The current approach to handling undocumented migrants often involves lengthy, costly deportation processes that strain national resources. This policy proposal introduces a financial incentive for voluntary departure, arguing that it’s more cost-effective to provide a one-time payment for migrants to leave than to undertake mass deportations.
II. Policy Objectives
Cost Reduction: Significantly lower the financial burden on the government by reducing the need for mass deportations, which involve law enforcement, legal proceedings, and transport costs.
Humanitarian Consideration: Offer a dignified option for migrants to return home or move to another country legally, minimizing the stress and risks associated with deportation.
Public Perception and Integration: Alleviate public concerns by providing a clear mechanism for reducing undocumented populations, potentially fostering better community integration for those who remain.
III. Key Proposals
A. Voluntary Departure Incentive:
Payment: Offer a one-time cash payment of $1,000 to each undocumented migrant who volunteers to leave the country within a specified timeframe.
Eligibility: The incentive would be available to migrants who can prove identity and willingness to leave without reentry for a significant period (e.g., 10 years).
B. Implementation:
Application Process: Establish centers or online platforms where migrants can apply for the incentive, providing necessary documentation and agreement to terms of non-return.
Verification: Use biometric data to ensure individuals do not reapply or return prematurely.
C. Exit Strategy:
Travel Assistance: Provide basic travel assistance or discounts with airlines and other travel providers, potentially reducing the overall cost for migrants.
Reintegration Support: Collaborate with migrants’ home countries to offer reintegration programs, funded partially by a portion of the payment if agreed upon.
D. Funding and Cost Analysis:
Budgeting: Allocate funds specifically for this program, potentially reallocating from existing deportation budgets or through new appropriations.
Cost Comparison: Studies would need to show that the cost of $1,000 per migrant is less than the combined costs of detention, legal fees, and deportation logistics for each individual.
IV. Rationale for Cost-Effectiveness
Deportation Costs: The average cost of deporting one individual can exceed $10,000 when factoring in apprehension, detention, legal processing, and transport.
Immediate Savings: Immediate financial savings occur by avoiding the judicial and enforcement processes required for deportation.
Long-term Benefits: Reduced strain on legal systems, law enforcement, and social services in the long term.
V. Challenges and Considerations
Moral and Ethical Concerns: The policy must address criticisms regarding incentivizing departure which might be seen as paying people to leave their lives behind.
Potential for Return: Measures must be in place to prevent or manage reentry attempts, which could undermine the program’s effectiveness.
International Relations: Coordination with countries of origin to ensure migrants are received and reintegrated, avoiding potential diplomatic issues.
VI. Conclusion
This policy leverages economic incentives to manage migration more humanely and efficiently. By offering a financial incentive for voluntary departure, the government not only potentially saves on the high costs associated with deportation but also provides a compassionate resolution for migrants who wish to leave. This approach could set a precedent for migrant management that balances national interests with humanitarian considerations.
Addendum to Voluntary Departure Incentive Policy Proposal
VII. Enhanced Security and Accountability Measures
A. Pre-Departure Screening:
Criminal Background Check: Before any payment or departure assistance is provided, each applicant must undergo a thorough criminal background check. This process will ensure that individuals with serious criminal offenses are not incentivized to leave without facing due legal processes in the host country.
Fingerprinting and Face Scanning: All applicants will be fingerprinted and undergo facial recognition scans. This biometric data will be used for identity verification and to prevent individuals from reapplying under different identities.
Identity Verification: Applicants must provide verifiable identity documents. In cases where such documents are unavailable, alternative methods like DNA testing or witness testimonies from community or consular officials could be considered.
B. Legal Accountability:
Pending Legal Cases: Migrants with ongoing legal proceedings, particularly for serious offenses, must complete these processes before being eligible for the departure incentive. This ensures that justice is served before voluntary departure.
Future Reentry Restrictions: Those who voluntarily depart under this program will be subject to a ban on reentry for the agreed-upon period (e.g., 10 years). Violation of this condition could lead to immediate deportation and potentially longer bans or legal consequences upon return.
C. Implementation of Biometric Exit System:
Exit Points Monitoring: Enhanced monitoring at all exit points (airports, ports, etc.) using the collected biometric data to ensure that those who receive the incentive are indeed leaving the country. This system would also prevent unauthorized reentry.
International Data Sharing: With consent from migrants, share their biometric data with countries they are returning to, to facilitate reintegration and monitor against re-migration back to the host country.
