DO ICE ENFORCEMENT TACTICS THREATEN THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY?

 

As a member of The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), I often wonder about the extent to which our membership voices concerns about ICE enforcement policies. While our training reinforces the practice of remaining objective in the design and execution of research studies, there is little doubt that the national media attention devoted to ICE enforcement practices has become ingrained in the minds of research practitioners and the potential disruption that it entails. Indeed, news reports tell us daily about the raids or sweeps by ICE that are taking place at such places as work, worship, schools and residences, and the disruption that these raids have caused to families and businesses that include immigrants – both the undocumented and those with legal status. More troubling are the deaths of U.S. citizens that have occurred by ICE agents, and the trend that a majority of the individuals arrested have no criminal record other than being in the U.S. illegally, as reported by The Cato Institute from analyses of federal statistics on U.S. apprehensions.

For a number of reasons, research practitioners should be concerned about ICE enforcement practices.  Let’s discuss a few of these reasons:

·        Chilling effects:  These raids or community sweeps create fear and anxiety among community members, especially immigrants and mixed-status families – leading in turn to no-shows, lower response rates, and a disruption of the research process.  I vividly recall conducting an intercept study of immigrants that were evaluating a commercial at a local Greyhound station.  As the immigrants arrived at the bus station, immigration agents appeared and detained all immigrants, thus undermining the study execution.

·        Undermining Trust: Aggressive enforcement tactics erode trust among communities that have been historically marginalized.  Concerns about trust are not just associated with government institutions but are generalized to institutions that have previously been considered safe havens by immigrants, such as churches, schools and community organizations.  Thus, research practitioners must work harder to regain this trust and face the reality of higher budgets to get a study completed.

·        Disruption of Research Talent: The scientific and academic labor force is experiencing disruption by ICE enforcement policies, including international students, visiting scholars, and multicultural staff.  Such risks to our talent pipeline ultimately influences the quality of scientific research, especially as one considers that the majority of U.S. patents are generated by immigrants to the U.S.

·        Community Resistance and Civil Unrest:  The resulting protest movements and civil actions generated by heightened enforcement actions can disrupt the research environment and participation availability.  New approaches will be needed to encourage participation, perhaps through novel incentive programs and data collection practices. However, novel incentives may not be enough to overcome the fear and anxiety experienced in these communities, which remain highly vulnerable as long as raids and search tactics do not require a judicial warrant by ICE agents.

·        Health Impacts on Communities: Health risks related to detention and family separation directly impact community well-being, raising additional concerns for researchers working with such individuals.

These are just a few of the reasons that come to mind that are increasingly influencing the quality of the research that we can conduct. The inclusion of immigrants and other marginalized groups in our research studies is essential to the generation of indicators that accurately measure their quality of life in numerous areas such as health, education, economics, the environment and others – indicators included in the U.S. Census, Center for Disease Control and other large-scale population studies that are key to defining interventions needed in these communities.

Perhaps our research community should set aside their scientific hats for a moment and join the chorus of organizations that are voicing objections about ICE enforcement practices. 

The War on Undocumented Immigrants

 

A casual observer visiting the U.S. might conclude that we are preparing for war against a dangerous enemy – undocumented immigrants.  Indeed, the evidence of such  “war preparations” are unmistakable and consequential to many of us:

·       Thousands of undocumented immigrants have been “booked” or in the process of being deported  – 65 percent, however, did not have any criminal convictions according to recent ICE Enforcement data analyzed by The Cato institute that included 204,297 detainees.[i] Moreover, 93 percent of these detainees were never convicted of any violent crime; (see Figure below)

                       Source:  The CATO Institute, 2025

·       Raids are taking place at workplaces, residences and other public areas to apprehend undocumented immigrants;[ii]

·       As a consequence of the birthright citizenship legislation, the children of detained undocumented parents may also face deportation – a legislation that is disapproved by 50 percent of Americans according to a recent report by Pew Research; [iii] an interesting historical note reveals that in 2017 an investigation revealed that wealthy Russians were using Trump properties to secure dual-citizenship for their babies. [iv]

·       Creation of Alligator Alcatraz – a migrant detention facility in Florida that is surrounded by alligators and pythons – will be used to detain 5,000 immigrants at a cost of $450 million a year to taxpayers; the Alcatraz name, presence of predators and remote location in the Everglades are meant as a deterrent to discourage illegal crossings; [v]

