In recent months, I have looked at the current state of immigration policy, immigration rates, and the state of immigrants in personal, political, and social context, with growing concern. The intention of this document is to both educate and persuade readers to reexamine their views on immigration and immigrants.
With current legislation passed in Arizona (SB 1070) and similar legislation coming to other states including Utah within the next several months it is important for people to understand the facts about immigration and immigration reform, before potentially ineffective, costly, and in some cases deadly legislation is passed. Immigration reform that may lead to a worse condition for both the American people and Immigrants entering America both legally and illegally.
Immigration and crime rate:
Recent polls have shown that nearly 75% of people believe that it is either very likely or somewhat likely that a rise in immigration rates will lead to a higher crime rate (Hagist). A recent study by Tim Wadsworth has examined the validity of this belief and in fact it appears that the exact opposite is true. This study looked at the influence of immigration on crime in urban areas across the united states between 1990 and 2000 with sample cities with populations of 50,000 or more. The study shows that “cities with the largest increases in immigration between 1990 and 2000 experienced the largest decreases in homicide and robbery during the same time period”.(Wadsworth)
There are also concerns that illegal immigrants also work as drug mules for major drug cartels while crossing the boarders. The most recent data coming from a report by the university of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, most immigrants who enter the united states illegally do so because they can make higher wages in U.S. Businesses that hire them then they could make in their native countries. (Rough) This is in conjuncture with the data from the Washington, D.C based Pew Hispanic Center that shows that as many as half the 11 million illegal immigrants in the country are visa violators, meaning they entered legally and stayed after their visas had expired. An additional 500,000 are here after using a day long border crossing cards and stayed.(Rough) This data shows that most immigrants have nothing to do with drugs when they initially cross the boarder and simply are looking for better lives or the ability to feed their families.
Immigration and the effects on the economy:
In a recent New York Times/CBS News Poll it was clearly apparent that public opinion was strongly convinced of the idea that illegal immigrants weakened the economy (roughly 74% of people polled, this compared to only 17% that believed that immigration strengthens the economy (New York). There are several theories on why this might be the case regardless of the facts. First many may be viewing immigration in light of the 2008 recession fearing the entry of new workers into the job market. Others view the strain caused by undocumented immigrants on public services, including schools, hospitals and jails. There also may simply be a racial component to the fear, as some have argued that immigrants are a convenient target for societies fears, stresses and insecurities. Any or all of these can contribute to the current climate of anxiety and mistrust towards immigrants, both legal and undocumented. What matters in this case is weather or not any of these attitudes are warranted or based on solid data.
To understand how immigrants effect the economy it is important to understand what sectors the the economy benefit and what sectors are hurt by high immigration rates, as benefits are uneven across sectors the job market and economy. David Card, an economist at the University of California, Berkely found that “businesses that profit most directly from immigrants are low-cost labor businesses and employers-meatpacking plants in Nebraska, for instance” (Campo-Flores) These savings translate directly to prices at the grocery store or other businesses that use products made with unskilled labor. This benefit is in comparison to immigration on native low-skilled workers, who suffer the most from immigrant competition. A recent study by George Borjas, an economist working for Harvard, immigration reduced the wages of high-school dropouts by 9 percent between 1980 and 2000. This has lead to surveys showing that people without a high-school diploma oppose illegal immigration more strongly then those with a high-school diploma or above (Borjas).
