Sunday, October 2, 2011

Thai Immigration All Is Local: Forming Policies

A look at policy as a successful  immigrant integration role in the receiving community.  The receiving community is located in Tennessee, USA. In 2006, the TIRRC (Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition) started a pilot program with two communities. The newcomers were from Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan and the local native borne population. The locals were not accustomed to hearing foreign languages or to seeing immigrants in their daily lives. The policy of inclusion rather than isolationism was chosen in Tennessee with many examples across the USA.(Jones-Correa, 2011)

Direct contact between the newcomers and the local native population over 5 years period begin to have results. For example, through the means of billboards on Tennessee highways, to letters to the editor in local papers, to church bulletin advertisements. This leads to a framework model based on the local and national levels such as nonprofit, civic, religious, philanthropic, business, and government entities as well as elected officials.

Strategies suggested include four keys. Number one is encouraging local leadership. Number two is fostering contact between immigrants and the native borne. Number three is building partnerships between state and local government and new residents. Finally, reframing the issues to counter misconceptions about immigrants.

 Policy recommendations are recommended on a multi-level of government and civil society. First, in the absence of immigration reforms, it is essential that the federal government be involved in mitigated immigration. Second, the State and the locale governments should expanded not contract its immigration affairs because it is the only front line for local integration. Third, nongovernmental actors have always been a significant role in providing aid to immigrate community and to the local native borne population. Finally, funders and foundations need to expand their efforts among native populations to provide a more balanced approach.

In conclusion, in the framework, the strategies, and policy recommendations lies a point of balance in the time of budget cutbacks. The time for all actors to stay involved is critical not cutting back. 


Jones-Correa, M.(2011). All Immigration Is Local. Center for American Progress  

Draft 3


  1. There are 5 states with no minimum wage law Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee...

  2. The following with taken from a 2010 blog:
    "Historically, the Democratic Party has proposed increases to the minimum wage, while the Republican Party has been in favor of capping or eliminating the minimum wage.
    According to the 2000 Census, there are more than 10 million minimum-wage workers in the U.S.
    In 2006, nearly half of surveyed economists said the minimum wage should be abolished. Only one-third said it should be increased.
    Washington state has the highest minimum wage, at $8.55, followed by Oregon, at $8.40.
    In January 2011, the minimum wage in San Francisco will be raised to $9.92. San Francisco also has one of the nation’s highest costs of living.
    Five states in the U.S. have no minimum-wage requirement: Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee.
    Working a job at the current federal minimum wage, $7.25, for 40 hours per week, all 52 weeks of the year produces an annual, pre-tax income of $15,080. If about one-third of that income is paid in taxes and benefits, net annual income becomes $10,556.
    In Oklahoma City, the major U.S. metropolitan area with the lowest average housing costs, one year of rent averages $8,676.
    The poverty line for a family of four is an annual income of $22,050."......

  3. South Carolina lowest average housing costs, one year of rent averages $4,620.

  4. Another Reference:

    Arindrajit Dube, T. William Lester, and Michael Reich*


    Abstract—We use policy discontinuities at state borders to identify the
    effects of minimum wages on earnings and employment in restaurants
    and other low-wage sectors. Our approach generalizes the case study
    method by considering all local differences in minimum wage policies
    between 1990 and 2006. We compare all contiguous county-pairs in the
    United States that straddle a state border and find no adverse employment
    effects. We show that traditional approaches that do not account for local
    economic conditions tend to produce spurious negative effects due to spatial
    heterogeneities in employment trends that are unrelated to minimum
    wage policies. Our findings are robust to allowing for long-term effects of
    minimum wage changes.