·       Local communities are being militarized by the National Guard that are being deployed to assist in the apprehension of undocumented immigrants, disrupting communities by separating mixed status families and removing persons with long-standing ties to the U.S. Moreover, time spent on nontraditional missions—such as immigration enforcement—reduces the National Guard’s ability to train for core functions (serving in combat overseas, responding to natural and manmade disasters). [vi]

This war against undocumented immigrants was a key component of Trump’s successful 2024 election and resulted in a significant reduction in border apprehensions and the decrease of undocumented immigrants residing in the U.S. It’s success, however, rested on the premise that undocumented immigrants were primarily responsible for the higher rates of violent crime that threatened the safety of all Americans.   Most Americans did not question this premise and believed that undocumented immigrants were indeed a real threat to the nation’s security and economy.  To further drive this point home, the 2024 campaign focused significant attention on the small number of homicides of American citizens by undocumented immigrants which pales in comparison to the numerous deaths resulting from a history of mass shootings committed by native-born Americans – not undocumented immigrants. Moreover, little attention was devoted in the media to reports by The Cato Institute – recognized experts on crime and immigration – that concluded that undocumented and documented immigrants have lower crime rates than native-born Americans.  [vii]

The consequences of this war against undocumented immigrants have been devastating to local communities and various industries.  Immigrants are living in fear of family members being deported and have minimized or stopped visitations to retail places, medical facilities or other places where they could be apprehended. A recent Pew Research study confirms that 43 percent of U.S. immigrants worry that they or someone close to them could be deported. [viii] The inhumanity of these raids was illustrated when one undocumented immigrant was tackled by ICE agents at his workplace – a father to three sons who had served as U.S. Marines. To help immigrants avoid apprehension by ICE, one company created an app called ICEBlock that alerts immigrants to ICE sitings within five miles.   Further, significant labor shortages are occurring in industries where the undocumented often work, such as agriculture, hotels, restaurants, and construction.  Such dangerous, low-paying jobs are not usually replaced by native-born American workers.  In a recent CNN  broadcast, President Trump softened his immigration tone to avoid worker shortages in such industries, clearly a response to companies in these industries that are suffering economically from these shortages.  [ix]

The research and scientific communities are also being impacted by Trump’s immigration policies. For example, a brain drain is being created from the slashing of research funding across various disciplines, while immigrant graduate and professional students have had their visas cancelled.  Immigrant scientists, both present and future, are being forced to look elsewhere for continuing support. [x]

Of considerable concern to all communities – scientific and non-scientific – are trends that are complicating the counting of the U.S. population. For example, immigrants who live in fear of disclosing information about their families are refusing to respond to surveys in increasing numbers, especially in studies sponsored by government agencies.  Even more concerning are efforts by the current administration to introduce legislation that excludes undocumented immigrants from the next 10-year census of the U.S. population, even though the Constitution currently requires the counting of all residents living in the U.S.  [xi]  Such legislation would have significant political implications since the 10-year census count is used to apportion House seats, determine the number of votes each state gets in the Electoral College for selecting the president, and a key determinant in the flow of trillions of dollars in government funds. [xii]

Are immigrants an enemy of the U.S.?  Of course not.  They come to the U.S. primarily to seek an improved quality of life for their families, not to commit crimes. Historically, immigrants have contributed significantly to the building of the U.S. economy and security in such area as:

·       Defense of our nation in times of war, often earning medals of honor;

·       Tax contributions that have kept the social security system solvent;

·       Accelerated growth of business enterprises that employ many Americans;

·       Elevated production of intellectual property that sustains our competitive advantage in the global marketplace and technological security; and

·       Numerous other contributions that are evident in the arts, science, and medicine.

While the demonizing of undocumented immigrants may have been considered a necessary component for winning the 2024 Presidential election, its continuation is accelerating the harm being experienced by immigrant families in the U.S.   As currently practiced, immigration policies do not represent the best investment in our nation’s future and designed to diminish the presence, dignity and contributions of immigrants who have historically taken a significant role in the building of our nation.  

