Thread: Study: The U.S. stops about half of illegal border crossings from Mexico

Study: The U.S. stops about half of illegal border crossings from Mexico

By Brad Plumer, Published: May 13, 2013 at 4:00 pm


There’s no question that the United States has poured vast resources into border security over the past few decades. The government has built 650 miles of fence and hired 21,000 Border Patrol personnel. It spent $18 billion on enforcement in 2012 alone.
Nice fence, but is it working? (The Washington Post)

Yet for all those billions of dollars, we still don’t have a great idea of how effective U.S. border security actually is. Many of the Obama administration’s favorite metrics — like the declining number of apprehensions at the border — don’t really tell us all that much.
So here comes a new report from the Council of Foreign Relations asking the key question: “How effective is enforcement?” The authors — Bryan Roberts, Edward Alden and John Whitley — come to a few big conclusions:
— The U.S. government doesn’t provide good data on whether border security is actually working. Government agencies have plenty of stats like how many miles of fence they’re building or how many guards they’ve hired. But they don’t report results and actual outcomes, such as the apprehension rate at the border.
As a result, little is known about the effectiveness of various enforcement measures. For example, some experts have argued that it’s easier to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants than it is to guard the border. Yet, the report notes, “analytical work that attempts to understand the relative effectiveness of workplace enforcement versus border enforcement in increasing behind-the-border deterrence has been limited.”
— The best outside estimate is that the U.S. government now stops about half of all illegal border-crossings from Mexico. The apprehension rate appears to have increased in recent years as a result of stepped-up border security:

“Based on the best currently available evidence,” the report says, “the apprehension rate along the southwest land border between the ports of entry is likely in the range of 40 to 55 percent.” (Note that these estimates depend on how often border-crossers who are caught then try again — this is the “recidivism rate.”)
To put this figure in context: The proposed Senate immigration bill would provide $3 billion for reducing traffic over the Mexican border through more drone surveillance and more patrol officers. If, by the fifth year, the apprehension rate doesn’t reach 90 percent, the bill would provide another $2 billion in security funding and launch a new commission.
— The flow of unauthorized immigrants has decreased in recent years. Part of that is due to better security, but most of it is due to the bad economy: “The best estimate available to date,” the report notes, “is that enforcement increases explain approximately one-third of the recent reduction in the flow of undocumented migrants, and economic factors the remainder.”
— But the incentive for illegal immigration isn’t going to disappear anytime soon. Even though Mexico is getting older and wealthier, illegal immigration will still be a factor for years to come: “While demographic change in Mexico and Central America will reduce the pressure for illegal immigration in the long term, the wage gap that is one of the primary drivers of unauthorized migration has narrowed only slightly.”
The big recommendation in the Council of Foreign Relations report is that Congress and the federal government need to develop much, much better metrics on how well its enforcement policies are working. The authors also urge the Department of Homeland Security to share its border security data with outside researchers.
　
　
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/13/study-the-u-s-stops-about-half-of-illegal-border-crossings-from-mexico/

Added to Homepage:
http://www.alipac.us/content.php?r=1...gs-from-Mexico

May 16, 2013 | 9:00 pm
Byron York
The Washington Examiner

Security along the U.S. border with Mexico is perhaps the key factor in the debate over comprehensive immigration reform. Those who believe the border is mostly secure already are more inclined to support the plan of the bipartisan Gang of Eight in the Senate -- legalization first, followed by enhanced security. Those who believe the border is still far from secure are more likely to oppose the Gang of Eight's approach, insisting that heightened security measures be in place before the nation's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants are legalized.

Now, a new report from the Council on Foreign Relations could have a significant effect on the conversation -- and cast real doubt on whether the government's border security statistics are reliable. If the report is correct, more illegal immigrants are making it past U.S. authorities than officials say. And just as important, the report suggests it is nearly impossible to have an informed debate about border security because the government does not reveal the most basic information about illegal border crossings.

"The Department of Homeland Security releases only a single output number: the total arrests, or apprehensions, made by Border Patrol agents of unauthorized crossers in the vicinity of the border," the authors write. "Such basic questions as the apprehension rate for unauthorized crossers or the estimated number of successful illegal entries cannot be answered simply by counting arrest totals."

No, they can't. To find some of the answers that Homeland Security won't provide, the authors looked to other data -- interviews with people who have tried to cross the border illegally; analysis of people who have been caught attempting to cross multiple times; and what is called "known flow," that is, the actual observations by the Border Patrol of people trying to cross into the United States.

Putting together all the evidence, what they found is that U.S. authorities are catching somewhere between 40 percent and 55 percent of the people who try to cross the border illegally. That's more than in the past, when the Border Patrol had less manpower, but it's still just somewhere around half, or even less.

And nobody is quite sure if that is accurate; 40 to 55 percent of what? Knowing that answer requires knowing the total number of people who have tried to enter the U.S. illegally in any given year, including the ones who successfully evaded Border Patrol. The DHS estimate of that group, the so-called "gotaways," is almost surely too low, and new information from drone-based surveillance suggests more illegal immigrants may be getting through than previously thought.

To that 40 percent to 55 percent who are apprehended, DHS adds another number referred to as "turnbacks." Those are people who try to enter illegally, make some progress, and then retreat back into Mexico. There are estimates that the turnback rate across the whole border is about 23 percent.

Some border experts put those two numbers together -- apprehensions and turnbacks -- and come up with what is called an overall effectiveness rate. If the apprehension rate is, say, 47 percent, and the turnbacks are 23 percent, then that would be a 70 percent effectiveness rate. (Assuming the government knows the total number that tried to get in, which it doesn't.)

DHS has been claiming a pretty high success record lately. "Right now, what is our effectiveness rate ... in high-risk border sectors as defined by the [Gang of Eight] bill?" asked Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., of Border Patrol chief Michael Fisher at a hearing last week. "It's approximately between 80 and 85 percent," Fisher answered.

Privately, some Republican lawmakers scoffed at that number. But the bottom line is that, given the secretiveness of Homeland Security, it's hard to make a really knowledgeable argument one way or the other.

The authors of the Council on Foreign Relations report find it "puzzling" that DHS does not release more data; what is available, they say, is "distressingly sparse." Maybe that's just a bureaucratic oversight, and maybe it's not. For years, DHS has resisted coming up with a clear way to measure border security. Why would they voluntarily produce reams of data about something they don't want to know?

But things might change. On Wednesday, the House Homeland Security Committee unanimously passed a bill that would force DHS to come up with a clear, definite measurement of border security. It's absolutely critical. Until there is such a measurement, the immigration reform debate is taking place in the dark.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/byron-...rticle/2529901

Originally Posted by Jean

May 16, 2013 | 9:00 pm
Byron York
The Washington Examiner

On Wednesday, the House Homeland Security Committee unanimously passed a bill that would force DHS to come up with a clear, definite measurement of border security. It's absolutely critical. Until there is such a measurement, the immigration reform debate is taking place in the dark.

Enforcement will never actually seal the border. What will seal the border is eliminating the jobs lure. No jobs, no illegals.

For a fraction of the cost of enforcement, we could implement Universal E-Verify. That would seal the border. It won't be perfect, no system ever will be. So we would be wise to supplement E-Verify with enforcement. But E-Verify is the single most effective tool for eliminating illegal immigration.

I think 'Bama and Co. want to exempt small businesses from having to use E-Verify. Patriots woud be wise to fight this exemption, because many ilegals work for smaller companies.