January 7, 2011

Prince William County Proves “Attrition Through Enforcement” Works

Posted by D.A. King at 6:01 am - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

Human Events

James R. Edwards, Jr.

Prince William County Proves “Attrition Through Enforcement” Works

With all the buzz about Arizona’s immigration law this past summer, one might have thought the border state had literally launched an attack on Mexico. Before then, Prince William County, Va., adopted a vigorous 287(g) program in October 2007 to rid the county of its burgeoning illegal alien problem.

The 287(g) program, which the Obama administration has substantially weakened, enables state and local police to help systematically enforce immigration violations. Arizona’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio operates a vigorous 287(g) initiative in his county.

These locales are the poster children for the “attrition through enforcement” strategy for reducing illegal immigration.

A recent final report by the University of Virginia has found that Prince William County’s popular law enforcement initiative, which is similar to that of Arizona, has benefited the county and worked effectively.

That county’s Latino population swelled more than 150 percent from 2000 to 2006. The report says “the number of illegal immigrants in the county definitely increased during these years.”

At the same time, the county saw rising crime, proliferating day labor congregants, overcrowding of single-family homes, public misconduct and increasing complaints by residents.

The county board, led by Chairman Corey Stewart (R), put this policy in place to restore public order and ensure public safety.

Shrill apologists for illegal immigrants used their Saul Alinsky tactics to fight the rational measure. Liberal news media like The Washington Post intoned the (Democrat) party line. But the county’s responsive public servants pressed forward.

The full-throated initiative puts county law enforcement on the job checking arrested suspected illegals’ immigration status. While that might be “controversial” in the rarified air of left-wing salons, it’s common sense, popular and welcome in real America.

In 6 percent of arrests in Prince William County between March 2008 and June 2010, police encountered suspected illegal aliens about 3,000 times. The report says, “Nearly all suspects thought to be illegal immigrants were later confirmed as such.”

About 70 percent of the county’s arrests of illegal aliens entailed drunk driving, public drunkenness or driving without a license.

And some 9,300 suspected illegals in the county jail had their immigration status checked. About 30 percent were illegals. The county gave federal immigration authorities custody of almost 2,500 illegal criminal aliens.
Thanks to this policy, the county’s non-U.S. citizen population fell “substantially,” by 7,400 over two years. U.Va. researchers conclude “that the number of illegal immigrants was significantly reduced.” Some 2,000 to 6,000 illegal aliens left the county between 2006 and 2008.

Those self-deporting out of Prince William County have largely been young, single males. The county’s Hispanic community now consists of more intact families, married couples and somewhat older residents.

Not only has the county rid itself of illegal aliens by consistently identifying illegal criminals and holding them accountable, not only have illegal aliens depopulated Prince William County on their own, but this model Virginia county has seen its violent crime rate fall. The U.Va. report notes that this policy caused “a substantial drop in aggravated assaults.”


February 2, 2010

Attrition through Enforcement … Postville Plant to Hire 150 More Workers

Posted by D.A. King at 10:38 am - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  


Postville Plant to Hire 150 More Workers
Monday, February 1, 2010
– posted on NumbersUSA

Postville Plant

The poultry plant in Postville, Iowa which was home to one of the nation’s largest immigration worksite enforcement actions in history is preparing to hire 150 new workers. In May of 2008, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials arrested close to 400 illegal workers. Read Full Story

December 17, 2009

David Frum on attrition through enforcement

Posted by D.A. King at 6:54 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

The Week Magazine

The case for inaction on immigration

On Tuesday, 80 House members unveiled a new immigration amnesty proposal. The bill, written by Illinois congressman Luis Gutierrez, would put illegals on the road to citizenship. — The Gutierrez bill is too permissive to get very far: It grants amnesty to any employed illegal alien provided the alien has not been convicted of a crime and pays a $500 fine…


July 6, 2009

Attrition Through Enforcement – A Cost-Effective Strategy to Shrink the Illegal Population

