Immigrant Poll Debunks Some Myths

In the first comprehensive survey of amnesty applicants, a state agency reported Tuesday that the overwhelming majority of California’s newly legalized immigrants hold jobs, rarely use government assistance, and lack health insurance but claim to be in generally good shape.

“The stereotype is that immigrants come in and try to take advantage of government programs,” said Jose Roberto Juarez, regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “But, in fact, there is tremendous underutilization (of government assistance) by immigrants because often they are fearful of doing anything that would expose them or that would jeopardize their legal status.”

Commissioned by the state Legislature in 1988, the statewide sampling of 5,000 amnesty applicants showed that 70% reported they were employed full time during the month before the survey was conducted in 1989. And most drew wages that put them just above the national poverty level of $230 a week for a family of four.

According to the Health and Welfare Agency survey, the median weekly income for families of “pre-82” applicants--those eligible for amnesty because they entered the United States before 1982--was $400 to $499; the median weekly income for families of “special agricultural workers”--those eligible because they had labored at least 90 days in the fields--was $350 to $399.

The national median weekly income for a family of four is $523, according to the Census Bureau.

The survey found that among the “pre-82” applicants, more than 90% have never collected food stamps; among the agricultural workers, 94% had never done so. The survey’s findings were similar for other government programs.

The state survey, which examined the major health, educational and social service needs of a population that is just emerging from the shadows of illegality, also found that more than half of the amnesty applicants lack health insurance, compared to 37% of the state’s general Latino population and 22% of the total population.

The state survey, which examined the major health, educational and social service needs of a population that is just emerging from the shadows of illegality, also found that more than half of the amnesty applicants lack health insurance, compared to 37% of the state’s general Latino population and 22% of the total population.

But about 90% described themselves as being in “excellent” or “good” health--a claim that can be made by only 78% of the general Latino population.

The survey was conducted between February and July of 1989, and has an error rate of plus or minus 2 percentage points.

State Health and Welfare Secretary Clifford L. Allenby said the survey “tells us that these newly legalized persons are working, are in good health, but have greater needs in areas of health access and education than the general population.”

Some immigrant rights advocates criticized the survey because the sampling included only those enrolled in English-language classes required for some of the amnesty applicants. But other advocates, who work with immigrants from San Francisco to San Diego, hailed the results as the most thorough documentation that amnesty applicants in California are a struggling group that is nevertheless not living off government handouts.

But others viewed the survey, which cost almost $200,000, as a waste of taxpayer money.

“The thing has been studied to death,” said Muriel Watson, a leader of San Diego-based Light Up the Border, a group that has called for stricter enforcement of immigration laws.

Watson said the stiff requirements of the amnesty law have assured that the newly legalized immigrants are a stable and, for the most part, hard-working population. A bigger problem for the country, she said, is continuing illegal immigration, which the state study does not address.

“Legal migration is fine,” Watson said. “I think the whole nation concurs. But illegal immigration is no good for anyone, including immigrants themselves.”

More than half of the 3 million undocumented aliens in the United States who qualified for amnesty under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act live in California, with about 60% of those in the Los Angeles area, 184,000 in Orange County and 90,000 in San Diego County.

The landmark federal legislation provided a period of amnesty from deportation laws to undocumented immigrants who met certain requirements. To receive permanent residency status, they have to complete classes in English, civics and history, or pass a proficiency test.

While enrolled in the amnesty program, applicants cannot receive certain public assistance benefits for five years from the date they are granted temporary legal residence. But the 1989 state survey indicated that even before amnesty, few applicants obtained public aid from half a dozen of the most well-known federal programs.

Of the “pre-82” applicants, more than 90% said they had never sought General Assistance, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Supplemental Security Income or Social Security benefits.

Of those applicants surveyed, 82% of the “pre-82” applicants said they were from Mexico, as were 93% of special agricultural workers. The other applicants came from El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Colombia.

The survey was conducted at 82 agencies throughout the state that offer English-language classes for immigrants. Epstein said his agency decided it would be more practical to go to the schools than to conduct the survey door-to-door or through a random telephone sampling.

“It seems like it automatically skews it,” complained Emily Goldfarb of the San Francisco-based Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights and Services. “Most of these people enrolled are the people who are the best informed, the best prepared and the ones with the best access to information.”

But Goldfarb said the survey will provide concrete information that could help serve immigrants. “It’s just been historically hard to get anybody to care about services for immigrants,” she said. “To that extent a survey is really helpful because it will give legitimacy to those in the field.”