Transcripts For CSPAN3 Immigration Policy 20171002

This incredibly important issue. We have a great panel for you. We have a cspan audience and of course a live web cast. Any one who would with like to tweet, theres the u. S. Immigration and we hope to have a good discussion both here and online. This is way back when when i was a graduate student at the university of california berkeley, where secretary napolitano runs these days, we learned about wedge issues. Wedge issues were those things that really divided the electorate, they got everybody excited and everyone had an opinion about. Well, immigration has become a wedge issue. Wedge issues kind of come and go and depending upon the year and clearly since 2015, when President Trump started to run for office, immigration has been at the forefront in terms of one of the wedge issues. It divides not just democrats and republicans, it divides republicans. In fact, theres an nbc the wall street journal poll out today that has some fascinating divides within the republican party, between Trump Supporters and people who were call themselves more or less traditional republicans. So this is this is a big issue. This is an issue that everyone has an opinion about as opposed to many of the other issues we talk about here at brookings, telecommunications and things like that, really people dont normal people dont really have strong opinions about those issues. This is one where people do have strong opinions and therefore it is of interest to everyone. The issue also runs the gamut from what i call a heart issue to a head issue. In other words, people have very strong opinions about what this means for our country, what kind of country we ought to have and we get emotional about it, but it also goes to more very practical issues. So john hue dak my colleague who will be moderating this panel and i, we just couple months ago took a look at the practical side, okay. Is it possible to do what the president wants to do and in theory was elected to do and we came up with some pretty interesting answers which i think will be brought out in the course of the discussion. And finally, one of the things about a political issue that becomes so hot is that often it is not exactly fact based and remember i think it was senator moynahan, the late senator said, everyones entitled to his own opinion but not everyone is entitled to their own facts. So in thiS Immigration debate we have been treated to a series of statements, some from the president , from his team, which simply dont dont have anything to do with reality and well talk about that im sure too. So thank you very much for joining us today. Were going to have our panel open up and give some statements, give have some discussion and then we will open it up to you in the audience and we will also open it up to people who are online. So again, thank you very much and would our panel please come up. [ applause ] good morning, everybody. Welcome to brookings. My name is john hudak. Its my honor today to moderate this panel and to introduce all of you to our panelists to discuss what is a critically important issue as elaine mentioned, broadly but also in the current political environment. Before i begin id like to thank the carn gy corporation for their support for our research and for the event today. Id like to welcome our viewers who are tuned in via live web cast from the brookings website as well as the viewers on cspan watching this live. Any of you who want to engage us on social media, you can u use usimmigration to get into the conversation. Now on to our annualists. Immediately to my left, Janet Napolitano is currently the president of the university of california system. A post shes held since 2013. Prior to becoming president of uc she served as the third secretary of the department of Homeland Security during the first term of president obama and a little bit into his second term. Prior to that she served as the attorney general of arizona and then the governor of arizona. Immediately to her left is carlos gavaros. A senior policy holder. He leads the immigration policy and legislative advocacy work for the organization. Previously he served in the Obama Administration from 2014 to 2017 where he focused on developing and implementing immigration policy for the administration. And last but not least on the end doris miezner. She is senior fellow and director of the u. S. Immigration policy program at the migration policy institute. From 1993 to 2000 she served as commissioner of the immigration and Naturalization Service and throughout a storied career in d. O. J. She served under five president s. Id like to thank our panelists for joining us today for what i hope will be an engaging conversation and im going to start with my first question to president napolitano. Recently you joined a lawsuit over the president s decision to rescind daca as president of the university of california. The president s decision to repeal this in a six month window with the hope that congress will step in and codify daca into law has made for a lot of controversy throughout the United States and in a lot of policy circles. You oversee a system with 4,000 students who are undocumented, many of whom have applied for daca protection. You talk a little bit about what this policy means broadly and what it means for your University System and for your students . I certainly can. Im very familiar with daca. We did daca when i was the secretary of Homeland Security and we did it out of a recognition that there was there were a whole host of individuals who had been brought here as children, had been raised in the country and from any kind of Immigration Enforcement perspective should be able to stay in the country without fear of deportation and so deferred action for childhood arrivals, daca, was the resulting program that we initiated and it is an exercise prosecutorial discretion. His applicant is reviewed individually. They have to have a clean criminal record, they have to meet a whole host of other requirements to qualify. And at the university of california, you know, we estimate that we have around 4,000 undocumented students and the vast majority of them are in daca. Indeed about a quarter of 800,000 Daca Recipients in the country are in california, and these young people are, you know theyre an important part of our University Community. They are by and large First Generation College students. They are and have done everything required of them academically to get into the university of california, which is not the easiest thing in the world to do. They have the brains, the energy, the initiative. Theyre exactly the kind of people we should want to stay in our country and contribute. So the president s decision to reskinned daca was wrong on a number of grounds and one of the reasons the university sued was to seek and get judicial relief from the decision. Its wrong as a matter of law. Its wrong as a matter of Immigration Enforcement policy and its inconsistent with our values as a country. Whether congress acts, who knows. One can always hope and we hear that there may have been a deal negotiated between the president and senator schumer and representative pelosi over chinese food and chocolate cake at the white house, and but, you know, reducing that to legislation and legislation that will be brought to the floor and passed that the president will sign and to get that all done in six months is while were going to advocate for it and believe strongly that congress can and should act, we also think as a matter of law the court should step in and protect, you know, these 800,000 young people. Sure. Thank you for those comments. Carlos, president napolitano talked about the