Policy Recommendations for Communities with New Immigrants

Authors:
Karin Bolwahnn, Michelle Chiezah, Rebecca Dennison, Jennifer Dillard, Debra Ehret, Stephanie Haddad, Nicola Johnson, Patricia Kelly Hall, Rachel Leatham, Kara Meade, Margo O'Dell, Jenny Schlukebier, Anna Schmalzbauer, Eva Spranger, Heather Tracey, Daniel Williams

Introduction

Minnesota, like the United States itself, is a land built by immigrants. This is both a fact of history and an important part of the identity of the state and the nation. In recent years, however, the demographics of Minnesota have changed. In place of the Scandinavian immigrants who populated the state early in the century, contemporary immigrants come from Southeast Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Africa. Minnesota receives small numbers of immigrants relative to coastal and border states. In 1999, fewer than five percent of Minnesotans were foreign-born, compared with about a third of Californians. The Minnesota Department of Planning estimates there are 224,000 immigrants residing in the state. Nevertheless, the influx of many new immigrants has brought vitality and challenges to many Minnesota communities. Although the majority of new immigrants reside in urban areas, the availability of jobs in meat processing plants, manufacturing and canneries in rural communities has led some Latino, African and Asian immigrants to settle in towns like Worthington, Mankato, Faribault, Madelia, Sleepy Eye and East Grand Forks. In both rural and urban areas these demographic changes create an urgent need to examine immigration policies and the adequacy and availability of housing, public assistance and language interpretation for new Minnesotans.

Immigration Policies and Public Assistance

In August of 1996, Congress passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA), reforming the welfare and public assistance system. This law had significant provisions for noncitizens. Specifically, PRWORA "barred 'unqualified immigrants' from all 'federal public benefits' and eliminated Social Security Insurance and Food Stamp eligibility for most noncitizens." More importantly, PRWORA required individual counties and public agencies to report to INS any individuals they suspected of being illegal immigrants (Fix and Tumlin, 1997). In Minnesota, agencies administering public assistance benefits are currently exempt from this requirement due to their thorough verification processes.

For one group of immigrant families in particular, the effects of the law are potentially devastating. "Nearly one in ten U.S. families with children are mixed status families, i.e. families in which one or more parents is a noncitizen and one or more children is a citizen." (Fix and Zimmerman, 1999). This is of concern because curbs on noncitizens’ use of public benefits may have the unintended effect of reducing needed benefits for the young.

It is also highly likely that many legal immigrants who are entitled to public assistance will not seek benefits for fear that they or their relatives may be reported and subsequently deported. The reluctance of immigrants to report private information poses a major barrier to data collection for many agencies such as the U.S. Census Bureau.

The Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP) was implemented in response to the federal PRWORA legislation. MFIP is intended to help families "work their way out of poverty by expecting, supporting and rewarding work" (Minnesota Department of Human Services). It provides low-income Minnesota residents with a monthly cash grant and food assistance, as well as child care and medical assistance. In order to qualify for these benefits, participants must meet income guidelines and work requirements, some of which include requiring participants to actively search for work, be working currently or be involved in an approved educational or training program.

Although many noncitizens are eligible for MFIP, a variety of barriers exist that may prevent these families from achieving economic independence. Some immigrants face discrimination either in the job search or in the types of employment that they are offered (Hollister and Wanberg, 1999). Once they are hired, immigrants may also face discrimination due to racism, employers’ concerns regarding their immigration status, or lack of English language skills. Finding appropriate jobs is another challenge. Several immigrants we interviewed had moved from high-status work in their countries of origin to lower-status work in the United States. One typical example is an Ethiopian man who had been a high school teacher in his native country, but has done housekeeping and factory work since coming to the United States.

Child care is another barrier to meaningful employment for many immigrants because of the prohibitive cost and the lack of acceptable care within immigrant communities. One service provider working with Bosnian families stated that couples often have to work opposite schedules in order to care for their children without resorting to child care. Perhaps the most serious impediment to a transition to self-sufficiency is the early elimination of benefits. Medical assistance is provided to MFIP participants while participating in the program, and they are eligible for a transitional year of assistance thereafter. Families who do not qualify for state-funded MinnesotaCare after the transitional year must subsidize their own medical care. The prohibitive cost may lead them to forego preventive health care altogether. Resulting illnesses can affect a parent’s ability to maintain steady employment, or children’s school attendance.

