Alternative Insight

The Immigration Debate



A previous article, The Immigration Wars, examined the immigration debate, and concluded that "unauthorized immigration to the United States has become a political football. Political correctness, catering to the Hispanic vote, and Right vs. Left have replaced an intelligent and objective analysis of a major problem." During the years, the immigration debate has not matured, only become more illogical and political.

On July 15, 2013, Atlantic Magazine and the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce sponsored a "debate' on Immigration Reform between Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and president of Americans for Tax Reform, Grover Norquist. Moderated by Steven Clemons, Washington editor-at-large of The Atlantic and editor-in-chief of AtlanticLIVE, the magazine's live events series, the "debate" contained incongruities - the two political adversaries agreed almost entirely on the need for immigration and failed to describe procedures for reforming the process. Comments revealed the illogical concepts and political motives that guide discussions on immigration reform. Unproven generalizations by the two participants are characteristic of the Immigration Reform debate, which needs examination and exposure in order to elevate the debate to a meaningful level.

The criticism does not infer any opinion, pro or con, on the immigration debate. Intention is only to highlight the emptiness that characterizes the immigration discussion.

Mayor Emanuel concentrated on new immigration and ignored its humanitarian aspects. Proposing economic benefits as the principal reason for immigration, none of which were clarified by either facts or statistics, he treated immigrants as a commodity. Irrelevant statements, contradictory expressions, and specious arguments highlighted President Barack Obama's former chief of staff's contributions to the "debate." Some samples;

Fifty percent of small business applications for new business licenses in Chicago come from immigrants.

No explanation of what types of businesses (service, consulting, industrial), establishing of the businesses, or how this claim translates into meaningful economic growth. The statement may only highlight a problem - because Chicago in June 2013 had the largest unemployment of the five major U.S. cities (9.55%) and top ten metro areas, immigrants, who are a major component of the unemployment rolls, would probably pursue self-employment through small service businesses. Lacking details, the statement is meaningless.

The second magnificent mile of Chicago's 26th street contributes the second most sales taxes to the city. Its retail businesses pull people from all over.

A stretch of 26th street houses Chicago’s Mexican community. Filled with restaurants, clothing stores, groceries and specialty shops, these businesses are a credit to the industriousness of the inhabitants. However, the businesses do not produce; they only sell production, some of which are imports and harm the trade balance. If customers did not purchase the production on this street, they would purchase these goods, or other goods, elsewhere. Does Mayor Emanuel suppose that Chicago's 26th Street is directly responsible for sales tax contributions to the treasury, and that these taxes would not exist or be collected if 26th Street did not exist?

As all municipalities, Chicago relies on property taxes for funding its departments, especially education. Emanuel stressed that immigration is needed because

New people buy homes and pay property taxes.

In less fashionable words, "I need them because they can help me with Chicago's $1 billion budget deficit this year, which has led to the closing of 49 elementary schools." Self-serving and incorrect.

The children of illegal immigrants attend schools, and American taxpayers support their schooling. If the illegal immigrants, 11.1 million in the entire U.S. and 525,000 in Illinois, were able to purchase property and pay taxes, their contributions would partially, only partially, compensate for the educational benefits given their children. However, the illegal and legal immigrants, being mostly low wage earners for several years, could not easily repay the cost of their share of municipal services plus welfare, training, and citizen preparation. Chicago is already providing almost cost free services to unemployed citizens of the highest unemployment rolls of all major cities. Don't these citizens deserve the jobs, attention, and provisions before new immigrants?

Before Mayor Emanuel pushes immigration as being economically beneficial to the county he governs, he should do some research and arithmetic. The three largest foreign-born groups in metropolitan Chicago are from Mexico (582,028 persons), Poland (137,670), and India (76,931). Immigration addresses Chicago's population decline, but burdens the municipality with social costs and dubious economic advantages

A 2009 report, Mexicans in the Chicago area, which referenced wage scales before the 2008 crash, states:

In 2000, median wage estimates showed that there were more foreign-born Mexican men in the Chicago region earning from $6 to $12 per hour, the lowest wage category than those in all other wage categories. Similarly, median annual earnings of Latinos are approximately $21,500 compared to $36,600 for white non-Latinos, according to a recent survey of the region. Many Mexicans, both US and foreign born face obstacles to gaining better employment and financial prosperity, including low education levels and inadequate English skills; limited contacts beyond their circle of friends and family; problems with validating degrees and other work credentials earned in Mexico; and cultural differences. For undocumented immigrants the obstacles are even greater.