University Community at uc and the Important Role that Daca Recipients play in that community. Can you talk a little bit more broadly about immigrant communities nationwide . What daca has meant for those communities and just as importantly what this uncertainty that has stemmed from the president s announcement also means to those communities . John, thank you for the question and the opportunity to be here and to its an honor to be here with my copanelists. Daca in many ways, i think back to where i began my legal career, once upon a time i was a line attorney doing a lot of these cases after the previously mentioned daca announcement. And i remember doing about a 100 of these cases and thinking through the difficulty and the conversations that must have happened around many kitchen tables across the country before coming to meet with me to do a consultation about what obtaining daca may actually mean for a family and what doors might actually open. I mention this because Daca Recipients today by definition of the program have been here at least ten years, at the time the program was announced there was a lot of uncertainty between the Community Even then about coming forward, submitting to criminal background checks, providing information about your residency your residents, family members and then oh, by the way, having to come up in many instances when youre a low income household with the money and take off the time to come and meet with someone like me to prepare your application. So in many ways, what im trying to convey is that the decision to even apply to daca took a lot of trust in the federal government. I was telling you theres a small piece of the grand bargain here that if you come forward you will have a relief from deportation and an opportunity to work and to amplify the opportunities for yourself and your family. So when we have the decision, john, about the recision that the president took on september 25th to put it mildly, the trust that was violated there and part of the deal, if you will that was undertaken by many in the community was completely eroded. So i think in this context we have to understand not only what we have ahead of us and what i believe truly to be a window and momentum to get to a legislative fix, but really have empathy to consider what these families are going through right now even as we drive to get folks who are eligible to even come and meet with an attorney to come to Community Meetings to learn about their rights and so forth. I was talking to some colleagues at the American Immigration association that a reporting, weve seen ourselves in our own network. We have a network of 300 affiliates that we work with across the country including in california, reporting that folks arent showing up for interviews or are not attending these opportunities to renew their daca status, the folks who are eligible. Were really concerned that the environment and i think well talk about this later that has been created in the wake of this decision and in the wake leading up to frankly the election of the current president and since will have a Chilling Effect on folks coming out. We encourage strongly that people do continue to come out and we continue to create the momentum for a legislative fix. And through the congress, so ill stop there. Great. Doris, youve worked under both democratic and republican president s on issues surrounding immigration and i know recently youve done some work on president ial rhetoric around this issue. Could you talk a little bit about what the president s rhetoric, both on the campaign trail and once hes been in office has met for politics, what it has met for voters, what its meant for advocacy communities around issues of immigration . Ill try. Thanks for the invitation. I think id like to take off from what elaine said about this being an area that is not exactly fact based because what weve seen here is really new on immigration in the American Experience at least in modern times and that is a president ial candidacy based on immigration as a top tier issue that has never happened before, others have tried it, pete wilson tried it in the 1990s. But this time it was successful and so a result of that candidacy, of course, has been the rallying cry of build the wall, which characterized virtually every event that took place during the campaign and an amazing drive as the president came into office to really pursue that agenda aggressively, quickly, initially through executive orders but with lots of other implications for budgets and for possible legislation including what has happened on daca and daca is really the first issue thats come along in this agenda where theres been any rethinking whatsoever, virtually Everything Else is straight out of the campaign playbook, which is also quite extraordinary in our political experience. So you have build the wall rallying cry and of course the promise of aggressive enforcement, obey the law, enforce the law, everybody whose in the country illegally is subject to removal because theyre in violation of the law. Well, the facts on the ground are incredibly different from that overall picture and from that agenda, because what we see just in two areas, ill talk more a moment about border enforcement and then a moment about interior enforcement. In border enforcement, we have were at a 40 year going on 50 year low in the numbers of apprehensions coming across the southwest border. Its an absolutely historic low. Weve come from a peak in 2000 of 1. 6 million apprehensions to an 88 drop by fiscal year 2016 and it will drop further when this year fiscal 2017 numbers come in. 88 . That is an enormous percentage in any policy realm and certainly in Law Enforcement. And a long with that weve come to a point where the traditional flows which have been mexican flows have been supplanted by Central American flows. So theres a real change in the character of whats taking place at the southwest border and that change is it peaked in 2014, weve been coming down since then, but even though it has supplanted the mexican flow, its at very much lower numbers than the mexican flow ever was and it is declining and it is a very different flow. Its what we call a mixed flow in immigration terms, in that it is made up of economic migration but also claims for protection, fleeing violence and persecution with people in it that are to some extent some of them eligible for Refugee Status in the United States. And dealing with that kind of a flow is a very different enforcement issue than dealing with the mexican flow because these are people that need to see judges and asylum officers and are wanting to turn themselves in to the government in order to pursue a possible claim for help rather than evading and trying to slip through the southwest border. So if ever there is not a picture that is looks for a wall as an answer this is that kind of a picture. And even that Central American flow is now falling dramatically between since this administration came into office between then and now, weve seen a 40 drop even in the Central American flow, again, a very significant percentage particularly in light of the push factors for that flow. So thats one set of numbers. The other set of numbers is in the interior where of course there is a much more muscular approach to enforcement, a very different philosophy of enforcement that you have just described that has to do with prosecutal discretion obviously and things like Holding People like the Daca Recipients harmless and this approach has created an enormous klei matte of fear and enormous uncertainty in the country and it is certainly true what we read in the press that the numbers of arrests are up and that the composition of the arrests are different. You have a larger share of noncriminals to criminals than was the case at the end of the obama years, but the shift is only over what we saw in the last two years. Its only over what was begun in 2014 with very strict guidelines that at the end of the baup administration were issued. If you look a little more broadly back to the earlier years in the Obama Administration, the record now falls short of what it was that was taking place between 2008 and 2012 and 13. So whats currently happening is actually falling back to being on a par or less than what it is that was taking place just a few years ago and it is also resulting in less people actually being removed from the United States. 