Contribution to Illegal Immigration Policy - Literature review Example

Policy Contribution part 2 Policy Contribution part 2 Many stakeholders in the United s hold varied opinions on the steps the government should take in order to correct the immigration situation in the country. Though they all agree that the government is failing in its duty of keeping out illegal immigrants, there is no consensus on the steps that the government should take to curb illegal immigration. Most of them agree that deportation, enforcement and the border fence are not enough to control illegal immigrants (Manhattan Institute, 2005). The latest proposal has been to reduce bureaucracy and allow illegal immigrants to stay in the United States as they wait for their visa to be processed (Saenz, 2012). This proposal favors the Latino portion of the population who make up the highest number of immigrants from Mexico, but the government should consider many underlying factors, including the reasons for immigration and the effects on the United States’ resources. This report will give an overview of factors to consider when formulating an immigration policy; then propose a possible policy change and implementation plan using the fifth and sixth steps Jansson’s policy plan respectively (Jansson, 2010). Statement of the Problem According to Guyette, Tavalin and Rooker (2012), the United States has throughout history attempted to control illegal immigration into the country by passing restrictive policies and increasing border security. These approaches have failed if the debate for and against illegal immigrants is anything to go by. Data concerning illegal immigration is mostly hypothetical, since transactions concerning immigrants are mostly not recorded in any official documents. For instance, Barnes (2010) claims that it costs each native households $ 1,117 per annum to support illegal immigrants, totaling to $113 billion a year for the whole nation. The influx of illegal immigration cases can be blamed on a myriad of reasons, but the main cause is the government’s inefficiency in enforcing its policies on immigration. Therefore, the country needs to refrain from a complete overhaul of policies, which has been the main reason for increased illegal immigration due to inefficiency and inconsistencies, and adopt a stable policy that will be monitored and improved continuously. Any policy proposal change should ensure to account for all the positive and negative aspects of immigration, mostly by being fair to illegal immigrants if the merits of having them in the country outweigh the demerits. An effective policy should contribute positively to various aspects of the United States society, and it should be implementable and assessable. Immigration and Politics The policy on immigration should limit the possibility of heightening corruption among political officers, and control the use of immigrants for political reasons, especially since 2012 is an election year (Schneider, 2012). Though these factors cannot be separated from each other, the policy should aim at achieving maximum control, which is only possible if the policy is stable and free from obvious loopholes. This would not only curb the habit of implementing regular changes on the policy to suit the needs to politicians, but it would also eliminate the possibility of politicians using it to further their political careers. It has always been common practice for politicians to promise the electorate changes in immigration laws; in essence, these politicians usually do not have an interest in common good, as theirs is a quest for power. In this quest, all they have to do is to tell people what they want to hear and they end up getting political mileage. For instance, some politicians who are not from the southern states are highly vocal in their calls for action against illegal immigrants (Schneider 2012). However, none of these politicians tells their electorate if illegal immigrants have any advantages on the country, all they want to do is to use the controversy for personal gain (Guyette, Tavalin, & Rooker, 2012). Depending on the effect that the issue of illegal immigrants is likely to have on their careers, politicians have taken one of the two main stances in handling illegal immigration including granting amnesty to illegal immigrants, or deporting, denying jobs and curbing any further immigration (Barnes, 2010). For instance, the Californian electorate has a major fraction composed of immigrants from South America, which makes the governor reluctant to implement border enforcements as recommended by the president. In addition, since this is an election year, many see the president’s attempt to ease regulation on immigration as a campaign ploy (Schneider, 2012). Immigration and Economy Illegal immigrants have both positive and negative effects on the United States economy, and any policy formulated should be based on the balance between these two factors. For instance, if illegal immigration hurts the economy, then it should be limited since the government of the United States is only responsible for its citizens. On the other hand, if immigration has a positive effect on the economy, then the proposed policy should reduce the limitations of immigration to encourage high rates of legal immigration. The policy should consider the effects of immigrants on national revenue, demand, labor, welfare, education and healthcare. Revenue Some sectors of the United States society blame illegal immigrants for failing to pay taxes, but the Congressional Budget Office (2007) states that over 6 million illegal immigrants file their annual tax returns to the Internal Revenue Service. The Congressional Budget Office (2007) asserts that approximately 50 to 75 percent of illegal immigrants pay taxes, with an estimate of $ 7 billion paid to social security. Moreover, the federal laws allow illegal immigrants to participate in nation building without fear of apprehension by limiting the IRs from sharing personal information of the immigrants with other state or federal agencies. Since the United States economy is the lifeline of so many people, then the proposed policy should not result in reduced revenue collection, especially if the revenue is greater than the costs of maintaining immigrants into the country. Demand The economy has undergone many changes in the recent years, most of which have reduced the purchasing capacity of residents. This has reduced the aggregate market demand, and illegal immigrants serve as one of the agents of increasing demand and driving the national economy. Migration of illegal immigrants back to their countries of origin is hurting the United States economy, mainly due to the loss of jobs and opportunities that arise from serving illegal immigrants. For instance, it is estimated that service to illegal immigrants employs 5 percent of the total national workforce; illegal immigrants occupy 4 percent of homes in the United States; and illegal immigrants contribute over $ 150 billion economic activity. If all immigrants were to be deported, or if the rate of reverse migration exacerbates, then the economy will lose up to $ 3, 000 dollars per week per immigrant, and jeopardize up to 8 million United States citizens’ jobs (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011). Stakeholders must ask themselves if losing these benefits is worth the venture before implementing a policy to limit the flow of immigrants into the country. Labor According to Davidson (2006), illegal immigrants do not have much