Next is the argument that immigrants take more from public services then they pay in, causing a drain on the public economy. Gordon Hanson, an economist at the University of California, San Diego, however has commented saying that many undocumented workers pay money to the federal government, in the form of social security contributions and income taxes, and take less in return. At the state and local level illegal immigrants make contributions through property and sales taxes, but in general immigrants use more public services such as schools, health benefits and welfare assistance. As a result the federal government ends up with a net gain while the states “get stuck with the bill”
In the end “the net effect of immigration is minimal (about a one tenth of 1 percent gain in gross domestic product...Even for those more acutely affected-say, low-skilled workers, or California residents-the impact isn't all that dramatic.”(Campo-Flores)
In a study published by the Center for American Progress it is speculated that “comprehensive immigration reform generates an increase in U.S. GDP of at least 0.84 percent. Summed over 10 years, this amounts to a cumulative $1.5 trillion in additional GDP. It also boosts wages for both native-born and newly legalized immigrant workers. The temporary worker program generates an increase in U.S. GDP of 0.44 percent. This amounts to $792 billion of cumulative GDP over 10 years. Moreover, wages decline for both native-born and newly legalized immigrant workers. Mass deportation reduces U.S. GDP by 1.46 percent. This amounts to 2.6 trillion in cumulative lost GDP over 10 years, not including the actual cost of deportation, Wages would rise for less-skilled native-born workers, but would diminish for higher-skilled natives, and would lead to widespread job loss. Legalizing the nation's unauthorized workers and putting new legal limits on immigration that rise and fall with U.S. Labor demands would help lay the foundation for robust just and widespread economic growth. (Center)
Reasons for Immigration
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the most significant "free trade" agreement in this hemisphere, was presented, developed, and instituted according to the classic capitalist logic of the flood that would raise all boats, and as such it was thought that NAFTA would actually reduce the number of immigrants crossing the border from Mexico both legally and illegally through increased wages and standards of living both above and below the U.S.-Mexico border. However, in the decades since its inception, precisely the opposite has occurred.
Hugely subsidized American agribusiness made it possible to flood Mexican markets with cheap white corn, a staple food source, which put pressure on Mexican farmers (along with many other cheap commodities affecting other fields of production). Unable to compete with the influx of white corn, farmers had either to turn to growing yellow corn to export for U.S. livestock feed, or to alternative crops, which would require investments they were largely unable to make. The net effect was that many agricultural workers were forced out of the business entirely.
The primary options available to those agricultural workers forced out of the business were to move north and find factory work in maquiladoras, that is, factories producing cheap goods for export to U.S. markets (which presented dangers of its own), or to cross the border and find work illegally in the U.S.
However, wages in the U.S. have outstripped those in Mexico for decades, partially as a result of NAFTA allowing U.S. companies to move their production to Mexico. Wages have been further driven down by the availability of desperate and poor former agricultural workers flooding the labor market south of the border, and thus the latter option, illegally entering the United States, proved the most attractive to many. As a result, the number of undocumented workers has risen from roughly less than 3 million in 1993, to over 12 million today, by some estimates; much of this can be attributed to the effects of NAFTA and supposed "free trade."
Current Immigration Laws
“The primary immigration laws are contained in a statute known as the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The INA and its related federal regulations (Title 8 of the code of Federal Regulations) cover immigration laws governing: Who is an immigrant and who is a citizen, who can enter the country from abroad, who must have a visa to enter the country, how visas are defined and administered, how immigrants are processed, which immigrants can be removed (deported) from the country, what immigrants must do to maintain their legal status, how immigrants can become permanent residents or naturalized citizens, who qualifies as a refugee or asylum recipient” ( Thaker Law)
These laws apply to all non-citizens who are physically present in the country or who seek such immigration benefits as work and tourist visas and green cards or citizenship. Violations of these laws mean the possibility of being deported or denied entrance with the possibility of never being able to enter the United States lawfully. (Thaker Law)
Non-citizens are subject to deportation laws regardless of their “immigration status, length of residence in the United States, existence of significant family ties, existence of steady work history and tax payments, contributions to the community....” (Thaker Law) this can mean hardships for people being deported and can cause unfair problems for the progress of immigrants working toward legal goals. Deportation for Green card holders can mean being forced off the path to citizenship. For those with family ties it means separation from family members, or giving up their connection to communities. It can also mean family members that were supported by the immigrants will suffer unnecessary financial problems.