13 less people actually being sent back to their countries than had been the case under the Prior Administration and thats because the border numbers are so low. There just are not that many people coming across from the borders. So the experience for countries is less pressure of returns than had been the case earlier. Now, that is a huge gap between perception and reality, and it just seems to me there are lots of takeaways from it, but, you know, the most straightforward take away it seems to me is how very important leadership tone matters, what the real power is of the rhetoric and of the message because we now are in an era where immigration is being portrayed as a threat to the country, as a danger to the country, not as an asset to the country and and, you know, the result of that is that we are seeing changes in behavior on the ground because of the perceptions rather than what it is thats really happening. Thank you. What youve touched on, what each of you have touched on with regard to the daca recision is that if congress doesnt act, 800,000 individuals about 800,000 individuals are supposed to be deported. Now each of you have worked in some capacity in different capacities on issues of enforcement around immigration and so id like to hear from each of you something that a lot of people dont talk about, beyond the rhetoric, beyond a lot of what ends up in political analysis and that is the administrative cost, that is what do you see as the challenges, the real burdens of suddenly telling the department of Homeland Security you need to go out and deport 800,000 people. I think in this conversation a lot of times this is just seen as a quick and easy costfree process that no one needs to worry about but in an era of budget cutting, in an era where congress and the president are committed to smaller government, can you talk a little bit about the challenges the Homeland Security secretary will face and the agencies within dhs will face in carrying out that order . Well, and lets not forget that if congress doesnt act the courts may, so. Sure, sure. So theres both the belt and suspenders approach to preventing the recision of daca. But, you know, you dont just pick up somebody and all of a sudden theyre in another country. Theres a whole administrative procedure that goes along with that beginning with the i. C. E. Agent who has to find the person and detain them and then an administrative procedure by which their ad jud indicated whether theyre deportable or not then youve got to transport them and the country to which they are being deported has to receive them. So theres a whole chain of things that happens and each of those things requires resources and each takes time and so the the notion that you just flip a switch and remove 800,000 people is a myth, doesnt work that way. And thats thats the, you know, the reality. The perception, however, is one that i think instill a lot of fear in immigrant communities and, you know, one of the virtues of daca was that these d. R. E. A. M. Ers didnt have to walk around always looking over their shoulder, wondering whether there was an i. C. E. Agent trying to find them and deport them. That assurance is now would be gone and so you have entire communities that, you know, live in fear and apprehension and when the rhetoric is to use doriss word so much more muscular, it just ups the temperature and makes everybody live not just in fear and trepidation, but reluctant to to things, like for example, reluctant to report when theyre the victims of crime. Its one of the reasons why local Law Enforcement agents agencies are so opposed to some of the actions being taken and the words being used on Immigration Enforcement and so these are all things that must be taken into account. If i may, i would add to that an important piece of that puzzle is where the immigration courts fall in and the opportunity the individuals have which is also part of this process to seek relief if available to them under our laws. So that also adds a dynamic in terms of how these things play out and again to the perception and reality of what enforcement actually means. I do want to talk about if i may, john, some of the other costs and perhaps an aspect that maybe is less talked about. What we know as the largest latino Civil Rights Advocacy organization in this country is, nearly eight out of every ten latinos in this country is a u. S. Citizen. Most of these individuals that were talking about, what were really talking about here is millions of American Families. So it goes beyond when we talk about the enforcement construct here it goes beyond the impact to an individual but then also to the broader fabric of who we are as a country. Interesting reporting recently coming out that has shown that there are 5. 7 million u. S. Citizen children in this country that have at least one undocumented parent. Six out of every ten registered hispanic voters in this country know at least one person that is undocumented. So i just want to provide that context when we talk about costs of what muscular enforcement may mean. Its really these not just the individual but the broader family context and then you Start Talking about and thinking through what are these socalled collateral costs of ramped up interior enforcement. We have as i mentioned earlier a Broad Network of affiliates ill relay one story out of los angeles of an individual who was in this country for 30 years, long time member of his community, has been raising four u. S. Citizen children in the los angeles area, most of them in the high school age. He had an incident that involved a misdemeanor and was ultimately picked up by i. C. E. On the way to dropping off his kids to school. I dont mention this issue to discuss or this case to discuss necessarily i hope folks would have some sympathy in the individual in question here but what it must be like as the daughter who as is so turned out was recording the incident and its now viral and on youtube, you can check that out, of i. C. E. Officers on the way to School Picking up your father. What that might mean for your Mental Health having to replay that every day, what it might mean for your attainment in school and oh, by the way, these two of the four daughters were actually training for the Los Angeles Marathon with the help of their father. So just the other aspects of trying to be a normal teenage in the daytoday. I think about running a marathon and i just think about it and get tired. So i think its important to think through that its not just the Community Member thats impacted which there are real significant costs associated with that but what are the collateral costs to the families and many incidents the American Families that are left behind with the ramped up interior enforcement that we are living through right now. Let me pick up on one other point on daca and if the daca deal does not happen. I mean i totally agree as dreadful as that would be as a general policy matter, i think one does have to