Pramila Jayapal: Why Immigration Policy Is ‘Sexclusionary’ (and How To Fix It)

If you’ve been following the current debate and news coverage, you probably think that immigration reform is mainly about men—the undocumented males scaling border walls, working in agriculture, doing construction work and writing code. And when you do see women, they are normally portrayed either as helpless victims of detention or deportation or as conniving leeches delivering what anti-immigrants call “anchor babies.”

Between this male-centered media narrative, and the fact that the Congress members crafting immigration proposals are almost always men, it’s no surprise that immigration policy is what I’ve dubbed as “sexclusionary.”

From the numbers alone, it’s clear that immigration is a women’s issue. Women and children comprise three-quarters of people migrating to the United States. Yet our current policy excludes them from many of the opportunities and protections of the system, and boxes them into a small number of visa categories.

As bipartisan proposals near completion in both the Senate and House, it’s critical that women across America change the conversation. We must highlight the ways in which immigration policy excludes and limits women and make sure this round of reform prioritizes issues that are essential to women’s equality.

Here are six ways that U.S. immigration policy excludes women—and corresponding ways that immigration reform legislation can be crafted to instead prioritize the needs of women.

1. Recognize the work that women do as real work. Roughly 60 percent of undocumented women work outside of their homes, many in industries where employment is temporary, informal or unverifiable—think domestic caregiving and service work. The remaining 40 percent work at home taking care of their children and families. A plan that attaches citizenship to proof of work would leave out millions of women and devalue the real contributions of their work, whether at home or in the formal or informal economy.

2. And quit trapping skilled workers as dependents on their husbands. Currently, only 27 percent of all principal visa holders—those authorized to work—are women. Since the majority of principal visa holders are men, it follows that two-thirds of dependent visa holders are women. Immigrant women in the dependent visa category are not allowed to work, even though they have the same level of attainment of bachelor’s degrees as native-born women and bring skills with them. As a result, they end up staying home, financially and socially dependent on their husbands. In fact, both the principal and dependent visa categories have significant problems for women. Globally, the employment system prioritizes professions dominated by men—such as technology and agriculture—even though our labor markets have tremendous shortages in professions dominated by women. For example, experts estimate that those who need long-term care will more than double to 27 million people by 2050. Simultaneously, the direct care workforce—both for in-home or domestic care workers—will be the fastest growing occupations in the labor market in the next decade. These industries, along with restaurant and hotel industries, employ majorities of women workers but are never prioritized for employment visas. Moreover, any employment visas also need to ensure protections and rights on the job, so women immigrants can move from employer to employer and feel safe in reporting abusive employers.

3. Don’t make women wait 20 years to unite with their families. Currently, 70 percent of women enter the country through the the family sponsorship channel. As a result, the system’s inefficiencies, outdated regulations and long wait times disproportionately burden women. Today, more than 4 million people sit waiting in the family “backlog”—meaning they have applied legally for their close family members to enter the country, but must wait for excessive periods to be reunited with their families. If you are from Mexico, the Philippines or India, for example, the wait times can be as long as 20 years. Same-gender partners are also excluded from sponsoring family members at all, since federal immigration law does not recognize same-sex couples for the purposes of family sponsorship. Left with no options, many same-sex couples end up living apart, across country borders or becoming undocumented in order to stay together.

4. Make the U.S. once again a safe haven for survivors of violence and trafficking. Human traffickers and smugglers prey on immigrant women desperate to join their families. Women asylum seekers or refugees also often see the U.S. as one of their only options to escape terrible abuse and conditions in their home country. Until 1996, America had a proud history of protecting these women. But everything changed under that Congress. Lawmakers created new barriers for asylum seekers and, in the years since, policy makers have continued making it easier for survivors of gender violence (including rape) to be deported to their countries of persecution or detained for long periods of time. The disregard for important protections for women immigrants was only highlighted by recent ugly squabbles around reauthorization of the Violence against Women Act. The ultimate passage of VAWA—after protracted battle and high-profile failures—was secured only after eliminating a tiny expansion of the number of visas for immigrant women to come forward and report domestic violence without fear of retribution. It is more essential than ever that this round of immigration reform restore the U.S. history of providing a haven for immigrants who are victims of domestic violence, as well as ensuring protections for pregnant women, asylees and refugees, abused women and unaccompanied minors.