When the larger majority of low wage immigrants are finally able to purchase homes, will their tax contributions exceed the social welfare costs that enabled them to survive? Even then, a $3000 - $5000 property tax will not compensate for the $12,000- $16,000 educational costs for two children. And that is only if they stay in Chicago and don't, as many immigrants, move out to the suburbs. The 2000 census showed a trend - more immigrants in the suburbs of metropolitan Chicago (788,000 persons) than in the city of Chicago (629,000).

Responding to a question of how Chicago is caring for its immigrants, Emanuel said:

Chicago has a large expenditure for the process for immigrants to become citizens.

Large expenditure. Is that a benefit?

The mayor claimed that

Chicago is the fifth largest Mexican city and second largest Polish city.

Because Chicago's Polish Americans number at 182,064, the second claim does not seem accurate. Why does the mayor give these statistics importance? He senses this will increase Chicago's exports to Poland and Mexico. Has it, why should it, and why are new immigrants needed? Actually, the reverse is more likely to occur. Remittances, travel to the home countries and purchase of property and goods from them will increase imports and send the Chicago money out of Chicago.

More dubious words:

Forty percent of patents come from immigrants who have furnished high tech entrepreneurs.

Rahm Emanuel must be referring to the entire nation rather than Chicago, which is not a high tech city. His words have an interpretation of disparagement - the United States, which prides itself on having the world's finest educational institutions and innovative population, cannot compete with foreign sources. He should also be aware that the skilled immigrants (in sourced outsourcing) contribute to U.S. unemployment:

The job market for recent college graduates in the United States, April 05, 2013.

Men who had earned bachelor’s degrees in 2011 had an unemployment rate of 16.1 percent in October 2011, compared with 11.2 percent for their female counterparts. Over the period of October 2007 to October 2009, the unemployment rate of both male and female recent bachelor’s degree recipients rose sharply. The increase in unemployment was especially severe for men, who experienced a peak unemployment rate of 26.6 percent in October 2009, more than twice the rate of their female counterparts.

The October 2011 unemployment rate for men who had earned advanced degrees in 2011 was 12.0 percent, compared with 6.1 percent for women who had earned advanced degrees in 2011.

And an emotional and compelling statement:

Nothing like the dedication of an immigrant child to their studies.

This is probably true and commendable, but neglects that the challenges facing children of immigrants - cultural adaptation, problems in communication, problems in understanding, victims of prejudice, and feelings of rejection - lead many to find allegiance in marginal activities. Mayor Rahm Emanuel invites immigrants without having ameliorated the problems that they face, and which has contributed to making Chicago the gang capital of the United States. According to the Chicago Crime Commission, "a 2012 Chicago Police Department gang audit found there are more than 600 gang factions in the city, with a minimum combined membership of 70,000." The Latin Kings, one of many Latino gangs in Chicago and not the largest, have 20,000 of their 50,000 members in Chicago. Hispanically Speaking News relates that "Two rival (Latino) alliances operating in Chicago are the People Nation (made up of the Latin Kings, Vice Lords, Black P. Stones, Gaylords, South Side Popes, Insane Unknowns, Mickey Cobras, Four Corner Hustlers) and Folk Nation (made up of the Black Disciples, Gangster Disciples, La Raza Nation, Spanish Cobras, Latin Eagles, Maniac Latin Disciples, Simon City Royals, and Gangster Two-Six).