 

Reference Notes

---

[i] Bier, D.J. (June 20, 2025). 65 Percent of People Taken by ICE Had No Convictions, 93 Percent No Violent Convictions, CATO Blog Institute.  Retrieved at: https://www.cato.org/blog/65-people-taken-ice-had-no-convictions-93-no-violent-convictions

[ii] E. C. (July 5 2025).   Analysis of ICE Raids in 2025: Targeted Locations and Methods of Identifying Undocumented Immigrants, The Immigrants Journal.  Retrieved at:  https://theimmigrantsjournal.com/analysis-of-ice-raids-in-2025-targeted-locations-and-methods-of-identifying-undocumented-immigrants/

[iii]  Ziyao T., Cahn, A., Martinez, G, Mukherjee, S. (June 10, 2025). U.S. public is split on birthright citizenship for people whose parents immigrated illegally,  Retrieved at: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/06/10/us-public-is-split-on-birthright-citizenship-for-people-whose-parents-immigrated-illegally/

[iv]    Pavey, H.  (September 7, 2017).  “Wealthy Russians are flocking to give birth at Trump’s luxury US resorts so their kids can have dual-citizenship,”  The Standard.   Retrieved at: https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/russians-flock-to-give-birth-at-trump-s-properties-in-the-us-so-their-kids-can-have-dualcitizenship-a3628971.html

[v]      Andersen, C. (July 3, 2025).  First immigration detainees arrive at ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ in Florida Everglades, PBS News,  Retrieved at: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/first-immigration-detainees-arrive-at-alligator-alcatraz-in-florida-everglades

[vi]     Banks, W. and Nevitt, M. (June 11, 2025), “The Mounting Crisis of Militarizing Immigration Enforcement.”  Just Security, Retrieved at:  https://www.justsecurity.org/114395/the-mounting-crisis-of-militarizing-immigration-enforcement/

[vii]    Landgrave, M. and Nowrasteh, A. (April 24, 2025).  “Illegal Immigrant Incarceration Rates, 2010–2023: Demographics of Incarcerated Immigrants,” Policy Analysis no. 994, Cato Institute, Washington, DC, Retrieved at:  https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/illegal-   immigrant-incarceration-rates-2010-2023 

[viii]     Noe-Bustamante, L., Im, C., and Hugo Lopez, M. (June 27, 2025).  “About 1 in 4 U.S. adults worry they or someone close to them could be deported.”  Pew Research Center.    Retrieved at: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/06/27/about-1-in-4-us-adults-worry-they-or-someone-close-to-them-could-be-deported/

[ix]  Blitzer, W.   (July 4, 2025).     “Trump Softens Immigration Tone To Avoid Farm Worker Shortage.”   CNN.com,  Retrieved at:  https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/sitroom/date/2025-07-04/segment/03

[x]     Rao, D. (2025). Scientists are the latest 'refugees'.   The Week US,  Retrieved at: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/scientists-are-the-latest-refugees/ar-AA1HVk4i?ocid=BingNewsSerp

[xi]   Weingarten, B.  (June 27, 2025)  ”Who Counts? Trump Poised To Try To Remove Non-citizens From Census Chronicles,”  Retrieved at:  https://chroniclesmagazine.org/web/who-counts-trump-poised-to-try-to-remove-noncitizens-from-census/

[xii]    Ross, C.V.  (June 2023). Uses of Decennial Census Programs Data in Federal Funds Distribution: Fiscal Year 2021, United States Census Bureau. Retrieved at: https://www.census.gov/library/working-papers/2023/dec/census-data-federal-funds.html

Tom Thumb Cancellation at Red Bird Mall Stuns Southern Dallas Community

 

There is little question that recent news about the cancellation of plans for a Tom Thumb store at Red Bird Mall stunned many interested parties that had invested considerable time, energy and finances in recent years to recruit a mainstream supermarket to this community.  The planned Tom Thumb supermarket was set to receive $5.8 million in city tax incentives to open the store next year at the Red Bird Mall area.

The planned Tom Thumb was envisioned as a welcome resource for residents who have long been yearning to see quality grocery stores in the area which would also include a pharmacy.  The planned store was especially appreciated given that Southern Dallas includes half of the 90 food deserts in Dallas County and populated by a growing number of dollar stores (Dept. of Agriculture 2019 Food Atlas).

Red Bird Mall developer, Peter Brodsky, was especially disappointed at this decision:  “We had gotten through the design process — fully designed building, fully designed site plan, had already received a permit — and it was sort of the last possible moment they let us know that they were going to pull out.” (Interview in DMN 12,16-24).

As a compromise, Albertsons Cos. stated that they would provide no-fee delivery to ZIP codes surrounding the previously planned store through nearby Tom Thumb locations.  But one community leader in Southern Dallas responded that “They want our business but do not want us to visit their store – that is very disappointing.”