be realistic. This is not an automatic deportation that takes place and, yes, it is some where between 700,800,000 people but the far more likely thousand people, young people who are will find themselves in an extraordinarily more vulnerable circumstance in this country. Some will come Law Enforcement will come across some of them in one way or another. I dont believe that there will be a targeted effort to go out and look for the daca population if this you know, if daca ultimately is removed, but the perception and the concern about deportation is as has been said incredibly real in these peoples lives and in their family lives. If you step back from it, probably the far more important characteristic of daca is Work Authorization. The Work Authorization that comes with daca is what has made this community, this population of people has showed actually what the importance of Legalization Program overall would be because if you have people that are legally in the labor market, they are on an upward mobility track. The data are clear that the daca population got better jobs, earns better, are able to get drivers licenses and therefore have much more mobility and ability to function, are able to go to school because of Tuition Assistance programs in many states, et cetera. Theyre able to be productive. If that Work Authorization goes, they fall back into the underground economy and falling back into the underground economy is not only of real vulnerability for them and their families in addition to the possibility randomly of deportation, its a real loss for labor markets and particularly the locations which are heavily concentrated. Were talking about california, texas. There are about six or eight locations that are the dominant locations for the daca population and thats a very big loss in general to our productivity in those parts of the country. So doris, to pick up a little bit on costs again. One of the issues that we address in our paper and that the president has talked about is a lack of capacity to enforce Immigration Law and the president s plan is to higher 15,000 i. C. E. And Border Patrol agents. Thats what hes set forward as his goal. Now, we talk a little bit about the financial challenges, the administrative challenges and basically the hr challenges of hiring that many people specifically to those jobs. As the former commissioner of the ins, can you talk about challenges that exist in terms of hiring, retention, et cetera and as well as the costs of hiring and what the likelihood is of an administration able to boost those numbers by 15,000 . Id like to start with you. Well, i can capture it in maybe one ratio, 271. In order to hire up in the Border Patrol and this may be different today but during the period that i was there, we had to have 27 candidates at the beginning of the process in order to get one coming out at the end of the process. That was in the Border Patrol. Thats an enormously expensive undertaking and a very big recruitment challenge, and the reasons are that, you know, you dont just hire anybody to be a Border Patrol agent. There are physical fitness requirements. Its the only agency in the federal government outside of the Foreign Service that has a Foreign Language requirement. People have to speak spanish and pass a spanish test. They are the physical training requirements and the Immigration Law training requirements are significant. These are really very well trained Law Enforcement officers and and the security clearances, lots of people fail the security clearances, frankly today the labor pool that is available for these sorts of jobs is a real difficulty because of drugs, because of other background clearance kinds of issues and the locations in which these people work are remote. Theyre salaries are very good for those locations but we have more than 20,000 Border Patrol already. The border is saturated with personnel and the Border Patrol numbers, though, are the smaller of this agenda. The larger are i. C. E. Agents. 10,000 on a workforce ive you all did the numbers in the report but its a much bigger percentage of the workforce. So when you are talking about absorbing that level of workforce, your whole supervisory structure, your physical facilities, there are tremendous ripple effects to that kind of a ramp up. If that rampup does happen it will happen over the course of five to ten years not two to four years because its simply not doable in a first term time frame. I would concur and i dont think the numbers have changed all that much, doris, since you were the commissioner and you are right that you have to have an enormous applicant pool to harvest one agent, the training at the Academy Takes a number of months. Youve got to have, you know, the physical facilities in which the training can occur. Youve got to have the stations out of which the agents operate need to be properly sized and as you say at the border theyre already had been a significant rampup. I think the real issue at the border is the greater use of technology and both at the ports of entry and between the ports of entry and air coverage over the border. So that agents are better able to detect where unlawful passage is being attempted and in terms of enlarging the interior enforcement, i. C. E. , that too will take a significant period of time and require a lot more resources than people anticipate. John, if i may, one point there. Please. I think to the credit of the leadership at dhs in the past eight years or so, agencies like the Border Patrol had been moving in the direction of Greater Transparency and accountability. In things like establishing internal Affairs Board and authorizing that division with more powers, publishing, use of force data, instituting or looking at instituting Body Worn Camera pilots and so forth. The reason i mention this is i think theres an inference that some may draw, why dont we look at the standards, why is it so hard for folks to get into the Border Patrol and possibly the i. C. E. Agency as well and i would caution against moving too far in that direction. I think to the credit again to the department, they had been moving in the right direction to enhance accountability to enhance and ensure that hiring standards are up to par so i would just offer that as something that contributes to possibly the hiring challenges but its a fundamental view that those things do not get lost. Thank you. So weve talked about the costs of hiring the saturation already at the border of having agents and a little bit about technology and all of this really folds into another topic that exists in the immigration debate and that is the border wall. As Homeland Security secretary and as governor you opposed the construction of a physical barrier at the southern border of the United States, president napolitano and you often were quoted as saying show me a 50 foot wall and ill show you a 51 foot ladder. Can you talk that said i would not get on a 51 foot ladder to be honest. Can you talk through a little bit the challenges of this policy and what types of alternatives are not just more effective but more attainable if the heated rhetoric died down a little bit and people entered this conversation in a more level headed way . Yes. So, you know, i think the notion of building a wall across the southwest border i mean i just first of all, just doing it, you know that border from a geography standpoint, you know, youre talking about going through river beds over mountains, theres a great deal private Property Ownership along the border. When there was money set aside in a secure fencing act, a decade and a half ago, a number of the Property Owners whose property would be used for that sued. Those cases many of them are