The Garbage Can Model as Applied to Local Response
to Current Illegal Immigration Problems
David P. Sosar
King’s College
The Garbage Can Model as presented by (Cohen, March and Oslen 1972), is utilized to describe the problem solving or policy making process in everyday organizational situations. It has also been utilized to describe government actions and policy making activities (Peters 2002). This paper will utilize the Garbage Can Model to understand the policy making process of the Hazleton City Government and the “blocking” action utilized by the local Hispanic individuals and groups to delay or prohibit the enactment of the “Illegal Immigration Relief Ordinance” (2006). It is the author of this paper’s belief that the Hispanic community utilized the same method of decision making in many ways as the city in a mistaken fashion. The result of the two actions has created a dysfunctional community and one which will not be mended by a court battle will last years.
The Garbage Can Model developed by Cohen, March and Olsen has best been explained in the following manner:
To understand the process within organizations, one can view a choice opportunity as a garbage can into which various kinds of problems and solutions are dumped by participants as they are generated, The mix of garbage in a single can depends on the mix of cans available, on the labels attached to the alternative cans, on what garbage is currently being produced, and on the speed with which garbage is collected and removed from the scene (Cohen, March, and Olsen 1972, p. 2).
In Kingdon’s explanation of the model he suggests that the components of problems, solutions, victims or those looking for solutions, and the active participants or groups involved in the decision making act in such a manner as to create an “organized anarchy” in the process (Kingdon 2003, p. 84).
Elements of organizational structure influence outcomes of a garbage can decision process (a) by affecting the time pattern of the arrival of problems choices, solutions, or decision makers, (b) by determining the allocation of energy by potential participants in the decision, and (c) by establishing linkages among the various streams (Cohen, March, and Olsen 1972, p. 4).
The Garbage Can Model is one of several decision or policy making models (Rational, Incremental, and Political) which groups or government may use to explain organizational choice in complex situations (Lahti 2005).
With the events as they unfolded in the mid-months of 2006 in Hazleton, Pennsylvania, it would appear that the Garbage Can Model was utilized by both proponents and opponents of the Illegal Immigration Relief Ordinance (IIRO).
Hazleton, Pennsylvania within the past year and one half has become the hot bed of examination and controversy as related to local government response to unauthorized migrants within its community.1
The controversy centers around local government’s responsibility to protect its citizens versus the national government’s right to handle immigration policy. No one disputes the power and right of the national government to make laws and regulate the immigration of individuals to the United States. Disputes have risen across the U.S. as to what powers state and local governments have to enforce laws within their boundaries to protect and serve their residents.
It is the purpose of this paper to demonstrate the concept of “organized anarchy described by Cohen, March, and Olsen as the often-utilized method (model) of addressing such matters as a rapidly changing community in diversity (Cohen, March, and Olsen 1972).
Local governments and community agencies are greatly concerned with making appropriate policy decisions and administering these decisions on behalf of residents and clients. Municipal governments, local school districts, as well as public and private organizations have attempted to make decisions that deal with the political, economic and social issues of a community. But, when that community is in transition, (ethnic cultural and economic) these institutions find it difficult to provide effective decision-making.
The inability of the U.S. federal government to create effective and meaningful policy to deal with unauthorized migrants has created a controversy among local governments as to what actions they may enact within their own communities. Local officials argue that their responsibility lies in protecting and serving the residents of their municipality. According to an interview with Mayor Lou Barletta of Hazleton Pennsylvania the city government’s ability to perform these two basic functions of government have been compromised by the significant influx of unauthorized migrants to the city within the past ten years.
According to the U.S. Census Reports of 2000, Hazleton, Pennsylvania possessed a total population of 23,329, and a Hispanic population of 1,132 (Institute Of State and Regional Affairs 2002, p. 12). The Census report indicated a further decline in the city’s population to approximately 22,000 residents by 2006 even with the supposed continued growth of the Hispanic population (Institute Of State and Regional Affairs 2002). The population however has not declined as projections had indicated. The city’s population in 2007 has grown to an estimated 30,000 to 31,000, residents, largely due to the influx of a new Hispanic population both documented and undocumented according to Barletta.