5. Protect families and ensure due process. Too many women and children unfairly bear the brunt of detention and deportation. As a Colorlines investigation uncovered, 23 percent of all deportations in a two-year period were issued for parents with U.S. citizen children. The stunning number of deportations taking place each year—over 400,000 in 2012 alone—have left tens of thousands of families destroyed and torn apart by outdated laws that punish aspiring Americans. Women, in particular, as primary caregivers are deeply affected. California Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard has proposed a fix to this, offering a bill that could be integrated into immigration reform legislation. The bill would provide protections for deported parents and for undocumented family members who care for young relatives.

6. Promote the ability for women to fully integrate into society. Approximately 10 million immigrant women speak limited English and need help from the federal government to learn our language and laws and ensure they can contribute their skills fully. English classes that currently exist often exclude women because they are tied to workforce training, take place at community colleges that require a basic level of English to enroll, or are held at times that are impossible for people who are caretakers to leave their homes and family responsibilities. Immigration reform legislation that includes an English language requirement without addressing these issues will leave millions of women at a severe disadvantage for the future. bell hooks described feminism once as “a movement to end sexist oppression.” By this measure, immigration reform offers a powerful moment for women to ensure their voices and priorities are at the forefront. If that happens, U.S. immigration policy can start working for women, rather than against them.

Pramila Jayapal is a distinguished taconic fellow at Center for Community Change and a co-chair of the We Belong Together campaign.
This article originally appeared in COLORLINES on Monday, March 18 2013. http://colorlines.com/archives/author/pramila-jayapal

In honor of the Ms. Foundation’s week of action on child care, 2012 Fellow E. Tammy Kim interviewed Lourdes Alarcon, 40, a working mother of two and member of Parent Voices, a Ms. Foundation grantee fighting for affordable and accessible child care in California. Alarcon spoke of her struggles to balance school, work and child care in the wake of her husband’s departure to Mexico under threat of immigration enforcement.

Ms. Foundation: Tell us about your background and your children.

Lourdes Alarcon: I’m from La Paz, Bolivia. I emigrated in 1992 and am a naturalized U.S. citizen. I have two children: Xavier, who is 7; and Itzel, who is 5.

Ms.: What is your work history?

LA: I lost my job in 2008 as a school secretary. A lot of deportations and hate against Latino immigrants happened then, just around the time my husband decided to voluntarily leave the country.

Nobody wanted to hire me because I didn’t have reliable child care; I needed child care desperately. Meanwhile, my unemployment expired, so I had to go back on welfare, CalWORKs.

They give you some cash aid and they try to train you and provide you with job entry. But even if I get a job, I cannot support my children at $9 or $10 [an hour], for minimum wage without health care and benefits.

I decided to pursue a career in education, to get my Associate’s degree and eventually start working again. I graduated from City College of San Francisco, and the job market was still slow, so I decided to continue. I transferred to San Francisco State University.

Ms.: What kinds of child care have you used?

LA: Being a student, I qualified for child care at San Francisco State University—only my youngest child joined. There is one teacher for every four children; the quality is amazing. They have a beautiful playground, a place to grow plants, chickens, science projects, a storyteller coming every week. It makes a difference in my child’s life. But I had to do a lot in terms of paperwork—I had to be on the waiting list for six months—and it was pretty hard on me.

My dad picks up Xavier after school. He gets $1.99 per hour—the state gives me a subsidy for someone in my family to take care of my child.

You have to pay $1200 a month for quality child care that’s licensed. [Unlicensed providers] are low paid, so you can find someone who gives care in their own home, but they have many children to meet their quota, to make some money. Sometimes it’s not quality [care].

Ms.: What have you observed about child care providers?

LA: Child care providers are, in a way, exploited. People may think that child care providers “watch” your children or change a diaper, but I think it’s one of the most important jobs because it’s taking care of the future. These are the future individuals who are going to be working and doing things, so I think that’s the most important job. Teaching and child care are usually diminished. They’re not well paid, and they’re not well recognized.

Ms.: What is your vision for child care and early childhood education?

LA: I think education goes from 0 to 18. Extra funds or extra revenue should go into education, and we should not divide the child care system from the education system.

Ms.: How have you advocated for this vision?

LA: Organizing. The budget cuts in California were horrible. They affected me in every aspect of my life. So I had to advocate for Prop 30* in order to take care of my community, my children and myself. My goal as an organizer is to light up the government officials so they make better decisions, not only for child care services but also for the whole education system.

*Proposition 30, approved by California voters in November, generates money for the state budget by temporarily raising the sales tax and income taxes for the wealthy. Parent Voices was active in this fight.

Upping the Ante: States Move to Attack Immigrants' Rights, 14th Amendment

Happy New Year! Now that we're refreshed and refueled after a short holiday break, it's time to get back to the business at hand: pushing for progressive change that benefits all -- something that's about to get significantly harder as conservatives harness increased power in Congress and in state legislatures nationwide.