Specific reasons for cancelling the planned store were not provided by Albertsons Cos. although a spokesperson explained that it followed discussions with the City of Dallas and had conducted a thorough economic evaluation.  Peter Brodsky, however, did not appear satisfied with this explanation: “You got to ask them their exact reasons, but I can only assume that they didn’t have confidence that the store will be successful in the market, even with the city subsidies.”  (DMN 12-16-24).

Indeed, it is possible that other reasons were driving the decision by Albertsons Cos. to cancel the planned store?  Let’s consider the following issues:

·       Diminishing the Competition:  Was the earlier introduction of the Joe V Smart Shop store by H-E-B approximately one mile from the planned Tom Thumb store at Red Bird Mall just a coincidence? Perhaps, but it is also likely that it was a planned move to erode whatever competitive advantage the planned Tom Thumb store would have enjoyed from City of Dallas incentives and significant community support that had grown in recent years. Indeed, the Joe V store could have been located at several other locations throughout Southern Dallas, but the decision to place the store in close proximity to the planned Tom Thumb store was viewed with skepticism by some community members.

·       Absence of Community Involvement:  In a recent study of 70 supermarket interventions in food deserts throughout the U.S., Dr. Catherine Brinkley of UC Davis concluded that community involvement was one of the best predictors of their success.  Yet, there has been no evidence that a trade area study of the Red Bird community has been conducted.  Such a study would have measured the estimated market share for the planned Tom Thumb and Joe V stores well as the estimated food expenditure that could support a 50,000 sq. ft. supermarket. Importantly, such studies are often used to evaluate the store design, products and services that would best fit the expectations of community residents.

·       Use of the Wrong Metrics:  The “thorough economic analysis” that was conducted by Albertsons Cos. may not have included the right metrics in reaching their decision to cancel the planned Tom Thumb store. Past studies have demonstrated that traditional site selection metrics are not as effective for selecting promising communities in lower-income areas (Rincon & Tiwari, 2020). Without an independent evaluation of the economic analysis conducted by Albertsons Cos., one cannot determine if the analysis was sufficient to support their decision.

Moving forward, Albertsons Cos. should support an independent evaluation of their economic analysis as a measure of good faith and to avoid perceptions that other factors were driving their decision making.  Prior to inviting other supermarket providers to invest at Red Bird Mall, a trade area study that includes a survey of community residents should be conducted to determine demand, market share, retail leakage and other key metrics that are critical in site selection studies. Of the various recent announcements of new store openings in North Texas by Kroger, Tom Thumb and H-E-B, most have excluded locations in Southern Dallas – so a new site selection strategy is clearly needed.   

Rincon, E. T. and Tiwari, C. (2020) Demand Metric for Supermarket Site Selection: A Case Study, Papers in Applied Geography, https://doi.org/10.1080/23754931.2020.1712555

Please send comments/feedback to the following email:  edward@rinconassoc.com 

Engaging the Latino Vote in a Close Presidential Election: Avoiding Past Pitfalls

 

Recent polls reveal that the race for president is very close as the November election approaches, so significant efforts will be devoted by both the Harris and Trump campaigns to target voter segments that could tip the scales in their favor.  The Harris campaign recently visited the Texas border to demonstrate its commitment to controlling illegal immigration and just announced that they will initiate a Latino advertising campaign to engage this important voter segment.  However, gaining more Latino voter support is likely to be fruitless if campaign strategists rely on the same tactics used to engage Latino voters in past political campaigns, especially in the current toxic environment that is constantly demonizing Latinos.  Following are some tactical points suggested from past research that the Harris campaign should consider to enhance Latino voter support. 

 Confusion About Latino Voter Segments 

As shown by this figure,  Pew Research projected that there will be 36.2 million Latinos who are eligible to vote in November 2024, representing 14.7 percent of all eligible voters. Native-born Latinos represent 76 percent of these eligible voters, while naturalized U.S. citizens (foreign-born segment) represent 24 percent. Why is this important?  Because past campaigns have often designed their Latino campaigns primarily with Spanish-language messages that are more relevant to foreign-born voters and assumed that existing English-language messages for general audiences would be effective in communicating with native-born Latino voters.  Decades of past research, however, confirms that native-born Latinos primarily consume English-language media and have a fragile grasp of the Spanish language. This long-standing misperception about language usage has resulted in substantially fewer advertising expenditures placed in English-language media that is consumed more frequently by native-born Latino voters.  Clearly, a more balanced media strategy is needed that concentrates on the larger segment of Latino eligible voters who communicate primarily in English.