impact on the availability of jobs for most Americans; however, they are in direct competition with high school dropouts for semiskilled and unskilled jobs. Since most of the United States population is educated, it is crucial for any new policy to consider the fact that the country may suffer a shortage of semiskilled labor if there were no immigrants. In addition, these immigrants are a source of cheap labor for United States manufacturers, and a suitable option to their expensive resident’s counterparts. On the other hand, illegal immigrants have pushed the minimum wage for unskilled and semiskilled labor to low levels since they are ready to accept minimal pay packages; a cause of concern for the relevant stakeholders (Borjas, 2004). Policy Proposal The government of the United States of America should change the immigration policy by lifting excessive restrictions, and allowing the illegal immigrants already in the country to have permanent residency without undue limitations. However, any illegal immigrant with a criminal history should be deported without further delay, and employers should be penalized for hiring illegal immigrants. Advantages According to Koven and Götzke (2010), illegal immigrants increase the profitability of investing in the United States, mainly due to reduction of costs of labor. This is attributed to the low costs of labor, which is the stimulus the economy needs on the road to recovery from the recession of late 2000s. Deportation and other restrictions imposed on illegal immigrants cause family separation that hurts many vulnerable groups like women and children (Saenz, 2012); enabling immigrants to stay in the country as their papers get processed will alleviate this unnecessary suffering. This policy adjustment will also promote the spirit of America, which includes promotion of cultural diversity and encourages equal treatment of all people regardless of their country of origin; in any case, many residents in the country were at one time immigrants too (Tierney, 2007). Finally, reducing the limitations to immigrate will allow semiskilled laborers to immigrate legally, which will go a long way to reduce the incidence of illegal immigrants. Disadvantages The people of America must make some compromises, which is worth it because the benefits of increased immigration outweigh the demerits by a large margin. For instance, the immigrants will cause a decrease in the minimum wage at first, but in the long run, things will change as the situation stabilizes (Tierney, 2007). In addition, before the economic benefits from increased immigration are noticed, the country will experience pressure on national resources, which will result to scarcity and increased prices. However, since immigrants give more to the economy than they consume, the situation is sure to improve in the long run. In conclusion, all the setbacks the country may encounter due to increased immigration are temporary, and it is necessary for the future of the country to be secured by making sacrifices at present. Policy Enactment Before Congress can decide what to do with the illegal immigrant policy, research must be conducted to ensure that all decisions are based on evidence. In addition, all stakeholders should be educated on issues concerning the effects of immigration to daily life, including its benefits and shortcomings. These stakeholders include the public, investors, trade unions, employees, and researchers; in addition, they should be asked to give their opinion and feedback on the policy before it is implemented. Things must be cleared up since researchers (Barnes, 2010) have convinced the public (Campo-Flores, 2010) that there are no benefits of having illegal immigrants in the country. For instance, evidence should be collected and posted in accessible locations, to create an awareness of the benefits and shortcomings of having illegal immigrants in the country. Every stakeholder should be encouraged to exercise due objectivity to enable the country to make the right decisions on this controversial matter. The policy should be screened and modified, and government professionals should calculate and predict the period within which the country should start noticing the benefits of increased immigration. Congress must debate this policy objectively, knowing that they were doing so for their country, and it may be the last line of defense against illegal immigration. Other stakeholders should participate fully in the implementation, with the knowledge that illegal immigration has benefits but implementing this policy gives the country a better shot at long-term sustainability (Tierney, 2007). Conclusion Illegal immigration has been an issue of concern for the country for many years, with various governments formulating policies whose main aim was to keep Americans in and foreigners out. However, it may be time that the government changed tack and embraced the concept of free immigration instead of fighting it so vehemently; this approach has failed severally, and there is no reason to believe that the situation will change. Therefore, the government should pass legislation that increases the volume of legal immigration, and take strict measures from within to control illegal immigration. Next, the government should start by educating all stakeholders and doing extensive research on the matter before implementing any policy changes. Finally, the government should monitor the effectiveness of this policy and make changes where necessary, but in consultations with stakeholders. References Barnes, E. (2010). Illegal immigration costs U.S. $113 billion a year; study finds. Fox News. Retrieved 13 March 2012 from http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/02/immigration-costs-fair-amnesty-educations-costs-reform Borjas, G. J. (2004). Immigration policy: A proposal. Retrieved from http://cis.org/articles/2001/blueprints/borjas.html Campo-Flores, A. (2010). Why Americans think (wrongly) that illegal immigrants hurt the economy. Retrieved 13 March 2012 from http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/05/14/why-americans-think-wrongly-that-illegal-immigrants-hurt-the-economy.html Congressional Budget Office. (2007). The impact of unauthorized immigrants on the budgets of state and local governments. The Congress of the United States: Congressional Budget Office. Retrieved 13 March 2012 from http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8711/12-6-Immigration.pdf. Guyette, E., Tavalin, F., & Rooker, S. (2012). A brief timeline of US policy on immigration and naturalization. Gathering and interactions of peoples, cultures, and ideas. Retrieved from http://www.flowofhistory.org/themes/movement_settlement/uspolicytimeline.php Jansson, B. S. (2010). Becoming an effective policy advocate: From policy practice to social justice. Cengage: USA. Koven, S.G., & Götzke, F. (2010). American immigration policy: Confronting the nations challenges. Springer. Manhattan Institute. (2005). Immigration poll. Retrieved 13 March 2012 from http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/immigration_pol_pr.htm Saenz, A. (2012). A humane immigration policy proposal. Retrieved 13 March 2012 from http://www.barackobama.com/news/entry/a-humane-immigration-policy-proposal/ Schneider, W. (2012). The politics of illegal immigration. Retrieved 13 March 2012 from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/06/the-politics-of-illegal-immigration/5022/ Tierney, S. (2007). Accommodating cultural diversity. Ashgate Publishing. Read More