2_ayala_david

David A. Ayala

Rhetoric

04/09/01

Illegal Immigration: An Economic Impact?

Illegal immigration into the United States impacts the economy. Undocumented immigrants are congesting the legal system, educational facilities and social services, and the federal government is to blame. Additionally, illegal immigrants are affecting the labor market, taking job opportunities from legal immigrants and United States citizens.

More and more illegal immigrants are committing crimes in the United States, costing the taxpayer money for processing and detainment. Ken Ellingwood, a
Times staff writer, reports that counties along the Mexican border shell out $108 million a year in police, court, and emergency medical care costs associated with illegal immigrants. Slightly more than half of the total costs nationwide were borne by California's two border counties, San Diego and Imperial.

Congress has enacted two important pieces of legislation to help resolve the illegal immigrant problem, the Immigration Acts of April 24th and September 30th of 1996, according to Ira Kurzban (8-9). These two enactments provide for the removal of criminal aliens from the United States. The fact that new laws have been passed is indicative that Congress is aware there is a criminal alien problem.

The enforcement of immigration laws is a costly matter. The Immigration and Naturalization Service has, under instructions from the former United States Attorney General, instituted a criminal alien program to identify and remove criminal aliens detained in state and federal correctional institutions (Kurzban 227). Genaro Armas, in the Monitor, reported that the Border Patrol's effects have curtailed the growing tide of illegal immigration across the 2,100-mile border (6A).

Educational facilities are being congested with illegal aliens and the local school districts are unable to stop the flow. According to Kurzban, in Plyler v. Doe, the United States Supreme Court prohibited school districts from inquiring into the immigration status of its student population (24). What should have been considered was what gave them the right to even study here in the first place, and most of all, live here?

The reality is that local taxes do not adequately support school districts. The individual cost of providing an education to an illegal student is far more than the taxes generated from his or her illegal parent's employment in the United States.

Social services are feeling the impact of illegal immigration. In the San Antonio Express News, Lt. Governor Bill Ratliff stated that when illegal aliens get sick or injured "we have to serve them with medical care just like you and me" (qtd. in Selby). It is the illegal immigrant that depletes the limited funds provided for social services. This is due to the fact that illegal immigrants have a lower average income and pay less into the system, but withdraw more from it. As an example of illegal immigrants depleting funds from social services, Armas reported that the Texas Health and Human Services Commission has set up booths in "colonias" to provide residents, without regard to their legal status, information about free services.

Although immigration is a federal issue, it impacts local and state governments. The federal government collects income and social security taxes, but does not adequately redistribute the monies to pay for programs impacted by illegal immigration.

Pro-immigrant advocates would have you believe that illegal immigration and its impact are issues of debate. According to Michael Fix and Jeffrey Passel, there is nothing to worry about because "these undocumented aliens are eligible for very little public assistance." Furthermore, they argue there is an "absence of reliable data" to conclude that illegal immigrants affect the economy negatively. The "use of public services is generally not affected by immigration status, including illegal status," said George Vernez and Kevin F. McCarthy. Illegal immigrants pay social security taxes, which are needed by the upcoming "baby boomers" that are becoming eligible to retire. Vernez and McCarthy state, "This lack of data forces . . . assumptions about immigrants' service usage and revenue contributions- -assumptions that are often mistaken." Donald Kerwin, in the Interpreter Releases, goes further and says that "most immigration offenses do not result from heinous motives," thus, the criminal alien should not be removed from the United States because it separates families (20). Kerwin should be more concerned about the effect these criminal aliens have on their victims.

Pro-immigration advocates argue that illegal immigrants only take the unwanted jobs. This argument falls short. Armas reported that data from the 2000 census showed an explosive growth in the Latino legal population outside the nation's urban areas and that Hispanics helped to fill increasingly available low-wage jobs in the 1990s. In analyzing the economic effect, Steven Camarota, in the Immigration Review, found that the labor market opportunities available to less-educated legal natives are reduced by illegal immigration (13).

Pro-immigration advocates give a false appearance of their position on the "open-border" issue. They are not so concerned about the reunification of families or the unwanted jobs of citizens, but the low-cost labor instead. It is most likely these advocates are either funded by or employed with industrial and/or agricultural businesses that want to boost profits. According to Yoav Sarig, James F. Thompson, and Galen K. Brown, "Lobbyists for farmers often claim that fruit and vegetable production in the United States would be impossible without large and continuing infusions of foreign labor" (1). Additionally, a study done by the California Farm Bureau Federation argues that without a sufficient number of workers harvesting, United States growers will become uncompetitive and will be forced to reduce their crops (1).