Messaging:  In recent debates and campaign advertisements, the Harris campaign has devoted minimal attention to challenging the constant demonizing of Latinos with falsehoods, while an immediate challenge was made about the falsehoods related to Haitian immigrants in Springfield Ma. More trust in Kamala Harris would likely result if future Harris campaign ads and public appearances would challenge the constant falsehoods about Latinos, such as:

·       Jobs are being taken away from American workers.  According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, immigrants in large part take jobs that U.S. born American workers do not want due to lower wages or dangerous working conditions. Foreign-born workers, especially the undocumented, are concentrated in jobs that are essential to the economy, such as construction, food, farming and services. Without immigrant labor, the cost of housing, food and other essential services would rise significantly for American consumers.  Instead of taking jobs from American workers, thousands of U.S. jobs are generated each year by the fast-growing immigrant-owned businesses.

·       Illegal immigrants into the U.S. include many criminals that are leading to rising crime rates. The Cato Institute, experts in the study of crime rates and immigration status, concluded in their 2024 study of illegal immigration and homicide rates that native-born Texans had a homicide rate that was 26 percent higher than illegal immigrants. Similar trends in crime rates have been observed in other U.S. communities.

·       An invasion by illegal immigrants at the southern border continues to increase and poses a continuing threat. According to a recent report from the U.S. Custom and Border Protection, border encounters decreased substantially over the past fiscal year from 240,932 in October 2023 to 104,116 in July 2024 – a 77 percent decrease – primarily due to the Biden administration executive actions to shut of access to the U.S. asylum system for migrants who enter illegally.

Perhaps it is time to retire the traditional messaging used in past political campaigns and replace it with more relevant messages that underscore the significant contributions made by Latinos to the U.S. Economists confirm that illegal immigrants, for example, have paid millions into the Social Security and Medicare systems that has helped keep them in a better financial position since undocumented immigrants pay taxes into these systems but are not qualified to receive the benefits.  In states like Texas with a high concentration of immigrants, immigrant spending power in 2014 was $89.6 billion that resulted in $29.1 billion in tax contributions to the state.  In cities like Dallas, Texas where immigrants comprise 23 percent of the population, immigrant households earned $10,7 billion in income of which $1.6 billion were paid to federal taxes and $900.6 million to state and local taxes, according to the Economic Impact Report: New Americans. Lastly, in times of war, immigrants have defended the nation in every major conflict and proven to be an invaluable resource due to their knowledge of different languages and cultures.  

In her recent visit to the Texas border, Kamala Harris focused attention on stronger enforcement of immigration enforcement at the border and placed secondary importance on the process of providing a pathway to legalize immigrants.  However, she also emphasized that America is a land of immigrants – a reminder that immigrants of all backgrounds have a history of helping to build this country. Would reminding Latino voters and non-Latino voters about these significant contributions tip the scales in favor of Kamala Harris?  I believe it would. 

Note:  I welcome your feedback. Please send your comments to edward@rinconassoc.com

Edward T. Rincón, Ph.D.

Please visit our website to learn more about our multicultural research services. www.rinconassoc.com

Mass Deportations: Time for a Re-fresh on Immigration Facts

  

It comes as no surprise that the Republicans for Trump are aggressively amplifying the campaign promise of deporting 15 million illegal immigrants if he is elected President – a strategy that resonates well with Republican voters since it blames illegal immigrants for such hot button issues as rising crime rates, taking jobs from American citizens, and generally destroying the U.S. economy.  Recent polls show that immigration remains a top concern among American voters, suggesting that voters are willing to accept Trump’s allegations about undocumented immigrants as factual.  When vice-presidential candidate JD Vance was asked in a recent interview just how this mass deportation would be implemented, his response was limited to stopping illegal entry at the border as a starting point but did not elaborate any details about the enormous undertaking of deporting millions of families residing in the U.S.  Past history points to three likely outcomes:  (a) setting up concentration camps for undocumented families, similar to the Japanese experience during World War II, (b) separation of families at the Texas border where many children were not returned to their families, or (c) deporting families to countries experiencing considerable violence. The hysteria related to mass deportations may be influencing perceptions of the Trump campaign.

