Thread: Lawmakers Discuss Deporting Foreign Convicts

Lawmakers discuss deporting foreign convicts

Idea could save money but carries security concerns

By Mike Ward
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Updated: 1:34 p.m. Sunday, March 14, 2010

Published: 7:40 p.m. Saturday, March 13, 2010

Years ago, when Texas looked for ways to ease prison crowding, lawmakers had a master stroke: Deport the few thousand foreign citizens who were in Texas prisons most of them from Mexico and free up those bunks for the growing number of Lone Star felons.

More recently, proposals were floated to build or lease prisons in Mexico, or even on a Caribbean island, for the same purpose.

The ideas went nowhere, thanks to a firm sentiment by many Texans that if you break Texas law, you ought to serve your time in Texas. And to concerns that deported criminals are allowed to go free in their home countries.

Now, with the population of foreign citizens in Texas prisons at an all-time high and with a state budget crisis looming in 2011, the idea of deporting some percentage of them — at least the nonviolent offenders — is again making the rounds, but with a new twist.

"It could mean a lot of jobs, economic development, because the federal government will have to find a place to put them before they deport them," said state Sen. Eddie Lucio, a Brownsville Democrat who is championing a two-part plan to empty state prisons of many of the nearly 11,400 foreign nationals by turning them over to U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials for deportation.

He said that ICE would need additional holding facilities for the soon-to-be deported criminals and that federal money might be available to pay for them and the jobs they would they create.

"This could be a win-win situation for Texas," said Lucio, noting that South Texas might benefit from such a program since that's where many federal immigration detention centers already are located.

Federal Homeland Security and ICE officials declined to comment on the proposal.

But other state officials question whether federal funding would be available for the deportations of large numbers of prisoners.

In fact, state officials say, federal reimbursements to cover the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants have steadily decreased during the past decade, and there is no indication that any additional money would be forthcoming.

Other states from Florida to California are considering similar proposals to deport foreign citizens to cut their prison budgets.

In Oklahoma, where a law was passed last year to deport some nonviolent prisoners who are in the United States illegally, officials say it has worked well so far.

"It's turned out to be a win for us," said state Rep. Randy Terrill, a Moore Republican who chairs the House committee that oversees the Oklahoma prison system.

"We're saving taxpayers the cost of incarcerating illegal aliens who never should have been in this country to start with. ... How can that be a problem?"

Even so, some of his counterparts in Texas worry that deported felons would soon slip back into Texas across the Mexican border, which most contend is not secure, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars that have been spent in recent years to make it so.

"It shouldn't be a reward to get out of prison early in Texas just because you're in this country illegally," said state Rep. Jerry Madden, R-Plano, the former chairman of the House Corrections Committee, which explored possible deportations two years ago as a way to save money.

"If you deport them and they come back and commit another crime, nobody wins."

The process of deporting illegal immigrants works like this, according to state and federal officials:

When they are released from a Texas prison — either on parole or at the end of their sentence — they are turned over to federal immigration officers in Huntsville and held in federal detention centers until their deportation can be arranged.

There can be months-long delays if immigrants challenge the deportation orders. Once those legal proceedings conclude, the immigrants are walked across the border, if they are Mexican citizens, officials said.

Non-Mexicans might be accompanied to their home countries by federal agents.

If they were released in Texas on parole, or before they completed their prison sentence, they usually are

not imprisoned once they arrive in their home country — unless they are wanted for previous crimes or unless they commit a new crime, officials said.

For that reason, Texas officials have been reluctant to support deportation as a way to save prison costs.

Even so, supporters say that Texas could be the big winner if the proposal is implemented correctly.

A white paper being circulated by Lucio and others asserts that the state could save perhaps as much as $100 million annually if as many as 5,000 foreigners were removed from prison and deported. The prison system budget is about $3 billion a year, but at a time when prison officials have been asked to look for as much as $300 million in budget cuts, the savings are enticing to some lawmakers.

Last June, state prisons held 11,395 convicts who claimed foreign citizenship, according to a Department of Criminal Justice report.

Of those, 6,727 were incarcerated for violent crimes, 955 for property crimes, 1,667 for drug crimes and 2,046 for "other" crimes including escape, weapons charges, drunken driving and minor sex offenses.

Most — more than 8,500 — were Mexican citizens, according to the report.

Offenders with federal deportation detainers or orders pending against them might have been in the United States illegally or might have been here legally but have been convicted of crimes that make them deportable, said Michelle Lyons, a spokeswoman for the prison system.

Of the total number, 3,770 already had final deportation orders — only 873 were doing time for nonviolent crimes — although they had not finished serving their sentences. Still, they could be deported if Texas decided to release them on parole to federal authorities, officials said.

The chairmen of the Senate and House committees that oversee state prisons say that while nonviolent offenders with deportation orders might be good candidates to send home, violent offenders should stay put to serve their sentences.

"If they've served enough of their sentence, and we're going to send them back home eventually, you could ask yourself why we're wasting money keeping them here — especially the ones who are minimum security, low risk, doing time for nonviolent crimes," said Senate Criminal Justice Committee Chairman John Whitmire, D-Houston.

"We're incarcerating people at a huge cost. Why would we not want to (deport them), as long as we can ensure public safety?"

House Corrections Committee Chairman Jim McReynolds, D-Lufkin, echoes the sentiment — with a caution.

"We just need to make sure they stay deported. This is probably not a surprise: The border still leaks," McReynolds said.

But, he added, "it's something we should definitely look at. We might be able to deport some of them without any problem."

Jerry Massie, a spokesman for the Oklahoma Department of Corrections, said that of the 164 illegal immigrants who have been released since that state's law took effect last June, only four have been caught back inside the United States — two at Arizona border crossings, one at a California crossing and one at the international bridge in Laredo.

"If they get caught back in the United States, they come back to Oklahoma and serve their whole sentence," Terrill said. "From what we can tell, that has proven to be a big deterrent. Why come back into the United States and risk going back to prison when they can stay in Mexico and be free?"

mward@statesman.com; 445-1712

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-pol ... 52470.html

The majority will be back here in 15 mins. -- unless someone thinks to close the border.