
Mass deportations could cost California in these surprising ways
The study, conducted by researchers at the San Francisco think tank Bay Area Council Economic Institute and UC Merced, projected that mass deportations of California's almost 2.3 million undocumented immigrants could cost the state's economy $275 billion through a loss of labor, economic output, small business job creation and consumer spending among other impacts.
The Trump administration says it wants to deport an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the United States to secure borders against immigrants who have committed crimes and because unauthorized immigrants are a drain on public resources, although people in the country illegally are generally ineligible for federal benefits.
Still, Trump initially struggled to get his agenda off the ground, with the number of deportations relatively flat before beginning to climb in March through May, partly because fewer people were nabbed at the border. Immigration arrests and detentions have spiked from January to May, however.
Anti-immigration advocates have argued that a large supply of undocumented labor depresses wages for some American workers, although there is substantial disagreement about the extent to which that's true. Supporters of immigration argue that undocumented laborers tend to take jobs Americans don't want, especially seasonal farmwork.
The report does not answer the question of whether undocumented immigrants cost the country more than they contribute to it. But it found that undocumented immigrants in California are more likely to be working age and employed than native-born residents, with an estimated 72% working compared to 67% for U.S.-born residents.
About 1.5 million undocumented immigrants work in California, constituting 8% of the state's workforce, the study estimated.
There is no official count of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. As such, researchers, including in this study, use what's called the 'residual method' to estimate it. That involves subtracting the estimated legally present foreign-born population in the U.S. from the total foreign-born population counted by the U.S. Census Bureau to get an estimated unauthorized population.
Used by the Department of Homeland Security for its official unauthorized population statistics, as well as research organizations Pew Research Center and the Migration Policy Institute, the method is generally accepted as the best way to estimate these populations.
The Bay Area Council Economic Institute is the research arm of the Bay Area Council, an advocacy organization for businesses across the Bay Area. Dennis Feehan, a UC Berkeley demographics professor and quantitative social science methodology expert, reviewed the report's methodology and said the methods used seemed reasonable and typical of this kind of work, although he said it is challenging to estimate the size of the undocumented population.
The researchers inferred that someone was likely present legally if they met certain criteria such as being born abroad to American parents, being employed in military or government positions, receiving government assistance such as food stamps or working in some jobs requiring professional licenses, such as engineers or nurses, explained the Institute's research director and report co-author Abby Raisz.
The undocumented immigrant population estimate includes both immigrants present without any kind of legal authorization and those with temporary legal protections that could be revoked, such as beneficiaries of the Obama-era program Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and Temporary Protected Status, which is given to nationals of certain countries.
The researchers measured economic impact in three main ways: First, the direct impact through wages that undocumented workers earn and goods and services they produce. Second, indirect impact such as when employers purchase materials used by undocumented labor. Third, induced impact through consumer spending.
Researchers said undocumented workers generate 5% of the state's overall economic activity through their labor, a number that rises to 9% after factoring in ripple effects of their spending and labor.
'We have been reliant on immigration as a source of population growth and driver of labor force growth for many years,' Raisz said. The report found that California would have lost 85,000 people last year if not for immigration. The state instead gained about 40,000 people.
'One thing I want to drive home is how embedded folks are in the state and communities,' Raisz said, pointing to the report finding that almost half of undocumented immigrants in California have been in the U.S. for more than 20 years.
The study found that almost 11% of all small businesses are owned by undocumented immigrants.
Undocumented immigrants also pay an estimated $10.6 billion in state and local taxes annually and almost $13 billion in federal taxes, the report stated, despite being excluded from most federal benefits.
The economic impact of deportations won't be equally felt. It'll be most acute in regions with a greater share of undocumented immigrants — including the Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, Inland Empire and Los Angeles — and in industries reliant on undocumented workers including housekeeping, agriculture, construction, food service, warehousing and manufacturing.
