As the nation approached Independence Day, a sweeping immigration
reform bill was approved by the Senate by a vote of 68-32, with 14
Republicans voting in favor of the measure. The GOP-controlled House
should do the same, before bipartisan goodwill fades.
The arguments used to postpone immigration reform are bogus. The positive aspects of the legislation far outweigh its flaws.
Consider, for example, the notion that the border needs to be
“secured” first. Immigration already has fallen dramatically. In the
case of Mexicans, net immigration had dropped to zero by 2011 and is
likely negative by now—meaning more Mexicans have been going home than
coming to the U.S. The number of undocumented Mexicans declined by
almost 1 million between 2007 and 2011.
What is the main cause of this? While other factors may be at play,
including improving economic conditions in Mexico, the main reason
appears to be the weak U.S. economy. People aren’t coming to the U.S.
because the economy is not producing enough jobs. Tightened border
security appears to have played little role.
Despite a sharp increase in border patrol activities since 2000,
including passage of the Security Fence Act of 2006, prior to the 2007
economic collapse the 10 states with the most immigrants saw their
undocumented populations rise by half a million.
But as soon as the recession set in, the number of illegal entries
dropped by two thirds and requests for H1-B visas—temporary work permits
primarily for tech workers—decreased as well. This is consistent with
what happened after the bursting of the dot.com bubble in 2000.
Opponents of comprehensive reform are now on the defensive. Zero or
negative net immigration means either that the border is as secure as it
will ever get in a democracy, or that immigration is so much more
sensitive to the economy than to enhanced security that further efforts
to secure the border are senseless.
Killing The Party
For their part, Republicans have a vested interest in passing
immigration reform as soon as possible. To judge by the GOP vote among
Hispanics and Asians, continued opposition to immigration reform could
be suicidal.
While Latinos constituted 5% of the total vote in 1996, they
represented 10% in the 2012 presidential elections. Together, Hispanics
and Asians supported Democrats by a 3-to-1 margin.
If the perception persists that th e GOP is anti-immigrant, Hispanics
could become a permanent Democratic constituency. This doesn’t have to
be. Earlier GOP leaders had strong Hispanic support, including Ronald
Reagan and George W. Bush, both of whom received close to 40% of the
Latino vote.
The argument that legalized immigrants will become permanent
Democrats mistakes the symptom for the cause. The cause of the
disproportionate Democratic support is not party loyalty, but fear that
Republicans are against immigrants. The Democratic support is a symptom
of that fear. Postponing reform will deepen it.
The economic and cultural arguments against putting undocumented
immigrants on a path to citizenship, and welcoming newcomers in the
future, also have been disproved by reality.
Rather than take away native jobs, foreign workers have helped
enlarge the economic pie. Economist Benjamin Powell, a senior fellow
with the Independent Institute, estimates that immigrants, legal and
undocumented together, add at least $36 billion per year net to the U.S.
economy.
As Arizona’s experience confirms, the millions of undocumented
workers also have not caused long-term unemployment to rise. Before
2008, undocumented foreigners made up 10% of Arizona’s 3-million-plus
workforce. But unemployment was a mere 4%. In other words, they were
filling a vacuum, not pushing natives aside.
Culturally, immigrants are not much different from natives either.
They are overwhelmingly religious, highly entrepreneurial and largely
family-oriented, with approximately half of all immigrants living with a
spouse and child.
Perhaps all this explains why acculturation patterns are similar to those of previous waves of immigrants.
The immigration bill is by no means perfect, but it is better than
previous reforms that created inflexible quota systems. The current
measure will better respond to the needs of the economy, rather than the
whims of bureaucrats and politicians.
That’s why immigration reform deserves House approval as well.
Alvaro Vargas Llosa is Senior Fellow of The Center on Global Prosperity at The Independent Institute.
He is a native of Peru and received his B.S.C. in international history
from the London School of Economics. His Independent Institute books
include Global Crossings: Immigration, Civilization, and America, Lessons From the Poor: Triumph of the Entrepreneurial Spirit, The Che Guevara Myth and the Future of Liberty, and Liberty for Latin America.
Full Biography and Recent Publications
No comments:
Post a Comment