In 1986, Congress passed a law prohibiting the employment of illegal aliens. Daniel Jester stated, "It failed to make the policy workable by providing a quick and easy way for employers to verify the eligibility for employment" (10). In other words, it gave rise to a variety of fraudulent documents. So long as there is an employment magnet in the United States, people will be drawn to it. Hence, there will be an exploitation of illegal immigrants by unscrupulous employers.

Mexico has a third world economy. According to Jester, Mexico's economy is not at par with that of the United States (10). It is common knowledge that the Mexican daily wage is insufficient to sustain one's basic needs. Thus, these low wages give the Mexican encouragement to come to the United States.

Illegal immigrants come to work. They have families in Mexico to which they send their American dollars. These dollars are spent in Mexico rather in the United States. Cindy Rodriguez, a writer for The Boston Globe, claims that between 1994 and 2000, the current employment statistics recorded 17.3 million new jobs while the population survey recorded only 12.1 million more people were employed. Rodriguez asks, "Why were there 5.2 million more jobs than people working, and who was holding these jobs?" One person answered, "All you have to do is look around and walk the streets, take a bus, or walk into any restaurant kitchen. It's immigrants" (qtd. in Rodriguez). David M. Kennedy states, "Mexico, is by far most the leading supplier of illegal immigrants in the United States." Furthermore, Kennedy estimates that about one thousand people immigrate illegally into the United States daily.

The United States has taken steps to curtail the illegal immigration that has impacted the labor market. Kurzban states, "Immigration laws have been enacted to prohibit the illegal entry so that job opportunities are not taken away from the legal immigrant or the United States citizen" (693). Furthermore, employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens are being punished (693). In February 1996, President Clinton signed Executive Order No. 12989, barring employers that knowingly hire illegal-alien workers from receiving federal contracts (Jester 9).

Though many pro-immigration advocates argue for an "open-border," they fail to understand the overall impact on the economy. The issues are not as debatable as the pro-immigrant advocates would lead you to believe. Their use of quantitative adjectives in describing the impact indicates they too recognize the existence of a cost. Even if the impact is downplayed, citizens and legal residents should not incur the cost. Illegal immigration is wrong and it negatively impacts the economy.

Sources Sited

Armas, Genaro C. "Swelling Hispanic Population has Schools looking for Answers." Monitor [McAllen, TX] 11 Feb. 2001: 6A.

Camarota, Steven A. "Immigrants in the U.S.-2000: A Snapshot of America's Foreign-Born Population." Backgrounder 26 (Jan. 2001): 1-19.

Ellingwood Ken, "Study Tallies Cost of Illegal Immigration." Times 6 Feb. 2001. 5 Mar. 2001 <http://www.latimos.com/news/asection/20010206/

t000010909.html>.

Fix, Michael and Jeffrey Passel. "Setting the Record Straight: What are the Costs to the Public?" Public Welfare 52 (Spring 1994): 23 Mar.

<http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/pub/Immigration/

WelfareUse/UIPubWelf.html>.

Jester, Daniel. "No Sanctions: Governments have not Fulfilled Promises to PunishRogue Employers." Immigration Review 33 (Fall 1998): 8-10.

Kennedy, David M. "Can We Still Afford to be a Nation of Immigrants?" Atlantic 11 Feb. 2000. 5 Mar. 2001

<http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96nov/immigrat/ kennedy.htm>.

Kerwin, Donald. "How our Immigration Laws Divide, Impoverish, and Undermine

American Families." Interpreter Releases 76.31 (Aug. 1999): 13-27.

Kurzban, Ira J. Kurzban's Immigration Law Source Book. Washington D.C.:

Immigration Law Foundation, 2000.

Rodriguez, Cindy. "Impact of the Undocumented." Boston Globe 6 Feb. 2001. 5 Mar. 2001 <http://www.Boston.com/dailyglobe2/...n/

Impact_of_he_undocumented+.shtml>.

Sarig, Yoav, James F. Thompson, and Galen K. Brown. "Alternatives to Immigration Labor? The Status of Fruit and Vegetable Harvest

Mechanization in the United States." Backgrounder 25 (Dec. 2000): 1-10.

Selby, W. Garder. "Ratliff Lashes Out at Feds for Texas' Border Troubles." San Antonio Express News 2 Mar. 2001: 8B.

Vernez, George and Kevin F. McCarthy. "The Cost of Immigration to Taxpayers: Analytical and Policy Issues." Rand (1995). 3 Mar. 2001

<http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR705.html>.









