German Marshall Fund Immigration and Integration Policy Fellowship

The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) is offering a three to six-month doctoral fellowship in the field of migration and integration at GMF’s headquarters in Washington, DC. The application deadline is February 28, 2013.

The Fellowship is designed to bring doctoral students working on immigration and integration issues to Washington, DC for a stay of three to six months. It aims to expose them to the work of a transatlantic organization and connect them with relevant experts and research resources in Washington, DC. During the program, the Fellow will be based at GMF’s headquarters and will work closely with GMF’s Immigration and Integration team. The Fellowship is unpaid, but the Fellow will be provided with shared office space and support from locally-based staff for independent research and writing activities while in residence. Depending on the experience level and the quality of the work produced, the Fellow will have the opportunity to write and publish short articles and papers, as well as actively participate in GMF events, including moderating or speaking activities. The Fellow may also have an opportunity to provide advice on GMF projects and programming.

Fellows should focus on a topic closely related to one or more of GMF‘s Immigration and Integration team’s research and programming areas:
1. Immigration and integration dynamics and practices at the local level, including welcoming initiatives and practices to foster social cohesion among immigrant and receiving communities;
2. Labor migration policies and the global competition for talent;
3. Diversity and Inclusion policies and the promotion of diverse leadership in sectors such as government, business or media.

Special consideration will be given to applicants who work on these topics in a comparative or transatlantic/international perspective.

GMF strengthens transatlantic cooperation on regional, national, and global challenges and opportunities in the spirit of the Marshall Plan. GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working in the transatlantic sphere, by convening leaders and members of the policy and business communities, by contributing research and analysis on transatlantic topics, and by providing exchange opportunities to foster renewed commitment to the transatlantic relationship.

Qualifications 
1. Applicants should have completed a university degree and currently be working on a PhD in the field of migration and integration, with expertise or research focused on one of the topics listed above.
2. Applicants should have experience in a professional environment (e.g. previous internship or employment).
3. Applicants should possess excellent verbal and written communication skills in English, and should be self-motivated and able to work independently.

For applicants already based in Washington, DC, there is also the option of doing this fellowship part-time.

Application Procedure
There is no formal application form. To apply for this fellowship, please submit the following documents:
• A cover letter describing your main research interests, your interest in the fellowship and what you expect to gain through a research stay in Washington, DC, and how you could contribute to programming at GMF;
• A curriculum vitae;
• A writing sample of 5-10 pages in English.

Please send your application materials via email to Stefanie Jost at sjost@gmfus.org. You will receive an email confirming the receipt of your application after the deadline. All application materials must be received by GMF by the deadline in order to be considered.

UC-wide Immigration Conference 2013

“We asked for workers and families came:” Children, youth and families in migration

Friday, February 22, 2013
9am to 8pm (including dinner and cultural event)
University of California, Los Angeles
(385 Charles E. Young Drive, 1242 Law Building, Los Angeles, California 90095)

This conference draws together UC-wide faculty and students who study children, youth and families in relation to migration issues, broadly defined. Collectively, we want to address such questions as: How do migration experiences shape the experiences of growing up and raising children? How do current immigration policies affect families? How are the children of immigrants faring in educational contexts? What identities are they forming? What are their daily lives and experiences, and aspirations for the future? What policies and practices best support the health and welfare of immigrant children, youth and families? How does the recognition of children’s claims to educational access and to various forms of lawful status (ranging from Deferred Action to U.S. citizenship), based on their ties or their birth in the United States, both reflect and affect fundamental notions of citizenship and belonging?

To RSVP, click here.

For more information, click here or contact Peter Catron at pcatron@ucla.edu.

* Jointly sponsored with UCLA


SCHEDULE (Rooms subject to change):

8:30-9:00 a.m. BREAKFAST AND REGISTRATION

Held in the hallway outside of Room 1347.

9:00-9:15 a.m. WELCOME

ROOM  1347.