While there is no means available to identify specifically the exact number of unauthorized migrants living in the Hazleton Area or the nation as a whole, the Pew Hispanic Center Has estimated that currently there are approximately 11.5 to 12 million unauthorized migrants living in the U.S. Whether or not that a portion of the unauthorized is represented in the 45 million number of Hispanics living in the U.S. at present is unknown. Passel (2006) Most estimates place the Hispanic population in Hazleton at 11,000 to 12,000 at the present time. Among this population most government officials and service providers estimate that currently among this population there are approximately 1,700 to 2,400 unauthorized migrants residing within the city of Hazleton.
The migration of many newcomers to the Northeastern Pennsylvania has occurred for many of the same reasons immigrants settled in small towns over the past one hundred and fifty years. Many newcomers have moved to areas such as Hazleton to find working opportunities, a quieter life, better education, as well as safety and security (Bressler 2002, p. 6). It is specifically because of the safety and security issue that Mayor Lou Barletta and members of the city council believed action was needed in ordinance form during the year 2006.
There have been numerous studies on whether taxes paid by unauthorized migrants equals the services provided this segment of American society. La Raza, the National Latino Coalition, And additional organizations cite the amount of taxes paid by unauthorized migrants that they may or may not utilize because of lack of documentation. Francine J. Lipman focuses on these arguments in her Harvard Latino Review article of 2006:
Americans believe that undocumented immigrants are exploiting the United States' economy. The widespread belief is that illegal aliens cost more in government services than they contribute to the economy. This belief is undeniably false. [E]very empirical study of illegals' economic impact demonstrates the opposite . . .: undocumented actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services. Moreover, undocumented immigrants contribute to the U.S. economy through their investments and consumption of goods and services; filling of millions of essential worker positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs. Eighty-five percent of eminent economists surveyed have concluded that undocumented immigrants have had a positive (seventy-four percent) or neutral (eleven percent) impact on the U.S. economy (Lipman 2006, p. 1).
Many groups and individuals opposed to unauthorized migrant groups argue that services provided are greater than the amount of taxes collected. The Center for Immigration Studies in several articles discusses the great expense of illegal or unauthorized migrants on the American Economy. Robert Paral of the American Immigration Law Foundation focuses most importantly on the local taxes as being insufficient in relation to services provided:
….when people talk about immigration at the state and local level they are concerned about the impact of immigration on local economies and governments. Indeed, while national studies generally find that immigrants pay more in federal taxes than they use in federally funded services, the opposite can be true at the local level, where immigrants may be net users of services because they tend to have children in relatively costly K-12 schools.
….school districts may be unprepared, police and fire departments may need to learn to communicate with new population, and bilingualism may become prominent (The American Immigration Law Foundation 2005).
The findings of Paral argue the point that the invisible “cash only” economy in which unauthorized migrants work often leave local governments without the income to provide the basic services they have been assigned to provide.
Data from the City of Hazleton indicated by Mayor Barletta in his often quoted speeches identify a continued rise in services over the past few years with no appreciable rise in revenue from local wage taxes.
Services within health care, education, and public service sectors have become severely taxed under such conditions. Local hospitals, especially their emergency stations, handle an increasing number of walk-in-traffic making visits for care average several hours, stated Mr. James Edwards of the Greater Hazleton Health Alliance (Galski 2006, p. 1). Local hospitals often assume lost income in the payment on bills from undocumented migrants.
The Hazleton Area School District, has witnessed tremendous growth in the past seven years in student population. The district has felt the strains of nearly two thousand new students added to the rolls during this time period. School officials often site the rise in English as a Second Language Programs in the Hazleton Area as additional costs which are creating a crisis in their schools. In the Year 2000, the Hazleton Area School District had an operating budget for its ESL program of approximately five hundred dollars. Today the program serves nearly one thousand students and has a budget of one and one half million dollars (Barletta and Yanuzzi 2007). Besides the overcrowding schools are facing throughout the district, schools are significantly feeling the effect of newcomers, documented or unauthorized, through the No Child Left Behind Legislation. Six of its schools are facing test results that indicate failure in reaching their Average Yearly Progress (AYP) (Galski (2007). While the general population of the district is performing above the minimum standards set by the NLCB, subgroups including minority, economically disadvantaged, English Learner Classes, and Special Education, are resulting in obligations through the legislation which place more expenses on the district in remedial costs as well as potential loss of funds due to reaching “failing school” status (107th Congress 2001).