			David A. Ayala Rhetoric 04/09/01 Illegal Immigration: An Economic Impact? Illegal immigration into the United States impacts the economy. Undocumented immigrants are congesting the legal system, educational facilities and social services, and the federal government is to blame. Additionally, illegal immigrants are affecting the labor market, taking job opportunities from legal immigrants and United States citizens. More and more illegal immigrants are committing crimes in the United States, costing the taxpayer money for processing and detainment. Ken Ellingwood, a Times staff writer, reports that counties along the Mexican border shell out $108 million a year in police, court, and emergency medical care costs associated with illegal immigrants. Slightly more than half of the total costs nationwide were borne by California's two border counties, San Diego and Imperial. Congress has enacted two important pieces of legislation to help resolve the illegal immigrant problem, the Immigration Acts of April 24th and September 30th of 1996, according to Ira Kurzban (8-9). These two enactments provide for the removal of criminal aliens from the United States. The fact that new laws have been passed is indicative that Congress is aware there is a criminal alien problem. The enforcement of immigration laws is a costly matter. The Immigration and Naturalization Service has, under instructions from the former United States Attorney General, instituted a criminal alien program to identify and remove criminal aliens detained in state and federal correctional institutions (Kurzban 227). Genaro Armas, in the Monitor, reported that the Border Patrol's effects have curtailed the growing tide of illegal immigration across the 2,100-mile border (6A). Educational facilities are being congested with illegal aliens and the local school districts are unable to stop the flow. According to Kurzban, in Plyler v. Doe, the United States Supreme Court prohibited school districts from inquiring into the immigration status of its student population (24). What should have been considered was what gave them the right to even study here in the first place, and most of all, live here? The reality is that local taxes do not adequately support school districts. The individual cost of providing an education to an illegal student is far more than the taxes generated from his or her illegal parent's employment in the United States. Social services are feeling the impact of illegal immigration. In the San Antonio Express News, Lt. Governor Bill Ratliff stated that when illegal aliens get sick or injured "we have to serve them with medical care just like you and me" (qtd. in Selby). It is the illegal immigrant that depletes the limited funds provided for social services. This is due to the fact that illegal immigrants have a lower average income and pay less into the system, but withdraw more from it. As an example of illegal immigrants depleting funds from social services, Armas reported that the Texas Health and Human Services Commission has set up booths in "colonias" to provide residents, without regard to their legal status, information about free services. Although immigration is a federal issue, it impacts local and state governments. The federal government collects income and social security taxes, but does not adequately redistribute the monies to pay for programs impacted by illegal immigration. Pro-immigrant advocates would have you believe that illegal immigration and its impact are issues of debate. According to Michael Fix and Jeffrey Passel, there is nothing to worry about because "these undocumented aliens are eligible for very little public assistance." Furthermore, they argue there is an "absence of reliable data" to conclude that illegal immigrants affect the economy negatively. The "use of public services is generally not affected by immigration status, including illegal status," said George Vernez and Kevin F. McCarthy. Illegal immigrants pay social security taxes, which are needed by the upcoming "baby boomers" that are becoming eligible to retire. Vernez and McCarthy state, "This lack of data forces . . . assumptions about immigrants' service usage and revenue contributions- -assumptions that are often mistaken." Donald Kerwin, in the Interpreter Releases, goes further and says that "most immigration offenses do not result from heinous motives," thus, the criminal alien should not be removed from the United States because it separates families (20). Kerwin should be more concerned about the effect these criminal aliens have on their victims. Pro-immigration advocates argue that illegal immigrants only take the unwanted jobs. This argument falls short. Armas reported that data from the 2000 census showed an explosive growth in the Latino legal population outside the nation's urban areas and that Hispanics helped to fill increasingly available low-wage jobs in the 1990s. In analyzing the economic effect, Steven Camarota, in the Immigration Review, found that the labor market opportunities available to less-educated legal natives are reduced by illegal immigration (13). Pro-immigration advocates give a false appearance of their position on the "open-border" issue. They are not so concerned about the reunification of families or the unwanted jobs