Posted by D.A. King at 10:34 am - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

Center for Immigration Studies

Attrition Through Enforcement

A Cost-Effective Strategy to Shrink the Illegal Population

April 2006

By Jessica M. Vaughan


Proponents of mass legalization of the illegal alien population, whether through amnesty or expanded guestworker programs, often justify this radical step by suggesting that the only alternative – a broad campaign to remove illegal aliens by force – is unworkable. One study put the cost of such a deportation strategy at $206 billion over the next five years. But mass forced removal is not the only alternative to mass legalization. This analysis shows that a strategy of attrition through enforcement, in combination with a stronger border security effort such as the administration’s Secure Border Initiative (SBI), will significantly reduce the size of the illegal alien population at a reasonable cost. Reducing the size of the illegal population in turn will reduce the fiscal and social burdens that illegal immigration imposes on communities. In contrast, a policy of mass legalization is likely to increase these costs and prompt more illegal immigration.

Studies of the size and growth of the illegal population show that a borders-oriented strategy like SBI, which aims to improve border security and focuses mainly on removing criminal aliens, will achieve only limited results. If supplemented by attrition through enforcement, which encourages voluntary compliance with immigration laws rather than relying on forced removal, the illegal population could be nearly halved in five years. According to the government’s own cost estimates, such a strategy requires an additional investment of less than $2 billion, or $400 million per year – an increase of less than 1 percent of the President’s 2007 budget request for the Department of Homeland Security ($42.7 billion).

Elements of the attrition through enforcement strategy include: mandatory workplace verification of immigration status; measures to curb misuse of Social Security and IRS identification numbers; partnerships with state and local law enforcement officials; expanded entry-exit recording under US-VISIT; increased non-criminal removals; and state and local laws to discourage illegal settlement.

The purpose of this analysis is to identify both the likely cost to the federal government and the expected effect in terms reducing the size of the illegal alien population, of re-orienting the nation’s immigration law enforcement strategy from one that relies primarily on border control and removing criminal aliens to one that also aims to increase the probability that illegal aliens will return home of their own accord. Among the findings:

A strategy of attrition through enforcement could reduce the illegal population by as many as 1.5 million illegal aliens each year. Currently, only about 183,000 illegal aliens per year depart without the intervention of immigration officials, according to DHS statistics.

Voluntary compliance works faster and is cheaper than a borders-only approach to immigration law enforcement. For example, under the controversial NSEERS program launched after 9/11, DHS removed roughly 1,500 illegally-resident Pakistanis; over the same time period, in response to the registration requirements, about 15,000 illegal Pakistani immigrants left the country on their own.

Requiring employers to verify the status of workers could deny jobs to about three million illegal workers in three years, affecting at least one-third of the illegal population. This measure is a central feature of H.R. 4437, the enforcement measure passed by the House of Representatives in December, and is estimated to cost just over $400 million over five years.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) knows the name, address, and place of employment of millions of illegal aliens, and issues hundreds of millions of dollars in tax refunds and tax credits to illegal aliens. Changing the laws to provide for information-sharing would help boost immigration law enforcement at minimal cost.

US-VISIT is a critical tool in curbing illegal immigration. Screening must be expanded to include Mexicans and Canadians, and DHS must move forward to deploy an exit-recording system. These steps should be a pre-requisite to adding or expanding any visa program.

Less than 10 percent of ICE investigative resources are devoted to fraud, workplace violations, and overstayers. DHS could double non-criminal removals at a cost of roughly $120 million per year, balancing a “broken windows” approach with its current triage approach to interior enforcement.

Laws enacted by the state governments of Florida and New York to prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining driver’s licenses have induced more illegal aliens to leave than have federal enforcement efforts against certain illegal populations in those states, and have come at virtually no cost to the federal government.