'Those are pretty staggering numbers,' Raisz said. 'If we lose this workforce, we're not harvesting crops, we're not building homes. These are things we need to survive as an economy and a society.'
Maria-Elena De Trinidad Young, an assistant professor of public health at UC Merced who co-wrote the report, said that the economic costs of mass deportation don't just come from the removal of individuals from the U.S. It also comes from absenteeism from schools and work and the loss in productivity due to fear after immigration raids on workplaces, she said.
That same chilling effect can apply to people going out to eat or heading downtown, Young said, thus reducing spending and economic activity.
'The term mass deportation leads people to think we're going to see one big workplace raid,' she said. But, she said, 'these economic hits would be the cumulative effect of lots of small enforcement actions… Overall, we stand to lose a lot because of increased enforcement even if we don't see it immediately happening in our backyard right now.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
7 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
School vouchers: an issue that unites and divides
Advertisement The issue of school vouchers is primarily one of wealthy people who want the government to bear the cost for their private school tuition vs. most Americans, who know that this policy choice is only going to worsen the education they depend on. This oligarchic reality is true in every state, regardless of which party is in charge of that state. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Ellery Klein Medford GOP's nod to the private market would undermine our sense of community Nothing binds a community together more than public schools. In our increasingly divided country this institution remains essential. Countless families with children know the experience of school involvement leading to a familiarity with neighbors and the community. Parents' interest in ensuring the best for their children prompts their participation in school affairs and municipal government. Advertisement Raising a family encourages all of us to care about what is going on where we live. In once again promoting the private market approach of school vouchers, Republicans undermine our public voice and sense of community. They wish for a diminished public sphere replaced by the marketplace. Expanding the use of publicly funded vouchers to support private elementary and secondary education would not only seriously harm our public schools. It would also further widen our national divisions. Perry Cottrelle Malden My taxes shouldn't go toward promoting another parent's values Jim Stergios, executive director of Pioneer Institute, argues for using public funds for private education ( Stergios cites Kendra Espinoza, the lead plaintiff in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue and a single mother, who explained in a 2020 Reuters interview, 'At the public school, there's a lot of disrespect and not enough of those values that I wanted them to learn.' I'm a childless atheist who eagerly supports public schools. Public secular education serves me by giving my fellow citizens the intellectual tools to meaningfully participate in our democracy. It's not my responsibility to promote parents' values. I don't want to contribute to parochial schools that promote parochial values or viewpoints. Citizens who are antiabortion don't want a dime of their tax money to support abortion, even indirectly. I feel the same way about spreading religious myths of any stripe. Parents, pass on your values as you see fit, but don't insist I have to pay for it. Advertisement Jim Mesthene Waltham


Indianapolis Star
21 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
This isn't the first time Trump's been parodied on 'South Park'
Whether you're a long-time "South Park" fan or just have heard of the show in passing, you've probably heard about that episode by now. The Season 27 premiere of "South Park" started off with a fiery take on President Donald Trump's widespread attacks on media. The episode, which aired on Wednesday, July 23, shows a character with Trump's face on a cartoon body crawling into bed, naked, with Satan. The episode referenced Paramount's $16 million settlement with the president, Trump's claims that he'll receive $20 million worth of ads on the network and the cancellation of CBS' "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert." In response to the episode, the White House told USA TODAY on Thursday, July 24, that the scene was a "desperate attempt for attention," calling the series a "fourth-rate" show. During a panel about the show at San Diego Comic-Con on Thursday evening, July 24, "South Park" creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone sarcastically said they were "terribly sorry" for the episode. Though Trump himself is not often depicted directly in the series, like the recent episode, Parker and Stone have used the popular character Mr. Garrison to represent the president through several seasons. In the series' 20th season, Mr. Garrison, who previously was an elementary school teacher, wins the 2016 U.S. presidential election against Hillary Clinton. Becoming President Garrison, the character continues to serve as a parody for Trump until 2020. President Garrison takes on Trump's swooped, blonde hair, sends out fiery social media posts and is obsessed with hosting Make America Great Again rallies. Here's a look at some of the key moments the president has been featured, or parodied, in "South Park." White House, 'South Park' trade barbs: What to know about the feud "Where My Country Gone" highlights the U.S.