Immigration Reform Question

Why does most immigration reform focus on the supply-side instead of the demand-side?

Comments

[upyernoz]

that's an easy one. the supply are a bunch of poor people who can't vote. the demand are a bunch of businesses who collectively have a lot of money, aren't afraid to lobby and whose owners do vote.

conservatives don't really believe in "supply side" anything. they go with whatever side has the most cash

[eRobin]

And where they can drive the deepst wedge in their opposition. In this case they get to turn legals against illegals. It's a power elite fantasy scenario.

[B.D.]

Why don't workers have the same rights to cross borders that corporations do?

[Rad Geek]

Are you suggesting that people who give undocumented immigrants jobs should be punished, instead of the undocumented immigrants?

If so, why are you suggesting that? I mean, I agree that undocumented immigrants shouldn't be punished. But why should employers be punished for hiring them?

[m.]

sorry.. i generally try to avoid peppering people with links, but really, this is something you may like to see given the context of this post. evidently *someone* is on the side of the immigrants - and how!:D

[Roxanne]

I'm not sure all employers should be punished for hiring them. It think employers should be punished for paying below the minimum wage --which is what many employers who hire undocumented workers do.

The immigration issue is a complicated one. More complicated than what the American public wants to hear.

I'd like to see national conversations about root causes of problems instead of symptoms (this also is my wish for the drug war and terrorism btw).

[bryant]

Without illegal immigrants, the U.S. economy would crash. It's really not that difficult to stop the bulk of it. It's just not viable. So, we rally the xenophobes around the issue and do nothing...of course.

Exporting jobs and importing labor...sooner or later the lines will cross - should be most fascinating.

Naturally, I think the "solution" is to eliminate the destitution so prevalent in other lands. No one comes to the U.S. because they want the food and fashion - they come (for the most part) to feed themselves and their families. Of course, if you paid folks in...use Mexico for an example...a living wage, they wouldn't work at the substandard wages paid at our "exported jobs" factories.

Silly me....delusional again...

[Rad Geek]

Roxanne, but there are already laws against paying under minimum wage. If you think those should be enforced more rigorously, fine, but how does that have any special connection with "immigration reform"?

Further, why is immigration a "problem" that we need to find the "root causes" for? The only fundamental problem I see here is that peaceful people want to move to the United States (because they have thought about it and decided that their lives would be better if they did so), and a bunch of nativist bullies are for using physical violence to stop them.

[upyernoz]

Roxanne, but there are already laws against paying under minimum wage. If you think those should be enforced more rigorously, fine, but how does that have any special connection with "immigration reform"?

they're related because employer who hire illegals regularly break wage and hour rules. another employee would get a lawyer and go straight to the DOL, but an illegal is usually too afraid of being deported to do anything like that. during the clinton years the DOL had a policy of not informing the INS if anyone complaining was illegal. but even then, the illegal generally didn't believe it if you told them. the government is the government. the bush administration has removed a lot of those guarantees. on paper they still have a legal recourse, but in practice they really don't because they'll be deported before their case gets far enough to pay off.

and even under the clinton administration, nothing could stop an employer from ratting out the illegal in retaliation for a wage complaint.

for all practical purposes, there is no minimum wage law, no overtime rules, no labor laws at all when it comes to illegals. so long as they're afraid of being deported, almost anything can happen to them

[Roxanne]

Because documented workers have the law on their side (when it comes to the minimum wage, anyway) and undocumented workers do not. Hence, the special connection.

[upyernoz]

Exporting jobs and importing labor...sooner or later the lines will cross - should be most fascinating

that reminds me of this image in upside down, a book about the madness of the first world-third world relationship. the author wrote about how jobs in north american and europe are moving south to latin america and africa. meanwhile the people from africa and latin america are sneaking north searching for jobs. and they pass each other like ships in the night.

[Rad Geek]

upyernoz: they're related because employer who hire illegals regularly break wage and hour rules. another employee would get a lawyer and go straight to the DOL, but an illegal is usually too afraid of being deported to do anything like that.

Roxanne: Because documented workers have the law on their side (when it comes to the minimum wage, anyway) and undocumented workers do not. Hence, the special connection.

So why not just remove the threat of deportation, instead of devising new legal meaures to punish people just for giving undocumented immigrants a job?

[Roxanne]

Did I suggest new legal measures to punish anyone?

[eRobin]

Exporting jobs and importing labor...sooner or later the lines will cross - should be most fascinating

That's true. And the jobs that are being sought (service work) are the target of organized labor now, which adds another player to the drama.

[george]

BD, you ask a great question here. it's funny that corporations are persons under the law, so yes, why are they permitted to cross national boundaries with such little scrutiny? corporations aside, it is indeed true that californian economy, among others, would crash if there really was a conservative crackdown on illegal immigrants. these people power what, 5,10% of the domestic economy? the hyprocisy here is astounding. let the republican agenda go through, though. they will won't occupy a single seat of power anywhere in CA for years! it'll be like prop 187 all over again.

