THE American Citizens Handbook on Immigration

By Clements Jarboe

Back Cover



Thomas Jefferson wrote “a well-informed electorate is a prerequisite to democracy.”

The American Citizens’ Handbook’s mission is to bring that line of thinking to the forefront of the immigration arena.

What started as a search for a questionable confirmation of a lone statistic ended after close to two years of research, being a candid conversation from a concerned citizen on inaccurate data with self-serving agendas.

Inside this cover, you will discover startling information that brings to light that the new class of victim is the US citizen.

You will see

how immigrants, legal and illegal, use the additional child care credit to claim billions in fraudulent claims

that there are credible statistics showing that there are more than 20,000,000 illegal immigrants in the US, with 60 percent of those having lived in the country for over a decade

that the top 10 H-1B employers use the visa program to send American jobs offshore

how the lack of assimilation interferes with our children’s education in the US

how illegal immigrants that arrive at an early age are more likely to be incarcerated than those who arrive at later ages

the impact that birth tourism plays in this country with over five hundred Chinese companies offering the service

how immigration profoundly redistributes political power at the federal level

the fact that sanctuary laws fall hardest on the backs of the American Citizens in that area.



The American Citizens’ Handbook on Immigration shows how society is putting the citizens of this great country second.

The content has been said to be articulate, factual, and informational.

Thomas Jefferson would be proud.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Fulton Books, Inc.
• Release date: Sep 28, 2020
• ISBN: 9781646547401

Book preview

cover.jpg

THE American Citizens Handbook on Immigration

Clements E Jarboe

Copyright © 2020 Clements E Jarboe

All rights reserved

First Edition

Fulton Books, Inc.

Meadville, PA

Published by Fulton Books 2020

ISBN 978-1-64654-739-5 (paperback)

ISBN 978-1-64654-740-1 (digital)

Printed in the United States of America

Table of Contents

An Overview of the History of Migration in America

So Where Are We Today, and Where Do We Go from Here?

Illegal Immigration and Taxes

Illegal Immigration and Crime

Assimilation

Catch and Release

Family Reunification (Chain Migration)

Sanctuary Cities

DACA: Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals

H-1B Visas

Birthright Citizenship (Anchor Babies)

Unintended Consequences

To my wife,

Cherie

To my children,

Stephanie

Holly

C. J.

Ashley

To my grandchildren,

Christian

Preston

Kaitlynne

Chase

Jackson

Nathan

Kaiden

Kensi

Lincoln

Poppy

Preface

Oath of Allegiance

1906

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

First of all, thank you for being a part of this conversation. With that being said, I am always in awe of our oath of allegiance and what it signifies to us, the American citizen. It relays our responsibilities that made this country great.

Here are a few housekeeping items:

This conversation is meant to be viewed in the same context as a college textbook—that is, to inform and educate so that as a citizen, you can make the best decision in the voting booth.

I do not profess to be some great writer. The great majority of this conversation is taken from articles and reports gathered from close to two years of research. I have done my best to give credit where credit is due. I am, at most, a facilitator of the information presented.

The information within can be somewhat boring at times, given the statistical nature.

In the majority of the chapters, you will see What you see and The complete story. What you see is the popular narrative in the media, while The complete story is what the narrative has left out, taken out of context, or manipulated.

As you read through this conversation, please note there is no hidden agenda here.

I started just looking for the truth, something I could believe in. As you read, you could believe that I am taking the conservative side, when actually I’m taking the side of the new-victim identity—that of the american citizen.

Last time I checked, the American citizen was not one race or one religion but literally comprise of millions of people from all walks of life.

My personal perspective is that our political parties over the decades have replaced their main reason for being, from representing the people to representing their own party and agenda. They need to be reminded who they serve.

At times, you will find the facts and numbers presented here somewhat overwhelming and dry, if not at points boring. The intent is not to entertain but, as said before, to provide you with facts and figures to make an informed decision. I ask you not to reign with those of the intellectually lazy.

