PROBLEMS WITH PRESIDENT BUSH'S GUEST WORKER PROPOSAL
By Alan Lee, Esq.†‡
There are a number of problems concerning the president's remarks
in the State of the Union address on January 31, 2006, on the immigration
issue.
We hear claims that immigrants are somehow bad for the economy,
even though this economy could not function without them.
Keeping America competitive requires an immigration system that
upholds our laws, reflects our values and serves the interests
of our economy. Our nation needs orderly and secure borders. To
meet this goal, we must have stronger immigration enforcement
and border protection. And we must have a rational, humane guest-worker
program that rejects amnesty, allows temporary jobs for people
who seek them legally and reduces smuggling and crime at the border.
1.) Does President Bush really want it, and if so, does he have
the will or political muscle to push through a guest worker program?
Many critics rightfully point out that there is great variance in
Mr. Bush's words and subsequent actions. A prime example is his
past speeches on bipartisanship as he has been extremely divisive
in pushing through controversial legislation such as lowering taxes
for the wealthy, appointing (during congressional recesses) a relative
novice to head the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency
(U.S.I.C.E.) and the tainted John Bolton to be ambassador to the
United Nations (accused of constant belittling of staff members),
and again selecting an apparently unqualified (Harriet Myers) and
then ultra-conservative (Samuel Alito) justice to the Supreme Court
in the face of Democratic Party opposition. Examining the question
of will, Mr. Bush has thus far had five years in office to push
through an immigration package and has not done so despite many
calls over the years by his good friend, President Vicente Fox of
Mexico, who has invested much political capital in Mr. Bush and
has yet to see any return. Besides will, a large question is whether
he is capable of whipping the Republican Party in line to pass the
program. He is not seen as a strong president at this time because
of his problems with Iraq, the weak response to Hurricane Katrina,
the controversy over domestic spying (his non-use of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Court, a largely rubber-stamping court
granting warrants either before or within 72 hours of government
surveillance activity, caused one of its judges, James Robertson,
to resign apparently on the logic that there was no point to his
service if the president did not even think that he needed a rubber-stamp
for his actions ), and the ethics scandal presently rocking Washington,
especially the Republican Party.
So there are valid concerns at this time whether any immigration
reform package besides one that only has enforcement provisions
can be passed during this Administration.
2.) Will a guest worker program solve this country's security problem
of knowing who is in the country? The answer is unfortunately "no".
There are anywhere from 9-14 million undocumented persons in the
U.S.. A guest worker program with no hope of amnesty has little
chance of enrolling the majority of these individuals. Mr. Bush
has clearly rejected the McCain/Kennedy (S. 1033), Hagel (S. 1916,
1917, 1918 and 1919) and Specter (draft) reform proposals, and apparently
adopted the Cornyn/Kyl (S. 1438) approach that denies a path to
permanent residence and would require departure within a certain
number of years with incentives for early departure. The majority
of the undocumented have already built lives for themselves here
in the States that they have no intention of abandoning. In order
for the program to succeed and enhance U.S. security, it would have
to attract most if not all of the undocumented. Otherwise they would
continue to exist like the vast numbers of sea creatures below the
surface unable to be seen. The goal of knowing who is in the country
would be lost. Besides the lack of a treasured prize at the end
of the process, one should seriously ask why the undocumented, especially
Mexicans, would want a guest worker program in light of the past
failure of such a program in the 1950's. Under the bracero program,
guest workers were exploited and not given promised benefits upon
return to their home country. The stigma of past failure rests heavily
in the Mexican communities and almost guarantees by itself a less
than enthusiastic response to a guest worker program.
3.) If you cannot entice them with a carrot, can you beat them
into submission with a stick? The Border Protection, Anti-terrorism,
and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 (H.R. 4437), which was
recently passed by the House of Representatives on December 16,
2005 would among other harsh enforcement provisions criminalize
unlawful presence by making it a felony to be illegal in this country.
Does the Administration hope that the threat of felony charges will
drive most undocumented individuals to register for a guest worker
program? Hopefully not, because anyone can see that this is an empty
threat. The costs of jailing and deporting millions of the undocumented
would be astronomical. Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), a cosponsor
of S. 1438, even stated that "The dirty secret is that we couldn't
deport 10 million illegal immigrants if we wanted to." A recent
survey by the Center for American Progress estimated the costs of
a vast deportation effort to be at least $206 billion over five
years, and the costs could reach as high as $230 billion or more.