[Comandante Agí]

The demand for undocumented laborers comes from businesses, which are more than likely controlled/owned by Republicans. However, the xenophobic Republican base recoils in horror at the “brown invaders” who come to the US to steal the jobs that Americans just won’t do. Do you expect the Republican base to realize the innate hypocrisy of this situation? Hence, it’s easier to attack the supply side of the equation.

Americans need to understand the reasons why people emigrate from Latin America—no jobs, no opportunity, etc. They do it to survive. Mexican farmers cannot compete with American farmers due to American government farm subsidies. So they come to work in the Central Valley of CA or any other agrticultural center of the county.

So much for “free trade”...NAFTA has probably increased the flow of immigrants to the United States. The root causes are complex. But I hope people will open their eyes instead of falling back on the easy xenophobic reaction.

[Shae]

Hear hear!

[tas]

I agree with comments like byrants and Agi's. To me, the whole issue of "immigration reform" just seems silly since we're trying to devise ways to keep people from coming into the country or kick them out for staying here and, shock!, daring to be employed. Why further complicate things with immigration mumbo-jumbo when it doesn't even solve the root cause of the problem? The cause being that the demand-side is caused by a Mexican economy which sucks.

It's just another case of Americans wanting it both ways. We want to toodle over to Wal-Mart in our huge SUVs and buy cheap goods that are produced by workers who are severly underpaid. Then we have the audacity to complain when those workers, whose backs we're living on, want to come here to make a semi-decent wage.

Makes me feel like waving a flag.

[osiris]

it's funny how interested "we" the U.S.A. are about spreading democracy to other parts of the world. "We" want "them" to be like us.
Just as long as "they" stay where they are and let us take what we want. Natural resources such as cheap labor or oil we take, you stay.

[bayoustjohndavid]

Has anyone proposed combing job site immigation inspections with OSHA inspections, with drastically increased penalties when OSHA (or wage/hour)violations are found with immigration violations? To me, it addresses the only real problem anone, at least any liberal, could have with illegal immigration. I know it would never happen, but the proposal could serve a purpose.

[Rad Geek]

Rox: Did I suggest new legal measures to punish anyone?

I don't know; I'm asking some questions because I'm not sure what you're referring to when you suggest that "immigration reform" focus on the "demand side."

Do you think that the government should (by whatever means) be actively trying to stop, or at least discourage, employers from hiring undocumented workers? If so, why should they be doing that, rather than simply removing the legal intimidation that prevents undocumented workers from taking and leaving jobs on an equal footing with citizens and documented immigrants? If not, then what kind of "demand side" policies did you have in mind?

[Roxanne]

Here's what I think:

As long as some workers don't have a legal right to work here, then I think the government should debate whether or not we should have some form of punishment for employers of undocumented workers. I would like to hear both sides of that discussion.

Of course, I also think they need to debate whether we want people to have an "undocumented worker" status in the first place.

The purpose of this post was to point out that legislation in this area is almost always focused on the supply side.

[tas]

But Roxanne, that would mean blaming a corporation for something negative. As we all know, that's impossible since it's much more politically correct to kick the poor in the teeth.

[Rad Geek]

tas: "But Roxanne, that would mean blaming a corporation for something negative."

I object to the idea that hiring undocumented workers is "something negative." One of the most common reasons that people immigrate is in order to find more lucrative work, and it's a good thing, not a bad thing, if they are able to find it. (This is why talking about "demand side" policies makes me queasy: what "reducing demand" means is making it so that people who need jobs are less able to find them.)

Of course, some companies that hire undocumented workers are abusive and exploitative: the threat of La Migra makes both legal and social recourses largely unavailable to undocumented workers; and that makes it easy for predatory employers to pay them starvation wages, cheat them, put them in unsafe situations, etc. That's wrong, and employers who do it should be blamed and punished. But it's wrong because abuse and exploitation of anybody is wrong; the only connection between this and immigration status is the artificial connection forged by government intimidation and punishment of undocumented immigrants. Given that that's the only connection, the logical response is not to force employers to discriminate against undocumented immigrants in hiring; the logical response is to call off the immigration cops and stop treating undocumented workers as outlaws.

Rox: "The purpose of this post was to point out that legislation in this area is almost always focused on the supply side."

Well, sure, and I'm all for wide-ranging debate that's not constrained by the operational assumptions of sadistic nativist blowhards. What I'm questioning mostly has to do with the terms on which the suggested broader debate is being conducted. A lot of discourse about immigration tends to assume that immigration or immigrants pose some kind of special problem that demands a special solution. A lot of it also tends to assume that undocumented immigrant workers are a problem that needs to be analyzed and solved (whether the problem is blamed on the workers themselves or on their employers). I think that both of these assumptions should be challenged.

[Jeremías]

It looks like the Supreme Court is interested in the management side of the equation. From today's Washington Post article on Gainesville, GA:

"Lawyers for U.S.-born carpet workers will argue to the Supreme Court this month that a Georgia manufacturer conspired to drive down wages by importing illegal laborers."