Several recent polls suggest that the tide is turning in favor of Kamala Harris, an unexpected change that may influence the willingness of Trump supporters to embrace the idea of mass deportations. Consider the following:

·        Recent polls of registered voters revealed that Harris has a consistent edge over Trump ranging from 4- 5 percent. Indeed, compared to last July, Harris (60%) has almost doubled her support by Democratic voters compared to Biden (34%), while support for Trump by Republican voters changed by only 3 percent since last July.

·       Support for Harris has also increased among Independent voters whose support since last July has increased by 11 percent compared to just 4 percent for Trump.

·       Importantly, one recent poll of Latino voters by Siena College revealed strong support for Harris at 57 percent with support for Trump lagging far behind at 38 percent – a substantial improvement from previous polls of Latino voters.  The recent endorsement of Harris by the League of Latino United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) could be helpful as well.

·       Trump stated in a recent interview at the National Association of Black Journalists convention that “there’s an invasion of people coming into the country, and the Black population is affected most by that.” The degree to which Black voters believe this assertion is unknown, although it underscores the need for the Harris campaign to publicly challenge this statement.  

·       While national polls between 2016 to 2024 show that Black support for Trump had been steadily increasing, a recent poll of Black male registered voters by HIT Strategies in key states showed that 66 percent planned to vote for Harris while only 17 percent planned to vote for Trump.  Black voters supporting Trump felt that they were left behind by Biden on social issues and policy failures.

·       A more recent poll conducted by YouGov for CBS immediately after the Democratic Convention revealed decidedly higher support among Black voters for Harris (82%) compared to Trump (17%), and increased support among Hispanic voters for Harris (58%) versus Trump (41%). 

·       In an apparent sign of desperation, Trump’s campaign has even created a fake ad using AI showing that Taylor Swift supports Trump – which Taylor Swift quickly denied.

Interestingly, these trends point to a potential window of opportunity for Democrats to give an additional boost to the Harris campaign,  especially in states like Texas, California, New York and others that include large numbers of Latino and Black voters.  Indeed, the additional boost provided by Latino and Black voters could make a substantial difference in a close race.

The extra boost could happen by more clearly defining to voters that, instead of a threat to the U.S. quality of life, immigrants represent a valuable asset.  This extra boost could be accomplished by encouraging journalists to (a) to conduct more thorough fact checks about the falsehoods related to immigrants and (b) reminding voters of the significant contributions that immigrants have made to the U.S. quality of life.

Fact Checking the Falsehoods

News stories often allow the demonizing of immigrants to continue with minimal efforts devoted  to challenge the factual basis for these falsehoods. Coincidentally, Trump is now using border crossings in his rallies to falsely claim credit for the lowest border crossings before he left office. By assertively challenging these falsehoods, audiences may reject or re-consider embracing statements that demonize immigrants.  Following are three falsehoods that should receive immediate attention:

·       Allegation: Border crossings by illegal immigrants continue to increase and bring many criminals and drugs into the U.S.

Fact Check:  According to a recent report from the U.S. Custom and Border Protection (See Figure 1 below), border encounters decreased substantially over the past fiscal year from 240,932 in October 2023 to 104,116 in July 2024 – a 77 percent decrease.  Compared to FY 2023 (dark blue line), this trend reflects a substantial improvement for FY 2024. Credit for this decrease is given to the Biden administration executive actions to shut off access to the U.S. asylum system for migrants who enter illegally and the Mexican government efforts to tighten enforcement at the border.

Figure 1

Source:  U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Encounters  by Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024 (YTD), Accessed on August 17, 2024.

·       Allegation:  Illegal immigrants into the U.S. include many criminals that are leading to rising crime rates.

Fact Check:  The Cato Institute is recognized for its expertise in the study of crime rates and immigration status.  In their 2018 analysis, the investigators concluded that the facts about immigrant crime rates have established over numerous studies that immigrants do not increase local crime rates, are less likely to cause crime and less likely to be incarcerated than their native-born. In their 2024 study of illegal immigration and homicide rates in Texas, investigators concluded that native-born Texans had a higher homicide rate that was 26 percent higher than illegal immigrants. Over the ten years from 2013 to 2022, the homicide conviction rate in Texas for illegal immigrants was 2.2 per 100,000, compared to 3.0 per 100,000 for native-born Americans and 1.2 per 100,000 legal immigrants.   The state of Texas is one of few states that uniquely keeps data on the immigration status of those arrested and convicted of crimes.  The Texas data may or may not generalize to other states.