Housing

In the face of the housing crisis, both native and foreign-born residents of Minnesota face the challenge of finding affordable housing,2 but the issue is particularly critical for immigrants and refugees, many of whom work at low-wage jobs while they hone language and technical skills. The Family Housing Fund of Minneapolis-St. Paul estimates that the region has a shortage of 36,000 affordable rental units for families with incomes below $10,000. In addition, most affordable housing is found in the inner cities, although available units are not always safe or convenient to suburban places of employment.

Immigrants may also face barriers when purchasing homes, such as lack of familiarity with the home buying process, financing and use of credit, and discrimination due to poor enforcement of fair housing laws (Urban Coalition and the Roy Wilkins Center for Social Justice, 1999). Unfair treatment can be outright, due to one’s national origin, race, or skin color, or it can be more subversive, such as discrimination related to requirements for credit and rental histories. This discrimination can prevent immigrants from acquiring suitable housing or can limit their choice of neighborhoods. The Legal Aid Society of Minnesota has documented predatory practices whereby landlords and others specifically target immigrants to rent unsafe, neglected housing because immigrants may be unfamiliar with legal rights under the Fair Housing Act, unfamiliar with complaint procedures through HUD, and limited in English speaking ability (Personal communication from James Wilkinson, Legal Aid Society of Minneapolis, March 2000). They may also treat immigrant renters differently and respond less urgently to request for repairs, maintenance, and sanitation.

Language

Discrimination on the basis of national origin has consistently been interpreted by the courts to include ineffective communication between English speakers and persons with limited English proficiency. Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, a federal regulation, states that "no person in the United States shall, on grounds of race, color or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance." (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964). The Minnesota Human Rights Act "prohibits discrimination based upon race, color, creed, national origin, religion, sex, disability, sexual orientation or status in the provision of and access to public services." (Minnesota Human Rights Act).

Although this legislation includes all federally-funded activities and state public services, its applicability to interpretation and translation services is largely unknown and often ignored. Two notable exceptions are health care facilities and the courts, which have made considerable voluntary efforts in the past few years to comply with the legislation. Additionally, the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) has developed a compliance plan as the result of a 1998 mandate from the state legislature. (Laws of Minnesota, 1998).

Policy Recommendations

We identified several overarching themes in this examination of the needs of immigrants and refugees in Minnesota. These include the need for better coordination among agencies and an attempt to provide "one stop shopping" in the provision of services; improved information dissemination to immigrants and to the general public; stronger partnerships between policymakers and members of local communities; and accountability for the quality of services to immigrants and refugees. In addition, we present specific recommendations in each of the four policy areas addressed above.

Immigration Status and Public Assistance

Changes in immigration law and welfare reform in the 1990s have resulted in the unprecedented interweaving of INS and state systems for the provision of health care and other services. In the process, citizens and legal residents of the state who were born outside of the United States have been deprived of their civil rights, lost benefits to which they were entitled and, in some cases, have been deported. In addition, the right to privacy of all working residents of Minnesota is jeopardized by proposed legislation allowing the INS open access to state employment data.

Recommendations:

1. Enact legislation to reinforce the rights of state and local units of government to deny access to confi-dential information without due process of law.
2. Ensure that employees of nongovernmental organizations are aware of legal rights of immigrant clients; create an email LISTSERV so everyone involved with immigrants is aware of legislative and other encroachments on immigrant/citizen rights.
3. Expand education and training programs for staff of local units of government to ensure that they are informed of the rights Minnesota residents have to various services; establish a hotline for the staff of all state and local agencies on how to handle sensitive cases involving documentation or immigration status.

Public Assistance

In order to ensure that noncitizens move from welfare to self-sufficiency, several aspects of MFIP must be reconsidered. Many times participants are put into the workforce before they have a good command of the English language and are therefore employed at positions that do not offer good benefits, advancement opportunities, and a livable wage. The following recommendations are designed to ensure that immigrants’ needs are being met while they strive for full and long-term employment.

1. In situations where English is not a participant’s first language, time limits and employment requirements should be expanded to allow opportunities to learn English, participate in educational programs and learn a skill or trade.
2. Since employment is a prerequisite to receiving MFIP benefits, state and county agencies should sponsor and fund programs which educate employers about hiring noncitizens. These should include diversity awareness training regarding immigration status, cultural and religious practices, and dress.
3. There needs to be an initiative to educate noncitizens and service providers who work with noncitizens about eligibility for health services, and how to access them. This educational plan should include provisions for bilingual financial counselors and translated materials.
4. Whenever possible, participants should be matched with providers from their ethnic communities, or at least providers who are fluent in the participant’s language (Hollister and Wanberg, 1999). When these accommodations are not possible, interpreters should be offered to participants. This is particularly critical for medical services.
5. Partnerships should be developed with mutual assistance organizations and county agencies to train members of immigrant communities to become child care providers, thus filling the need for culturally appropriate care.