Remarks by Marcelo Suarez-Orozco.

9:15-10:45 a.m.  PLENARY SESSION: CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN IMMIGRATION LAW

ROOM  1347.

10:45-11:00 a.m. BREAK

Refreshments provided outside of Room 1347.

11:00-12:30 p.m. PLENARY SESSION: YOUTH, FAMILY, AND IMMIGRANT HEALTH

ROOM 1347.

12:30-1:30 p.m. LUNCH

Boxed lunches are located outside of Room 1347.

1:30-2:30 p.m. POSTER PRESENTATIONS

Poster presentations are located in the hallway outside of Room 1347.

2:30-3:45 p.m. BREAKOUT PANELS, SESSION A

ROOM 1347: IMMIGRANT PARENTS AND EDUCATIONAL POLICY

ROOM 1457: IMMIGRANT RIGHTS AND PUBLIC OPINION

ROOM 1420: HOUSEHOLD AND COMMUNITY DYNAMIC

ROOM 1430: MOBILIZATION AND EXPERIENCE OF BEING UNDOCUMENTED

3:45-4:00 p.m. BREAK

4:00-5:15 p.m. BREAKOUT PANELS, SESSION B

ROOM 1347: GENERATIONAL PATHWAYS

ROOM 1457: IDENTITY AND BELONGING

ROOM 1420: TRANSNATIONALISM AND FAMILIES

ROOM 1430: UNDOCUMENTED TENSIONS

ROOM 1347: EDUCATION OF LATINO IMMIGRANTS

6:00-8:30 p.m. Dinner (with keynote speaker and cultural event) 

Qualcomm CEO Discusses Immigration With Obama (UT San Diego)

BY MIKE FREEDOM   FEBRUARY 6, 2013

UT San Diego

Qualcomm Chief Executive Paul Jacobs has often criticized current immigration law, saying it makes it hard to hire foreign-born engineering graduates when the company recruits at U.S. universities.

On Tuesday, Jacobs got the chance to make that pitch directly to President Barack Obama as one of about 10 business leaders invited to the White House to discuss immigration reform.

Jacobs joined chief executives from Motorola Solutions, Goldman Sachs, Yahoo, Marriott, Alcoa, United/Continental and other firms in the private meeting with the president, who has made immigration reform a priority of his second term.

Jacobs was unavailable Wednesday for an interview. But Qualcomm issued a statement saying the San Diego company supports comprehensive changes to the nation’s immigration laws.

“Highly skilled immigrants are critical to innovation and are important contributors to economic growth in the United States,” said Jacobs. “As a company that employs and hires thousands of engineers, we believe it’s critical that we do everything possible to welcome the most talented inventors to our shores by updating immigration rules that disadvantage U.S. companies.”

Qualcomm’s gripe with current law centers on caps and restrictions on temporary work visas and permanent green cards for foreign workers.

For example, one rule forbids spouses of workers with temporary visas from seeking jobs in the U.S., said Alice Tornquist, Qualcomm’s vice president of public affairs based in Washington, D.C. Caps on the number of green cards issued each year can result in foreign-born graduates of U.S. universities waiting years — sometimes a decade — to be cleared to work here permanently.

Supporters of reform say these hurdles discourage not only foreign-born, highly skilled workers but also noncitizen entrepreneurs from founding companies and creating jobs.

“We don’t know to what extent we’re losing talent, brilliant people, who just decide upon graduation not to pursue employment in the United States,” said Tornquist. “We’re making it impossible.”

A bill recently introduced in the Senate raises caps on annual temporary work visas and exempts certain jobs from the green-card limits in fields such as science, technology, engineering and math — or STEM.

“So a STEM graduate from a U.S. university with an advanced degree — master’s or above — with a job offer in a science, technology, engineering or math field, would get a green card without waiting,” said Tornquist.

Critics of loosening rules for highly skilled immigrants say many U.S. citizens with degrees in science, technology, engineering and math can’t find jobs in those fields, said John Skrentny, a sociology professor and director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at UC San Diego.