·       Allegation:   Immigrants are taking jobs away from Americans.

Fact Check:  In a recent analysis in 2024 by Axios.com, the investigators reported that the notion that immigrants take jobs from U.S. workers has been refuted by economists for years. This conclusion also applies to the recent statement by Trump that the invasion by immigrants into the U.S. was mostly affecting the Black population – also a falsehood.

In 2023, foreign-born workers (including legal and undocumented immigrants), comprised 18.6 percent of the U.S. civilian labor force according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Foreign-born workers, especially the undocumented, are concentrated in such jobs that are considered essential to the economy, such as construction, food, farming, and services. Without immigrant labor, the cost of housing, food, and other essential services would rise significantly for American consumers. These jobs tend to pay lower wages, are often dangerous, and offer little to no insurance benefits. Some occupations like construction and farming result in injuries and exposure to toxic chemicals. It comes as no surprise that native-born American workers do not aggressively seek such occupations.

Immigrant Contributions to the U.S. Quality of Life

The contributions made by immigrants, both legal and undocumented, to the quality of life in the U.S. is not a common topic discussed in daily news reports.  Yet, their contributions have been documented in various areas as discussed below.

·       Economic Power:  In their report on Taxes and Spending Power,  The New American Economy reports key indicators of the extent to which immigrants support the U.S. economy.   In 2014, the spending power of the nation’s foreign born was estimated at $926.9 billion while their total tax contributions were $328.2 billion.   Hispanic immigrants provided a total spending power of $300.0 billion with federal tax contributions of $56.4 billion.  Immigrant spending power in Texas was $89.6 billion which represented 17.1 percent of total immigrant spending power. Texas also benefited by $29.1 billion of tax contributions by immigrants. Spending power provides immigrants considerable power to buy goods and services, which strengthens the U.S. economy, provides jobs to American workers and supports businesses.

·       Business Formation:    Immigrants are more likely to start businesses than the U.S. born.  The National Immigration Forum reports that the entrepreneurship rate for immigrants in 2015 was 11.5 percent while it was 9.5 percent for the U.S. born. Immigrant-owned businesses generated $65.5 billion in income in 2024, and 40.2 percent of immigrant firms were listed in the Fortune 500. Immigrant businesses also tend to revive neighborhoods, create jobs and spur further economic development.

·       Social Security and Medicare:  Experts have observed for many years that Illegal immigration has helped to keep Social Security and Medicare in a better financial position. This happens for one clear reason: although illegal immigrants are generally not eligible to collect Social Security and Medicare benefits, many still pay taxes into these two systems. As long as the illegal immigrants remain ineligible for benefits, these taxes function as free contributions to the trust funds.

·       Military Participation:  Since the nation’s founding, immigrants have defended the nation in every major conflict and proven to be an invaluable resource in conflicts requiring knowledge of different languages and cultures.  As of 2022, Military Times reported 731,000 foreign-born veterans in the U.S., representing 4.5 percent of the nation’s 16.2 million veterans.  Moreover, of the 3,400 Medals of Honor awarded since the Civil War, 22 percent have been awarded to immigrants.  

Conclusion

All things considered, immigrants – both legal and undocumented -- continue to be an enormous asset to the quality of life in the U.S., including the economic assets, labor supply for essential services, job creation, defense of our country in global conflicts, business formation, and scientific competitiveness.  By focusing on the relatively few although tragic murders of Americans committed by undocumented immigrants, Republicans have created a significant amount of hysteria that generalizes to both undocumented and legal immigrants to the detriment of voter support for Democratic candidates.  The isolated number of homicides committed by undocumented immigrants distract attention from a history of mass shootings by native-born Americans and evidence confirming a higher homicide rate by native-born Americans than undocumented immigrants. Moreover, the number of border crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border has decreased in the most recent fiscal year by 77 percent, pointing to great progress by the Biden administration in controlling the flow of undocumented immigrants.   Kamala Harris is indeed gaining momentum in the race for president, but the Harris campaign will continue to be threatened by persistent Republican messaging that focuses attention on American murders committed by undocumented immigrants.  Therefore, it is urgent that Democrats diffuse the Republican message about the danger of undocumented immigrants by reminding the public about the many immigrant contributions to the U.S. quality of life and their lower crime profile that reinforces their respect for U.S. laws.

Note:  I welcome your feedback. Please send your comments to edward@rinconassoc.com

Edward T. Rincón, Ph.D.