Rob Martin is a professional economist and semi-regular guest contributor at The Bull Elephant.
The so-called “immigration reform debate” ignores the real issue. Let’s start with what most people can agree on. Virtually everyone favors legal immigration, although we could debate the details. Most people also agree that we are not going to deport all 11 million illegal immigrants that are here now.
Unless future massive illegal immigration is prevented, we will have the same problem with illegal aliens in a few years that we have today. If we are too lenient with the illegal immigrants that are here now, many more illegal aliens will quickly replace them, just as happened after the last immigration “reform.” So the reform debate should concentrate on how to prevent future waves of illegal immigration. Consideration of what to do with the illegal aliens here now should be start with the premise that any “amnesty” should not be so attractive that it will encourage another wave of illegals expecting eventual amnesty.
What to do with those here now
This is where reasonable people may differ. I believe that the best approach would be to require those here today to register immediately with the government. They would have their picture taken and be fingerprinted then issued a permit to continue to reside here. Since these people came here illegally, jumping the line on millions of others waiting to be admitted legally, they should be denied citizenship for some period of time and pending good behavior. Felonies would mean deportation. During this period, say ten years, they would be expected to work and pay taxes. Public benefits could be limited. While we can debate whether this is too draconian or too lenient, or if another approach would work better, the key is that citizenship (which is largely the right to vote) is denied for a fairly lengthy period of time.
What to do to discourage others coming illegally in the future
Some think we need a higher wall to prevent future illegal immigration. Given that a significant number (40%) of illegal immigrants simply overstayed their visas, I think we need another idea. It seems to me that the obvious way to discourage future illegal immigrants is to change current laws and procedures to simplify and expedite the deportation of those who come here illegally in the future. While there are any number of ways to do that, I would suggest that anyone unable to demonstrate their right to be here within 48 hours after being detained by the authorities as a suspected illegal alien would be summarily deported. State and local authorities would by authorized to assist in enforcing these laws, detaining those suspected of being here illegally and handing them over to the federal authorities. If any of those deported feel that the deportations were unjustified, they could make their case to the U.S. Embassy in their home countries. Errors will be made and so a system could be set up to indemnify any deported unjustly.
The “Be Charitable” argument
Some will disagree with these points, arguing that we should allow unlimited immigration as a charitable measure for the billions of people that would benefit by moving here. Let me point out that virtually open borders would not be generally beneficial to either new immigrants or current U.S. residents, because the influx of unskilled workers would quickly depress wages for those with limited skills to near third world levels. Minimum wage laws would guarantee that these millions of people would work off the books on jobs where they are paid by cash or check without benefits or health care. Lawn care, day care, housecleaning and such would become much cheaper and those with good jobs could have full time servants. Those eligible would drop out of the labor market, opting for disability, food stamps or black market jobs. Assimilation would be difficult and the schools would be overrun with non – English speakers. The costs of various welfare programs would soar, leading to irresistible pressure to curb those benefits. As Milton Friedman said, you can have a welfare state or open borders, but not both.
15 comments
Boehner at the Country Club
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2014/04/24/boehner-mocks-colleagues-immigration-reform/8101699/
Watch this brief video:
Racists, Xenophobes & Bigots
Shaun Kenney’s
sanctimonious self-serving diatribes and politburo style party purges as
written in blogs and captured on video are thoroughly discussed by witnesses
who know all about real prejudice, name calling and attempts to stifle open
debate.
Fix the agencies
http://nypost.com/2014/04/22/computer-glitch-creating-havoc-with-immigration-cases/
And the reason why DHS ICE doesn’t have adequate back-up and tech capability? Inadequate managerial talent and skills.
My immigration plan in (2) steps:
1. Grant illegal immigrants resident alien status with no chance of citizenship. Must register by X date.
2. After X date, fine employers of illegal aliens $50K per employee
Obviously there’s some details in there (like using e-verify and such).
Mr. Martin,
Your solutions are only viable if you first fix the failure at the source. Why is it that Democrats always understand that personnel is key to getting things done the way they want them done , be it legally or illegally, while Republicans are all sound and fury on so many issues?
Why don’t we just enforce the laws we have?
I have a great idea. Why don’t we at least try to uphold the 1986 Immigration laws already on the books. Reagan said that it was one of his greatest regrets that he was convinced by the liberals, particularly Ted Kennedy that if he signed the Immigration bill, which gave a few million amnesty, other provisions of the bill would be upheld as promised.
Almost 30 years later, the borders have never been closed by both Republican and Democrat presidents. It’s as porus now as it ever was, maybe even more so. Reagan was promised an employment verification system that got little funding, and may have been designed by the same architects as the Obamacare website. Obama abandoned it entirely, and had that funding shoved over to his secure communities project which only tracked imprisoned convicted felons. Our border patrol agents were equipped with bean bag bullets, while the drug cartel members were equipped with high powered weapons supplied by the Fast and Furious project.
Since the 1986 Immigration law, that was passed by a liberal Congress, we need to go back and follow that law that includes the promises made by the liberals at the time. Ted Kennedy promised Reagan that if he would plase just sign that law, the liberals would never ask for an amnesty again. That was until the McCain/Kennedy bill was pushed and promoted by George W Bush.
