Immigration Reform and Control Act - Research Proposal Example

There are over nine million undocumented immigrants living in the United s (Fandl, 2007) and they account for nearly 5% of the total US labor force. In addition to agriculture, these workers fill up jobs in construction, meat and poultry and maintenance jobs. A large number of these workers have been in the country for over ten years and most have been here for over five years. It is now generally believed that the growth, prosperity and the economy of the nation is dependent on these illegal immigrants. There are almost 10 to 11 million illegal migrants who perform crucial jobs in the economy. According to the Pew Hispanic Research Center 24% of all farm jobs, 17% of cleaning jobs, and 27% of butchery jobs are performed by illegal migrants (Powell, 2006). Any reforms to drive these migrants out would disrupt the economy and the employers and the migrants would suffer as well. Nevertheless, there has been concern over the presence of these workers and voices have been raised by the citizens of the US. Immigration is changing the size and composition of major cities in the US. Card (2007) says that immigrants are usually drawn to expanding cities particularly to cities with historical enclaves of earlier immigrants. Immigrant arrivals increase the local population with limited outflow of other groups. The immigrant arrivals affect the skill composition in different cities. Skilled immigrants come in from India, Canada and Western Europe while unskilled immigrants come from Mexico, El Salvador and Guatemala. The Asian and Pacific Islander population more than doubled by 1980s in the US and the US Census Bureau predicts that by 2009 it would double again (Frisbie, Cho & Hummer, 2001). Three fourths of this population has been due to immigration. There is an unbalanced skill distribution and it has been observed that high-immigration cities have more low-skilled people in their local population (Card). Increase in the relative supply of a particular skill group will lower the relative wages of that group while raising average wages for workers as a whole. The protests led to reforms in the immigration Act. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) contained four main provisions: legalization, guest-worker programs, border enforcement, and employer sanctions (Brownell, 2004). Amnesty allowed legalization of regular workers who had worked in the US since 1982 including the agricultural workers. IRCA made it illegal to knowingly employ immigrants without valid work authorization and required employers to verify the prospective employees’ records. The employers were subject to fines for violation or as well as the possibility of being jailed. At the same time, IRCA had not discouraged illegal immigration according to Martin (2003). Worker identification was not included in the law, enforcement was underfunded and ineffective, and fraudulent documents were widely used by workers. This only helped to increase the number of illegal workers specially the Mexicans. The imposition of IRCA led to decline in the wages as employers made provision for expected costs of sanction being imposed on them. Before the IRCA came into effect it was found that employers were either able to evade the responsibility for illegal employment or the penalty was so small that it did not deter them from repeating the act in future. The laws were not strictly enforced because of legal constraints. Research by Brownell (2004) suggests that employer sanction could not succeed in sanctioning the employers or stopping the hiring on undocumented employees because they were not intended to be enforced. The law contained several loopholes in protection of the employers. They could be saved from prosecution if they had examined the documents which appeared to be genuine on the face of it. This has increased the employers’ power relative to their undocumented employees. If the employers find the documents not genuine they evaluate and ask for valid documents. They thus safeguard themselves against fines. There are also incidents cited by Brownell that employers know the documents are not genuine but they ask the employees to at least get something that looks real. Thus, the employers while trying to comply with the requirements of IRCA also know that the documents submitted are not genuine. In any case the papers have to undergo the process of I-9 verification and the workers know they situation is vulnerable. They are therefore willing to accept lower wages. If the employees ask for wage hike employers have been known to call the INS which keeps the employees under control. In mid-nineties immigration law was amended to obstruct undocumented entry into the US. This was prompted due to professed links between urban crime, welfare abuse, terrorism, inner city drug addiction, the failure of the melting pot citizenship model and the growth of undocumented migration (Coleman, 2007). The changes did not deal with the border enforcement and the provisions expanded the criminal grounds for deportation from the US. The general public expresses dissatisfaction with federal enforcement of immigration laws and majority wants immigration reform or better enforcement of immigration laws (Fandl, 2007). The number of people crossing the border, whether legally or illegally was quite high. These people are coming into the interior and competing for US jobs either as illegal aliens or as legitimately documented foreign workers. Ineffective immigration policy is increasing illegal immigration but the government failed to acknowledge this fact. After the September 11, 2001 the US is further trying to strike a balance between welcoming foreigners and protecting Americans (Martin, 2003). While the politicians want to root out terrorists they do not want to shut out the immigrants. Even though lot of restrictions was imposed and the entries and exits of foreign students were tracked, the number of immigrant settlers and the nonimmigrant visitors did not drop sharply. Immigrants are perceived as an undesirable peer group for two reasons – a majority of immigrants are either non-White or Hispanic. Neighborhoods and schools with a higher fraction of either group are perceived as less attractive (Card). Whites are even likely to leave neighborhood. Immigrants have less education and low income compared to the natives which makes them less desirable as neighbors and as parents of the children in the local schools. Parental income and education are supposed to contribute to better results from the students and hence such immigrant children are considered as “bad” peers. Ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity pose an obstacle to effective governance and growth. People from different groups have trouble of getting along or interacting leading to social tensions and weak or ineffective institutions. The current reform proposals by the House of Representatives, according to Powell (2006) do not address the reality that border enforcement cannot reduce the flow of illegal migrants as the opportunities in the US are much better than in most countries. The House Bill on immigration reform would only make the illegal migrants felons and increase penalties on employers who hire illegal who hire illegal migrants. The Bill would also affect the industries that employ a large number of migrants. The Bill would in fact continue to encourage illegal migrants as there is no provision for legal entry. President Bush wants to include a “guest-worker” program but the US businesses must demonstrate that no US citizen is willing to take that job before it is offered to the guest. This program must allow flexibility to change jobs and also reduce the administrative burden on the employers. At the end of the guest-worker period there is no guarantee in the program to let him stay on in the country and he could be deported back. The Bush administration also imposed a rule requiring employers to fire workers identified as illegal immigrants in government records or face prosecution. This has been blocked by a federal judge in San Francisco (Egelko, 2007). The order prevents the government from sending letters to employers to clear the workers’ citizenship status. Wooldridge (2005) emphasizes that the US citizens represented by Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) feel threatened by illegal migrants and the guest-worker program. They displace and depress the wages for the America’s middle class in numerous professions. They contend that employers who knowingly employ unauthorized workers should be penalized by way of fines, jailing for repeat offenders and loss of corporate characters. Despite numerous threats of the employers being fined or penalized, hundreds of workers have been sentenced after the immigration raid but not one employer as yet faces any charges (Pitt, 2008). At Agriprocessors Inc. plant in Postville, Iowa, almost one-third workers were arrested which proves that the company officials knew they were hiring illegal workers but the company has not been imposed any fine on. The immigration laws have to be equally imposed on the employees and the employers for it to be successful. Because of the large numbers of arrests from one single company, it is evident that the company is as culpable as the workers. In such cases the company suffers as they are now looking for new leadership as well as replacement employees as well as working with immigration officials to employ only properly documented employees. Employers claim that it is very difficult for them to verify the status of the employees but some do admit that pressing need for laborers forces them to hire illegal migrants. Some others believe that since IRS grants them tax identification numbers it is no problem to hire the migrants. The employers have been escaping without any fines even though according to Section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act the employers who violate the law are supposed to be fined up to $10,000 per day for each illegal worker they employ (ICMS, 2006). No law is imposed because the employers flout the rules and there is evidence of complicity by government officials. Some illegal immigrants do pay federal taxes but the cost to the federal government is much higher. The Los Angeles County has about five thousand apparel firms apart from many that operate underground. The garment industry in the US is reliant on immigrant labor predominantly from Latin America and Asia. Because of the transnational movement of capital there has been movement of people from the developing to the developed nations. The process of globalization and immigration are interlinked. The apparel industry in the US needs low wage workers to compete against imports and this need is fulfilled by the illegal migrants. Los Angeles has about 120,000 illegal workers in the apparel industry out of which 80 percent are Latin American immigrants, and the rest are Asians including Chinese, Vietnamese, Koreans, Thais, and Cambodians (Loucky et al.,) . There is always a downward pressure on wages and security for the workers. Most of the cutting and sewing operations in Los Angeles are outsourced. This allows them flexibility and capable of dealing with highly seasonal and erratic demands of the industry. These contractors themselves are migrants and they in turn employ illegal migrants who come for low wages. Garment workers in Pacific Rim as well as in Los Angeles make significant contribution to the production but remain deprived. The federal laws support the cause of the employers because the employer sanction of IRCA has not seriously affected the production or garments in Los Angeles. The maximum immigrants to US have been from Mexico but they have helped the US economy take a lead in the industrial revolution by keeping labor costs low. The difference between the wages earned by an immigrant Mexican to America and that of a domestic worker in Mexico is more than double which prompts them to take the risk of death and deportation from crossing the border (Fandl, 2007). There have been suggestion of a border fence but this would do little to keep the people from crossing the border because they make several attempts even after being caught. In fact it would only spoil the relations with Mexico and if the border is meant to be general protection of the borders, then a fence is also required at the Canadian border. A border at the Mexican end would hence only increase illegal immigrants. It is hence advisable to have joint worker exchange program with the foreign governments and temporary immigration program that would facilitate open and regulated border policies. According to Rosenblum (2006) the statistics of illegal migrants hint at a crisis which may end up with grave human and economic costs. While the undocumented migrants and their families suffer from exploitation and pay their way through into the country, the IRCA needs to be more effective. The US administration lacks secure documentation for identification and eligibility verification. Fake documents can be easily procured and existing documents can be counterfeited. Secure documents can be easily borrowed or stolen. When these are produced before the employer it becomes difficult for them to prove the authenticity and very often they accept it as genuine after initial verification. The hiring procedures are inaccurate screening mechanism, contends Rosenblum (2006). A total of 27 documents are required but the employers usually visually verify just one or two of them. The employers are supposed to record the results of their verification on the I-9 form but anti-discrimination provisions of the IRCA allows them to accept documents at face value as long as they appear to be genuine. Since the screening system is weak, the employers lack the required tool to reject unauthorized workers while they claim to be complying with the norms of ICRA. A voluntary electronic screening program has been initiated but this has posed another problem. In this, legitimately authorized workers are denied employment. While this system can detect fake IDs, it fails to detect borrowed or stolen documents. Since the names of foreigners are spelt differently, sometimes even for such reasons the IDs are rejected. Thus the system identifies about thirty percent of all non-citizens as ineligible to work. Ultimately most cases are found to be genuine and resolved but the process proves to be time consuming and costly. In addition, many authorized workers abandon their plans to work. Employer sanction procedures have had little deterrent effect. Before the 9/11 attacks sanction enforcement was undermined and the later abandoned altogether after the responsibility for investigations passed from the INS to the Department of Homeland Security. The enforcement agents also target the non-compliant employers. In any case investigations have hardly led to convictions. Fines hardly range from $100 to $1,000 per undocumented immigrant for paperwork errors and from $250 to $10,000 for substantive violations (Rosenblum, 2006). These remain unchanged since 1986 and it is compensated against the low wages that employers pay to the illegal migrants. There has been steady decline on employer sanction over the years. In 2003, INS was reorganized into Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as a part of the DHS. ICE selects an employer at random to conduct an audit. The audit involves the inspection of the employers’ I-9 forms where the employers are supposed to certify that they have inspected the documents of the employee and that the individual is authorized to work in the country (Brownell, 2005). Research suggests that there has been a steep decline in the number of audits that have been conducted. The following chart shows the decline: Source: Office of Immigration Statistics Performance Analysis System G-23.19 and authors calculations from the Center for Immigration Studies Employer Sanctions Database. As a result of the audit the minor