-Mexico border wall that Trump wished to build long before he took office in 2017. The episode aired in September 2015, ahead of the 2016 presidential election. In the episode, Mr. Garrison (not yet President Garrison) begins to promote the idea of building a wall along the U.S.-Canada border to eliminate the number of illegal Canadian immigrants entering the country. Can 'South Park' take on Trump 2.0? They're walking a tightrope In "Oh, Jeez," Mr. Garrison is elected as president in the 2016 election. The character, renamed to President Garrison, continues to serve as a parody of Trump in the series until Season 24, when Trump lost the 2020 election. The episode aired on Nov. 9, 2016, the day after the election. In the next episode, "Members Only," President Garrison begins his duties. He gets a Trump-style toupee, tours the Pentagon, is given a book of "military secrets" and gets in a heated phone call with Boris Johnson, the former prime minister of the United Kingdom. "Put It Down" highlights the United States' relationship with North Korea and references Trump's presence on social media. In the episode, which aired in September 2017, President Garrison posts aggressive tweets about North Korea, specifically about a nuclear missile fired by the country, which causes car accidents by drivers who are distracted by the posts. "Doubling Down," references the decreasing popularity of Trump during his first presidential administration. The episode aired in November 2017. During the episode, President Garrison insults a world leader on the telephone in the White House while his advisers discuss low approval ratings. "Splatty Tomato," again, parodies Trump's approval ratings following the 2016 election. The episode aired in December 2017. Throughout the episode, President Garrison pops up, scaring characters and asking them about his approval ratings. The characters compare Garrison sneak attacks to characters in "Stranger Things" and "IT." At one point, the character Tweek is riding his bicycle around town when he sees a collection of balloons that read, "Make America Great Again." The balloons then pop, revealing President Garrison, who asks Tweek about his ratings. "The Pandemic Special" was the premiere of Season 24. Airing in September 2020, the episodes satirize the United States' handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and civil unrest amid the Black Lives Matter movement. President Garrison makes minor appearances in the episodes, notably using a flamethrower to encourage citizens to vote in the 2020 presidential election. "Spring Break" parodies the insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021. In the episode, Mr. Garrison, who freshly lost the 2020 presidential election, goes on a trip with his boyfriend to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The episode aired in March 2023. During the trip, Mr. Garrison starts to slink away to Make America Great Again rallies, despite his boyfriend's pleas not to. The episode ends with Mr. Garrison leading a chant that results in his supporters rushing the U.S. Capitol. Old and new episodes of "South Park" are now available for streaming on Paramount+ with a paid subscription. A Paramount+ Essential subscription is $7.99 a month with ads, and a Paramount+ Premium subscription is $12.99 a month without ads. Contributing: Brian Truitt and Brendan Morrow, USA TODAY


USA Today
37 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump's golf trip to Scotland reopens old wounds for some of his neighbors