Deportation is warranted under current law for several reasons including: involvement with drug related or violent crimes, unlawful voting, attempting to aid immigrants getting into the country illegally, termination of immigration agreements, and many other reasons. (Thaker Law)
Current Enforcement of Immigration Laws
Current enforcement efforts that focus entirely on the enforcement of anti-immigration laws while ignoring big picture consequences and causes that are currently in use by the government are not cost effective and ineffectual. Instead of curbing immigration levels and preventing the movement of immigrants into the country they have wasted billions of dollars in tax payer money as well as forced immigration further underground. This furthering of dangerous illegal immigration has caused the demand for people smugglers to go up and forced immigrants into circular migration patterns rather then permanent settlement in which they could directly benefit their community and families.
Attempting to enforce unrealistic immigration laws has a high cost and no benefit. The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased since 1990 however costs of enforcing immigration laws has increased by 714 percent since 1992. Spending 2.7 billion in the fiscal year 2009 (Hinojosa-Ojeda) Another way to look at the cost for border patrol is to look at the cost per apprehension numbers, which is the amount of money spent per person actually apprehended while attempting to enter the country illegally. According to the same data by the U.S. Border Patrol yearbook of immigration statistics, the cost of apprehension has gone from 272 dollars in 1992 to 3,102 dollars in 2008. Despite this increase in spending the immigration rates have nearly tripled in the time since 1990 from 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008.
This inability to prevent immigrants from entering the country illegally has had unintentional consequences however, both on the boarder and within the United States. First by focusing efforts on urban areas in which boarder crossing is relatively safe, immigrants are forced to use mountainous or desert trails that are far more dangerous. This has lead to a much higher migrant death rate since 1995 when boarder enforcement was increased. The national Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants have died while crossing the boarder between 1994 and 2008 (Hinojosa-Ojeda 5). Second increased boarder pressure has increased opportunities for people smugglers. The necessity of crossing the boarder in more dangerous terrain has made the hiring of a people smuggler almost a necessity when crossing the boarder so much so that 9 out of 10 unauthorized migrants are forced to hire one. This in comparison to the numbers 10 years ago when hiring a smuggler was the exception rather then the norm. This need for smugglers has also sent the price up dramatically from 10 years ago to nearly $3,000 a head in many cases causing migrants to go deep into debt just to get into the United States. (Hinojosa-Ojeda 5). The high risk of crossing also means that it is more likely that immigrants will settle permanently rather then earning what they need and going back to their communities or families in their native countries. Last the high enforcement rates force workers further underground allowing companies to hire them for lower and lower wages, which cuts costs. This depresses the low-wage labor markets and lowers income of both low-skill native workers and migrant workers, which ironically creates more demand for undocumented workers from outside the country.
Examples of positive alternatives to enforcement only policies.
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA)
“The 1986 IRCA granted legal status to 1.7 million unauthorized immigrants through its “general” legalization program, plus another 1.3 million through a “Special Agricultural Workers” program. Even though IRCA was implemented during an economic recession characterized by high unemployment, studies of immigrants who benefited form the general legalization program indicate that they soon earned higher wages and moved on to better jobs-and invested more in their own education so that they could earn even higher wages and get even better jobs. Higher wages translate into more tax revenue and increased consumer purchasing power which benefits the public treasury and the U.S. Economy as a whole. IRCA failed, however, to crate flexible limits on future immigration that were adequate to meet the growing labor needs of the U.S. Economy during the 1990s. As a result, unauthorized immigration eventually resumed in the years after IRCA, thereby exerting downward pressure on wages for all workers in low-wage occupations.(Hinojosa-Ojeda 7-8)