Interpreter Services

Language is a key barrier preventing noncitizens from daily communication, not to mention comprehending their civil rights. Policy recommendations designed to protect these rights are as follows:

1. The state should undertake a thorough needs assessment to determine where interpretive services to immigrants are lacking, and where they could be improved. The needs assessment should cover a broad range of sites including schools, day care centers, the criminal justice system, housing and employment agencies, and insurance companies.
2. Legislation that requires interpretive services to be provided in all state- and federally-funded agencies should be enforced. Government agencies, as well as state- and federally-funded organizations should develop an interpretive service plan, similar to that of the Department of Human Services.
3. The state should monitor and enforce compliance with antidiscriminatory legislation across all service areas with the assistance of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights.
4. Monitoring and enforcement should follow the implementation of statewide outreach, training and education programs.
5. Funds should be designated for state agencies to provide interpretive services.

Housing

Legislators should commit to the development and long-term funding of a comprehensive regional housing policy, such as the one proposed by the Citizen’s League, with provisions that specifically address the housing needs of immigrants. (Citizen’s League, 1994). Such a policy could be developed by undertaking the steps described below:

1. Agencies such as the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, Housing and Urban Development, and the Greater MN Housing Fund should conduct a statewide assessment of the housing needs of immigrants and refugees.
2. A statewide task force should be created to conduct an ongoing review of major housing issues and to oversee the development of programs and policies to address them. Smaller regional subgroups could provide a regular exchange of ideas and oversight of housing issues and program development.
3. Increase the number and types of services designed especially for immigrants, such as translated materials on renting, buying homes, antidiscrimination laws, and landlord/tenant rights.
4. Housing agencies need to hire people familiar with the characteristics and needs of various immigrant groups.
5. Decrease barriers to housing, such as requiring refugees to demonstrate a credit history, and by using resettlement agencies, employers, and other providers as cosigners or verification agencies.
6. Encourage flexibility with mortgage lenders, banks, and landlords.
7. Loosen restrictions on family size per rental unit, and encourage rental buildings to give priority for large apartments to immigrants with extended families.
8. Produce a directory that lists housing agencies and buildings that may be suited to the needs of immigrants and refugees.

Conclusion

There are two main forces that draw new immigrants to Minnesota. The first is the acute need for a steady and reliable labor force in an era of low unemployment; the second is a commitment to human rights on the part of charitable organizations in Minnesota who sponsor refugees fleeing persecution. New immigrants have the potential to revitalize many Minnesota communities; however, this potential can only be realized if they are given an opportunity to find housing, learn English and to pursue educational and occupational goals.

References:

Citizen’s League. 1994. Why We Should Build Inclusive Communities: The Case for a Regional Housing Policy in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Final Report of the Committee on Housing Policy and Metropolitan Development. Randy Peterson, Chair. May.

Fix, Michael E. and Karen Tumlin. 1997. "Welfare Reform and the Devolution of Immigrant Policy." (Series A, No. A-15). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. October.

Fix, Michael E. and Wendy Zimmerman. 1999. All Under One Roof: Mixed-Status Families in an Era of Reform. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

Hollister, D., M. Martin and C. Wanberg. 1999. Findings from the Second Phase of the Transition from Welfare to Work in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, University of Minnesota. December 1.

Minnesota Department of Human Services. 2000. Minnesota Department of Human Services . St. Paul. Retrieved January 30, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/us/ecs/program/mfip/mfip.htm#top.

Minnesota Department of Human Services Info. Center. 2000. Health Care Programs. Retrieved April 4, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/hlthcare/asstprog/default.htm.

The Urban Coalition and the Roy Wilkins Center for Human Relations and Social Justice, Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota. 1999. A Dream Deferred: the 50/30 Housing Research Institute Final Report. St. Paul: The Urban Coalition. July.

Wilkinson, James. 2000. Personal Communication, Legal Aid Society of Minneapolis.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000d. et seq:; 45 CFR Part 80.

Minnesota Human Rights Act. MinnStat. § 363.073; 363.03 subd.4.

Laws of Minnesota, 1998, Chapter 407, Article 4, Section 64.

<< return

Produced by Communication and Educational Technology Services, University of Minnesota Extension.

In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this material is available in alternative formats upon request. Please contact your University of Minnesota Extension office or the Extension Store at (800) 876-8636.