Rahm Emanuel recites the same dubious proposition as many proponents of immigration but does not offer any evidence for support. He suggests that an increase in population has economic benefits but does not show why these must come from immigration (or legalizing the illegals) rather than from native births, and uses spurious information to intimate that an immigrant is preferable to a native laborer. How can this be? The U.S. native has cultural, language, educational and other skills that the immigrant does not have. Despite continuous population growth, the U.S. has severe unemployment and almost static Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The country's greatest economic problem is that it cannot offer sufficient jobs to its growing population. Why add to the population? Could it be to lower the wages? Something wrong somewhere.

Grover Norquist, the nation's most ardent supporter of lowering the income tax, steered his presentation to a political path - trying to prove that the Republicans were always friendly to immigration and the Democrats nasty to newcomers to United States' shores. Using clichés and sweeping statements, Norquist referred to the past as if it were the present and invoked the memory of former President Ronald Reagan to support his arguments. Presenting himself as heir apparent to preserving Reagan's policies, which he perceives as a guide to a successful economy, and others regard as the underlying cause of present day economic problems, Norquist used ghosts to define the present Republican thrust on immigration.

Without any facts to support his argument, Norquist tied immigration to his favorite subject and blithely stated:

Because we had immigration and lower taxes, we grew faster.

This is a strange and false statement. The U.S. economy grew quickly after World War II when income tax brackets were 20-90 percent during the fifty decade and 14-70 percent during the sixty decade.

During the late 1800s and early 1900s, when the United States expanded from coast to coast, needed settlers to occupy empty agricultural lands and replace Native American populations, needed miners to extract the newly discovered resources and workers for rapidly expanding heavy industry, immigration was a necessity for economic growth. In 2013, the frontier has been closed, California is the most populated state, the Native Americans have been suppressed, many of the mines are closed, and steel mills are operating at reduced levels.

Grover Norquist is evidently unaware that conditions have changed and what was beneficial in 1901 may not be relevant today.

More than anything, Norquist wanted to put the genie back in the bottle and prove that a divided GOP, whose 2004 platform states, "We oppose amnesty because it would have the effect of encouraging illegal immigration and would give an unfair advantage to those who have broken our laws," is favorable to Immigration Reform.

If you go back into American history, the Chinese exclusion act, historically, going up to the 1980's, every anti-immigrant impulse was driven by organized labor...and yes, moderate democrats.

Another comment on yesteryear catapulted into the twenty-first century. Organized labor of the early 1900s was not anti-immigration; it opposed using immigrants as pawns to lower the wage rates and struggled to improve their conditions in housing, health, and education.

Norquist is also guilty of faulty logic. Because organized labor may have favored the Democrats and not have favored immigration, does not mean that the Democrats, composed of northern liberals and southern Dixiecrats at that time, automatically favored labor and followed labor's immigration policies.

Can there be a discussion without the president of Americans for Tax Reform mentioning his hero, President Ronald Reagan?

(I advise) the Republicans in the house and the senate to encourage them to do what Reagan did. This is the Reagan Republican view.

President Reagan, in 1986, signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act, which legalized close to 3 million undocumented immigrants. He signed the bill with the provision that safeguards prevent additional illegal immigration. Noting that 11.1 million illegal immigrants subsequently crossed the borders, a Ronald Reagan of today might be hesitant to sign another bill of the same type.

Another sweeping, and peculiar statement by Grover Norquist.

China, Japan and Europe are not the future because they don't have immigrations.

China has the largest internal immigration of all time, moving hundreds of millions from rural to urban areas. Does it need external immigration?

If resource limited and prosperous Japan had one-half the resources and area of the United States, it would be a super powerhouse and would need immigrants to increase its output. Its declining population will lead to a problem of financing its social security, but Grover Norquist did not discuss that aspect. Declining production and lower GDP is not a catastrophe. In resilient, robotic, and social- minded Japan, exports/capita and GDP/capita may actually rise. Toyota may sell fewer cars, but each Japanese citizen may feel more prosperous. Toyota might favor immigration, but the Japanese may favor their centuries old singular national identity in preference to a few more Yen in the bank.

Struggling European countries have enough social and economic problems with their present citizens. Are re-arranging Europe's populations or allowing external immigration in a time of severe unemployment advisable?