still in litigation, so youll have those issues. You have indian reservations that straddle the border thats in arizona, for example. The community lives on both sides of the border. Theyve already said theyre not going to have a wall. So just the pure doing of it, not to mention the actual cost, which, you know, i think the numbers ive seen are low numbers and i think youre probably talking in excess of 20 billion to build anything like a wall. And so you have to question, what does a wall do . Well, the notion that a wall theres going to be some kind of impermable structure along the border, again, anybody whose been at the border and knows the border knows that that just wont fly. And what, you know, real border enforcement means is a strategy that includes manpower, that includes technology, that includes as i said before air coverage. It also includes working with our neighbors to the south to try to prevent traffic before it actually gets to the physical border, and, you know, i think some of the Real Progress that we made was with the government of mexico and in their own efforts in protecting their southern border, so, you know, so waiting until the traffic hits a mythological structure does not suffice as an immigration policy. Would anyone else like to add . Well, maybe i should use this opportunity to throw out my favorite number. You said the wall is probably in the 20 billion range. Thats what Homeland Security has been estimating, 21 billion. We now spend 19 billion on Immigration Enforcement overall in this country. That represents 25 more than all federal criminal Law Enforcement, which is to which means the fbi, the dea, the atf, the secret service, the marshal service. On Immigration Enforcement were spending 25 more than those agencies combined and now were talking about a 20 billion wall that is even more expensive than that expenditure and in the face of the changes in flows and the kinds of points that youve properly raised that i completely agree with. I actually will raise my hand as a proponent of barriers along the border in certain places under certain circumstances. About a third of the border already has barrier you can wall or whatever you want. A third of that 2,000 miles has barrier of one sort or another and its enormous assistance to the Border Patrol. But it requires repair. Its the most expensive piece of infrastructure that is there. It has to be combined with agents and technology and overflight. Its simply a method of helping to channel the flow and deal with certain types of terrain. Its not a one size fits all and solve the problem solution. So we have about 12 or 13 minutes before i open this up to audience questions. So now i want to get away from being accountants and actuaries and talk about the policy of this issue. So carlos, i want to start with you. One of the most high profile, active advocacy in the United States working on a whole range of issues. Im hoping you can talk a little bit about onedus has responded to the new political environment, and in many ways the what was happened with onedus and its partners. When there is a disastrous policy situation in your on your radar it can bring groups together in ways that other situations may not. Can you talk a little bit about the Interest Groups pane Advocacy Group environment. Yes. Thank you. I think suffice to say the election of President Trump perhaps unexpectedly by some kind of threw many of us in the advocacy space, of course then i wasnt in the advocacy space, but now in the advocacy space for a loop. I think that the profile or the positioning of a lot of groups today has had to be one of a more Rapid Response posture whereas perhaps many were gearing up for a different dynamic had Different Administration been in place. And so what that means is relentless to your point, john, a relentless, you know, tracking of the latest hot button issue of the day and coming together frankly of the groups to deal with those in the most appropriate manner. Well tell you it feels like its a constant onslaught these days starting from muslim ban to ramped up interior Enforcement Actions to daca now. It feels like we are just always on the defensive. But i say that and i say that with some pride in the reaction that the Advocacy Community and others partners have in the way that they have come together to respond. And one of the ways that we are seeing that play out is, in fact, with the response to the daca recision now and this very multifacetted approaches to that. And as we think about the window that we have and i sincerely believe that we have a window right now to get something done, youll see a lot of the groups carried forward the momentum until we get to a place where we must hoping the government talk about debt ceiling and so forth where we might have opportunities to discuss this issue for fully as a comprehensive package, perhaps. So ill say that. That momentum and that work continues. Well continue to be in this fight and we know that we have a lot at stake. Its not just 800,000 individuals with Daca Recipients, its their families and also the individuals not to be forgotten in this space who do not have daca but are otherwise for all intents and purposes lawabiding individuals who are trying to go about their daytoday lives as well. Ill stop there. Great. President napolitano, over the past several election cycles weve seen your home state of arizona trend toward purple in 2004 president bush won arizona by ten points, in 2012, president obama lost arizona by nine points and in this past election, President Trump won the state by only about 3. 5 and there are a lot of factors that go into that but surely immigration is one of them. Can you talk a little bit about what effect you think the president S Immigration policie is broadly, whether its rhetorical, whether it involves daca or the wall. Controversial pardons, perhaps. What that might mean for politics on the ground in a state like arizona, in local elections, statewide elections, congress ap elections and for the next president ial race . Well, youre right, arizona does trend toward purple, although, it trends a little more republican than democratic, although it has elected democratic governors and senators. The delegation in the house is equally divided. You know, i think that one impact could be to register latino population. The fact is, if the latino population voted at the same percentage as the white population arizona would be a blue state now. And so all of these actions taken together, the rhetoric, the policy pronouncements the pard could have the impact as i said, increasing latino voter turnout. And we will see that in 2018. Great. So for my last question, we have about five minutes before audience questions. Im going to wrap by asking you to think before are the next 5 1 2 months, as Congress Mulls over what to do on daca, a variety of immigration policies, whether its through a funding bill coming up in december, two or three months later, and two or three months after that. What bit of advice would you give to members of Congress Facing this set of issues. And feel free to talk about politics, policy, the human aspect, or whatever portion of that you think is most important to congressional leadership or rank and file. Well, i think if i were called upon to advice a member of congress, which i would be reluctant to. I would say that the imminent risk now is to the dreamers, and that the while we all hope at some point for a comprehensive Immigration Reform, which the country sorely needs, that achieving some sort of statutory resolution for at least that population and if a need to attach it to a must pass bill that you know, that is a stra teethry that has worked in the