While no number can be attached to those enrolled in the school district as unauthorized, the number is assumed by authorities to be significant because of the lack of English speaking ability and the lack of paperwork often that accompanies the students.
City officials have also felt the assumed problem of unauthorized migrants to the local area. Unlike the hospital and schools, the local government has the means at times to determine legal status of those in the city that would commit a crime. An evolving trend of violent crime began to occur between October of 2005 and the present that led city officials to passage of the Illegal Immigrant Reform Ordinance. Throughout the early 2000 time period local crime was reported as it had always been in the local newspaper with little change and little significant violent crime to report. In October of 2005, within five days, the city witnessed a murder in the middle of the afternoon on its city streets, a shooting of a young man in the wrist and a couple shoot at as they walked along a major street in the city (Monitz (2005, p. 1). At this time, very little about the documentation of the individuals involved in the crime as victims or perpetrators were written. Although described as Hispanic, little more about the individuals was mentioned.
In the spring of 2006, violent crime became a more common occurrence in the City of Hazleton. A second murder in daylight, a teenager shooting a pistol in a playground around children playing, and a major drug bust all within a week created fear and demands on the city government for better police protection and provision of personal security (Tarone 2006, p. 1).
All of the events of May 2006 were violent crimes, perpetrated by Hispanic individuals, all major actors in the committing the crime were unauthorized migrants. Since that time, local new agencies and especially the Hazleton Standard Speaker Newspaper, have continued to point out with regularity the legal status of Hispanic individuals accused of committing criminal acts within the city. The total of local government officials facing an ever increasing population which by report was documented and unauthorized led to significant pressure on the Mayor of the city to take action.
As one can see from this simple overview of the change that occurred within this microcosm example of what is occurring across the country, leaders felt the need to take action. Based on partial statistics, some assumed information, and a need to act quickly, city officials were in need of assistance. Lacking a plausible remedy created locally by government officials and other groups within the community, the mayor searched the internet and found an ordinance which he felt met the needs of the municipality. That ordinance was the proposed ordinance dealing with “illegal aliens” in San Bernardino, California (Dorell 2006).
One need only to read a few pages of Kingdon’s textbook, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, to identify the organized anarchy which occurred in Hazleton, Pennsylvania a typical of that described in his few pages on the Garbage Can Model (Kingdon 2003, p. 84).
The city government unable to enlist the aid of the Hispanic leadership in jointly working to deal with the problems of fear and crime in the community sought through other means a method to assist in the elimination of the crime issue. As applied to the Garbage Can Model, Hazleton seemed to be a community in great population transition therefore affecting the policy stream of changing conditions and time. Lack of effective means to deal with the problem locally, through police, programs, i.e. technology, the city needed to react. Lack of concrete data on unauthorized migrant crime statistics, an unwillingness on behalf of the federal authorities in general, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement to react to Hazleton’s violent crime events left the mayor of the city in need of a program to “take back” his city. By selecting the San Bernardino ordinance, it opted to place its confidence in a “problematic preference” which possessed fairly clear methods to reach achieve unclear goals (Kingdon 2003, p. 84). The reduction of crime seems clear enough as a community goal, but remains questionable when applied through the IIRO.
Many accused the city of using “unclear technology” in its ordinance suggesting there was no clear, direct, and effective means of actually identifying documented and unauthorized migrants within the city limits. Many opponents of the ordinance suggested that the immigration laws of the country are so complicated, that the only individuals capable of accurately identifying unauthorized persons would be federal officials within Immigration and Custom Enforcement (Wade 2007, p. 1). The city tried to argue that it was only dealing with unauthorized migrants who had committed a crime by entering or staying in the country without proper documents. It suggested that federal databases existed to identify those in the country as authorized and therefore those who were unauthorized as well. The court eventually refused to accept this identification system which legal opponents labeled as incomplete and unreliable. Nor did the court believe it was in the power of the city, landlords or employers to serve as ICE agents in determining the legal of status of individuals (Wade 2007, p. 1).