A statement by the tax expert, which shows how his thoughts are directed.

Every business wants to legalize immigrants.

Every business? What poll has shown this? The rhetoric about immigration is loud but the effects of immigration on the United States' economy and life is relatively small. In a nation of 300 million, 11 million persons, or three percent, do not affect many businesses. Besides, it is not business that must make the decisions; it is the American people who should decide, and they may care.

Grover Norquist, in his attitude toward immigration, which is more towards President Obama's view, rather than that of Republican Senator Jim Demint, is reasonable and progressive. His failure is showing how he got there. Incoherent, dubious, spurious, sweeping and unauthenticated statements don't assist a cause and only provide ammunition for those railed against the cause. That is the story of Grover Norquist. His assumed power uses each new adherent to broadcast a growing power and gain more at his side in admiration. Despite his involvement with conservative institutions and praise from conservative folks, Norquist has never pulled any candidates into office, never determined any legislative decisions, and never obtained a mass movement.

Rahm Emanuel and Grover Norquist had a debate on immigration that failed to contribute to a meaningful understanding of immigration and its reform. Some less popularized features of immigration were previously disclosed in the earlier article The Immigration Wars, and are still relevant.They are only presented as alternative viewpoints that are neglected in the debate, and do not imply an opinion as to the worth of immigration in the present era.

Uncontrolled Central American immigration to the United States (Note: Mexico is considered as part of Central America) skews nations from their natural growth and deters them from seeking approaches to resolve significant social and economic problems.

The Central American leaders export their economic and social problems to the United States and never consider solving those problems.

The immigrants from Central American nations are close to their homes, can easily return to their native countries and have a tendency to remain culturally as Latinos. Previous waves of immigrants to the U.S. didn't contemplate, except in some rare cases, returning to their birth nations. They had more incentive to learn English and assimilate into the U.S. community.

Unauthorized immigration takes jobs from U.S. workers and lowers the wage scale. This seems obvious, but because Illegal workers are only 5% of the working population, their effects on jobs and wages are not excessive. Nevertheless, one study by the Center for Immigration studies, Increasing the Supply of Labor Through Immigration, Measuring the Impact on Native-born Workers, May 2004, Dr. George J. Borjas, includes all immigration, indicates effects, especially on less educated U.S. workers.

By increasing the supply of labor between 1980 and 2000, immigration reduced the average annual earnings of native-born men by an estimated $1,700 or roughly 4 percent. Among natives without a high school education, who roughly correspond to the poorest tenth of the workforce, the estimated impact was even larger, reducing their wages by 7.4 percent. The 10 million native-born workers without a high school degree face the most competition from immigrants, as do the eight million younger natives with only a high school education and 12 million younger college graduates.

Behind the scenes is the competition for jobs between ethnicities, similar to the antagonism between Cuban immigrants and Africa-American citizens, which erupted into civil strife in Florida.

Central American governments receive a dual benefit from the exportation of human capital; in addition to the solution for their unemployment, they receive remittances of monetary capital, which, because it is an import, harms the U.S. economy.

MEXICO CITY - Mexicans living abroad sent $11 billion home in the first half of 2006, an increase of 23 percent over the same period last year, the government news agency Notimex reported. Remittances represent Mexico's second-largest source of foreign income after oil.

Proposals to halt illegal immigration have generated controversy and little legislative progress. The reasons are due to the inadequate consideration to major factors - globalism and trade agreements - which have affected the labor markets, as well as to the legitimate fears of disease and terrorism crossing U.S. borders. It was predictable that the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) would disturb labor markets, but, similar to 9/11, no action was taken until the problem exploded. Delicate social, economic and political conditions in Mexico, for which the immigration of marginal populations acts as a safety valve, complicate the solution to the southern neighbor's export of labor. An immigration problem has become an immigration war of classes and words rather than a coordinated effort to resolve a compelling problem.

alternativeinsight
august, 2013

HOME PAGE MAIN PAGE

alternativeinsight@earthlink.net

No Need to Login to post a comment.

comments powered by Disqus