past for other types of measures. You know, the notion arises what kind of a would you agree to anything on the enforcement side for those who have that interest paramount in their mind in order to get success for the dreamers. And, you know, the there should be some red lines, funding for a wall should be a red line. But if you have too add some other funding for Border Security to the mix, whether that is well spent funding or not, that funding is going to in my view, occur in some form or fashion anyway, if you can get the dream act through using that as a package, that should be worthy of consideration. So while we shouldnt lose sight of the fact that the country needs overall Immigration Reform the immediate need now is for the dreamers. I would have one simple clear message. That would be, lets get it done. Lets get it done. And we talk about the we have been talking about the human costs today of the 800,000 or so youth and their families that would be impacted by nonaction by congress. I would remind congress we have a man made disaster after the recision of daca and all eyes are on you to react. I would remind congress that the American People support a pathway for these youth. That this includes not just the usual suspects of democrats and moderate republicans but an overwhelming number of republicans who voted for President Trump p. M. The time is now, we have a window to get this done. I would urge representatives in congress, the community is watching more broadly we are concerned and facing an issue of credibility in some of our core institutions and congress submit us one. What better way than to show the American People that we can come together and really express who we are as a country. What our American Values are and Work Together to find a solution for these youth. Lets get it done. I would say if theres any issue on which to test a time where you should break the resurule, this is it. Immigration legislation has never been able to pass by just one party. Immigration legislation historically has required bipartisanship. There are elements of each party, i dont say this is an equivalency. There are parts of each party that will resist however, as you pointed out. Its so important, this issue of all others in this contain shouse area is one that is strongly backed across the board by the public. Its members of Congress Know that we have to find a way to get a center back into play. And this is an election, whatever else wants to see problems solved. They picked a way to do it that was surprising, but nonetheless, thats part of the message. And so you cant solve problems without bipartisanship. The leadership has got to be willing to take this to the members and allow both parties to vote for it in order to get a majority. And they will get credit for it. Thank you. Now, id like to turn it over to all of you. I have a couple caveats. Short questions are great. Testimony is not great, this is not a courtroom. And i reverve the right to cut you off and shut you down if you make yourself a fifth panelist. Next, you can ask questions via twitter, tweet the them brookingsgov. And our social media team will grab a microphone and ask some questions along the way. Lets start right up front here. First and foremost, thank you. Id like to thank all of our panelists today, you guys were wonderful. Im currently an intern at the u. S. Department of Homeland Security. What components are essential to keep in mind in regard to immigration policy, when working for the office for civil rights and civil liberties, thank you. You know dhs better than i do. Well, i think the office, its interesting, dhs is the only federal department that has a civil rights office, that looks internally not externally. And i think it important that that office have visibility into the policies and practices of what is happening at ice, at cbp. That it have an effective mechanism by which complaints can be received and resolved. And that that process in and of itself be transparent. Right up front. Thanks. Im a Congressional Correspondent for the hispanic outlook. In 2013, the judiciary subcommittee considered. This was in july, after june, after the 2013 bipartisan immigration bill passed. The judiciary subcommittee considered a bill called the kids act, which was a standalone dream act. Every democrat on the panel opposed it. Luis gutierrez said it is unamerican to legalize just one segment of the illegal immigrant community. The democrats have been completely against the standalone bill. Now, the tables have turned. They want this as a stand alone. And they dont want to add anything. I think the republicans would like to add e verify. What do you think about that. Ill take it. I think to the first point of your question. Moving away from perhaps a more comprehensive bill, to something a little more specific. I think theres a recognition that we are not just in different times, but theres a sense of urgency and momentum as we speak, to resolve this issue and get it done for this population. I think thats what some of the democrats you spike to are reacting to. Not just democrats, frankly, republicans as well. I would offer that. In terms of e verify, i will maintain and weve said publicly, we are one of the organizations that is pushing for a clean dream act. Or a vehicle that is clean that contains the central policy provisions of a dream act. And the proposals that we have seen to date or what we see percolating in the background are frankly unacceptable to the community. Why i say that is remember, one of the themes of my points here is, were not just talking about the 800,000. Were talking about the parents of Daca Recipients. Dreamers and the broader population. I think e verify is one of these issues that i would submit we really cant have that conversation until we address that theres over 300,000 immigrants in the United States. What do you think is going to happen to current status. And how will that affect Work Authorization renewal for those immigrants. You have 11 million undocumented individuals in the United States. You dont have the resources to deport them all. Just as the Justice Department doesnt have the resources to prosecute every bad check case for example in the cunning the. The executive branch has the authority to exercise whats called prosecutorial discretion and have priorities. And so the Obama Administration set forth those priorities. The Current Administration has basically undone those directives, and creates a greater sense of free for all in Immigration Enforcement. I dont think thats a wise use of executive branch authorities. I think it has all of the impacts that carlos has talked about in terms of the community. And i think that it is a misuse of the resources that the department does have. Great. Lets see. Also on the isle in the back. Hi, im claudia, i spent a year at the uva school of education. Where, of course, immigration became a huge talking point. My question is what can schools do to combat the human cost that mr. Gavarro was talking about. Thank you for the question. Glad to hear from a uva alum. I think this is one of the points i was trying to describe in terms of collateral impacts of increase interior enforcement, one of the places we hear time and time again from our affiliates and folks on the ground is this very issue of, what do we do in schools, which are seen kind of de facto as a safe space. I think something that has been very helpful, im not advocating folks to do certain things and what not. I think schools provide a convening power to discuss the broader context of what folks rights are. Using these venues as opportunities to screen folks for additional forms of relief. If theres ways schools can discuss