As so many have said, close the borders with proof that they really are closed, and then we can talk about those already here. By the way, I am unaware that many if any illegals are hiding in the shadows. During the partial government shutdown, the feds truied to keep our WWII vets from visiting their monuments in DC, yet an immigration rally was allowed. I didn’t think you could hide in the shadows on the national mall.
Good start, Rob, especially since you avoid ad hominem attacks — suggesting pro-amnesty Republicans are puppets of big business — suggesting those opposing immigration reform do so out of fear of “the other” and bigotry. We certainly need this type of discussion in the GOP.
Nevertheless, this piece is a little sparse on fact and heavy on opinion, which I wasn’t expecting when I read the byline “…is a professional economist…” 😉
You say a better border wall might stop only 60% of illegal immigration — wouldn’t that at least be a piece in the puzzle to fix the problem?
You wrote, “It seems to me that the obvious way to discourage future illegal immigrants is to change current laws and procedures to simplify and expedite the deportation of those who come here illegally in the future.” Could you expand on that? Many illegal immigrants have shown real moxie in breaking laws and avoiding prosecution — what specific changes in “laws and procedures” do you see as impressing them enough to discourage illegal immigration?
Cheers,
I suggest that it’s more than a mere suggestion that pro-amnesty Republicans are puppets of big business. Head on to opensecrets.org and put in the name of any pro-amnesty Republican you care to name, and I can guarantee you they are getting the lion’s share of their money from Wall Street, lawyers, or certain large industries. There is more of an appearance of a conflict of interest.
I’m in the early stages of preparing an article on the dark underbelly of the immigration issue that will need to be faced to come up with a realistic solution to the problem.
Make sure you look at the 2006-2007 hearings. 🙂
That might be true, ARB, but the problem is that it doesn’t get to the nub of the immigration question anymore than calling someone a “nativist,” and it doesn’t move the conversation into an area where arguments can be tested. Instead, it just pisses everyone off and makes them talk (yell) past each other.
If amnesty or some kind of slow-motion citizen-track — which Rob appears to be suggesting — is bad for Americans, then it’s bad for Americans. Period. FWIW, I think it is.
Get ready for the hate mail, Rob. It’s only a matter of time.
Where do I start? First let’s identify why illegal immigrants are coming across the border.
1. Corruption and lack of opportunity South of the Border. Most societies south of us are Socialist with poor or failing economies. WAKE-UP AMERICA, WE ARE HEADING IN THAT DIRECTION. Although Nations like Mexico have strong Election Laws with photo Id., no Gerrymandering, ink well staining of finger, etc. corruption is rampant and is tolerated by the population.
2. The cartels recruit by force so people are forced into smuggling by creating a simple choice; refuse and die as well as you family; or go to the US and if not caught you will be given everything you need to survive and possibly thrive. If you succeed we will give your family money. If caught the US will give you water, food, and a short incarceration then send you back so you can try again.
3. There is a political movement in Mexico called La Raza, which has the attitude that much of the western US really belongs to Mexico and should be reclaimed by slowing invading America until the Hispanic population can politically force the US to return what we stole from Mexico.
So what do we do about it:
1. Singapore has a law that provides the death penalty for drug smugglers. Why not here? If faced with death here when caught, there will probably be more resistance in Mexico before they strap on the back pack and swim across the river or walk across the desert. Until America takes this invasion seriously we will never stop this, ever.
2. Enforce the current laws on the books. If there are no jobs here and stringent penalties for any American company or individual that employs or provides commercial transactions to an illegal alien the attractiveness of coming here will stop. Many will self deport. They walked in, let them walk back. In fact make it easier for them to go home. Let’s provide them a bus ticket to the border after they have set through a training class on how they can fix their country once they return.
3. Incarceration if caught. Provide a negative incentive for them to stay. Those that decided that the grass is greener here, if they can not make money by setting in jail when caught they will leave. Mexico does not tolerate people coming illegally into their country, why should we.
I am tired of the argument the we can not deport 11 to 20 million illegals. We don’t have to. If the market for their services dries up they will leave. They are not here to make us a better country. They are here to sponge off of our generosity and send what money they make home. We are making it attractive to do so.
Excellent points. Over the decades we have sent billions and billions of dollars to Mexico for aid, yet nothing ever changes within the Mexican government, nothing. The government is run by the cartels, and there has never been any movement by the citizens of that country to clean up and change their government.
There were reports not long ago where some in Mexico, who were tired of the cartel rule by violence, set about trying to out the cartel members and their locations. Seems that that light went out as soon as it was ignited. It was similar to the Iranians who participated with the revolution to overturn the government in Iran, only to have no support from the US.
Your PS note is completely wrong. Why do you think South Americans from Socialist countries come to the US? Because they are fleeing from Socialism and its failed economy! If they liked their system of government, why on Earth would they leave their native countries? They come to America to achieve the American dream, while that is fast dissapearing thanks to the progressive policies of the current administration.