Los Angeles Times
By Mary Ann Toman-Miller
August 21, 2015
Apart
of the growing outcry this summer over cities that limit cooperation
between law enforcement and U.S. immigration officials, Republicans on
Capitol Hill threatened
to cut off funding to bring those municipalities in line.
But
an examination of some of the federal dollars in play shows that among
the largest jurisdictions that receive the funding — including Los
Angeles County, San Francisco
and Cook County, Ill. — the money represents only a tiny fraction of
their law-enforcement budgets, and eliminating it is unlikely to be an
effective cudgel to change their behavior.
Cutting
funding is “only one leg of the stool,” said Jessica Vaughn, director
of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates
for lower immigration
levels.
“Die-hard jurisdictions won’t be swayed by cutting off money,” she said. “They need to be forced to do it.”
The
standoff between Washington and local governments illustrates the
complex effects of the broken immigration system, where cities and
states have eked out ways in recent
years to maintain order and to provide services to the 11 million or so
people living in the U.S. illegally while proposals for more
comprehensive solutions fizzle out on Capitol Hill.
Some
of the funds now at issue are federal grants called State Criminal
Alien Assistance Program reimbursements, which were designed to offset
costs incurred by cities
or counties for incarcerating inmates in the country illegally.
In
its most recent fiscal year, Los Angeles County received $3.4 million
in SCAAP funding, according to the Department of Justice, which
administers the funding along
with the Department of Homeland Security. That’s about one-tenth of 1%
of the county sheriff’s budget of $3.08 billion.
San
Francisco received $167,055 in SCAAP funding, .09% of its sheriff’s
department budget of $176.5 million. And Cook County, Illinois, received
$1.3 million in the funding,
about .29% of its sheriff’s budget of $463 million.
The
state of California received $41 million in SCAAP funding, down from
$86 million a decade ago, though still more than any other state.
The
grants were called into question after the shooting death last month of
32-year-old Kathryn Steinle on a pier in San Francisco’s famed
Embarcadero. The man arrested
in her death had been deported five times and was released from custody
in the spring after local prosecutors in San Francisco decided not to
pursue a decades-old bench warrant in a marijuana case.
The
law in San Francisco, a so-called sanctuary city, prohibits municipal
employees from asking about immigration status. Several localities
adopted the stance to encourage
immigrants to cooperate with government officials on a variety of
issues without the threat of being turned over to immigration officials.
But U.S. lawmakers point to the inconsistency of cities receiving
federal funding while not reporting people in the U.S.
illegally.
Steinle’s
death put pressure on Congress to pass legislation to require sanctuary
cities to comply with federal deportation efforts, which lawmakers have
been attempting
for years. Some cities and towns have passed ordinances that instead
are aimed at protecting immigrants.
“The
tragic murder of Steinle has elevated the importance of the issue to
many folks who didn’t think about how you can have a [local] government
that refuses to abide
by federal mandates,” said Julie Myers Wood, former director of U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
“Chances are better now than they have been,” Wood said.
Legislation
sponsored by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine), which passed the House,
would cut off SCAAP funds to localities that do not fully cooperate with
immigration officials,
The bill also would cut money from two other programs, the Community
Oriented Policing Services Program, which goes toward hiring and
training law enforcement officers, and Justice Assistance Grants,
funding that goes to an array of programs.
The
city of Los Angeles received $2.1 million in JAG funding. Chicago
received $2.6 million in JAG funding. Among Los Angeles, L.A. County,
San Francisco and Cook County,
none receives COP hiring grants.
“This legislation is about one thing — and that’s accountability,” Hunter said when the bill passed his chamber.
Joe
Kasper, Hunter’s chief of staff, defended the legislation as an
effective tool to get cities to comply with immigration law and noted
that it gained pushback from
immigration advocates as well as sanctuary cities.
“This
is money that they want,” Kasper said. “This is money that they need.
Otherwise, they wouldn’t be asking for it year in and year out. Anybody
who says they would
happily bypass whatever amount in annual funding, that is money that’s
not going to city operations. They’re going to feel the pinch, and
that’s the point here.”
Kasper noted that the bill was meant to warn localities to stop disregarding federal law.
“If you want to continue subverting the law, go ahead, but don’t expect money from us,” Kasper said.
Wood also pointed to the symbolic nature of cutting off SCAAP funding and agreed that it was not a complete fix.
“Focusing
on the SCAAP funding is a reasonable first step,” Wood said, “but …
certainly that can’t be enough.”A Senate bill co-sponsored by Sen. Jeff
Sessions (R-Ala.),
would require states to comply with federal law enforcement, prevent
sanctuary cities from receiving law enforcement or Homeland Security
grants and punish those who attempt to reenter the U.S. illegally after
deportation with a minimum of five years in prison.
ICE’s
policy is not to comment on pending legislation, but the agency pointed
to its recent initiative to work more closely with state and local law
enforcement as part
of its strategy on deportations.
Republican
presidential candidates have joined the chorus of conservative voices
urging Congress to impose penalties on sanctuary cities. Sen. Ted Cruz
(R-Texas) advocated
cutting off federal funds to noncompliant cities. Former Florida Gov.
Jeb Bush went further at the GOP presidential debate this month, saying,
“We need to eliminate sanctuary cities.”
Immigrants’ rights groups oppose both bills.
Chris
Newman, the legal director for the National Day Laborer Organizing
Network, dismissed the discussion in Washington as “political saber
rattling,” noting that “some
of these proposals are riddled with irony, given they’re threatening to
take away funding that usually has been used to incentivize
compliance.”
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment