If you listen to the news these days, you get the impression that immigration reform is inevitable. Never mind that it also felt this way in 2007 before the immigration deal collapsed. If you’re excited about these recent developments, try to understand the forces that propel and resist reform and you’ll know whether there will be reform this time around.
The current debate on immigration reform boils down to three main issues, namely: (1) the legalization of undocumented aliens; (2) stopping illegal immigration; and (3) encouraging the immigration of top talent from all over the world. The first two issues are related. In an article published in Foreign Affairs on February 11, 2013 entitled “Winning the Next Immigration Battle”, Edward Alden reminds us of the parallels between the immigration reform law of 1986 and the current efforts. Then, as now, the basic formula for reform was legalization in exchange for tougher immigration enforcement.
Let’s look at the first issue. Alden writes that the consensus in 1986 was that the US had little choice but to offer amnesty to those already living in the country because deporting them would be messy and expensive. There were around 3 million undocumented aliens at that time. The mood then was to wipe the slate clean by granting amnesty rather than on cleaning up the past by deporting the undocumented. However, amnesty did not stop illegal immigration. The undocumented population has since grown to its current size of 11 million. The challenge for current reform advocates is how to persuade lawmakers that it would be different this time and that legalization would not provide an incentive for future illegal immigration.
The second issue in the immigration reform debate is how to discourage illegal immigration. Proposals for curbing illegal immigration include tighter border security, strict workplace enforcement and establishing a guest worker program for low skilled workers. In 1986, the response was to secure the border and to penalize employers who employed undocumented aliens. There are similar calls these days for more border security and stricter workplace enforcement. However, when more than $90 billion has been spent on border security and $18 billion for the current year alone, when certain aliens face jail time for unauthorized entries, when employers who hire undocumented workers face fines and criminal sanctions, is there really anything more that could be done through legislation?
Both sides in the current debate agree that the 1986 law failed to end illegal border crossings and the employment of undocumented aliens. Opponents of immigration reform argue that legalization created an incentive for future illegal immigration. Proponents of reform counter that the 1986 law failed to stop illegal immigration because it did not anticipate the future flow of immigrants and the future needs of the economy for immigrants. They point out that businesses, especially in the agricultural and services sectors, could not hire the low-skilled workers they needed because visas were limited and the visa quota system was rigid. Thus, waves of illegal immigrants rushed to supply the demands of businesses when the economy was growing.
If securing the border and stopping the hiring of undocumented workers, could not deter illegal immigration, what would? The answer apparently is a guest worker program. This is a new component that’s touted as the solution to the shortcomings of the 1986 law.
In an article published in US News on February 21, 2013 entitled “The Split Politics of Immigration Reform-And What To Do About It”, David Brodwin describes the fight on immigration as not between Republicans and Democrats but within each party. He asserts that within the Republican Party, its working class base opposes immigration out of fear of competition from immigrant workers that would drive down wages. The other parts of the Republican Party that include business owners favor immigration because they depend on cheap immigrant labor. The Democratic Party is also divided between its Latino constituents that support immigration and the labor unions that also fear competition from cheap immigrant labor. The labor unions have long opposed a guest worker program.
So when the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL–CIO) and the US Chamber of Commerce announced on February 21, 2013 that they’re working on a compromise agreement that would define the outlines of a guest worker program, we should pay attention. Disagreement on this issue led to the failure of the immigration reform bill in 2007. Under the current proposals, the number of visas that would be issued to guest workers would expand and contract with the economy. More guest workers would be allowed when the need for their services is greater but these numbers would be lowered when the economy slows down.
If the labor unions could find a guest worker program that’s acceptable to their interests, we might finally see the passage of an immigration reform law. So if you hear in the coming months that no agreement was reached on a guest worker program, chances are there won’t be a new law because this is the crucial component in any immigration reform deal.
