The escalating child migrant crisis has once again brought our ailing immigration system back into the mainstream spotlight. As usual, both sides revert back to their usual arguments. Republicans take the migrant crisis as being a result of loose borders and lax executive enforcement, and many call for more deportation of both the child migrants and all illegal aliens within the United States. In contrast, Democrats generally argue for making it easier and faster to become a citizen and to implement gradual amnesty. Though both sides have legitimate concerns and arguments, I (surprisingly) mostly side with Democrats on this issue, and I strongly believe that Republicans should reconsider their stance on immigration reform. Here’s why:
- We need more immigrants, legal or illegal, and badly. Contrary to the beliefs of many, virtually all types of immigrants – legal or illegal, skilled or unskilled, etc. – benefit the country economically (though legal immigrants are, of course, preferable to illegal immigrants). Skilled immigrants make up a large proportion of innovative business start-ups, while low-skilled immigrants lower prices for consumers & employers and take jobs that natives are less inclined to perform. All groups add to national GDP, and (unlike in many European countries), they usually contribute more to overall tax revenues than they consume via social programs, helping to balance budgets at the federal, state, and local levels. As such, there is a strong economic argument to expanding legal immigration and making legal naturalization avenues more efficient. Macro-economically, more legal immigrants could serve as both a short and long-term economic stimulant to the moribound US economy, adding to short and long-term supply and demand. Due to the retirement of the baby boomers, the US labor force will continue to contract in the coming decades, producing labor shortages that an influx of immigrants could help fill (and freeing up natives to perform other jobs, thus boosting job creation). Additionally (and largely due to the aforementioned retirement of the baby boomers), America faces long-run fiscal challenges that more legal immigrants (with their contribution to higher GDP and higher tax revenues) could help to alleviate. Considering that Republicans are broadly regarded as the “party of business” and of fiscal conservatism, Republicans should thus be embracing legal immigration. Instead, though they pay lip service to legal immigration, their laser-like focus on illegal immigration and accelerating enforcement measures overshadows their support for legal immigration. Ironically, an increasing of legal immigration via immigration reform would help to solve illegal immigration and the presence of large numbers of undocumented workers.
- Continued deportation of unauthorized immigrants is impractical and costly. Currently, there are over 11 million unauthorized immigrants residing within the United States. Many Republicans argue that deportation should be ramped up to deal with them. I disagree. First of all, despite the perception among many, deportation rates have stabilized at relatively high levels in recent years – rates have not fallen off a cliff, so it’s not like this strategy isn’t being actively pursued. Second, can you imagine trying to deport all 11 million + immigrants from the US? Deportation already costs the government quite a bit, with the Department of Homeland Security reportedly requesting approximately $230 million in budgetary authority for the deportation of undocumented immigrants just in fiscal year 2015. That is for the current rate of about 400,000 people a year, which is, of course, partially offset by continued inflows of unauthorized immigrants. Logistically, deportations of a larger scale would undoubtedly create massive strains on the system. Additionally, the removal of 11 million people would be hugely destructive economically – lowering productivity, raising prices, and disrupting both the creation and operation of businesses, at a time when the US has yet to fully recover from the 2007-2009 recession. Of course, we also cannot forget the costs of splitting up families, which imposes deep scars the social fabric of the nation. If anything, deportation should be scaled down.
- Resources devoted to immigration enforcement are at historical highs – and further enforcement measures, like building a wall, will not stop illegal immigration. As partially mentioned above, immigration enforcement (such as deportations) is hardly on decline. Indeed, according to The Economist, border enforcement costs about $20 billion a year, which is more than all other federal law enforcement agencies combined. Yet, despite all these costs, we clearly still have enforcement problems, and until we reform the immigration system, we always will. Why? The reason is simple: the economic incentives for people to immigrate to the United States are overwhelming. Even for low-skilled immigrants, pay is usually several times greater in the United States than it is in their country of origin. No matter how much the federal government devotes to border enforcement and trying to prevent people from immigrating (legally or not), people will keep trying to come here – and many will find ways to succeed. Since these forces will not be disappearing anytime soon, it would be better to work with the force, not against.
- Current immigration policy is tantamount to anti-trade protectionism – the antithesis of Republican ideology. Republicans, in accordance with their belief in free markets, tend to be much more supportive of free trade than liberal Democrats. However, the current legal immigration system is based largely on a series of quotas. According to Vox.com, on the employment side a maximum of 65,000 H1B visas (for high-skilled workers) and 66,000 H2B visas (for low-skilled workers) are issued by the federal government annually. Both of these quotas are usually hit pretty quickly, indicating that employer demand in the US is far outstripping supply. These quotas are artificially restricting the supply of workers, raising employment costs and decreasing growth prospects. Additionally, the number of “green cards” supplied tends to be less than demanded, especially for people without US-based relatives or prospective employers. These restrictions do not let the market to operate efficiently, which goes against Republican notions of free market capitalism. Not to mention, these quotas help to drive the illegal immigration that everybody is so furious about.
- Current immigration proposals do not grant unconditional amnesty – nor should they. Last time I checked, the current mainstream immigration reform bills passed by House committees in the summer of 2013 allowed unauthorized residents to gain citizenship only after meeting several conditions, including paying several fines and going through vigorous checks. Republicans are right to be weary of the granting of unconditional amnesty – unauthorized immigrants did, after all, technically break the law, and the rule of law must be upheld for the republic to function properly. However, the current bills (and any bill that is likely to be passed) will not let unauthorized immigrants off the hook. Now, many Republicans say that any form of amnesty, conditional or not, is both unfair (as others still had to wait to become naturalized) and undermines the rule of law. I think the fines help to partially offset this, punishing those who broke the law. Though it (understandably) seems unfair that immigrants would be able to gain a “special” route to citizenship this way, such a route is, on net, still much more practical than sending those residing here illegally “to the back of the immigration line”. Doing so would be too costly economically, difficult logistically, and would overwhelm the already strained legal immigration system.
- Republicans could use immigration reform to their political advantage. Everyone knows that Hispanic voters tend to lean Democratic, and that this persuasion is becoming increasingly costly for Republicans electorally. As the Hispanic population continues to grow in influence, the political parties increasingly need their support in order to win elections. Right now, Republican opposition to immigration reform and a perceived anti-immigrant ideology is hurting the party. Embrace immigration reform, and the Republicans could vastly improve their political fortunes.
Considering all of the outstanding issues on the federal policy radar, it is understandable that immigration reform might not top the policy agenda at the moment. But until Washington is ready to devote its full attention to the issue, Republicans should seriously consider revising their views on the subject. Too much is at stake for them not to do so.