MODERN TIMES

Art Hobson

ahobson@uark.edu

NWA Times 7 July 2007

The immigration debate

People should keep their minds open, but not so open that their brains fall out. It's humane and rational to welcome legal immigrants and give them plenty of support, but it makes no sense to admit them in their present overwhelming numbers, or to encourage more illegal immigrants by legalizing the 12-plus million who are already here, or to admit guest workers when our own workers' wages are so low and when so many Americans live in poverty.

Most immigrants, legal and illegal, are good hard-working people. Many European nations welcome legal immigrants and devote sufficient special education, welfare benefits, health benefits, and other services to each one to assure that they are successfully and completely integrated, while severely restricting their numbers. So should we. A restrictive policy is not only best for the accepted immigrants and for the accepting nations, it's also best for the nations from which the immigrants come, and for the planet. In the long run, it's probably even best for the would-be immigrants who don't get in.

U.S. immigration policy is paralyzed and dysfunctional because we have a hard time holding both a supposedly "liberal" and a supposedly "conservative" idea in our heads simultaneously: Cherish and care properly for every immigrant, while severely limiting their numbers. The issue is mired in ideology. Many liberals, and some conservatives, ruin the chances of real reform by insisting that our nation accept nearly unlimited numbers. Many conservatives think immigrants should be kept out because they are lazy, they refuse to speak English, they are dirty, they form gangs, etc. We'll never reach consensus so long as we hold fast to such notions. Immigrants are good people, but we must put reasonable limits on their numbers and we must end illegal immigration.

There is broad agreement that we need to better control our borders. There is less agreement about the 12-plus million illegal immigrants here now. The key to solving both problems is not fences, which will always be "leaky," and it's not mass deportation, which is impractical and often inhumane. The key is effective workplace enforcement. Employment is the great attraction. Immigrants come here for work, and once that work is found, other family members follow.

Surely this high-tech nation can come up with an identity card that protects the civil liberties of legal citizens, that is essentially impossible to forge, and that employers can use to identify legal citizens. Once such a system is up and working, employers should be required, subject to real penalties, to verify the legal status of all employees. Such a system would, in my opinion, cause many illegal immigrants and their families to return to their countries of origin, and prevent further illegal immigration. Mass deportations should not be needed.

It seems entirely reasonable to me to wait until workplace identification and border control are verifiably working before we talk about guest workers or legalizing illegal immigrants. It makes no sense to once again admit guest workers and grant legalization until we have stopped illegal immigration.

Slogans, generally a barrier to rational thought, are driving the debate. We hear that "America is a nation of immigrants" when in fact most nations are immigrant nations during some early part of their development. The question is not whether we are an immigrant nation, but rather what immigration rate is best for the nation and best for the world.

President Bush tells us that "immigrants do work that Americans won't do." But Americans will do any legal work, they will even spend their days cutting up chickens or descending into coal mines, if you're willing to pay them a decent wage. Bush's slogan is an admission that high immigration reduces American working class wages. America doesn't have a worker shortage problem, it has a low wage problem. Guest worker programs and tolerance of illegal immigration are sops to businessmen seeking cheap workers. Reduced immigration rates will increase working class bargaining power and wages.

High immigration rates harm our neighbors. Neighboring nations cannot afford to lose so many of their most energetic and ambitious citizens. The large number of immigrants coming from Mexico represents a tremendous drain of the very people most essential to reform in Mexico.

High immigration rates harm the planet. Earth cannot afford more Americans. We are arguably the most overpopulated nation, because our 5 percent of global population hogs 25 percent of global resources. It's been estimated that we'd need four Earths to support the planet's population if everybody had America's gluttonous consumption habits. Yet America is 300 million strong and growing at nearly 1 percent per year, a rate more akin to the developing nations than to the industrialized world. This expansion is driven by immigration: Immigrants and their U.S.-born children are responsible for two-thirds of our rampant growth.

Legal plus illegal immigration stands at an all-time high of 1.7 million per year. The United States accepts more legal immigrants than the rest of the world combined. Either the rest of the world knows something we don't know, or we are uniquely wise in admitting such large numbers. I don't think we are uniquely wise.

For the planet, for America, for American workers, for neighboring nations, and for the long-run good of the immigrants themselves, we should reduce illegal immigration to practically zero, and reduce legal immigration far below present levels. At the same time, we must do much more than we are doing now for the welfare and full integration of every legal immigrant.
LINK TO ART HOBSON'S HOMEPAGE