Wayne Cornelius, a national authority on immigration and director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), maintains that proper execution of the labor laws in the workplace, more than of the immigration laws at the border, is what is required for the United States to develop a truly comprehensive immigration policy,

In his evaluation based on a UCSD study of models of immigration from Mexico – “Controlling Unauthorized Immigration from Mexico: The Failure of 'Prevention through Deterrence' and the Need for Comprehensive Reform” – Cornelius recommends that the United States provide more and better opportunities for legalization and assimilation, including the legalization of the majority of the undocumented workers presently living in the United States, and that it help Mexico develop alternatives to emigration by means of social projects.

The authors concluded in their published report that, “Tens of billions of dollars have been spent on improving the methods of enforcement of immigration laws at the border since 1993, without improving their effectiveness.”

According to the study:

* One of every five immigrants enters the United States at designated border crossing points, which are the preferred means of entry because they mean the least physical danger.

* While a great many people try to cross the border at San Diego, fewer than half of them are caught, with an eventual success rate of 92 to 98 percent for those who make subsequent attempts.

* Three out of five immigrants now depend on the services of a coyote, in spite of the fact that what they charge. In studies carried out in 1995, the average cost was $978. It has doubled and tripled since then. During the period of time covered by the UCSD study, the average cost was $2,100.

Cornelius indicates, however, that contracting the services of a coyote “is a virtual guarantee of success.”

Tens of thousands of coyotes operate in the context of a “decentralized industry,” states Cornelius, with many of them running their businesses on the basis of references and referrals from former clients, from their families and from their friends. Often, they are paid at the successful conclusion of a border crossing. In the final analysis, it is in their best interests to make sure their clients arrive safely in the United States.

Kevin Appleby, director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops - Office of Migration and Refugee Policy, is in agreement with Cornelius' evaluation of the way U.S. immigration law is carried out. He states that the U.S. response to the issue represents “a dark time in the history of immigration.”

Entire immigrant families come in order to avoid being separated, he emphasizes, and points out that the unity of the family should be a consideration in weighing new legislation. “The Church's response to a wall along the border is economic development,” he says.

Tamar Jacoby, an immigration issues analyst, says she is “shocked” by the UCSD study’s conclusion that current methods of law enforcement at the border do not work. She shares the opinion that a more effective enforcement of the laws at the workplace is needed. “A lesson for policy-makers is that realism could help a great deal,” she declares.

The study can be found on line by entering www.immigrationpolicy.org and clicking on “briefing paper.”