One issue we're sure to be hearing (and talking) much about in the near future is the coming state-level assault on undocumented workers and "immigration reform" -- a battle that will have a particularly severe impact on immigrant women, who now make up the majority of immigrants in the United States.

According to a recent article in the New York Times, at least six states (Georgia, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and South Carolina) are now planning to propose anti-immigrant legislation much like Arizona's maligned SB-1070 bill, which is currently tied up in the courts after being challenged by the federal government and progressive groups. In addition to expanding the abilities of the police to question anyone "suspected" of being undocumented, as the Arizona legislation did, these bills also seek to bar undocumented students from public colleges and universities; allow for seizure of vehicles and property "used to transport or harbor illegal immigrants"; visit severe penalties on businesses that employ undocumented workers; and generally make life hell for anyone who is or aids an undocumented immigrant.

Read more »

Action Alert: Immigrants' Rights Attacks in Arizona Underscore Urgency of Reform

In the last week, the Arizona Legislature and Obama's own Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have proven just how crucial it is that Congress debate and pass just immigration reform now.

Arizona lawmakers -- short of the Governor, who has yet to sign it into law [call on her to veto it here] -- passed a virulently anti-immigrant bill that even the New York Times editorial board says "verges on a police state." Meanwhile, on April 15, ICE conducted massive, military-like raids in Arizona, unleashing over 800 federal, state and local authorities in Nogales, Rio Rico, Tucson and Phoenix. Their stated objective was to target "human smuggling networks," but the greatest outcome was instilling unshakeable terror and fear among immigrants -- a majority of whom are now women -- and their families.

Not coincidentally, the raids took place just days before a key deadline to return 2010 Census forms. Before the Census count began, Ms. Foundation grantee, the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR), led an effort, which we and over 200 other organizations joined, demanding that the Obama Administration follow precedent and temporarily suspend raids and other harmful enforcement activities to encourage greater immigrant participation. Their response? One of the most sweeping, "dragnet" immigration raids since Obama's term began.

There is still a small sliver of hope: Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has yet to sign the anti-immigrant legislation. Whether you live in Arizona or not, raise your voice in support of immigrants' rights and send Gov. Brewer a message demanding that she veto it now.

If passed, according to NNIRR, the bill (SB 1070) would:

• Criminalize all undocumented immigrants as "trespassers" in the state of Arizona. SB 1070 would subject all undocumented workers and their families to arrest and conviction for misdemeanors, and in some cases felony charges for the new crime of "trespass" (reminiscent of HR 4437, the 2005 'Sensenbrenner bill').
• Legalize unchecked racial profiling by police of anyone they "suspect" is undocumented.
• Give police the authority to enforce federal immigration law and arrest people who cannot produce identification proving their legal residency in the U.S.
• Give police the power to investigate and entrap employers for hiring undocumented workers.
• Make seeking work illegal for day laborers and force all individuals, regardless of immigration status or citizenship, to carry identification papers or be subjected to detention and even deportation. Public agencies and service providers would have authority to demand identification documents from any person.

Arizona has long been a flashpoint for anti-immigrant fervor -- strong enough to bleed across state lines. That said, this bill wouldn't just undermine the rights of communities of color and immigrants in Arizona, but nationwide -- particularly with national reform (potentially) on the horizon. Groups like NNIRR are already concerned that federal lawmakers' idea of "reform" -- like the proposal submitted by Senators Schumer and Graham -- will lead to increased reliance on local law enforcement and therefore, heightened criminalization.

So join NNIRR, call for the veto of SB 1070, and "send a signal to Congress, the Obama Administration and the country that further criminalization of immigrant workers, families and communities will not solve the problem." We certainly don't need one more roadblock to reform.

Guest Voice: Outsourcing Immigration Enforcement Threatens Communities

Today we share a commentary by Ms. Foundation friend Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center. In "Obama's Expansion of Bush-Era Immigration Tactics Endanger Us All," Hincapié calls attention to a worrisome July 10 announcement by the Obama administration that it would expand a Bush-era agreement to use local police officers in the enforcement of immigration law. This must be a call to hold decision-makers accountable to policies of justice and inclusion and to prepare for numerous challenges as Congress returns to immigration reform.

In her New America Media commentary, Hincapié writes:

Some would argue that these minor, cosmetic changes with the 287(g) program are evidence of the Obama administration’s effort to create the political space for comprehensive immigration reform. Putting the burden of immigration enforcement on overtaxed, under-funded, and untrained local law enforcement is unacceptable. The bottom line is that with or without immigration reform, giving local law enforcement agencies the authority to enforce immigration laws is foolhardy and costly.

