DHS Loses Track of Taxpayer Money for Local Immigration Enforcement

by Gabriela Garcia · 2010-10-24 08:15:00 UTC
Topics:

Section 287 (g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act is the program that opened up the door for bills like Arizona’s “Paper’s Please” SB 1070, and the patchwork of similar bills being proposed in states all over the country. It authorizes Immigration and Customs Enforcement to engage certain state and local law enforcement agencies in federal immigration enforcement activities. In other words, it’s the reason people like “America’s worst sheriff” Joe Arpaio are allowed to run amuck rounding up immigrants for deportation while failing to target actual criminals in their precinct.

And, as with all federal programs, the money to fund the program comes from us, the taxpayers. It is now costing us $68.3 million for 2011, up from $5 million in 2006. So where is all of our money going to justify such a gigantic leap in spending? Nobody knows. No, seriously — ICE says it doesn't know.

The inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security has issued a report stating he is “unable to verify federal money … was spent as Congress intended.” For instance, ICE officials charged with reviewing whether local agencies were complying correctly with the rules and policies of 287 (g), charged $455,649 for travel expenses, or “$6,329 per person.” But “the inspectors general's office said its calculations of airfare, lodging and per diem rates, using costs from the most expensive place to travel to, added up to $2,300 per person.” Hmm, looks like 287 (g) compliance reviews are pretty lavish affairs.

The inspector general’s office requested documents to back up “staffing, payroll, and other expenses” from several program officials who were unable to provide them.

While seriously troubling, this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to criticism of the program. Back in April, the Office of the Inspector General released another report that stated 287 (g) is “poorly managed, ineffectively organized, and arbitrarily implemented from place to place; ignores or actually provides false information to the public; fails to focus on non-citizens who pose a safety threat; gives shoddy training; and lacks oversight and has not terminated those local partners who have clearly violated the terms of the agreement.”

Even the leading research nonprofit of the police, the Police Foundation, has spoken on behalf of law enforcement, urging that “immigration enforcement by local police undermines their core public safety mission, diverts scarce resources, increases their exposure to liability and litigation, and exacerbates fear in communities already distrustful of police.”

It’s time to end a program that has opened the door for people like Sheriff Joe Arpaio to terrorize immigrant communities, inspired misguided laws like SB 1070, and proven ineffective and open to easy abuse by the very government department that oversees it. Tell the Department of Homeland Security and President Obama to end 287 (g) agreements.

Photo Credit: ICE

Gabriela Garcia is a freelance writer who has written for Latina, the Miami New Times, National Geographic Traveler blog, and Matador Network blogs, amongst other publications.
PREVIOUS STORY:
What Part of “Broken System” Don’t You Understand?
NEXT STORY:
UCSF Doctors, Grads, and Patients Speak Out for Immigrant Denied Kidney Transplant

COMMENTS (0)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.