violators receive a warning but serious violations like knowingly employing illegal immigrants can result in fines. The employers have a right to appeal against the fine imposed on them but if they do not respond within 30 days or if they lose the appeal, then a Final Order is issued detailing their violation and the fines imposed on them (Brownell, 2005). Some employers who have been found guilty enter into negotiations with the government and reach a settlement to pay less than what has been laid out in the Final Order. Some businesses even dissolve or move when the Final Order is served on them. The number of warnings issued and the number of fines imposed or Final Order issued have all declined over the years but the amount of dollars collected has been stable. The government has been using several strategies to control the employers from employing illegal migrants. In 1994, the INS used the "Operation Gatekeeper" strategy in San Deigo and in 1999 the INS adopted a new enforcement strategy that listed that listed "block and remove employers access to undocumented workers" (Brownell, 2005). This strategy focused on those cases where they found a "clear nexus between alien smuggling and the employment of unauthorized workers". After the 9/11 attacks the worksite enforcement took on a "National Security Focus”. This was mainly directed at employers specially the sub contractors that placed workers at airports, nuclear power plants or at military bases. Such worksite enforcement led to disruption in business and individual members of the Congress started intervening on behalf of their constituents. Since the US Congress has not shown positive results in controlling illegal migrants or in enforcing the employers to abide by the IRCA, independent states have started enacting their own rules. Arizona enacted a law punishing employers who hire illegal migrants and the result was that scores of migrants are fleeing back to other states or to their Latin American homelands. Violators face suspicion or revocation of their business licenses at the same time reducing the economic incentives for those who cross the border illegally (Billeaud, 2008). The law in Arizona clearly states: intentionally or knowingly hiring an illegal immigrant violates Arizonas employer-sanctions statute (AZFamily, 2008). One in ten workers in Arizona is an illegal migrant. This has resulted in the construction industry losing valuable workers and the schools having a substantial amount of dropouts. Golfland/Waterworld/Big Surf/Sunsplash is an outdoor entertainment giant with presence in Mesa and north Phoenix (AZFamily, 2008). A four month search revealed that the owners were knowingly employing illegal aliens. The company records were seized and it was found that as many as 104 of the 198 employees have discrepancies with their social security numbers like more than one name is associated with those social security numbers. While the company is cooperating with the investigating officers and they claim they have not violated the law, it does cause harassment to the employers. There is an exemption in the IRCA (1986) which allows local and state governments to take action when it comes to "licensing and similar laws" (Pitzi, 2008) The Legal Arizona Workers Act uses this exemption to justify its sanction hiring illegal immigrants. The business license would be suspended if the employer is found to be knowingly hiring illegal immigrants and when the offense is repeated the license would be withdrawn altogether. The law however does not differentiate between employing a hairdresser or an employee in another business. The stand that Arizona has taken against employers has been followed by many other states but the questions lurks whether the state and local governments have the authority to set immigration policy. In Pennsylvania, the limits have been overstepped as the city requires any business filing an application for license to submit an affidavit that they would not knowingly hire or employ any illegal workers. The sanction laws enforced by the state have economic and legal impact and hence they would ultimately be referred to the US Supreme Court. Globalization has changed the content of the global workforce and hence the domestic laws should synchronize with the need for effective and efficient worker exchange. The economic conditions in the US are better so illegal immigration is prospering. As the American economy demands cheap labor, if the flow of illegal immigrants is controlled, it would adversely affect the American jobs and businesses. These are the jobs that the Americans would not opt for or even if they do, they would demand higher wages which would affect the profitability of the organizations and eventually the economy of the country. Without low-cost workers these jobs would be sent overseas, outsourcing would increase, or the US businesses would become less competitive due to higher domestic labor costs. Outsourcing and shifting jobs overseas would reduce the jobs available for the US citizens. Thus, according to Fandl (2007), temporary work visa programs should be looked into. At the same time, the citizenship application process should be streamlined. The reform advocates should also look into foreign domestic assistance which would reduce the demand for emigration from the developing countries. The immigration laws need amendment to facilitate the transition of the legal and the illegal immigrants into either permanent lawful residents or legal temporary workers. There are a number of undocumented immigrants that contribute to the US economy by way of taxes and have not committed any crimes. They desire to continue to live and work in the US and such amendments would greatly help not only those immigrants but the country as well. If they are offered a clear and effective mechanism for legalizing themselves, it would prevent the jail and detention facilities from overflowing with illegal immigrants who are charged for not having proper documentation. Brownell (2005) suggests that employer sanction should be more effective and one way to do this is to grant the Department of Labor (DOL) a larger enforcement role. They should be authorized to conduct the audit and then refer the violations cases to ICE for further investigation. DOL should be allowed to pursuer such cases without political interference. While the illegal immigrants have been steadily increasing in the US there is diverse opinion on the impact that it has on the national economy. Some consider it good for the economy as it creates more jobs while others feel it has spoiled the wage slabs and the overall job market. The government had formulated the ICRA in 1986 but it was not seriously enforced leading to serious violations by the employers and the illegal immigrants. The employers seeking to benefit from low wages attempted to hire such workers and were prepared to pay the fines imposed in case of sanction. They attempted to be complying with the laws laid down but did not make serious attempts in verification of the documents of the workers. the citizens of America reacted against such employment of the illegal immigrants and thus was formed the law in Arizona which strictly enforced the law. There have been no prosecutions so far although the companies have been raided. This has resulted in many more states following the same course but the question ligers whether the state has the authority to impose such employer sanctions. References: AZFamily, (2008). UPDATE:Indictments handed down in water park raids. Availablke from: http://www.azfamily.com/yahoo_rss/stories/phoenix_local_news_061008_waterworld_arrests.1bf8c17f.html [accessed 28 June 2008] Billeaud, J. (2008). Employer-sanctions law forces illegal immigrants to move on. Available from: http://www.svherald.com/articles/2008/03/03/news/doc47cb9f7c14db5486886624.txt [accessed 28 June 2008] Brownell, P. B. (2004). Sanctions for Whom? The Immigration Reform and Control Acts "Employer Sanctions" Provisions and the Wages of Mexican Immigrants. Available from: http://www.demog.berkeley.edu/~brownell/docs/Brownell_prospectus.pdf [accessed 27 June 2008] Brownell, P. (2005). The Declining Enforcement of Employer Sanctions. Available from: http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?ID=332 [accessed 28 June 2008] Card. D., (2007), How Immigration Affects U.S. Cities, Centre for Research and Analysis for Migration, 18 Oct 2007 Coleman, S., (2007), Immigration Geopolitics Beyond the Mexico–US Border, The Author, Editorial Board of Antipode Egelko, B. (2007). Judge stays rule requiring employers to fire illegal immigrants. Available from: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/09/01/MN3RRTFO5.DTL [accessed 27 June 2008] Fandl, K. J., (2007), Immigration Posses: U.S. Immigration Law and Local Enforcement Practices, 18 Oct 2007 Frisbie, W. P., Cho, Y., & Hummer, R. A., (2001), Immigration and the Health of Asian and Pacific Islander Adults in the United States, American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 153, No. 4 ICMS (2006). Economic Effects of Legal and Illegal Migration. Available from: http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/WRHC/Effects%20of%20Migration%20on%20American%20Economy.doc. [accessed 27 June 2008] Loucky, J. et al., Immigrant enterprise and Labor in the Los Angeles Garments industry. Global Production - The Apparel Industry in the Pacific Rim, Chapter 19, Available from: http://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ES51Q1k-adQC&oi=fnd&pg=PA345&dq=US+employers+suffer+employing+immigrants&ots=6uBc6YgyXI&sig=vBgcVpgOVf5pBmFbPZCkb6SMng0#PPR7,M1 [accessed 27 June 2008] Martin, P. (2003). Immigration: Shaping and Reshaping America. Available from: http://www.npc.umich.edu/news/events/PRB-Monograph-Final.pdf [accessed 27 June 2008] Pitt, D. (2008). Immigration raid spurs calls for action against employers. Available from: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5812441.html [accessed 27 June 2008] Pitzi, M. (2008). Sanctions law ruling will ripple across U.S. Available from: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0608sanctions06080.html [accessed 27 June 2008] Powell, B. (2006). How To Reform Immigration Laws. Available from: http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1696 [accessed 27 June 2008] Rosenblum, M. R. (2006). US Immigration Reform: Can the System Be Repaired? The Center for Comparative Immigration Studies. Available from: http://www.ccis-ucsd.org/publications/wrkg132.pdf [accessed 28 June 2008] Wooldridge, F. (2005). TRUE IMMIGRATION REFORM. Available from: http://www.frostywooldridge.com/articles/art_2005sep17.html [accessed 27 June 2008] Read More