In addition to the legal problems, there were many groups who should have been involved with the problems facing the city government and its residents. Several Hispanic organizations in Hazleton demonstrated little concern for the problems facing the community before the passage of the ordinance. Remaining silent during the acts of violence committed across the city included the leadership of the Hispanic community, the Hazleton Area Latino Association, Casa Dominico, the Community Justice Organization of Hazleton and the Governor’s Advisory Commission of Latino Affairs. They did not speak out on criminal acts or work to join with city government in asking for cooperation and safety. The Mayor of Hazleton is quoted as having asked Hispanic leaders to stand with him in condemning unauthorized crime and gang activities. According to Barletta at meeting with Hispanic leaders, they only voiced concern that members of their community were being singled out on racial terms.
Community economic development organizations and business groups however, did not take positive action. Organizations such as CAN DO and the Chamber of Commerce promote the Hazleton Region as an important area to build industry and create jobs. These groups did not act effectively to act in a liaison capacity in order to work out differences and develop strategies to cooperatively work for a better and safer life in Hazleton. Outside groups from the county, to state-wide organizations such as the Pennsylvania Statewide Latino Coalition and the Pennsylvania Immigration and Citizenship Coalition, did not attempt to step in and promote the need for understanding and joint effort in working to rebuild the public’s faith in the community. Rather, they proceeded to use their efforts and numbers to protest the “illegal” actions of a mayor and city council (Wade 2006). They felt that the ordinance placed a strong discriminatory stance on anyone who spoke a “foreign” language or looked “foreign” in their viewpoint (Hall 2007).
Within twenty-four hours of the passage of the IIRO, state-wide and national organizations jumped to the aid of the Hispanic community in Hazleton to defend what they considered unjust and discriminatory treatment by the city government officials (Tarone 2006, p. 1). Giving the Hispanic Community little time to consider a local response and to work in a local but meaningful manner to develop a cooperative response to the government’s passage, larger and outside influences took control of the situation. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund stepped in the assist members of the Hispanic Community prepare a court case response to the passage of the ordinance (Miriam 2006, p. 10).
With no community groups (Economic Development, Ministerium, or others) to act as conduits to compromise, both sides in what may have been solved by community forces, were left to fight their causes on the larger national scene over mass media venues. Lawyers and national organizations, many associated with the American Civil Liberties Union and the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, became the key players to some extent, fighting over causes that are important to the rights of Americans but do little to solve crime, drug, and gang problems in the small community of Hazleton, Pennsylvania. Hall (2007)
The court case has been filed and heard in front of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Judge James M. Munley presided at the case. The decision of the judge was to rule the IIRO unconstitutional and therefore unenforceable (Preston 2006).
As expected the two sides will continue to press on in the legal channels available to them (Federation For American Immigration Reform 2007). The case has been appealed to the 3rd Circuit Court located in Philadelphia. It is expected to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court regardless of the decision in Philadelphia (Whalen 2007).
This paper however, is not really concerned with the final decision of judges in whatever court may eventually decide this issue. In Hazleton, Pennsylvania and many communities facing similar problems, the court decision will be of little consequence.
This paper strongly suggests that the true answer for the city of Hazleton must be found among the various subgroups which make up the community. The city government in concert with the traditional residents, newcomers, community development groups, commerce groups, and local ministerium must meet and honestly work out differences that recognize all community problems and work to compromise but develop legitimate answers to this complex problem. Programs must be developed to create a living environment that all local residents can find satisfactory. They must reach these goals in a fair and equitable manner to new and old residents alike.
The court decision that will be rendered by the Federal Courts will not render the city of Hazleton a safer place in which to reside or a more accepting municipality to unauthorized migrants who may seek to live and work in this type of community.
Bibliography
The American Immigration Law Foundation. (2005). A Lifeline to
Barletta, Lou. (2007, June 17). Illegal Immigration Relief Ordinance.