False Choice

In November 2005 Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff presented the Bush Administration plan to address the nation’s immigration crisis. Known as the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), the plan is billed as a comprehensive solution that will “secure America’s borders and reduce illegal migration” within five years.1 The cost of SBI was projected to be $2.5 billion.2

While SBI addresses a number of grave border security weaknesses, such as Border Patrol staffing levels, detention capacity, and physical infrastructure, and is certain to reduce the number of new illegal arrivals, it will have no noticeable effect for communities across the country that already are hosting illegal populations. The SBI makes almost no effort to reduce the size of the existing illegal alien population; nor does it address the problem of visa overstayers, who make up perhaps as much as 40 percent of the illegal immigrant flow.

Ongoing research by leading immigration scholars strongly suggests that when border control is the sole focus of immigration enforcement policy, illegal immigrants tend to stay put, rather than risk re-entry. According to Princeton researcher Douglas S. Massey, “Enforcement has driven up the cost of crossing the border illegally, but that has had the unintended consequence of encouraging illegal immigrants to stay longer in the United States to recoup the cost of entry. The result is that illegal immigrants are less likely to return to their home country, causing an increase in the number of illegal immigrants remaining in the United States.”3 If the goal of immigration policy is to relieve the fiscal and social burden of illegal immigration and enhance homeland security without spurring more illegal immigration, then some effort must be made to reduce the existing population of illegal immigrants as well as to slow the flow of new illegal arrivals.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has said it is simply “not practical” to try to forcibly remove the illegal population: “The cost of identifying all of those people and sending them back would be stupendous. It would be billions and billions of dollars.”4 The administration, along with some supporters in Congress, maintains that the only alternative is to legalize the resident illegal alien population through a massive new guestworker plan.

Cost would certainly be a factor in any new guestworker or amnesty program, as well. According to a 2004 report by Center for Immigration Studies Director of Research Steven Camarota, the illegally-resident population produces a net fiscal drain of about $10 billion (fiscal costs minus taxes paid). After an amnesty, that cost rises to nearly $29 billion, as the amnesty beneficiaries become eligible for more services.5 In addition, based on past experience, any new amnesty is likely to result in large numbers of ineligible individuals receiving status, including terrorists, and will spawn new illegal immigration.6

Policies for Attrition

The purpose of attrition through enforcement is to increase the probability that illegal aliens will return home without the intervention of immigration enforcement agencies. In other words, it encourages voluntary compliance with immigration laws through more robust interior law enforcement. When combined with a strategy to improve border security, this approach will bring about a significant reduction in the size of the illegal alien population and help deter future illegal immigration. This strategy requires a modest investment in additional resources for certain federal enforcement programs totaling less than $2 billion over five years above and beyond what has already been appropriated by Congress or requested by the White House for immigration law enforcement. The key elements of this strategy are:

1) eliminating access to jobs through mandatory employer verification of Social Security numbers and immigration status;

2) ending misuse of Social Security and IRS identification numbers, which illegal immigrants use to secure jobs, bank accounts, drivers licenses, and other privileges, and improved information-sharing among key federal agencies;

3) increasing apprehensions and detention of illegal immigrants through partnerships between federal immigration authorities and state and local law enforcement agencies;

4) reducing visa overstays;

5) doubling the number of non-criminal, non-expedited removals;

6) passing state and local laws to discourage the settlement of illegal aliens and to make it more difficult for illegal aliens to conceal their status.

Some of these measures are included in H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005, passed by the House of Representatives in December 2005. Additional legislative action is still needed to end Social Security and tax identification number misuse and additional funds need to be appropriated for expanded removal programs, support of state and local partnerships, and the enhancement of the US-VISIT program.

Enforcement: Faster and Cheaper

Table 1 illustrates the significantly better results that can be achieved by pursuing attrition in addition to a border control strategy such as SBI. With an attrition strategy, the United States could reduce the illegal population from its current 11.5 million to 5.6 million over a period of five years, a 51 percent reduction. SBI alone will produce only modest results – reducing the illegal population to only 10.3 million illegal aliens after five years, a 10 percent reduction.