The Cuban Adjustment Act
“ The Cuban Adjustment Act (CAA), Public Law 89-732, as enacted on November 2, 1966. the law applies to any native or citizen of Cuba who has been inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States after January 1, 1959 and has been physically present for at least one year, and is admissible to the United States for Permanent Residence.” (Fact) The Cuban adjustment act has had success coupled with several procedures put in place in order to ensure that immigrants from Cuba are able to enter The United States legally including: the issuing of visas to children, parents and spouses of US citizens as soon as the immigration visa petition is approved, a preference system that more easily allows siblings and adult married children visas, resettlement options through the refugee processing unit for those who have fear of persecution (on the basis of race, religion, membership in a particular group etc.), and a special Cuban migration program often called the Cuban Lottery. These systems and procedures set in place allow as many 67% in 1996 to 73% in 1998 of people attempting to become US citizens visas and legal entry into the country and allows them to become full citizens after only a year of physical residence in the country. (Fact)
Conclusion
In light of the evidence and current trends, I hold a stance that current immigration reform is ineffectual, costly, and dangerous. It is also not aimed at the wants or needs of society but instead driven by a poorly thought out nationalist ideology that pushes a harmful “us verses them” mentality. This legislation should be halted immediately and more effective and humanizing tactics should be implemented. Including but not limited to extending successful traits of the Cuban adjustment act and other successful immigration laws to all immigrants regardless of nationality. Next we should urge current representatives to view the evidence of immigration as well as approach any problems with the attitude that immigrants are people and not statistics or a force to be frighted of. We should also attempt to spread helpful and accurate information that supports immigration to people who are ignorant or misinformed of current immigration issues. In the long run of course the most effective recourse of action would be to stress immigration issues while organizing including using effective protest and agitation tactics that fall in line with a proper Marxist Leninist Maoist ideology in efforts to organize the working class in a way that transcends boarders, the information in this document is meant to be the basis of organization and propaganda methods targeted at promoting proper and evidence based opinions on immigration and immigration reform and should be used as such.
-Maxx Stewart
Sources:
Baybee, Roger, and Carolyn Winters. "Immigration Flood Unleashed by NAFTA's Disastrous Impact on Mexican Economy." Common Dreams. Common Dreams, 26 Apr 2006. Web. 15 Jul 2010.
Borjas, George. "THE LABOR DEMAND CURVE IS DOWNWARD SLOPING: REEXAMINING THE IMPACT OF IMMIGRATION ON THE LABOR MARKET." NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES. NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 6/2003. Web. 4 Jul 2010.
Camp-Flores, Arian. "Why Americans Think (Wrongly) That Illegal Immigrants Hurt the Economy." Newsweek 05/14/2010: n. pag. Web. 4 Jul 2010.
"Fact Sheet: The Cuban Adjustment Act." State Department . Office of Cuban Affairs, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, Department of State, 16 Mar 2000. Web. 13 Jul 2010.
Hagist, Megan. "How We’re Doing: the Real Numbers on Immigrants and Crime." Ms. Blog magazine 23 June 2010: n. pag. Web. 24 Jun 2010.
Hinojosa-Ojeda, Raul. "Raising the Floor for American Workers." American Progress. Center for American Progress, Immigration Policy Center, 01/2010. Web. 6 Jul 2010.
"Immigration Laws of the United States of America." Thaker Law. Thaker Berowitz LLP, 06/07/2010. Web. 6 Jul 2010.
"NAFTA boosted Mexican immigration: study." World War 4 Report. WW4 Report, 24 Jan. 2009. Web. 15 Jul 2010.
Rough, Ginger. "Brewer: Most illegal immigrants smuggling drugs." Az Central 25/06/2010: n. pag. Web. 6 Jul 2010.
Shaffer, Ellen. "Immigration is a NAFTA Problem. This is Not Big News.." Huffington Post 13 Jul. 2010: n. pag. Web. 15 Jul 2010.
"The New York Times CBS News Poll." The New York Times. The New York Times, 05/2/2010. Web. 4 Jul 2010.
UCHITELLE, LOUIS. "Nafta Should Have Stopped Illegal Immigration, Right? ." New York Times 18 Feb. 2007: n. pag. Web. 15 Jul 2010.
Wadsworth, Tim. "Is Immigration Responsible for the Crime Drop? An Assessment of the Influence of Immigration on Changes in Violent Crime Between 1990 and 2000." Social Science Quarterly 91.2 (2010): n. pag. Web. 24 Jun 2010.