BALMEDIE, Scotland − Long before he was the 45th and the 47th president, on a wild and windswept stretch of beach in northeast Scotland, Donald Trump the businessman, was accused of being a bad neighbor. "This place will never, ever belong to Trump," Michael Forbes, 73, a retired quarry worker and salmon fisherman, said this week as he took a break from fixing a roof on his farm near Aberdeen. The land he owns is surrounded, though disguised in places by trees and hedges, by a golf resort owned by Trump's family business in Scotland, Trump International Scotland. For nearly 20 years, Forbes and several other families who live in Balmedie have resisted what they describe as bullying efforts by Trump to buy their land. (He has denied the allegations.) They and others also say he's failed to deliver on his promises to bring thousands of jobs to the area. Those old wounds are being reopened as Trump returns to Scotland for a four-day visit beginning July 25. It's the country where his mother was born. He appears to have great affection for it. Trump is visiting his golf resorts at Turnberry, on the west coast about 50 miles from Glasgow, and at Balmedie, where Forbes' 23 acres of jumbled, tractor-strewn land, which he shares with roaming chickens and three Highland cows, abut Trump's glossy and manicured golf resort. On July 28, Trump will briefly meet in Balmedie with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to "refine" a recent U.S.-U.K. trade deal, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Golf, a little diplomacy: Trump heads to Scotland In Scotland, where estimates from the National Library of Scotland suggest that as many as 34 out of the 45 American presidents have Scottish ancestry, opinions hew toward the he's-ill-suited-for-the-job, according to surveys. "Trump? He just doesn't know how to treat people," said Forbes, who refuses to sell. What Trump's teed up in Scotland Part of the Balmedie community's grievances relate to Trump's failure to deliver on his promises. According to planning documents, public accounts and his own statements, Trump promised, beginning in 2006, to inject $1.5 billion into his golf project six miles north of Aberdeen. He has spent about $120 million. Approval for the development, he vowed, came with more than 1,000 permanent jobs and 5,000 construction gigs attached. Instead, there were 84, meaning fewer than the 100 jobs that already existed when the land he bought was a shooting range. Instead of a 450-room luxury hotel and hundreds of homes that Trump pledged to build for the broader community, there is a 19-room boutique hotel and a small clubhouse with a restaurant and shop that sells Trump-branded whisky, leather hip flasks and golf paraphernalia. Financial filings show that his course on the Menie Estate in Balmedie lost $1.9 million in 2023 − its 11th consecutive financial loss since he acquired the 1,400-acre grounds in 2006. Residents who live and work near the course say that most days, even in the height of summer, the fairway appears to be less than half full. Representatives for Trump International say the plan all along has been to gradually phase in the development at Balmedie and that it is not realistic or fair to expect everything to be built overnight. There's also support for Trump from some residents who live nearby, and in the wider Aberdeen business community. "There used to be nothing but dunes here," said one Balmedie resident who lives in the shadow of Trump's course. "He's made it look a lot more attractive, no matter what other people might say." Fergus Mutch, a policy advisor for the Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce, said Trump's golf resort has become a "key bit of the tourism offer" that attracts "significant spenders" to a region gripped by economic turmoil, steep job cuts and a prolonged downturn in its North Sea oil and gas industry. Trump in Scotland: Liked or loathed? Still, recent surveys show that 70% of Scots hold an unfavorable opinion of Trump. Despite his familial ties and deepening investments in Scotland, Trump is more unpopular among Scots than with the British public overall, according to an Ipsos survey from March. It shows 57% of people in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland don't view Trump positively. King Charles invites Trump: American president snags another UK state visit While in Balmedie this time, Trump will open a new 18-hole golf course on his property dedicated to his mother, Mary Anne MacLeod, who was a native of Lewis, in Scotland's Western Isles. He is likely to be met with a wave of protests around the resort, as well as the one in Turnberry. The Stop Trump Coalition, a group of campaigners who oppose most of Trump's domestic and foreign policies and the way he conducts his private and business affairs, is organizing a protest in Aberdeen and outside the U.S. consulate in Edinburgh. During Trump's initial visit to Scotland as president, in his first term, thousands of protesters sought to disrupt his visit, lining key routes and booing him. One protester even flew a powered paraglider into the restricted airspace over his Turnberry resort that bore a banner that read, "Trump: well below par #resist." 