December 22, 2007

Attrition through enforcement works ….again!

Posted by D.A. King at 4:15 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

“I don’t want to live here because of the new law and the oppressive environment,” he said. “I’ll be better in my country.”

Illegal alien in Arizona on that state’s new law aimed at illegal employment.

For months, immigrants have taken a wait-and-see attitude toward the state’s new employer-sanctions law, which takes effect Jan. 1. The voter-approved legislation is an attempt to lessen the economic incentive for illegal immigrants in Arizona, the busiest crossing point along the U.S.-Mexico border.

And by all appearances, it’s starting to work.

“People are calling me telling me about their friend, their cousin, their neighbors – they’re moving back to Mexico,” said Magdalena Schwartz, an immigrant-rights activist and pastor at a Mesa church. “They don’t want to live in fear, in terror.”

Martin Herrera, a 40-year-old illegal immigrant and masonry worker who lives in Camp Verde, 70 miles north of Phoenix, said he is planning to return to Mexico as soon as he ties up loose ends after living here for four years.

Attrition through enforcement works! Again! HERE. ( Las Vegas Sun)

December 6, 2007

My Marietta Daily Journal column today: D.A. King: “Time overdue to try attrition through enforcement”

Posted by D.A. King at 11:32 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

My Marietta Daily Journal column today: ( I have added some hyperlinks to educate the reader ) Original HERE.

Time overdue to try attrition through enforcement

D.A. King
December 7, 2007

On the illegal immigration crisis, it is likely time – again – for a reminder about false choices and an as yet untried and reasonable solution.

The transparent argument from those who will never relent on the amnesty-again agenda is that because we cannot round up and deport more than 20 million illegal aliens by sundown tomorrow (false choice “A”), the only other option is to legalize them as part of some contrived and disingenuous “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” program (false choice “B”).

I know what the reader must be thinking: “Why is he bringing that up again? The amnesty attempt of 2007 was defeated in the U.S. Senate in June!”

Here is why: Just weeks after this year’s attempt at forcing the now not-so-trusting American people to accept the legalization option, another nationwide push began to prepare them for the next one – but not until the elections are over.

But, for the “legalization now, legalization tomorrow and legalization forever” crowd, there is a rather inconvenient truth emerging in news stories from around the country.

Nearly every week Americans paying attention can read news reports from places where the law is actually being enforced about illegal aliens giving up and leaving for more hospitable places to look for a better life, either in other states here or back to their home countries.

Simply put, again: Enforcement works.

For many in the amnesty industry, the fervent hope is that either many Americans don’t realize that the legalization option was tried – and failed – more than 21 years ago, or they can be convinced that Albert Einstein was wrong when he remarked that one definition of insanity was “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”

It is past time that pundits, editors and candidates for political office begin to recognize and discuss the third and seldom-mentioned option: Attrition through enforcement.

It doesn’t take another Einstein to recognize that the idea of gradual attrition of the illegal population through the enforcement of existing laws while at the same time stopping illegal entries by securing our borders – at any cost – will work. It simply takes good old-fashioned common sense.

For decades, common sense seems to be in short supply when it comes to illegal employment and the illegal immigration it produces. Illegal immigration isn’t just wrong because it is illegal – it is illegal because it is wrong.

The national disaster created by the fact that Washington has failed to secure American borders or enforce our immigration and employment laws did not happen overnight. It has taken more than 30 years to get where we are today.

We should all stop looking for an overnight solution. There isn’t one. It may take as long to solve the problem as it did to create.

Not many can argue that border security is not a fundamental duty of the federal government. Neither can anyone argue against the equal application of American laws. Put the two logical concepts together and we can watch the illegal immigration problem begin to shrink instead of grow with each passing day.