that in a safe space, that would go a long way. That said, i we have heard the anecdotal reports. Were working to find a way to provide this information imperically. More aggressive tactics that bleed into these locations or places that are perceived to be as safe. I would encourage schools to really use that space for the broader, the know your rights screenings, and getting information to people that is much needed at this time. Carlos, sir. And you know, i would just kind of list what we go at the university of california. Undocumented students pay in state tuition. We have undocumented Student Centers on our campuses. We provide a dream loan program, so its a loan program for undocumented youth who cant get federal loans. And we provide Legal Services for our undocumented students and their families. So those are just you know, some concrete actions weve taken over the past years, proceeding the daca recision, for you are undocumented student population. Quickly, before the next question, for students or School Administrators or whomever who are looking to do more in this space. Are there any resources offered that you could let them know about . Yes, certainly, folks should feel free to reach out to me. We have a Top Notch Team that covers not just imgas station issues, education, health care and so forth. Were looking at this information. Including one meese, as were driving to asking folks who are lirjable to renew to renew. Thank you. My name is dan melnyk. Im retired. My question is, id like to ask you to relate what youve been talking about to the broader stance of america and the world. You is specifically you discuss the immigration issue, but you never mentioned or discussed the role of the United States in aiding refugees. And secondly, when you talk about the changes into the flows in the United States, id like you to address the issue of how this reflects perhaps the an impact of this rhetoric on immigration. And does this mean or doesnt it mean that the policies are succeeding in a way. Because theyre stopping the flow in. I think its an extremely interesting point. There are so many things one could talk about. The refugee realm is an entire topic of its own on which one could do a panel and if the rumors are correct, the numbers the administration will request or propose are going to be dramatically lower than they have in the past. And this year they were lowered from 110,000 to 50,000. The 50,000 cap is written into the statute, we havent gone under that since 1980 when it was when that statute was written. But this fits by the overall world view that fits with this administration. Not as an asset, and the irony where refugees are concerned, if theres any group that are the victims, its, of course, people that are outside of their own countries. And thats a historically high number now since the second world war. The u. S. Has always been a leader where refugee policy is concerned. Were abdicating that roelt. And we are also in the process of that along with so many other things that are going on, really changing our america as a brand around the world. I dont say that flip abtly in pr terms, part of our image and part of our ability to be leaders has to do with our immigration stance over time. Refugees are part of that, but the rest of it is as well. This is a welcoming nation that benefits from immigration. It shouldnt be chaotic, its indefensible toville run a system for as many years as we have, thats relied on illegal immigration the way it does, those are all important caveats, but nonetheless, all of those things are now being cast in a very different way. So i but the one of the ironies is what you point out. That some of this is working. There is no other good explanation right now for the drop in just the last six months of crossing at the southwest boarder than whats being termed the twrumd effect. It is against all historic norms of the season of the year, it runs against what we know the causes of the flows from Central America have been. It is most likely a function of this climate of fear and of the information flows through the Informal Networks among the smugglers, from families in the u. S. Back to countries of origin that things have changed and its a dangerous time. Dan marcus, im a retired lawyer, professor and alumnus of the clinton administration. One of the fundamental principles of Immigration Reform, both comprehensive proposals and the dream act has been a path to citizenship. Im sort of optimistic something is going to get done on daca in the next six months, its not going to include a path to citizenship, i dont think. I want to ask you, if im right, what does that mean to the long term prospiblgts for Immigration Reform for undocumented immigrants. In terms of path to citizenship . Thank you for the question. Look i still maintain that we have a window and were pushing for a vehicle or a measure that includes a pathway toward legalization. I think theres support, theres a recent polling done that addresses this issue, there is support among republican voters. For a solution that includes a pathway toward legalization. We can talk about what that might mean. I think its important from our communitys perspective that we continue to push for that, and concerns we have you start introducing notions of second class citizenship which reminds me of another group of individuals that we have a historical precedence with. Theyre kind of on protective status, that have been in limbo for over 15 years. So we continue to believe that theres a window to get that done. In terms of in terms of the broader question of pivoting to Immigration Reform. I think we need to get past this initial conversation first. I think this could lead to more momentum for that broader conversation. And perhaps include should we not get to that point of legalization, would certainly have to include that discussion at that time. Howard, right in front of you. Thank you very much. President napolitano mentioned the possibilities of voting. And i want to ask a question, related to voting at state and local levels whether its for governor or house of representatives in off years. Last week we saw nancy pelosi being attacked at a town hall meeting. And yet there is Something Like 7 or more republican congressmen in california who are not on record as supporting a dream act provision. Sending energy in what could be the wrong direction. The state and local level, at an off year representative elections. They respond to who vote. And latinos have not been known to vote in off year elections. And state and local elections many id like you all to comment on the degree to which you can complain or fight a system in which you dont use the tools that you can to not elect an attorney general in texas who brings a suit against dacas. Its convoluted but my question relates to the nonfederal focus that i think is lacking in some of this discussion. I think you know, any effort to vote and to support voting is a good thing. And when people go and get their ballot, you know. It will have federal and state offices on the same ballot. The question is to get in either by voting by mail or to go to the polls on election day. And i think it also would be helpful for some of these state offices to do a better job educating people about what impact those Office Holders can have on them. For example, state attorneys general have a big impact. It was state attorneys general who filed to hold up dapa in the courts. It was the threat of state attorneys general filing suit that led to the trump decision to rescind daca. So i dont think from a turningout perspective. The ballot includes state and federal offices. I think we can help stimulate turnout. Certain