Skip to main content

By Mary Giovagnoli

Among the many spending cuts recently passed by the House was funding for the Office of Citizenship’s immigrant integration programs.  The importance of these programs, however, cannot be overstated. Immigrants who integrate into U.S. society go on to become innovators, entrepreneurs and future job-creators. Although a new study released today by the British Council, Migration Policy Group and Immigration Policy Center ranks the U.S. nine among 31 countries in promoting full integration of legal residents (a relatively good score), cutting these programs can only hurt us in the long run. As the Senate prepares to take up the Continuing Resolution, restoring $11 million to the budget of the Office of Citizenship should be a no brainer given that this relatively small investment in the potential of aspiring Americans can pay huge dividends for the United States.

The Migration Integration Policy Index III (MIPEX) places the U.S. in the top 10, (Sweden, Portugal, and Canada take the top three spots overall) largely because of our outstanding performance in one of the seven categories surveyed:  civil rights and anti-discrimination laws (we’re number one there, tied with Canada) compared to other countries. MIPEX also finds that the U.S. does a decent job of promoting access to nationality (8th in that category), largely through laws that grant citizenship at birth, reasonable standards for becoming a citizen, and some commitment to helping newcomers prepare for citizenship.

But many of these citizenship programs are at risk during these times of belt-tightening at the state and federal level.  As states prepare to slash their budgets in this area (Illinois, a leader in immigrant integration, is reportedly cutting funding for immigrant services by 74% over two years), it becomes even more imperative for the federal government to provide support.  Giving the seed money for integration grants that will fund programs to help teach English and civics courses and prepare legal residents to take the citizenship exam is critical to ensuring that legal permanent residents fully integrate into society through citizenship.

Why? Immigrants are increasingly showing themselves to be entrepreneurs and innovators who help to revitalize communities.  Whether they come on family or employment visas, through the asylum or refugee program, or through other much smaller legal immigration programs, legal permanent residents come to this country with the dream of becoming U.S. citizens and giving back to their adopted home.

The MIPEX survey demonstrates that the U.S. can certainly improve in plenty of areas—family reunification, employment access, the many obstacles to maintaining legal status, and especially the high fees we charge for immigration benefits—but ninth place is not a bad starting point.

The Office of Citizenship has already helped thousands more people prepare to become citizens through Congress’s support and it has helped to reinforce the network of excellent state service providers around the country.  Cutting the funding for integration grants now, just when the program is starting to show some benefits is a setback for immigrant integration. More importantly, it would be a huge loss of human potential, something the U.S. cannot afford to waste.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Canada has the advantage of a point system (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IT Professional, Dem Forever

    for immigration. It once admitted large numbers of people who found assimilation difficult, but no longer. Points accrue for education, work experience, youth and fluency in English or French.

    It is a shame to cut a program needed by people who are in the country legally, but going forward the Canadian practice would greatly reduce the need. And, people who are educated, have some knowledge of English and have useful work experience are far more likely to be entrepreneurs and innovators and less likely to just compete for blue collar jobs.

  •  It was interesting to see the MIPEX (0+ / 0-)

    score, but when Sweden comes out as nb. 1, it indicates to me that this score doesn´t mean everything, cause integration of immigrants in Sweden isn´t going that particularly well.

  •  A touchy issue... (0+ / 0-)

    Immigration is a touchy issue. The Tancredo-types use the issue to demagogue their base, making it extremely difficult for people like me to express concerns about the numbers.

    The truth is that the number of immigrants makes a huge difference in how quickly they integrate. 150,000 immigrants per year would probably integrate quicker. Since we are inviting more than 1 million per year, integration would considerably slower.

    The truth was that between 1924 and 1965 we had a strict quota system that reduced the flow to a trickle. In that time, unions flourished and millions of recent arrivals from Italy, Ireland, and Eastern Europe were able to join the middle class.

    If we keep inviting 1 million per year, I don't think we can ever integrate recent arrivals from Mexico and Central America into the middle class.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site