Personally, the journey on this compilation of facts and truths began when I questioned that from 2010 to 2017, the immigrant population increased from 40 million to 44.5 million for an 11.25 percent increase for that time, an increase of roughly 4.5 million, while illegal immigration on the other hand had reportedly decreased from 11.6 million to 10.7 million in the same time period—a drop of 0.9 percent or 10,400.

This is from the Pew Research Center:

Basically, our estimate of unauthorized immigrants is the total number of immigrants living in the country minus the number of immigrants living here as lawful residents. In concept, it’s a very simple relationship. There’s a lot that goes into producing the final estimate, but the basic estimate is just this difference.

I’ve got to tell you, you may tell me on one hand, the immigrant population increased 4.5 million in a span of seven years.

But on the other hand, the illegal population (basically a subset of the whole) decreased by 10,000.

The math doesn’t seem to work.

So I started nosing around on the internet and research articles. It appeared that all factions were cherry-picking their data or making vague statements to promote their own agenda.

Take one article on how illegal aliens contribute 19.5 billion in taxes, making them a productive contribution. And compare that with the article stating that illegal cost of Medicaid alone runs close to 18.5 billion, and something seems tainted. More on those numbers later.

Or how about assimilation into days society isn’t as important as when the majority of immigrants came through Ellis Island.

Add to the conflict that one article states most immigrants are hard workers and carry two jobs, while another article claims that the amount of immigrants on government programs are almost twice as high as natives.

Then there is the stance that immigrant crime rate is less than the natives,

While the department of justice maintains that 26 percent of all federal prisoners are alien.

And then there are the sanctuary cities.

Addressing all the issues would require a book that borders on the size of War and Peace.

All the above contradictions and conflict led me on this two-year journey for the truth.

So this conversation is going to research twelve main issues.

To start the conversation, the first chapter will be a brief overview of the rulings and laws that shaped our immigration structure today.

Once again, thank you for joining in on the conversation. I pray that I have done the subject justice. God bless and Godspeed.

Chapter 1

An Overview of the History of Migration in America

Way back in 1987, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit described immigration law as second in complexity only to the internal revenue code."

It would appear little has changed."

—Anna.O. Law

There are numerous acts, bills, and changes to migration over the centuries.

For the purposes of this book, we will start with current acts and bills that appear to bear the brunt of the reason we are where we are.

Beginning with the Immigration Acts of 1921 and 1924, the Immigration Act of 1965, the amnesty bill in 1986, and the Obama executive action on the DACAs in 2012, the United States experienced rising immigration during the early years of the twentieth century. Between 1900 and 1920, the nation admitted over 14.5 million immigrants. Concerns over the mass immigration brought about a presidential commission that brought about the writing and passage of the Immigration Act of 1917. The act, among other things, required that the incoming immigrants be able to read and write in their native language.

Massive immigration resumed after the First World War. Congress responded with a new immigration policy, the national origins quota system. Established by the Immigration Acts of 1921 and 1924, the national origins system numerically limited immigration for the first time in United States history. Each nationality received a quota based on its representation in past United States census figures. The State Department distributed a limited number of visas each year through US embassies abroad, and the Immigration Service only admitted immigrants who arrived with a valid visa.

Severely restricted immigration often results in increased illegal immigration. In response to rising numbers of illegal entries and alien smuggling, especially along land borders, in 1924, Congress created the US Border Patrol within the Immigration Service.

The 1921and 1924 acts limited the annual number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2 percent of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890—down from the 3 percent cap set by the Immigration Restriction Act of 1921, according to the census of 1890. The law was aimed at further restricting the Southern and Eastern Europeans who were immigrating in large numbers starting in the 1890s as well as prohibiting the immigration of Middle Easterners, East Asians, and Asian Indians.

According to the US Department of State Office of the Historian, Mexicans and the Central Americans had a different status. The war would bring about labor shortages especially in the Southwestern fields and farms. In 1942, the bracero act was established, Public Law 45. It was seen as a seasonal workers’ program for workers, not their families. The mostly Mexican workers were housed and fed by the employers, who could bring them in unlimited numbers. It was not meant to be an immigration visa but a temporary work visa. But braceros were free to come and cross the border without restriction. They were not restricted in the National Origins Act of 1924.