organizations like ours are looking at this issue closely and making the push to register and so forth. The latino population is not mono lijsic, and perhaps the views of some folks in the california area may be different than folks in texas. Theres also a question of political maturity as well. Certainly organizations like ours are looking closely at this issue, and will be at the forefront of trying to push that, push folks to have greater understanding of whats at stake, not just in general. But midterms as well much. In the pink blouse. Or purple. I dont know. I dont know colors that well. My name is selena singleton. We represent historically black colleges and universities. Just wondering about the effect of the african and caribbean students on our campuses and you just mentioned tps, what we need to be doing to protect some of those young people as well 37. Since i opened that one up. As an organization, we are acutely focused on this question of tps. We know in the next 5 months the department of Homeland Security will make an announcement as to what theyre going to do with the current designation. We know that in the next four months, between now and mid january, well have decisions on the top three countries in terms of populations to include honduras, which will have a decision, we expect a decision at the beginning of november. And particularly in terms of numbers, were talking about 80,000 individuals. Haiti which will be around thanksgiving time, and weve already seen an extension back in march. And some of the messaging after that has been a little concerning, suggestions being that they might not extend. But were watching that closely, and then the big one so haiti is 50,000. And then the big one, from a latino perspective, were concerned about all of these, el salvador represents Something Like a quarter of a million individuals who are protected and been in this country for at least 16 years, and in many indications much longer. Were working hard to elevate this issue. 400,000 individuals that will need a decision to be made. We are working with our friends in congress to get some momentum going on this issue. Were concerned about the state of play with these countries and the folks who have been lawfully in this country, submitting to criminal background checks, having the rug pulled from underneath them. I think the most important thing is to help elevate the importance of this issue, and working with your partners and constituencies to reach members and folks who may influence this administration on this particular issue to elevate the importance of that issue. We have about five minutes left. Gentleman in the back . Shes the one with the question, i just have longer arms. With the exception of possibly canada. Mexico is one of the countries that has the highest levels of cooperation with the United States, whether that be issues of trade or environment or national security. All of these affect both countries and request extensive bilateral cooperation. What is the administrations rhetoric and policy on immigration mean for mexico . I think the timing of your question is good given the nafta negotiation. The whole u. S. mexican relationship is in my opinion, a valuated to the United States. To our economy. There are at least a half a million jobs in in california alone, directly related to trade with mexico under nafta. Its a value add from an historic and cultural ties, its a value add certainly on the Security Side where over the past decade weve seen stronger and Stronger Partnership and cooperation with mexico. And so we run the risk under the guys of rhetoric of really diminishing that relationship, and from every possible perspective that is the wrong way to go what we should be doing is working ever more closely with mexico, to look at ourselves as an economic region as we face the rest of the world as we look as a security region and deal with our common problems in a linked up fashion. And again as we appreciate the other ties that we have with mexico so im quite concerned. That we are putting that key relationship at risk. Time for one more quick question. Richard . This is particularly for secretary in a politan know and commissioner meissner. Lets say tomorrow morning you get a call from chuck schumer, nancy and i are meeting at the white house for lunch with the president , ryan and mcconnell. They are ready to do a deal on daca, but they want something on Border Security. What could i give them that would not be detrimental and may be helpful and they would like. Tall order. W8, that would are an interesting call. You know, i i would say a Border Technology package. That would include funding for sensors. And for border surveillance devices. That would be a force multiplier for the Border Patrol. I would agree with that, in order to have an effective border enforcement regime, you need, people, equipment, technology, infrastructure. And you could do some plussing up on all of those that is reasonable. I would definitely put most of my eggs in the technology basket, i completely agree. In addition to that, to a part of the boarder that never get the attention it should. That is the ports of entry. The more effective enforcement you do between the ports of entry, the more pressure there is on the ports of entry. That is a big long term infrastructure effort that could align with what it is this administration wants to achieve, that is very much in our interests from the standpoint of enforcement, mexico and legal flows. There is a conversation to be had about the border that is short of a border wall, and short of the kind of heated rhetoric that has been in play now. Id like to encourage all of you to look at the work being done by doris and her colleagues at the migration policy instituinst institu institute. Were looking forward to more leadership from the university of california, system particularly on this issue. I encourage you all to visit the brookings edu website to check out our work for shameless selfpromotion. Read the paper hitting the wall that my Colleagues Co authored with me, as well as the latest brookings essay by our colleague that looks at Security Issues specifically around the border wall and the debate around that, with all that said, id like you guys to join me in thanking our panelists for a great conversation today. [ applause ] later a discussion with the authors of a new article on the rise of isis. They argue with different policies, the u. S. Could have prevented the rise of isis. You can watch live online at cspan. Org. Tomorrow the former chair and ceo of equifax testifies before congress about the companys data breach. First before the house energy and commerce committee. And wednesday before the Senate Banking committee. Live online or using the cspan radio app. Tonight on the communicators. 5g is going to open up a completely new wave in the market. Youll be able to use more speed than you currently can on your smart phone or tablet. Shes interviewed by politico Technology Reporter Margaret Harding mcgill. Do you think the u. S. Has the right Regulatory Framework for 5g and making sure were getting it out there. We did a good job on spectrum. Weve done a pretty good job on fiber. We have Fiber Industries getting it out where it needs to be. We could do some work on the infrastructure part, in order to get 5g to the homes the way ive described it, we need to put a lot of different small cells all over the country. Once we do that, i think well be in in a good position. Tim ryan is a co chair of a congressional caucus that deals with Addiction Treatment and recovery. Well show as much of the discussion as we can ahead of the live forum on isis, which is scheduled to start at 6 00 eastern