The Stop Terrorism Entry Program Act of 2010 - Research Paper Example

HERE HERE YOUR HERE HERE H.R. 4441 To Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act The proposed amendment, referred toas The Stop Terrorism Entry Program Act of 2010, “bars the admission of aliens from countries determined to be state sponsors of terrorism, and prohibits the use of funds to transfer enemy combatants detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, and Cuba to facilities in the U.S.” (washingtonwatch.com, 1). The goal of this is to prevent individuals from entering the U.S. that originate from countries that have systems in place to support different terrorist acts or provide funds toward this goal against the United States. This Act would maintain several outcomes for the country if it were enacted, including effects on the labor market, potential effects on political relationships with foreign nations, and even problems at the social level. Several economists identify that increases in immigration tend to lead to diminished job opportunities for less-advantaged, native groups in the United States. Statistics show that increases in immigration have been linked with falling compensation rates for native high-school dropouts (Borjas, Freeman, Katz & Lawrence, 246). At the same time, those holding high school equivalency certifications, such as the General Education Diploma, have received lowered compensation rates that are proportional to rises in immigration (Borjas et al). This occurs because the majority of immigrants into the United States have access to limited education in their native homeland, which is the general rationale for why immigrants seek new opportunities in the United States. Upon entry, the current economic system in the U.S. tends to limit immigrants from receiving appropriate government-sponsored educational funds, and they are forced to take low-paying jobs in order to sustain themselves or their family members. In this situation, native high school drop-outs or those holding their GED witness these jobs being taken by immigrants looking for inexpensive labor. Despite the statistics, there is an opposing viewpoint that suggests that immigrants tend to demand products that are not commonly found in the United States and will therefore begin demanding importation of products from their home country, thus stimulating global trade and economic growth or development (Mundra, 28). However, despite this trend toward demanding foreign product importation, this represents the needs of a much smaller market than that of native citizens and there should be minimal impact on trade or the economy if the Act is passed. Also related to the economy, immigrants tend to have higher price elasticities (Lach, 548), which in economic theory is the amount a consumer is willing to pay for a product based on their perceived value of that good or service. This price elasticity is generally caused by their socio-economic status as low wage earners upon entry and they therefore cannot purchase high cost goods without rejecting them in favor of cheaper alternative products. If the Stop Terrorist Entry Program Act is enacted, this will limit foreign immigration, impacting the economy in terms of companies that produce low-cost goods to service groups of immigrant consumers. Companies that service these groups might find demand for their products decreasing and find sales losses, whether minor or significant depending on product or service variety. In terms of society, native citizens tend to believe that immigration can alter the social norm (Verbon & Meijdam, 666). Immigrants usually have their own well-defined social structures and cultural values that become superimposed on the local community (or broader society) upon entry into the United States. There are concerns that higher immigration can lead to an erosion of core social norm values and alter communities to favor the needs of non-domestic aliens. If the Act is enacted, immigration will be reduced and citizens will likely have these concerns minimized to ensure that the current social norm meets without disruption. The social norm might refer to concepts such as opinion about intermixed relationships between different ethnic groups or concerns about the presence of too much diversity in the workplace or community. At the political level, enactment could cause strained relationships with foreign nations and their leadership as this Act would draw explicit attention to U.S. governmental sentiment about the internal activities of foreign governments. For example, if Saudi Arabia or Iran were considered to be countries that support ongoing terrorist acts against the United States, citizens from these countries would be denied access into the country. By adopting tangible and publicized legislation that identifies which countries are banned from allowing their citizens entry visas, leadership of these nations might respond against being labeled solely for their perceived terrorist support. At a time when the world is already being shaken by many different political misunderstandings or power struggles, further adding insult to the integrity of these nations could lead to new disputes related to U.S. foreign policy. This would be a piece of legislation that would receive considerable media exposure in multiple channels and would most likely spark political debate within the identified foreign nations. Enactment of The Stop Terrorist Entry Program definitely has potential benefits for improving the labor opportunities for certain less-educated native citizens by simply lessening the frequency of immigration. Reducing the alien population in the country could give struggling, native job-seekers new opportunities within various low-paying service jobs when they become available since they would not be taken by foreign-based laborers. Further, it was identified that there could be minor economic disadvantages to this enactment by reducing demand for foreign products from immigrant homelands, having some sort of measurable impact on companies that service these markets. The most significant negative outcome to enacting this amendment involves the reputational standing of the United States within countries that are identified as being terrorist-sponsoring entities. There is a common theme in many different scholastic and political literatures that reinforce the importance of diversity, such as reinforcing the Great Melting Pot concept and this Act seems to negate this ideology. At a time where American influence is present in many foreign nations, damage at the political level might pose risk for future negotiations as this Act might appear to be a snub against foreign leadership. Bibliography Borjas, G., J. Freeman, R. Katz & F. Lawrence. “Searching for the effect of immigration on the labor market”, The American Economic Review, Nashville, 1996. Vol. 86, Iss. 2, pp.246-252. Lach, Saul. “Immigration and Prices”, The Journal of Political Economy, Chicago, 2007. Vol. 115, Iss.4. Mundra, Kusum. “Immigration and international trade: A nonparametric and semiparametric approach”. Dissertation – University of California, Riverside. Verbon, H. & L. Meijdam. “Too many immigrants, too few services: A model of decision-making on immigration and integration with cultural distance”, Journal of Population Economics, 2008, Vol. 21. Washingtonwatch.com. “H.R. 4441 – The Stop Terrorist Entry Program Act of 2010”. Viewed March 31, 2010 at http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_HR_4441.html Read More