In the end, the most basic purpose of the 1924 Immigration Act was to preserve the ideal of American homogeneity, and this stood as the cornerstone for migration until 1965.

The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, also known as the Hart-Celler Act, abolished the earlier quota system based on national origin and established a new immigration policy based on reuniting immigrant families and attracting skilled labor to the United States, an intellectual victory.

At the signing of the bill on October 3, 1965, President Lyndon Johnson said, This bill that we will sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not reshape the structure of our daily lives or really add importantly to either our wealth or our power.

While at an immigration hearing on February 10, 1965, Senator Ted Kennedy stated, The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not change the ethnic mix of our society.

But in fact, some say the law changed the face of America. The major source countries of immigration radically shifted from Europe to Latin America and Asia. The number of immigrants tripled by 1978. It made the country the highly diverse, multinational, multiethnic, multicultural American nation that it is today.

The 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act may be the most liberal immigration law that will ever be passed in the United States.

It can be said that no one who supported the passage of the INA so eagerly in 1965, openly recommended what it would turn out to be, wrote history professor Otis Graham in his 2004 book Unguarded Gates.

The law’s two chief results were unintended (p. 1783):

Increasing the volume of immigrants back to over one million legal permanent per year as it had been in the 1920s when the restrictive National Origins Act was passed; in addition, over two million immigrants come in each year on temporary visas, and over five hundred thousand illegal immigrants either sneak across the border (about 60 percent) or overstay their temporary visa, totaling close to four million new immigrants who stay in the country. (Please remember these numbers as we will include them for extrapolation purposes.)

Altering the United States ethnoracial national population to resemble the world rather than the nation that had grown out of the thirteen British colonies (and thousands of black slaves).

By the end of the twentieth century, the policies put into effect by the Immigration Act of 1965 had greatly changed the face of the American population. Whereas in the 1950s, more than half of all immigrants were Europeans, and just 6 percent were Asians. By the 1990s, only 16 percent were Europeans, and 31 percent were of Asian descent, while the percentages of Latino and African immigrants had also jumped significantly. Between 1965 and 2000, the highest number of immigrants (4.3 million) to the US came from Mexico, in addition to some 1.4 million from the Philippines, Korea, the Dominican Republic, India, Cuba, and Vietnam. They were also leading sources of immigrants, each sending between seven hundred thousand and eight hundred thousand over this period.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, illegal immigration was a constant source of political debate as immigrants continue to pour into the United States, mostly by land routes through Canada and the Southwest border. The Immigration Reform Act in 1986 attempted to address the issue by providing better enforcement of immigration policies and creating more possibilities to seek legal immigration. The act included two amnesty programs for unauthorized aliens and collectively granted amnesty to more than three million illegal aliens.

Nearly everyone admits that the 1986 amnesty was a humane act that was supposed to be a one-time legislation.

IRCA is generally known for three key components, which the bill’s sponsors fondly referred to as a three-legged stool. The three legs of the stool were tougher border enforcement, penalties for employers who hired unauthorized immigrants, and legalization for unauthorized immigrants who had been in the US for five years or more. Supporters of the bill saw all three components as being critically important to solving the problem of illegal immigration.

IRCA’s proponents stressed that increasing border control and immigration enforcement had to be the first leg of the new immigration enforcement regime. To accomplish it, the law established new criminal penalties for fraudulent use of identity documents and for knowingly bringing in, harboring, or transporting unauthorized immigrants. It also increased appropriations for the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which handled immigration enforcement, and for the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR), which adjudicated deportation cases. In addition, the law called on the INS to increase the number of Border Patrol agents by 50 percent from its 1986 level.

The second component of IRCA was to establish, for the first time, federal, civil, and criminal penalties for employers who knowingly hired unauthorized immigrants. Through a new employment verification regime, the I-9 process, employers were required to verify and document the lawful status and authorization to work of all new hires, including US citizens.

In addition, to ensure that foreign-looking workers were not subject to discrimination, IRCA made it