The authors of the study realized that figures are mind-boggling
and unable to be comprehended by readers who are more attuned to
the price of a gallon of milk or pair of pliers than to rampant
governmental spending. Therefore they gave comparisons that the
amount of $206 billion on an annualized basis of $41 billion would
either be more than double the annual cost of military operations
in Afghanistan; half the annual cost of the Iraq war; or approach
the total amount of money requested by the 33 federal agencies responsible
for Homeland security activities for fiscal year 2006. Even the
Congressional Budget Office report of December 13, 2005, estimated
a cost of $1.9 billion over five years to implement H.R. 4437, but
under the assumption that there would only be an increase of the
prison population by 7000 person - years over the 2006-2010 period
and factoring in such expenses as employment eligibility verification
systems, payment to counties along the southern U.S. border, additional
port of entry inspectors and dogs, etc., but conspicuously leaving
out costs of deporting the undocumented. On the other hand, the
Administration might certainly hope that a few high-profile prosecutions
and sentences under a felony statute might stampede the reluctant
to enroll into the program. The problem with such a strategy is
that, with so much tied up in the effort over the years to remain
permanently, many would most likely not be panicked into participating.
This would have the unwelcome effect of creating a permanent subculture,
terrified of any encounter with authority figures and prone to crime
and worker exploitation because of fears that they themselves could
be jailed while reporting crimes and other abuses. In addition,
such a law would divide the nation while ostracizing the undocumented
and their children as felons.
Is there a possibility than most of the undocumented would sign
up on the thought that this is the only game in town and that things
could change in U.S. immigration policy by the time that they would
have to leave? The difficulty here is that the firm tone against
amnesty does not promote hope of change in the future and there
is common knowledge that enrollment into a guest worker program
would make it much easier for the government to locate and subsequently
deport those who did not return.
4 Can you have an effective guest worker program without enlisting
undocumented workers if the purpose of such a program is only to
help the U.S. economy without concern for security? The answer is
probably "no" both in the short and long term. Whatever
form of program is finally established will undoubtedly be expensive
for participating employers and workers alike. Most U.S. employers
will probably want to know more about the individuals that they
are sponsoring in light of their investment and they will not be
able to obtain a feel about the individuals if they are outside
the U.S.. Unlike large corporations and farms, many small U.S. employers
will be reluctant to petition for guest workers that they know nothing
about. Long-term, this will hurt the U.S. economy as the security
measures now being enacted along U.S. borders and other ports of
entry will largely turn off the flow of illegals and the visa overstays
that are adding to the number of workers in the U.S. With the retirement
of the baby boomer generation, this country faces a shortfall of
30 million workers that will not be made up by Americans in the
following working generations. Even with the number of undocumented
workers in the country and a current replacement birth rate higher
than the European countries, the country will face a timebomb in
the future. Without more workers, the U.S. has the unhappy prospect
of being reduced to a second-tier power in which the off-shoring
of jobs will become a necessity. If this happens, shortsightedness
will become one of the legacies of this Administration.
5.) What is the answer to the immigration problem? If the writer
had a true answer, he should be heading the U.S.C.I.S. and running
for Congress at the same time. Any answers here are dependent upon
the perceived beneficiaries. If the goal is to show compassion towards
the undocumented, they should be afforded a path to legalization.
If it is to secure the country against terrorism with no thought
to cost or compassion, they should all be identified through any
means possible, detained and deported or given some status. If it
is to secure the future of this country's leadership position, the
choices appear to be a.) returning to the policies of tolerance
towards illegal immigration complete with porous borders, ability
of illegals to obtain identity documentation, to work, and to travel
without fear that the local law will enforce the immigration laws;
or b.) regularize their statuses instead of attempting to make them
leave. The first choice would actually make more economic sense
as the undocumented would continue to make less wages than U.S.
workers thereby providing an automatic wage cap for inflation purposes
and pay far more in taxes than they obtain in benefits. With either
choice, the government should expand by vast amounts the number
of individuals allowed to enter the country under employment based
visas. The present annual allotment of 140,000 permanent resident
visas for needed workers is hopelessly inadequate. Unfortunately
it appears at this time that this Administration will settle for
an antiquated U.S. guest worker program solution, leaving the problem
for the next Administration.
|