Immigration
Today an estimated 8 million or more people live in the U.S. without legal documents, and each year the number grows by an estimated 250,000 as more immigrants enter illegally or overstay their visas. More than half of those entering or already here come from Mexico.
Although the U.S. government has encouraged closer trade, investment and political ties with Mexico, it has labored in vain to keep a lid on the flow of labor across the border. Since 1986, the numbers of tax dollars appropriated and agents assigned for border control have risen dramatically. Yet by any real measure of results, the effort to constrict illegal immigration has failed.
Demand for low-skilled labor continues to grow in the U.S. while the domestic supply of suitable workers inexorably declines,yet U.S. immigration law contains virtually no legal channel through which low-skilled immigrant workers can enter the country to fill that gap.
The result is an illegal flow of workers characterized by more permanent and less circular migration, smuggling, document fraud, deaths at the border, artificially depressed wages and threats to civil liberties.
Legalizing Mexican migration would, in one stroke, bring a huge underground market into the open. It would allow American producers in important sectors of our economy to hire the workers they need to grow. It would raise wages and working conditions for millions of low-skilled workers and spur investment in human capital. It would free resources and personnel for the war on terrorism.
Contrary to common objections, evidence does not suggest that a properly designed system of legal Mexican migration will unleash a flood of new immigrants to the U.S., hurt low-skilled Americans, burden taxpayers, create an unassimilated underclass, encourage lawbreaking or compromise border security.
President Bush and leaders of both parties in Congress should return to the task of turning America’s dysfunctional immigration system into one that is economically rational, humane and compatible with how Americans actually arrange their lives.
Daniel Griswold
(Griswold is associate director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Trade Policy Studies in Washington, D.C.)
On May 1, illegal immigrants and their supporters across the country boycotted our nation, pronouncing the “Great American Boycott.” They refused to attend work, didn’t send their children to school, boycotted American businesses and gathered and protested in metropolitan areas to demonstrate their significance to America’s economy.
While the sheer masses of recent immigration protesters were indeed significant, so far the assessment is that the impact on our economy was negligible.
As a matter of fact, the most significant impact was related to our transportation system. Roads that were feared might be heavily congested were, surprisingly, lightly traveled. On the other hand, our transit systems, which are generally underutilized, experienced increased use.
The California Senate weighed in on the issue, passing on a party-line vote a resolution honoring the boycott. In the resolution, there is not a single mention of the words “illegal” or “illegal immigrant,” nor is there mention of the left’s more favorable term “undocumented worker.”
However, the most disturbing occurrence was when the Democrat leadership shut down the operations and floor sessions of the Legislature in honor of the boycott.
There are three glaring hypocrisies in the majority party’s actions.
The first and most disconcerting is that a state government, whose existence is reliant upon tax revenue, much of it from California businesses, promoted the boycott of those very businesses.
The second and more symbolic hypocrisy is that although they canceled floor sessions, the legislative leadership still allowed Democrats who refused to work to collect their per diem.
The third problem is the name the boycott was given, “The Great American Boycott.” It is disingenuous to give America’s name to a boycott by those who have broken U.S. law to reside in this country.
Mimi Walters
Assemblywoman
R-Laguna Niguel
Mexican President Vicente Fox recently addressed the state Legislature while I was in a secure location somewhere near the Capitol.
President Fox entered our immigration debate with both feet, using code words to call for full amnesty and an unrestricted guest worker program.
I suppose this should not come as a shock to anyone,after all, when they encourage mass migration to America it helps Mexico by allowing them to continue to pass the buck on helping their own people through true rule of law, education and job opportunities.
I only hope the next president of Mexico does a better job for his people than this president has done.
Chuck DeVore
Assemblyman
R-Irvine