Barletta, Lou, & Yanuzzi, Joseph. (2007). The Sam Lesante Show, 7/20/2007 [Television series episode]. In SamSon
Productions (Producer), The Sam Lesante Show. Hazleton: Channel 13 Service Electric.
Bressler, Stephanie, & Msgr. Delaney, Michael (2002). La Voces de la Communidad: A community Perspective by
Hazleton Hispanic Residents. Paper presented at the meeting of the Hazleton Civic Partnership. Hazleton, PA.
Cohen, March, & Olsen (1972). A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 17(No. 1), p. 1.
Cohen, Michael D., March, James G., & Olsen, Johan P. (1972, March). A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice.
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17(No. 1), 25. Retrieved October 1, 2007, from JSTOR database.
Congress Of The U.S. (2002, January 8). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
Dorell, Oren. (2006, August 25). Town Takes Aim at Illegal Immigration. Retrieved October 27, 2007, from USA Today
Web Site: http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=....8/25/06
Federation For American Immigration Reform. (2007, July 26). District Court Ruling is Not the End of the Road for Local
Illegal Immigration Ordinance. Retrieved November 3, 2007, from The Federation for American Immigration Reform
Web Site: http://www.fairus.org/sites/PaperServer?pagename=media_release7272007
Galski , Sam (2005, June 15). City Proposes Illegal Immigrant Relief Ordinance. Hazleton Standard Speaker, pp. 1-18.
Galski, Sam (2007, October 8). Low Test Scores. Hazleton Standard Speaker, pp. 1-18.
Hall, Randy. (2007, July 27). Retrieved November 3, 2027, from CNSNews.com Web Site:
http://cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?=Page/Nation/archive/200707/Nat20070727a.html
Institute Of State and Regional Affairs (2002). Population of Municipalities in Pennsylvania with 10,000 or More Persons
by Type of Municipality 1990-2000. In Pennsylvania State Data Center. :
Kingdon, John W. (2003). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies (2nd. ed.). New York: Longman.
Lahti, Ryan K. (2005, October 27). Group Decision Making within the Organization: Can Models Help? Retrieved May 25,
2007, from Center for Collaborative Organizations Web Site:
http://www.workteams.unt.edu/literature/paper-rlahti.html
Lipman, Francine J. (2006). Taxing Undocumented Immigrants: Separate, Unequal and Without Representation. Retrieved
October 27, 2007, from Social Science Research Network Web Site:
http://papers.ssrn.com/so13/papers.cfm?abstract_id=881584
Miriam, Jordan (2006, August 16). City's Rules on Illegal Immigrants Draw First Lawsuit of Its Kind. Wall Street Journal,
p. B10.
Monitz, Kelly (2005, October 30). Downtown Businesses See Slump. Hazleton Standard Speaker, pp. A1-A2.
Passel, Jeffrey S. (2006, March 7). Retrieved October 27, 2007, from Pew Hispanic Center Web Site: http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=61
Peters, B. G. (2002). Governance: A Garbage Can Perspective. Political Science Series 84,
Preston, Julia (2007, July 27). Judge Voids Ordinance on Illegal Immigrants. New York Times,
Tarone, L.A. (2006, June 13). Mayor Proposes English as Official Language of the City. Hazleton Standard Speaker, p. 1.
Tarone, L.A. (2006, June 18). Hispanics Meet in Sports Center Restaurant. Hazleton Standard Speaker, p. 1.
Wade, Malcom. (2007, March 9). Small Town Defenders. Retrieved October 30, 2006, from Small Town Defenders Web
Site: http://www.smalltowndefenders.com/public/node/140
Wade, Malcom (2007, July 26). Hazleton Illegal Immigration Ordinance Struck Down. The Citizen's Voice, p. 1.
Whalen, Jill. (2007, August 24). Hazleton Appeal Immigration-Law Decision. Retrieved November 3, 2007, from Small Town
Defenders Web Site: http://www.smalltowndefenders.com/public/node/231 References Renewal: the Demographic
Impact of Immigration at State and Local Levels [Brochure]. Washington, DC: Author.
- The term “undocumented migrant” is the common term presently being used by the Pew Institute for Hispanic Studies.
|