Illegal immigration has been labeled by many in the media as the “third rail of politics.” But that’s not the case on the streets of America or at office water-cooler conversations. The American people rightly expect the issue to be addressed with something more than the empty rhetoric of the last two decades.

Candidates for office – on all levels – should heed the common sense of the American people and their ever increasing education on the topic and realize that a growing number of voters will not accept the false choices being offered on illegal immigration.

American voters should demand that we stop the insanity of repeating the mistakes of the past and expecting different results. Enthusiastic enforcement of the existing laws seems to be the only thing we haven’t tried. A slow but steady decrease in the illegal population is the obvious reasonable and workable solution.

This longtime American will be listening closely for the concept of attrition through enforcement to be one of the first things mentioned in political candidate’s campaign speeches.

I suspect that I will be in a very large group of common-sense voters.

D.A. King is president of the Dustin Inman Society, a Cobb-based non-profit coalition dedicated to educating the public on illegal immigration. On the Web: www.theDustinInmanSociety.org.

December 5, 2007

Attrition through Enforcement works again…in Arizona VIDEO HERE 3 minutes

Posted by D.A. King at 11:29 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

Attrition through Enforcement works again…in Arizona VIDEO HERE 3 minutes HERE.

October 19, 2007

The answer is attrition through enforcement – Presidential candidate Fred Thompson gets it!

Posted by D.A. King at 12:01 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

The answer is attrition through enforcement – Presidential candidate Fred Thompson gets it!

Here from Jim Galloway and the AJC or here from Jerry’s site….Fred Thompson tells it l;ike it is on the solution to the illegal imigration crisis! ENFORCE THE LAW!


Thompson takes swipe at GOP foes
Found in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

By Jim Galloway
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 10/19/07

Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson breezed through metro Atlanta ahead of a rare line of thunderclouds on Thursday, brandishing his conservative credentials and accusing GOP rivals Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney of favoring “sanctuaries” for illegal immigrants.

In a brief interview, Thompson also addressed questions that some conservative Christian leaders have raised about his religious convictions and work he once did as a lobbyist for an abortion rights group.

He said he wasn’t bothered by the scrutiny.

“If you’re right with the man upstairs, and you’re right with those who love you, and those who you love, then everything else will take care of itself,” said the former Tennessee senator and “Law & Order” actor.

Thompson’s first foray into Georgia consisted of two fund-raisers and an airport gathering of 70 supporters and reporters in Kennesaw.

In a hangar at McCollum Airport, Thompson was endorsed by two Cobb County officials, Sheriff Neil Warren and District Attorney Pat Head. In July, Warren became the first sheriff in Georgia to have his deputies trained to determine the immigration status of foreign workers who land in the county jail.

Thompson put illegal immigration atop a long list of positions he said proved his conservative pedigree.

Thompson accused both Romney and Giuliani of tolerating “sanctuary” policies endorsed by some U.S. cities, in which local authorities routinely don’t inquire into an individual’s immigration status.

Later, Thompson said that after securing the U.S. border, the millions of undocumented foreign workers now working in the United States could be addressed through attrition.

“They set up a false choice —- either we get giant busloads of people tomorrow, and round them all up, or we have to grant amnesty. Attrition by enforcement is what makes the most sense,” he said.

July 5, 2007

D.A. on NPR this AM…What’s next? It’s attrition through enforcement

Posted by D.A. King at 9:21 am - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

NPR this morning listen here

If the link is gone, it is from this show.

December 1, 2015

D.A. King in the MDJ today – my column on smearing pro-enforcement Americans as “Nazis” – is Barbara Jordan next? ‘Straw man anti-enforcement “Nazi” smear on immigration’

Posted by D.A. King at 12:54 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  


Note: Due to what I am told was an editing error, only half of the below column was published in the MDJ today. I note in the text where the published version abruptly ended. We miss Joe Kirby

Marietta Daily Journal

Straw man anti-enforcement “Nazi” smear on immigration; (Is Barbara Jordan next?)