D. Post-Departure Monitoring:
Reintegration Follow-Up: Establish mechanisms to track reintegration outcomes in collaboration with sending countries. This could include periodic check-ins or support from local NGOs to ensure the migrant has not faced undue hardship due to the departure.
Return Penalty: Clearly outline the penalties for unauthorized return, including forfeiture of any future eligibility for similar programs, immediate detention, and potential criminal charges for visa or immigration fraud.
E. Ethical and Privacy Considerations:
Data Protection: Ensure all biometric and personal data collected are handled under stringent data protection laws, with clear consent processes for data sharing with other countries.
Human Rights Compliance: The policy must adhere to international human rights standards, ensuring that the incentive is not used coercively but as a voluntary option with full information disclosure.
F. Collaboration with Law Enforcement and International Bodies:
Inter-Agency Coordination: Work closely with local and international law enforcement to share information regarding criminal backgrounds and compliance with the terms of the departure.
Diplomatic Agreements: Secure agreements with countries of origin to manage the returnees and to prevent them from immediately reapplying for entry into the host country.
Conclusion:
This addendum aims to enhance the original policy proposal by integrating robust security measures that ensure legal accountability and national security. By incorporating these elements, the policy not only offers a financial incentive but also ensures that migrants who have committed serious crimes face appropriate legal consequences before departure. This approach balances humanitarian aid with legal and security imperatives, potentially making the voluntary departure program more acceptable to the public and more effective in managing undocumented migration.
I really think the easiest way to create voluntary self-deportation, is turn OFF the money. No more free phones, turn them off instantly and kill the IMEI numbers.
Turn off the free housing, reduced housing, turn off the social security payments. Turn off citizenship when a person has violated the law to be in the US for the birth (5th amendment issue there, self incrimination) Turn off the free EBT and welfare etc, turn off the freebees, and they will leave.
I know a lot of undocumented migrants. Most desire to leave voluntarily. The American dream turned out to be way too expensive, they end up sending very little money home. Most are heartbroken missing their families and children. They have no idea how to leave. We need to make a clear path to vacating the country that is safe and respectful. And yes I agree, turning the money spigot off is a crucial first step.
ABSOLUTELY NOT If we cut off the visa/ebt cards, cell phones and payment to the shelters, they will self deport. The American people should not have to pay another cent for the scheme of this lawless administration and definitely not to people who actively took advantage of these treasonous acts. They knew they were breaking our laws. I want every single one of them out of our country.
Projections? We turn off the money, and it costs us money? You can’t have it both ways, if you want a solution, REMOVE the incentives for them to be here.
Look at what you wrote, It will cost us billions to ship them out, and cost us billions to keep them. I am of course paraphrasing. Simplifying. There is no way on God’s green earth it will cost us 88K per head to deport them. IF that is a projection, some one in our government or a contractor is making bank. It is a falliacy.
If you compare money to just straight up deport to money given to the people who shouldn’t be here in the first place, I’m happy to spend a extra if it doesn’t result in the people who shouldn’t be here being rewarded for breaking the law.
Even assuming that 20 percent of the undocumented population would “self-deport” under a yearslong mass-deportation regime, we estimate the ultimate cost of such a longer operation would average out to $88 billion annually, for a total cost of $967.9 billion over the course of more than a decade. This is a much higher sum than the one-time estimate, given the long-term costs of establishing and maintaining detention facilities and temporary camps to eventually be able to detain one million people at a time—costs that could not be modeled in a short-term analysis. This would require the United States to build and maintain 24 times more ICE detention capacity than currently exists. The government would also be required to establish and maintain over 1,000 new immigration courtrooms to process people at such a rate.
Faster, cheaper, and probably safer to offer an incentive for them to leave.
We finger print them and tell them they’ll see 5 years in prison if they come back illegally (erroneously spending more public money on illegal immigrants.)
Given the source, I suspect that information is more propaganda than fact.
Even a brief glance at their website tells me they have a bias towards promoting continued immigration, which would give them every reason to give ‘bad news’ designed to deter people from supporting mass deportation.
A family of four put up in a nyc five star hotel recieved $1400 monthly for food expense not including a weekly stipend for spending on other things if they truly wanted to leave they would of used this debit card to buy plane tickets . They broke the law they got free housing free food free spending money no. They get put on a ship or plane or coach and get deported asap it is the quickest and economical way. As for human rights it didn’t bother them coming in the way they did so a free flight cruise or road trip is not against their right as a criminal