Many Asians Shunning Alien Amnesty Plan

While undocumented aliens from Mexico and Central America have been jamming into government centers by the thousands to apply for legalization under the immigration amnesty program, Asians have largely been staying away, according to federal officials.

Before the start of the program on May 2, immigration lawyers and community organizations had unofficially estimated that 20,000 to 30,000 of the 200,000 Chinese immigrants residing in Los Angeles County might qualify for amnesty. But as of last week, fewer than 700 had applied in the entire Western region of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which includes California, Nevada, Arizona, Hawaii and Guam.

About 100,000 Mexicans have already applied in the region, as well as about 15,000 Central Americans.

“I have no explanation whatsoever,” said Lupe Ochoa, chief legalization officer at the INS’s El Monte center, which serves the western San Gabriel Valley where large numbers of immigrants from the Far East have settled in the last decade. “I know there are large communities of Asians here in Monterey Park and Alhambra, but so far the number of applicants has been minimal.”

Only a Few Apply

At the El Monte center, only 40 Chinese--entering the United States from China, Taiwan or Hong Kong--had applied. At the Hollywood center, which serves the Chinatown and Mid-Wilshire areas, only 55 have applied.

The same is true of other Far Eastern nationalities, immigration officials said. For example, only about 100 Korean applicants had appeared at the Hollywood center, which is reasonably near Koreatown, according to John Bowser, chief legalization officer. The entire four-state region has drawn only 403 Korean applicants.

Howard Ezell, INS Western regional commissioner, contended that many Asians still do not understand the amnesty law and that many are demonstrating “cultural resistance” to admitting that they are “illegal.”

“It doesn’t matter if you walked across the border or if you came in with a student visa or a visitor’s visa that has expired (as did most Asian illegal aliens),” he said. “I think we need to stress to the Asian and Pacific Americans that, ‘Hey, you’re just as illegal as the person who walked across the border six years ago.’ ”

Built-In Obstacles

But some immigration lawyers said that is not the case and that the law, as it was passed by Congress last year, presents built-in obstacles for Asians. Specifically, a provision saying that an applicant must be able to prove that he or she has been an illegal resident since before Jan. 1, 1982, disqualifies the vast majority of Asian illegals, lawyers said.

Many applicants of all ethnic groups have had periods of legality during this period, and the INS said that it is developing a standard for what exceptions can be made to the requirement of uninterrupted illegality.

“Unlike the Mexicans, people from Taiwan or Hong Kong are a Pacific Ocean away,” said Monterey Park immigration lawyer Steve W. Chu. “If they want to come to this country, they have to come legally.” Most Asian “illegals” are students or visitors who have overstayed their entry permits, he said.

Ezell said his office plans a stepped-up “marketing” effort to get Asians and Pacific Islanders to apply, including a large-scale orientation session in Koreatown on Aug. 25.

“We’re going to get as many of the Asian-Pacific leadership as we can into a meeting hall and tell them, ‘Look, this is for real,’ ” he said. “Let’s go ahead and admit you’ve been here illegally and get out of the shadows and into the light.”

‘It’s a Puzzle’

Ezell said that other parts of the Western region, including San Francisco, are experiencing the same lack of Asian participation. “It’s a puzzle to me,” he said.

Illegal aliens who are employed have until Sept. 1 to voluntarily submit work authorizations, indicating that they are applying for amnesty, to their employers. After that date, employers can be fined for employing illegals.

Asian immigration lawyers and community groups offer a variety of explanations for the dearth of Asians applying for amnesty, ranging from continuing anxieties about getting involved with INS officials to built-in obstacles to Asian applications in the sweeping 1986 law that created the program.

“I think there are still a lot of people out there scared and worried about their families being split up,” said Stewart Kwoh, executive director of the Asian-Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California in Los Angeles, which is equipped to interview applicants in eight Asian and Pacific languages. So far, 57% of the agency’s amnesty clients have been Latinos, he said.

Kwoh said initial estimates of the numbers of undocumented Asian aliens may have been high.

Estimate Appears High

“Some immigration attorneys were saying that as many as 15% of the Chinese community in greater Los Angeles would qualify,” he said. “That may have been an over-count. Maybe it’s more like 5%.”

There are no updated census figures to indicate the ethnic breakdown of the population in Los Angeles County. But National Planning Data Corp., a research organization, said that 7.4% of the county’s population, or 616,000, is currently other than white, Hispanic or black. Most of those in the “other” category are Asians, the company said. Estimates of the proportion of those who are illegal vary widely.

Community leaders unofficially estimate that the county’s Chinese population is about 200,000. About 29% of the county population, or 2.5 million, is Latino, the research company said.

Chu and others said the strategy most Asians adopt is to maintain legality as long as possible, while applying for entry to the United States under the system of quota preferences, which opens the door for family members of permanent residents and for workers with special skills.

Thus, most of the current “illegals” have gone through interludes of legality, by getting extensions of their visas or, if they were initially tourists, by enrolling as students, Chu said. If they were “legal” for any period after the 1982 cut-off date, they would technically be disqualified, he said.

‘Better Off Illegal’

“Some people are kicking themselves now for extending their legality,” said attorney Howard Hom, a member of the executive board of the Los Angeles County Bar Assn.’s immigration section. “They’re telling us that they would have been better off illegal.”

Guan-Xiong Tang is one of the rare ones. A Shanghai-born “illegal” who has twice been turned down for permanent residency by the INS, Tang is going for amnesty.

“For eight years now, I hardly ever go out,” said the Mandarin-speaking pastry chef from Monterey Park, talking through a translator in Hom’s Mid-Wilshire office. “When I drive, I drive very carefully, because I’m afraid the police might stop me and ask me for my green card.” A fine mist of perspiration appears on Tang’s forehead at the thought.

With a deportation order hanging over Tang, the 3-month-old immigration amnesty program seemed a convenient last resort, said Hom. The 39-year-old chef--who, in the tradition of many Chinese-Americans, has anglicized his name to Jack Tang--has been provably undocumented for the last five and a half years. He qualifies.

“Like most Chinese illegals, he’s been trying to make himself legal while in hiding,” Hom said.

Failure Is an Asset

But the essential component to Tang’s eligibility for amnesty has been, ironically, his singular lack of success in achieving legality during the last eight years, Hom added.

Immigration lobbying groups complain that the requirement of “continuous” illegal residency is arbitrary and irrational. “(Despite its benefits to Tang) it doesn’t seem fair,” Hom said. “The purpose of the law was to bring people in the underground up to the surface. It’s a self-defeating piece of legislation. Congress said that it had to draw the line somewhere, but it seems like an artificial line.”

But Ezell said it is still possible that cases where applicants have gone through periods of legality could be adjudicated in the applicants’ favor. “If anybody has any question about that, they ought to go ahead and file,” he said. “They’ve got nothing to lose and everything to gain.”

Lobbying groups acknowledge that they were not assertive enough on the issue when the law was being drawn up last fall.

‘Little Asian Input’

“To be very blunt, I don’t think anyone was especially aware of the problem,” said Linda Wong, immigration director for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “During the period that Congress was debating the merits of the legislative program, there was very little Asian input.” She said organizations like her own had been more concerned with preserving Asian immigration quotas for legal immigrants, which appeared to be jeopardized by the new legislation.

“All the lobbying was from the Hispanic community,” Hom said. He added that the bill had “caught a lot of people by surprise.”

“Two weeks before it passed, everybody thought it was dead,” Hom said. Last-minute compromises resurrected the bill, which had been under discussion in Congress in various forms for 15 years.