“For example, about 15 million Americans have STEM degrees, but only 5 million work in STEM,” he said. “Where do these STEM workers go? It’s not clear.”

U.S. computer programmers have complained that they are replaced by cheaper foreign workers here on temporary work visas, added Skrentny. “Some also argue that employers refuse to train or retrain American workers and prefer to simply import foreigners who have the needed skills,” he wrote.

Lawmakers last tackled comprehensive immigration reform in 2007. Those efforts largely failed. Qualcomm is hoping for a better outcome this time.

“We really look at this opportunity, with comprehensive immigration reform, as the best chance to get the changes that we think are needed,” said Tornquist.

Read the Article »

Veronica Terriquez – The Political Socialization of Youth from Immigrant Families and the Role of Community-Based Organizations

Thursday, January 31
12:30pm-2:00pm
Social Sciences Building 101

Veronica Terriquez (USC) will present, “The Political Socialization of Youth from Immigrant Families and the Role of Community-Based Organizations”.

Abstract: Advancing the literature on immigrant incorporation, youth civic engagement, and voluntary associations, this mixed-methods study examines the political socialization of youth from immigrant families. I contend that the barriers to immigrant parents’ political engagement limit their children’s political participation, unless children gain significant political exposure from community-based organizations (CBOs) or other non-family sources. Drawing on survey data from a representative sample of California’s youth population, my analysis demonstrate strong support for the top-down model of political socialization in which political behaviors, or lack thereof, are transmitted from immigrant parents to their U.S.-raised children. However, this is not the case for my unique survey sample of youth who participated in politically oriented CBOs. My analysis of follow-up in depth interviews with survey respondents indicates that while most youth do not seek to politicize their immigrant parents, CBO youth members actively orient their immigrant parents to U.S. politics. In describing the efforts of CBO youth members to educate their foreign-born parents about politics and encourage their participation, I demonstrate trickle-up effects in the political socialization of immigrant families. I argue that future research on politically oriented civic associations should consider the impact of individual-level organizational membership on family-level patterns of political engagement.

*Jointly sponsored with UCSD Department of Sociology

David FitzGerald and Rafael Alarcón’s migration study published in Mexico and the United States: The Politics of Partnership

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the partnership between Mexico and the United States? What might be done to improve it? Mexico and the United States explores both policy and process, and issues ranging from trade and development to concerns about migration, the environment, and crime.  The book features CCIS Associate Director David FitzGerald and Rafael Alarcón’s chapter, “Migration: Policies and Politics”.

For more information, click here

President Obama’s National Address and Dialogue on Comprehensive Immigration Reform

CCIS Research Associate Tom Wong  attended President Obama’s address on immigration reform in Las Vegas, NV January 29, 2013.  The audience was comprised of the President’s key advisors on immigration policy, as well as several national and regional civil rights and immigrant-serving organizations that have played key roles in moving the immigration reform debate forward. Wong, in line with his current research on the determinants of immigration policy in the U.S., is advising several of these organizations on the political prospects for comprehensive immigration reform in 2013.  After the address, the White House released more details of the President’s proposal to attendees, which can be found here.

 


Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar – The Political Economies of Immigration Law

 

Seminar to be held on Monday, January 28th in ERC 115 at 12:00 pm.