D.A. King

“Those who should get in, get in; those who should be kept out, are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave… Deportation is crucial” – 1995 Testimony of the late Barbara Jordan, the Clinton-appointed Chair, U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform.

In Kevin Foley’s recent column (Trump’s final solution: ‘deportation force’ MDJ 11/20/2015) were treated to another amusing example of the liberal practice of inventing a false scenario, projecting it onto a political enemy and then smearing that enemy as if that enemy had created the scenario.

Look up “straw-man argument” to get a clue on this transparent manipulation.

If you missed it, Foley explained that he heard presidential candidate Donald Trump promise to create a “deportation force” for illegal aliens. Foley then went on to write his own script of what Trump’s immigration enforcement action would do. “In picturing Trump’s “deportation force” deployed throughout a sprawling Los Angeles, I envision something that looks an awful lot like the Nazi Schutzstaffel (“Protection Squadron”) or more familiarly, SS, and the Gestapo secret police who rounded up Jews, political opponents, intellectuals, homosexuals and everyone else Hitler deemed “undesirable,” wrote Foley.

We (yawn) get the idea. Anyone who supports deportation of illegal aliens is obviously a Nazi.

Score one for a slight variation on the observation made on weak arguments by Mike Godwin in 1990. ‘Godwin’s law’ asserts that “as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches – that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism.”

“I see families torn apart…” is a regurgitation of the standard – and poorly constructed – liberal argument against immigration enforcement. Qualified, for now, with a possible exception for illegal aliens convicted of a felony. All this absent even a token nod to someday, maybe, securing American borders or monitoring visa-holder departures.

The reality is that about half of the illegals now here illegally did not come illegally. They came on a temporary visa and refused to leave. As did several of the 9/11 terrorists.

Don’t disregard the dangerous audacity of hope for this loony “only if they are convicted of a felony” deportation idea. It came a week after Islamists bombed Paris and ran on another day that news stories informed us of the capture at the southern border of illegal aliens from countries with known terrorist ties. The FBI has confirmed last week’s apprehension of six military-aged men from Afghanistan and Pakistan. (THIS IS THE MISTAKEN END OF PUBLISHED COLUMN IN THE MDJ TODAY)

None of these victims of borders have been convicted of a felony here and are apparently exempt from deportation under the enlightened “felons only” premise of immigration enforcement.

The truth is that we already have a federal deportation force. It is called “ICE” and part of its mission is to enforce our immigration laws in the interior of the U.S., including apprehension and processing of illegal aliens for deportation.

The crisis that we are now enduring on immigration has been created by successive White House administrations that refuse to allow ICE to do its job for political reasons. Currently, Obama has ordered ICE to implement policies that allow about 80% of the illegals in the nation to escape deportation.

The far left is in a frenzied panic because Donald Trump has permanently embedded the issue of immigration into the 2016 presidential contest and because the depth of the seething anger of middle-class Americans regarding illegal immigration has been bared.

Barbara Jordan’s recommended solutions to congress included the now proven premise that cutting off access to jobs, benefits and services would result in illegal aliens returning to their home nations in desperation. As has been presented in this space for more than a decade, the reasonable and logical solution is a steady attrition of the illegal population through enforcement of the law. Oh, my!

The late Barbara Jordan Source; GovTrack.us

In a nation gone mad in which the illegal aliens are victims and Americans who demand an equal application of the law are portrayed by many as ‘Nazis’, one should assume that the civil rights icon and presidential Medal of Freedom winner Barbara Jordan would come out on the wrong side of the 21st century liberal’s hate campaign against the pro-enforcement majority.

The bi-partisan Jordan Commission also recommended cutting legal immigration to about 550,000, which is half of today’s level. Oh, my!

We wonder exactly when the far-left will begin to smear ‘the Barbara Jordan solution.’

D.A. King is president of the Georgia-based Dustin Inman Society and a nationally recognized authority on immigration.


Next Page »