to efficiently learn a new language. This is why the children of these immigrants always learn English fluently: They go to an English speaking school five days a week where everything is taught in English, and where many of their classmates speak English as well. This is great practice that many adult learners don’t get, simply because they have no one to talk to, especially like our Polish friend who lives in an immigrant Polish neighborhood. Being surrounded by people who share in your culture may feel comforting, and it is understandable why someone would want to live there, but it will only hinder language goals.
Kowald brought up the question of why the inability to read, write, and speak an advanced level of English is such a “handicap” in America. This is true even for immigrants “lucky” enough to find jobs in their ethnic neighborhoods. At some point in their lives, they will have to venture out of their neighborhood and interact with the large English speaking portion America, such as the man called for jury duty, who definitely wouldn’t be able to understand a court case, full of legal jargon, if all he knew were basic English phrases. There may be no official language in America, but English is the national Language, and a common lingua franca, or chosen language among people who do not speak the same native language. If immigrants decided to “pack their bags” and move into ethnically diverse towns, where they could experience constant interaction among English speakers, their language proficiencies would skyrocket (which is why that “lucky” man who found a job in his ethnic neighborhood may not be so lucky). In this way, immigrants would be headed to operating not in a small ethnic neighborhood, but in their diverse new home country. However, are we willing to sacrifice major hubs where people can experience other cultures, listen to other languages, and eat authentic ethnic cuisines, for the sake of spreading English and intermixing America? Would such things not be possible without those places, or with smaller-scale ones?
http://www.timesledger.com/stories/2013/15/kowald_we_2013_04_12_q.html
On February 12, 2014 residents of a small Nebraskan city voted to keep a measure, put place in 2010, which bans illegal immigrants from renting homes. The small city has been considered controversial for having voted for the ban in 2010 and even more so now that 60% of its residents have, once again, voted in favor of the ban. It must be noted that the number of residents in favor of the ban has gone up by 3% since it was originally instated, making the matter much more worrisome for illegal immigrants. The controversial measure prevents landlords from renting to any illegal immigrants. In fact in order, for any one to rent a home they must now apply for a permit from the police and prove that they are legally residing in the United States.
This measure is incredible detrimental to all of those hard-working families and sole individuals who have emigrated from their countries in hopes of a better life and even in some cases of asylum. Nebraska, which has proven to be one of the states enjoying a fair amount of economic health, has become increasingly menacing towards illegal immigrants over the years. Perhaps as a New Yorker and daughter of an immigrant mother, it seems outrages to see that immigrants, especially Hispanics could have their life dynamics go asunder. That is, many of the legal immigrants living not only in Nebraska but in most states have started of their lives as illegal immigrants and eventually gone on to become residents and even citizens. Thus, by passing bans such as this one, illegal immigrants’ chances of survival and perseverance are quickly diminishing.
Ha sorry. Didn’t realize I was supposed to write about something in the news.
For the first time in American history, people are prioritizing reform for the 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the United States than border security reform. According to a CNN poll, 54% of Americans were more concerned about legalizing immigrants here currently.
This poll came out right when Congress was going to shelf the immigration issue. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/17/polls-publics-immigration-priorities-changing/)
Most likely nothing will happen this year given the Republican’s distrust of President Obama, according to John Boehner, House speaker. But most republicans claim that changing the status quo will increase the amount of poverty in the United States, and will result a bigger demand for welfare.
Below is a really interesting article which affirms what we learned in class about the relationship between welfare benefits and illegal immigrants. According to the article, “the amount of welfare benefits given is unaffected by the foreign origin or diversity of population.”The article goes as far to say that immigration actually reduces the size of welfare states, as seen in some European countries.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/18/increased-immigration-is-unlikely-to-increase-the-size-of-the-welfare-state/)
This is especially interesting given Switzerland’s recent decision to limit their immigration. Economists are saying that this decision will most likely hurt economic growth. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-19/swiss-immigration-curbs-seen-as-threat-to-economic-growth.html)
After visiting the tenement museum last week with class, I was excited to speak to my grandmother about her experience, if any, with the tenements. My grandmother, second generation American, barely speaks of her past, and little is known about her childhood.
Usually my grandmother takes a good deal of prodding, and after a few words on the subject, she changes it to something more current.
This past Sunday was different though. During a biweekly visit to my grandmother’s assisted living facility, I briefly mentioned the tenement museum, and as soon as I did, she seized the opportunity to tell me about her experience with the tenements, and about her father’s story.
Her grandparents, and my great-great-grandparents, came from Eastern Europe between the 1870s and 1880s. They were the first of their family to come to the States. My great-great grandfather worked in a factory, and every nickel went to his family back home. My great-great grandfather even bought them tickets, but his parents refused to come.
They refused to speak Yiddish with their children, even though that was what was being spoken all around them. But even when my great-great grandparents could afford to move out of the tenements, they decided to stay. My grandmother speculated that they did not want to leave all of their friends and memories behind.
My grandmother frequently visited her grandparents on Cherry Street (or so she says– she is 97), and was shocked to learn about the living conditions of the tenements later on, given the fact that her grandparents lived only two in one tenement when she visited.
I loved the tenement museum: I really got a sense of what life was like for the Eastern European Jews during the early 1900s, as well as my own family. The community that I learned about was my great-great grandparents’ community, one that my great-great grandparents refused to leave.
This poster, which is now displayed at the entrance of the tenement building, reminds us that the Lower East Side was largely populated by German immigrants in the mid 1800’s.
This photograph not only shows the overcrowded life-style of Immigrants living in the Lower East Side but also the clash of styles.
Here are the slides from Joe Salvo’s presentation. It seems that the 51% figure we were discussing (thanks, Milan!) is actually people who speak English at home. Only 23% of New Yorkers are not English proficient. Here’s the full report.
About public assistance (from the report): “Overall, the percentage of native-born households receiving public assistance (4.5 percent) was similar to that for foreign-born households (4 percent).” Note that they are talking about households, not individuals. From the footnote: “Households with at least one person receiving public assistance were defined as receiving public assistance income.”
According to this excellent source of information on all things migration in the world, immigrants are more likely to be married than native-born people (nation-wide).
I have not found anything about hours worked per week, but I’ll keep looking. If you come up with interesting information or story, post it here even if it’s not your week.
