"It's going to be, 'You're letting them keep that job, when I could have that job....'"Today the New York Times announced that President Obama intends to advocate legislation that could begin reforming immigration policy, possibly including a channel for legalizing the status of currently undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Should the U.S. allow undocumented workers some measure of amnesty? Or should we pursue a course geared toward prosecution and deportation? Would such a course create jobs? And most importantly, can the President even introduce such a charged issue with the state of the American economy?
-Roy Beck, Exec. Director of Numbers, USA in the New York Times.
"'[Immigrants who are long-time residents but lack legal status] have to have some mechanism over time to get out of the shadows.'"
-President Obama in Costa Mesa, CA, also in the New York Times.
I can understand where President Obama is coming from. I really can. I understand that immigration concerns are of great value to a lot of his key constituents in the last election, and I also understand that our current immigration policy often makes no sense. But sometimes I wonder how exactly grand plans such as the President's proposed massive immigration reform could be introduced to the legislature at such a tense economic moment, much less implemented on a broad scale.
The question of whether or not illegal immigration is "right" or "wrong" is irrelevant here. Illegal immigration is, by definition, a crime. Some people choose to argue about this, claiming that the U.S. should be a haven for the oppressed, the tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, etc. etc. That's all well and good, but we have legal channels for that, in theory. Entering the country illegally is still a punishable offense. The real questions that a proposed immigration reform brings up are:
- Will the timing of Mr. Obama's proposed legislation make the issue politically untouchable?
- How the hell do they plan to deal with the immigrants who are already here????
Is illegal immigration untouchable? Can the President bring this issue up first without making his re-election that much less likely? My answer would be yes in some states, and no in others. The big issue here, which Mr. Beck attempts to speak to in the Times, is going to be whether Americans see the possible deportation of illegals as a potential job opportunity. In states such as Washington and California, where illegals often work in construction, food service, service-oriented jobs such as cleaning, and especially agriculture, it seems unlikely that this opportunity will amount to much more than a labor shortage were those workers to disappear. These states are famous for their high proportion of white-collar workers, though many blue-collar jobs exist as well. Just try imagining for a moment a flood of Californians from Los Angeles flooding out of the city, desperate to pick fruit. These states would lose workers, and might have a very hard time replacing them. Could state residents fill those jobs? That remains to be seen, but off the top of my head, I'd guess no.
In states where illegals often work in manufacturing, however, the story may be completely different. In this economy, we see manufacturing jobs rapidly disappearing, with huge layoffs in the forseeable future. In a manufacture-oriented state, not only might the factories stand a chance of replacing their lost workers with legal residents, but the potential gain in American jobs held by American citizens or legal immigrants could be substantial. For this reason, it may come down to which states' constituents align themselves with the manufacturing sector, and which states align themselves with a more service-oriented or agricultural sector.
It's a quandary for the members of Congress in states which have high percentages of illegal workers: will they align themselves with those constituents who have an incentive to vigorously prosecute illegal immigrants and take their jobs? Or will they choose to align themselves with voters who might have little incentive to care at all? States like Washington have large liberal Democratic populations that advocate for immigrants, which might help tip the balance in favor of Obama's approach. Finally, how might the corporate sector factor into all of this? The cost of illegal labor is necessarily low, allowing undocumented immigrants to underbid American workers. How might Congressmen be incentivized to either support legal channels for current undocumented workers or oppose them?
On top of the Congressional quagmire, President Obama has a tiny tiny tightrope to walk. Just Washington and California together have a lot of electoral votes and (in Washington's case at least) large urban populations with compassion to spare for the huddled masses. But key midwestern and southern states also have a lot of clout in the electoral college, and Obama could easily face Congressional opposition from their regions.
No matter what happens, Obama is in for a fight. Some states might come to his aid, and some states might strongly oppose him. How Congress responds may, in large part, depend on...
How the hell do they plan to deal with the immigrants who are already here????
Coming next week!
