home > by publication type > backgrounders > The U.S. Immigration Debate
Email
| Author: | Esther Pan |
|---|
Updated: July 25, 2006
The U.S. Congress has produced two sharply different proposals for reforming the U.S. immigration system. A bill passed by the House of Representatives emphasizes enforcement efforts, including penalizing employers who hire illegal immigrants and tougher controls at the U.S.-Mexican border. The Senate bill, by contrast, would provide a path to citizenship for a majority of the estimated twelve million illegal immigrants in the country. A growing number of U.S. states have begun to act on their own, introducing measures to cut off support for illegal immigrants. Congress, meanwhile, is unlikely to grapple with a measure reconciling its two competing bills until after midterm elections in November.
Contentious and deeply divided, experts say. Public opinion polls show that most Americans are in favor of strong punitive measures to prevent and/or reduce illegal immigration. However, business leaders, policy experts, and politicians—particularly in the Senate—have proposed amnesty programs and other measures that will not cut off what they call a necessary flow of labor into the United States. “There’s a big gap between the elites and the American general public” on how to handle immigration, says Joseph Chamie, director of research at the Center for Migration Studies. Immigration is a “political hot potato in an election year,” he says. “It’s a lose-lose situation for politicians.” Most of them seem to agree; the immigration issue, originally scheduled for a vote this summer, has been pushed back until the late fall—after the midterm elections. In the meantime, the House and Senate are holding unusual public hearings on the issue.
House and Senate passed competing bills on the issue that would have to be reconciled into one bill and signed by the president for any changes to take effect.
The House bill was passed in December 2005. The Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act (HR 4437) reflected the anti-illegal immigration mood in the House, and proposed strong steps, including:
The House bill would make it a felony for groups like Humane Borders and other charity organizations to give water or other assistance to illegal immigrants crossing the border from Mexico. The bill sparked massive protest rallies across the country and earned the opposition of the Catholic Church, which encouraged its adherents to defy it. Other critics said the House bill, with its focus on only one side of the immigration issue, would likely make the problem worse. “Enforcement is clearly an important part of the question, but enforcement alone is insufficient,” says Deborah W. Meyers, senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute.
After much heated debate, the Senate’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 was passed in May 2006. It reflected concerns about how to integrate the millions of illegal immigrants already in the United States into American life, and included measures to:
Critics of the bill said it would effectively grant amnesty to more than ten million illegal immigrants, and slammed its provision to greatly increase the number of legal immigrants allowed into the United States from one million per year to five million per year. Advocates of the bill said it acknowledged the labor needs of the U.S. economy through a temporary worker program while offering a legitimate path for illegal immigrants already here to become American citizens and play an open, protected, and legitimate role in society.
Advocates of temporary or guest worker programs say they would acknowledge and legitimize a massive work force that is currently completely unregulated. While illegal immigrants work and pay taxes, they have no workplace protection and are vulnerable to exploitation or abuse. The giant pool of unregistered illegal immigrants in the United States—some twelve million—is also an enormous security risk in the age of terrorism. Proponents of guest worker programs, including many business associations, say they would honestly address the labor needs of the U.S. economy and give necessary protection to the workers who fill those needs.
“There needs to be a legal mechanism for people to enter and work in temporary jobs,” Meyers says. She points out that many jobs—harvesting crops, for example—are seasonal, and many immigrants would like to come in, work for the season, and then return home. “Temporary worker programs are one approach, and certainly better than what we have now,” Meyers says. “If there are legal channels of entry, why in the world would you risk your life to enter illegally?” The New York Times favors guest worker programs that lead to citizenship, arguing in a March 15, 2006 editorial for “a comprehensive immigration bill, one that acknowledges that permanent guest workers, while important, are no substitute for immigrant citizens who work their way up to better jobs, pay more taxes, buy houses and consumer goods, and otherwise strengthen the social fabric.”
Critics of guest worker programs say they would create a permanent underclass of immigrants with no opportunity to integrate into society and no access to the privileges and responsibilities of citizenship. They say a guest worker program is effectively an amnesty that would reward people who broke the law by coming to America illegally, and claim it would encourage further illegal immigration. Some also say the programs are doomed to fail. “To expect someone to work here for six years and then go back—it’s not going to happen,” Chamie says. “It didn’t work in Germany or France, and it won’t work here.”
Experts stress that many changes to the current system are needed, including cracking down on employers who employ illegal immigrants. Last year, only three employers were cited for employing illegal immigrants. Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, argues for a national Social Security registry that employers could use to find out if potential employees are authorized to work in the United States (PDF). In addition, many experts argue for increasing the numbers of visas for skilled workers and eliminating the backlog in processing visas. Only if many steps are combined—stronger border control efforts, workplace enforcement, increased visas, and some kind of path for illegal immigrants to earn citizenship—will the problem be brought under control, experts say. “We have to do all these things together. They’re all intertwined and necessary,” Meyers says.
The issue is a highly sensitive one in an election year, with many experts saying the House bill passed because members of Congress wanted to show their constituents that they are tough on immigration. Others say that while most people share the goal of reducing illegal immigration, they do not agree on what to do about it. “Everyone agrees: we want people to come in legally, not illegally,” Meyers says. “But simply putting up more walls or adding border agents—without addressing the flaws in our system—is not responsible policy-making.”
“My guess is that the House bill and the Senate bill won’t be able to be reconciled,” Chamie says. “The political concerns have undermined any rational program.” In any event, skittish members of Congress appear to have punted the issue until after the elections. It’s possible the issue could be resolved between the elections and January 2007, when new members are sworn in—but the political divisiveness of the issue makes this another fraught prospect for politicians, experts say. All told, the chances for reform are “certainly possible, but you wouldn’t want to be naïvely confident,” Jacoby says.
Potentially, nothing. “In the short run, it will likely be the status quo,” Chamie says. “No enforcement, no guest worker program, and increasing numbers of illegal immigrants.” But Jacoby says there is pressure on politicians to act. “There’s a lot of momentum to do something,” she says. “The system’s broken, and voters are frustrated. Unlike in the past, [legislators] are afraid to go home and face their constituents without voting on it.” Meyers hopes the debate at least sparks an honest discussion about the multitude of issues—including education policy, health care, and the makeup of American society—affected by immigration policy. “There will always be some sort of immigration flow,” says Meyers. “But we want it to be regulated by the U.S. government and not smugglers.”
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel—a country of 7.1 million, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies— produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the UK? With the insights of geopolitical experts and investors, the authors examine this nation’s adversity-driven culture to answer this question and offer prescriptions for a global economy on the rebound.
In Forces of Fortune, Vali Nasr presents a paradigm-changing revelation that will transform the understanding of the Muslim world at large. He reveals that there is a vital but unseen rising force in the Islamic world—a new business-minded middle class—that is building a vibrant new Muslim world economy and that holds the key to winning the cold war against Iran and extremists.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba's unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
Identifying international threats and acting on them may be the most difficult job for U.S. policymakers. This report
provides an actionable road map for managing international threats before they erupt into crises and makes a strong case that preventive action is not a luxury but a necessity.
For more than a decade, the United States has mostly watched from the sidelines as Asian countries organize themselves into an alphabet soup of new multilateral groups. In this report, the authors review the relationship between pan-Asian and trans-Pacific institutions and suggest policy guidelines for a new U.S. approach to this new Asian landscape.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.