Outsourcing immigration responsibilities to local law enforcement only makes communities more dangerous by marginalizing our most vulnerable members of society. The destruction of families, the criminalization of immigrants and people of color, and a growing distrust in a police force that needs community support to keep us safe are the wrong way to go. It’s time for President Obama to stop following in Bush’s failed footsteps, leave behind senseless immigration enforcement policies by suspending programs like 287(g), and lead the country toward achieving broad and humane immigration reform. Read full commentary

Ms. Foundation President Joins Discussions on Women Immigrants

Last week, Ms. Foundation President & CEO Sara K. Gould moderated a discussion among leading immigrants' rights advocates--including current and former grantees--and ethnic media exploring the growing number and changing role of women immigrants in the U.S. and the ramifications for immigration reform. Ms. Gould also participated on a similar panel at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. in May. The sessions accompanied the release of "Women Immigrants: Stewards of the 21st Century Family," a poll published by New American Media.

[Photo: New American Media. From Left: Silvia Henriquez, Executive Director, Ms. Foundation grantee National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health; Sara K. Gould, President and CEO, Ms. Foundation for Women at poll announcement at the National Press Club.]

Collapsing 'Universe' in Health 'Reform'

Framed as yet another "wedge issue," and superfluous to true health care reform, immigrants' rights joins reproductive justice on the Congressional chopping block. Excuse us, but what ever happened to the term universal?

Deepak Bhargava, executive director of the Center for Community Change, shares his thoughts on the matter in the Huffington Post:

All of the plans getting serious consideration in Congress would exclude undocumented immigrants. Many proposals would even bar access to community health centers and emergency rooms -- a historic shift from America's humanitarian tradition that in an emergency no one should be turned away. Some proposals would exclude legal resident immigrants who have been in the United States for less than five years. Unless the debate takes a different turn, millions of immigrants will be left out of the system.

We should not enshrine discriminatory principles into a new health care system. A "universal" health care program that leaves out millions of Americans is a fraud. Just as we stand up for other core principles in the health care debate -- quality, affordability, a strong public plan -- we need to stand up for immigrant coverage as an essential component of just and effective health care reform. Read more

Sara K. Gould in Discussions About Immigration and Women

As discussions about immigration reform, health care reform and the economy dominate conversations in Congress and legislative halls nationwide, we're thrilled to have opportunities to join leading grassroots and national policy experts to discuss the current reality faced by immigrant women and their families and the policy and organizing solutions that are most needed to ensure human rights and social justice for immigrants throughout the U.S.

On Thursday 14 May 2009, Sara K. Gould, President & CEO of the Ms. Foundation and Sylvia Henriquez, Executive Director of Foundation grantee the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health (NLIRH) appeared on the Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC in New York City. The radio session followed their appearance at the release of a new poll on women immigrants conducted by New America Media. On the panel, at the National Press Club, in Washington, D.C., Sara and Sylvia were joined by: Olga Vives, Executive Vice President of the National Organization for Women; Karen Narasaki, President and Executive Director of the Asian American Justice Center; and Angela Kelly, Vice President for Immigration Policy at the Center for American Progress.

(Download the complete poll Women Immigrants: Stewards of the 21st Century [pdf]. Learn more about the poll, including an audio commentary by Sandy Close and Richard Rodriguez.)

Listen to or download the Brian Lehrer Show appearance

Download mp3 recording.

Ms. Foundation Grantee Calls for ICE Raid Moratorium

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials rounded up almost 600 assembly plant workers on Tuesday in the small, rural town of Laurel, Mississippi in the largest raid on a single workplace in U.S. history. Local communities are reeling in its wake, as families have been torn apart, the plant’s operations suspended, and a climate of fear has settled over surrounding towns.

Upon surveying the humanitarian crisis the raid has created, Ms. Foundation Grantee Mississippi Immigrants' Rights Alliance (MIRA) is calling for a moratorium on such actions and asking supporters to join them in contacting federal legislators [find yours here] to demand a stop to the attacks on immigrant families and workers.

Of the 600 or so workers caught up in the raid, approximately 100 have been allowed to return to their homes to care for children or for other humanitarian reasons. Over 475 individuals, however, are being held four hours away in a federal facility in Jena, Louisiana where they await deportation hearings.

In addition to providing legal assistance and coordinating volunteer lawyers to provide services to the detained workers, MIRA is working with local organizations to provide basic necessities to families. Since breadwinners have either been detained or confined to their homes, many families now lack even access to food. MIRA has set up a relief fund to support affected families and the work of volunteers at http://www.yourmira.org/.