A largely dysfunctional American immigration system is only poorly explained by simple depictions of the political economy of lawmaking in this area, blaming functional economic policy-setting, longstanding public attitudes, explicit presidential discretion, or general gridlock. Instead, the structure of immigration law emerges from intersecting effects of three separate political economies – statutory compromises rooted in the political economy of lawmaking, organizational practices reflecting the political economy of implementation, and public reactions implicating the responses of policy elites and the larger public to each other. Together, these factors help constitute an immigration status quo of continuing legal controversies as well as powerful obstacles to change: (1) Particularly since 1986, American immigration statutes have created a legal arrangement essentially built to fail, giving authorities regulatory responsibilities that were all but impossible to achieve under existing law. (2) Implementation has been characterized by organizational fragmentation, with policy changes involving one agency producing externalities not owned by that agency, alongside limited presidential power to change enforcement or implementation. At the same time, (3) the interplay of unrealistic statutory goals, enforcement patterns, and public attitudes engenders a polarizing implementation dynamic, where agencies’ incapacity to enforce existing law tends to spur polarized responses producing legislation that exacerbates agency difficulties in meeting public expectations, without giving interested parties enough of a reason to support an alternative.

The resulting cycle favors expansion in the provision of border enforcement resources, a development supported or at least tolerated by most political actors yet failing to address the core institutional dysfunction in the system, while locking in most other features of the status quo. Beyond what these developments tell us about immigration law, they also reveal much about (a) how statutory entrenchment in the United States is affected by political cycles capable of eroding the legitimacy of public agencies, and (b) how powerful nation-states control, in limited but nonetheless significant ways, the transnational flows affecting their well-being and security.

Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar works at the intersection of law, public policy, and political science.  A member of the Stanford Law School faculty since 2001, he is currently Professor and Deane F. Johnson Faculty Scholar at Stanford Law School, Professor (by courtesy) of Political Science, and the Co-Director of Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation.  His research and teaching focus on administrative law, executive power, and how organizations implement regulatory responsibilities involving public health and safety, migration, and international security in a changing world.  In July 2010, the President appointed him to the Council of the Administrative Conference of the United States, an independent agency charged with improving the efficiency and fairness of federal regulatory programs.  He also serves on the Department of Education’s National Commission on Educational Equity and Excellence, and the Department of State’s Advisory Sub-Committee on Economic Sanctions.

From early 2009 through the summer of 2010, he served as Special Assistant to the President for Justice and Regulatory Policy at the White House.  In this capacity, he led the Domestic Policy Council’s work on criminal justice and drug policy, public health and food safety, regulatory reform, borders and immigration, civil rights, and rural and agricultural policy.  Among other issues, Cuéllar worked on stricter food safety standards, the FDA’s regulatory science initiative, expanding support for local law enforcement and community-based crime prevention, strengthening border coordination and immigrant integration, and the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review.  Before working at the White House, he co-chaired the Obama-Biden Transition’s Immigration Policy Working Group.  During the second term of the Clinton Administration, he worked at the U.S. Department of the Treasury as Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary for Enforcement, where he focused on countering financial crime, improving border coordination, and enhancing anti-corruption measures.  He is on the Board of Directors of the Constitution Project, a non-profit think-tank that builds bipartisan consensus on significant constitutional issues.  He clerked for Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Barbara Buckinx – Non-Domination Through Citizenship

Monday, January 14
12:00-2:00pm
Social Sciences Building 102
UC San Diego

Non-Domination through Citizenship

Barbara Buckinx, Visiting Scholar, UC San Diego Center on Global Justice; recently of Goethe (Frankfurt), Brown, and Princeton Universities

Scholars such as David Miller rely on civic republican ideas about the normative importance of the state to defend a restrictive citizenship regime. I argue that republicanism instead mandates an inclusive membership policy, and that all non-temporary residents ought to be given access to the status of citizenship and its associated privileges. After all, the republican state can fulfill its function only when its law is non-arbitrary, and this obtains only when all those who are subject to the state’s rule have the necessary means at their disposal to force the state to take their interests into account. Against Iseult Honohan, I argue that a waiting period for citizenship acquisition can also not be justified. Finally, I consider and reject three alternatives to the extension of citizenship to residents: non-citizen voting, legal protections, and cosmopolitan citizenship.

The paper will be posted at http://polisci2.ucsd.edu/ptw/Current_Schedule.htm by 5 PM, Thursday, Jan 10.

For more information, please contact Gerry Mackie