'Terrific guy': The Trump-Epstein party boy friendship lasted a decade, ended badly Trump's course in Turnberry has triggered less uproar than his Balmedie one because locals say that he's invested millions of dollars to restore the glamour of its 101-year-old hotel and three golf courses after he bought the site in 2014. Trump versus the families Three families still live directly on or adjacent to Trump's Balmedie golf resort. They say that long before the world had any clue about what type of president a billionaire New York real estate mogul and reality-TV star would become, they had a pretty good idea. Forbes is one of them. He said that shortly after Trump first tried to persuade him and his late wife to sell him their farm, workers he hired deliberately sabotaged an underground water pipe that left the Forbes – and his mother, then in her 90s, lived in her own nearby house – without clean drinking water for five years. Trump International declined to provide a fresh comment on those allegations, but a spokesperson previously told USA TODAY it "vigorously refutes" them. It said that when workers unintentionally disrupted a pipe that ran into an "antiquated" makeshift "well" jointly owned by the Forbeses on Trump's land, it was repaired immediately. Trump has previously called Forbes a "disgrace" who "lives like a pig." 'I don't have a big enough flagpole' David Milne, 61, another of Trump's seething Balmedie neighbors, lives in a converted coast guard station with views overlooking Trump's course and of the dunes and the North Sea beyond. In 2009, Trump offered him and his wife about $260,000 for his house and its one-fifth acre of land, Milne said. Trump was caught on camera saying he wanted to remove it because it was "ugly." Trump, he said, "threw in some jewelry," a golf club membership (Milne doesn't play), use of a spa (not yet built) and the right to buy, at cost, a house in a related development (not yet constructed). Milne valued the offer at about half the market rate. When Milne refused that offer, he said that landscapers working for Trump partially blocked the views from his house by planting a row of trees and sent Milne a $3,500 bill for a fence they'd built around his garden. Milne refused to pay. Over the years, Milne has pushed back. He flew a Mexican flag at his house for most of 2016, after Trump vowed to build a wall on the southern American border and make Mexico pay for it. Milne, a health and safety consultant in the energy industry, has hosted scores of journalists and TV crews at his home, where he has patiently explained the pros and cons − mostly cons, in his view, notwithstanding his own personal stake in the matter − of Trump's development for the local area. Milne said that because of his public feud with Trump, he's a little worried a freelance MAGA supporter could target him or his home. He has asked police to provide protection for him and his wife at his home while Trump is in the area. He also said he won't be flying any flags this time, apart from the Saltire, Scotland's national flag. "I don't have a big enough flagpole. I would need one from Mexico, Canada, Palestine. I would need Greenland, Denmark − you name it," he said, running through some of the places toward which Trump has adopted what critics view as aggressive and adversarial policies. Dunes of great natural importance Martin Ford was the local Aberdeen government official who originally oversaw Trump's planning application to build the Balmedie resort in 2006. He was part of a planning committee that rejected it over environmental concerns because the course would be built between sand dunes that were designated what the UK calls a Site of Special Scientific Interest due to the way they shift over time. The Scottish government swiftly overturned that ruling on the grounds that Trump's investment in the area would bring a much-needed economic boost. Neil Hobday, who was the project director for Trump's course in Balmedie, last year told the BBC he was "hoodwinked" by Trump over his claim that he would spend more than a billion dollars on it. Hobday said he felt "ashamed that I fell for it and Scotland fell for it. We all fell for it." The dunes lost their special status in 2020, according to Nature Scot, the agency that oversees such designations. It concluded that their special features had been "partially destroyed" by Trump's resort. Trump International disputes that finding, saying the issue became "highly politicized." For years, Trump also fought to block the installation of a wind farm off his resort's coast. He lost that fight. The first one was built in 2018. There are now 11 turbines. Ford has since retired but stands by his belief that allowing approval for the Trump resort was a mistake. "I feel cheated out of a very important natural habitat, which we said we would protect and we haven't," he said. "Trump came here and made a lot of promises that haven't materialized. In return, he was allowed to effectively destroy a nature site of great conservation value. It's not the proper behavior of a decent person." Forbes, the former quarry worker and fisherman, said he viewed Trump in similar terms. He said that Trump "will never ever get his hands on his farm." He said that wasn't just idle talk. He said he's put his land in a trust that specified that when he dies, it can't be sold for at least 125 years.