Wiston Papers

The time for immigration reform is here

Summer in Washington promises to be even hotter than usual this year.  Not from climate change.  But generated instead by the contentious, partisan, often disingenuous debate over proposed immigration reform before Congress

The “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Modernization Act” (Senate Bill 744) already has raised the temperature on Capitol Hill along the ideological divide between liberals and conservatives.  A chasm long separating those who want to tighten our borders against unlawful entry and those who promote robust immigration to boost America’s economy and intellectual competitiveness.   Not surprisingly the debate already has produced more heat than light.

Co-authored by four Democrats and four Republicans--the so-called “Gang of 8”--the measure attempts to resolve the disparate issues of secure borders and legal status for guest workers.  It would also resurrect the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).  Popularized among its advocates as the “Dream Act,” DACA promises a fast track to United States citizenship for nearly 2-million unauthorized Latino/a  children who came to America as children.

Immigration reform is a hotly-contested polemic that  at best pits opposing intellectual advocates in the battle for policy supremacy.  At its worst, the controversy reveals an ugly undercurrent of ethnic and racial bigotry with an equal mixture of national paranoia and xenophobia.  Even the language contributes to misunderstanding and emotional reaction: illegal aliens, undocumented workers, unlawful immigrants, unauthorized arrivals.

The normally respected conservative think tank Heritage Foundation fueled the flames last week when it published a controversial study arguing that the proposed immigration bill would cost trillions of dollars.  The beneficiaries of immigration reform, the authors claim, will be poorly educated, unlawful arrivals with limited work skills.  By permitting this, the measure will encourage the wrong types of immigrants--those who will add to America’s already overburdened welfare state.  

Instead, Heritage argues, the type of immigrants the U.S. most needs are asked to wait for years to enter the country legally thus depriving the nation of badly-needed, highly-educated, skilled employees who will add to the country’s financial coffers rather than deplete them.

The blowback was immediate and harsh. Both conservatives and liberals pounced on the conclusions and denigrated the study’s methodology.  One of the two authors resigned.

The Washington Post columnist David Nakamura said Heritage co-author Jason Richwine’s departure followed criticism of the study’s “racially charged conclusions” about immigrants with “...less education and lower IQs.”  

Although I, too, am critical of the study, I’ve read the 102-page original report--twice--and find no statements to support these allegations.  Rather, my criticism is about the calculations employed by the researchers.

Yes, I know the proponents of equitable reform want to promote faster immigration of highly-educated persons who bring badly needed skills to American high-paying jobs.

And, yes, such arrivals would pay more taxes and the benefits-taxes ratio would be more in balance with this group than with poorer immigrants.

Nevertheless, the number of highly-skilled immigrants--under the best of circumstances because of their comparatively small numbers--would generate far fewer tax dollars in the aggregate.

Furthermore, there are already millions of undocumented workers who pay taxes on their income.  At the same time, we have millions of of American-born citizens who are unemployed, receiving welfare benefits, yet not paying taxes.

As one mathematical expert told me, the Heritage study errs in part because it “...compares a net total (the increased revenue) to a gross total (the overall cost of benefits), which is wrong...”

Early efforts to change the nation’s immigration laws have stalled in Congress on more than one occasion--most recently in 2007.  And today there is no shortage of opinions or studies regarding the latest proposal in the U.S. Senate as evidenced by the controversy surrounding the Heritage conclusions.

COMPETING VOICES:

    Those who clamor for greater border security claim we are overrun by an illegal invasion of Mexicans.  Not true.  That traffic has declined significantly in recent years.  (See Woodrow Wilson Research Center)

    Those who complain that undocumented workers take jobs away from Americans are wrong.  There are no long lines of U.S. citizens applying for jobs in the kill rooms of meat packing plants or anxious to clean public bathrooms or prepared for the backbreaking work of harvesting the nation’s fruit and vegetable crops. (See Center for American Progress).  Further studies show that the immigrant labor force actually has saved some rural communities. (See Ripon Society)

    Advocates of tighter immigration laws argue that unauthorized residents increase the crime rate in American cities.  The data are mixed. (See Center for Immigrant law Enforcement and Center for Immigration Studies)

    Unlawful workers do not reflect American values and do not assimilate.  Wrong again.  The assimilation patterns of today’s immigrants are not unlike the history of other groups including Northern Europeans.  And there is clear evidence that new arrivals contribute to our diverse culture.  (See Aspen Institute,  Cato Institute, and Russell Sage Foundation)

   

    The need for immigration reform is long overdue.  Current laws are antiquated, exclusionary and punitive.  They are based on an unfounded fear of foreigners.  Such laws make it too difficult for highly-educated persons with critical skills to reach America’s shores. Instead such restrictions encourage  the impoverished, poorly-educated desperate for a better life to cross our borders illegally.

    The Dream Act that would be included in the current proposal answers that need. It would grant amnesty to immigrant children and young adults who are in an unfair legal purgatory through no fault of their own.  Many of whom, in fact, are the very “best and brightest” advocates seek for a competitive America. These immigrant children are already here, let’s open the doors for them to contribute.

Unlike 2007,  the atmosphere in Congress this year appears more favorable for passage of some form of comprehensive immigration reform.  

Long-range forecasts are always risky.  However, despite often bitter partisan disputes on other controversial issues, there seems to be an undercurrent consensus that some measure will reach President Obama’s desk.  But with so many competing voices, what the actual bill will look like on arrival is uncertain.

One thing is very clear.  The current immigration system is not working--it must be fixed.  Now is the time.

Steve Coon

May 13, 2013