of citizens, but the low-cost labor instead. It is most likely these advocates are either funded by or employed with industrial and/or agricultural businesses that want to boost profits. According to Yoav Sarig, James F. Thompson, and Galen K. Brown, "Lobbyists for farmers often claim that fruit and vegetable production in the United States would be impossible without large and continuing infusions of foreign labor" (1). Additionally, a study done by the California Farm Bureau Federation argues that without a sufficient number of workers harvesting, United States growers will become uncompetitive and will be forced to reduce their crops (1). In 1986, Congress passed a law prohibiting the employment of illegal aliens. Daniel Jester stated, "It failed to make the policy workable by providing a quick and easy way for employers to verify the eligibility for employment" (10). In other words, it gave rise to a variety of fraudulent documents. So long as there is an employment magnet in the United States, people will be drawn to it. Hence, there will be an exploitation of illegal immigrants by unscrupulous employers. Mexico has a third world economy. According to Jester, Mexico's economy is not at par with that of the United States (10). It is common knowledge that the Mexican daily wage is insufficient to sustain one's basic needs. Thus, these low wages give the Mexican encouragement to come to the United States. Illegal immigrants come to work. They have families in Mexico to which they send their American dollars. These dollars are spent in Mexico rather in the United States. Cindy Rodriguez, a writer for The Boston Globe, claims that between 1994 and 2000, the current employment statistics recorded 17.3 million new jobs while the population survey recorded only 12.1 million more people were employed. Rodriguez asks, "Why were there 5.2 million more jobs than people working, and who was holding these jobs?" One person answered, "All you have to do is look around and walk the streets, take a bus, or walk into any restaurant kitchen. It's immigrants" (qtd. in Rodriguez). David M. Kennedy states, "Mexico, is by far most the leading supplier of illegal immigrants in the United States." Furthermore, Kennedy estimates that about one thousand people immigrate illegally into the United States daily. The United States has taken steps to curtail the illegal immigration that has impacted the labor market. Kurzban states, "Immigration laws have been enacted to prohibit the illegal entry so that job opportunities are not taken away from the legal immigrant or the United States citizen" (693). Furthermore, employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens are being punished (693). In February 1996, President Clinton signed Executive Order No. 12989, barring employers that knowingly hire illegal-alien workers from receiving federal contracts (Jester 9). Though many pro-immigration advocates argue for an "open-border," they fail to understand the overall impact on the economy. The issues are not as debatable as the pro-immigrant advocates would lead you to believe. Their use of quantitative adjectives in describing the impact indicates they too recognize the existence of a cost. Even if the impact is downplayed, citizens and legal residents should not incur the cost. Illegal immigration is wrong and it negatively impacts the economy. Sources Sited Armas, Genaro C. "Swelling Hispanic Population has Schools looking for Answers." Monitor [McAllen, TX] 11 Feb. 2001: 6A. Camarota, Steven A. "Immigrants in the U.S.-2000: A Snapshot of America's Foreign-Born Population." Backgrounder 26 (Jan. 2001): 1-19. Ellingwood Ken, "Study Tallies Cost of Illegal Immigration." Times 6 Feb. 2001. 5 Mar. 2001 <http://www.latimos.com/news/asection/20010206/ t000010909.html>. Fix, Michael and Jeffrey Passel. "Setting the Record Straight: What are the Costs to the Public?" Public Welfare 52 (Spring 1994): 23 Mar. <http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/pub/Immigration/ WelfareUse/UIPubWelf.html>. Jester, Daniel. "No Sanctions: Governments have not Fulfilled Promises to PunishRogue Employers." Immigration Review 33 (Fall 1998): 8-10. Kennedy, David M. "Can We Still Afford to be a Nation of Immigrants?" Atlantic 11 Feb. 2000. 5 Mar. 2001 <http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96nov/immigrat/ kennedy.htm>. Kerwin, Donald. "How our Immigration Laws Divide, Impoverish, and Undermine American Families." Interpreter Releases 76.31 (Aug. 1999): 13-27. Kurzban, Ira J. Kurzban's Immigration Law Source Book. Washington D.C.: Immigration Law Foundation, 2000. Rodriguez, Cindy. "Impact of the Undocumented." Boston Globe 6 Feb. 2001. 5 Mar. 2001 <http://www.Boston.com/dailyglobe2/...n/ Impact_of_he_undocumented+.shtml>. Sarig, Yoav, James F. Thompson, and Galen K. Brown. "Alternatives to Immigration Labor? The Status of Fruit and Vegetable Harvest Mechanization in the United States." Backgrounder 25 (Dec. 2000): 1-10. Selby, W. Garder. "Ratliff Lashes Out at Feds for Texas' Border Troubles." San Antonio Express News 2 Mar. 2001: 8B. Vernez, George and Kevin F. McCarthy. "The Cost of Immigration to Taxpayers: Analytical and Policy Issues." Rand (1995). 3 Mar. 2001 <http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR705.html>.