Most of H.R. 4437, the “Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005” discussed in Abhi’s post, looks like the trainwreck that he deems it. Still, I think that the part that amends Section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a) to increase penalties on employers for hiring undocumented workers is a step in the right direction. The United States needs a more honest immigration policy, one that includes neither support for law-breaking nor animus toward immigrants, and as long as employers win on the cost benefit analysis — F x P < S, where F= cost of fines, P= probability of getting caught, and S= saved money from using undocumented labor — we never will have such reforms. Supporting illegal immigration is at best a short term help to such aliens, as they deal with the longterm problems of having to remain invisible and lack access to the safety net for the elderly, i.e. Social Security and Medicare. Whose sympathy for the undocumented cab driver extends far enough to pay for his prescriptions when he’s too old to drive anymore?Another problem is that rampant illegal immigration, especially of the type more likely to be practiced by desis, makes the U.S. government paranoid about letting anyone into the country. Unlike immigrants from Latin America, South Asians are unable simply to go over a border to get into the U.S. and thus are more likely to overstay visas. The frequency of this evasion of immigration law gives Congress an excuse to withhold business visas that would enable people back in the motherland to do work for the U.S. without actually immigrating.
To me, outsourcing is preferable to immigration. It raises the standard of living in South Asia; increases the tax base (at least when people pay their taxes); provides some trickle down to the poorest people who never would have a chance to immigrate; keeps human resources in developing countries instead of continuing the “brain drain”; allows families to stay together without the disruptions and delays of the immigration process. This is not to say that immigration shouldn’t occur at all. Some people simply were born in societies for which their personalities are incompatible, and they ought to be able to move to more congenial ones. But we should not fall into the trap of assuming that merely because economic necessity drives people out of South Asia, that they are happy to be leaving.
The ability to maintain the outsourcing boom, however, is dependent on the free movement of service workers. If a Bangalore company builds a new system for an American corporation, people from the former need to be able to visit the latter for training, testing and other work that cannot be done wholly through telecommunications. This means that business contracts that otherwise would go to South Asians who could perform them most efficiently will be withheld, for fear that visa trouble will slow down the process.
If we are interested in the successful future of India and Indians, we should be lobbying the U.S. government to loosen its restrictions on the non-immigrant movement of people. This is currently under discussion at the World Trade Organization talks, but as with many aspects of international trade, under the radar of front-page politics. South Asian Americans should become an interest group supporting India’s position on ending the trade barrier to the continued growth of India’s economy.
To me, outsourcing is preferable to immigration.
agreed.
pg,
Good writeup.
If we are interested in the successful future of India and Indians and the continued success of America and Americans, we, as Indian-Americans, should be lobbying the U.S. government to loosen its restrictions on the non-immigrant movement of people.
M. Nam
The immigrantion debate from the Indian perspective. Nice post.
South Asian Americans should become an interest group supporting IndiaÂ’s position on ending the trade barrier to the continued growth of IndiaÂ’s economy.
Fantastic! Agreed.
It raises the standard of living in South Asia; increases the tax base (at least when people pay their taxes); provides some trickle down to the poorest people who never would have a chance to immigrate; keeps human resources in developing countries instead of continuing the “brain drain”; allows families to stay together without the disruptions and delays of the immigration process.
However, immigration also enhances the Indian economy–through remittances, through Indian immigrants in positions of influence making a case for investment in India, and through increasing American confidence in India’s work product.
Would Bangalore be as succesful as it is without the Brown presence in Silicon Valley?
pg,
interesting viewpoint. i have spent my lifetime on different campuses in Amrika where more than half of the faculty are usually immigrants. i have yet to meet “personality” type immigration case, you are talking about – even an english “Bob” PhD bloke from Cambridge takes up a job at Cornell or UCLA because the salary and research grants are fatter, not for any personality magnet to US of A, etc. We are not even going to talk about medical doctors, mom and pop businessmen (chinese deli, etc.)
Regarding social security issue, my understanding is verty different. Excerpts from NYT article (April 5, 2005): “Illegal Immigrants Are Bolstering Social Security With Billions”
Some of the excertps: ………….
Starting in the late 1980’s, the Social Security Administration received a flood of W-2 earnings reports with incorrect — sometimes simply fictitious — Social Security numbers. It stashed them in what it calls the ”earnings suspense file” in the hope that someday it would figure out whom they belonged to.
The file has been mushrooming ever since: $189 billion worth of wages ended up recorded in the suspense file over the 1990’s, two and a half times the amount of the 1980’s.
In the current decade, the file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year, generating $6 billion to $7 billion in Social Security tax revenue and about $1.5 billion in Medicare taxes.
In 2002 alone, the last year with figures released by the Social Security Administration, nine million W-2’s with incorrect Social Security numbers landed in the suspense file, accounting for $56 billion in earnings, or about 1.5 percent of total reported wages.
Social Security officials do not know what fraction of the suspense file corresponds to the earnings of illegal immigrants. But they suspect that the portion is significant.
”Our assumption is that about three-quarters of other-than-legal immigrants pay payroll taxes,” said Stephen C. Goss, Social Security’s chief actuary, using the agency’s term for illegal immigration.
……………….
They are telling a very different story
The entrepreneurial impatient and the squeaky-clean who dislike pervasive bribery tended to leave India in the ’70s.
Rich nations have citizens who do not want to make more babies. That is the bottomline on Social Security. There is no magical way of fixing it, other than American to start making babies.
Singapore is far less democratic than India, but Indians line up to be able to move to Singapore. Your above statement smells of arrogance of cultural superiority.
remind me to invite you to dinner with my mother, should you and i both be in northern california simultaneously.
“remind me to invite you to dinner with my mother, should you and i both be in northern california simultaneously.”
Sure, will do that. Last week, I was in SF.
Also note that it is hard to admit that one has immigrated for “MONEY” as opposed to “VALUES” becauses doing something just for MONEY is not “considered” honorable.
Also note that it is hard to admit that one has immigrated for “MONEY” as opposed to “VALUES” becauses doing something just for MONEY is not “considered” honorable.
I would think money is why most immigrants of any period came. How many Indian immigrants do you know who think American culture is superior to Indian culture? Many I know say “What culture?” (in America)when asked (which is annoying); then they lambast Indian socialism and inefficient government and praise American capitalism (which is an emergent of the culture).
After visiting Canada, the U.S. and europe, my parents chose Canada because they felt there was a difference in values. I am not saying their preconceived value notions were valid or not (not trying to start a values war) – my point is that some immigrants do consider the values and culture and their experiences in/of the country they are immigrating to – it’s not a money thing. They constantly talk about how much they love Canada… and hockey…. but that’s another story.
And in their professions, they could make alot more money in the U.S…..
After visiting Canada, the U.S. and europe, my parents chose Canada because they felt there was a difference in values.
You are correct Eh. I know all about Canadians and how many doctors for example chose Canada over the US. But still they chose among the wealthier parts of the world in which to settle. Surely that was a major reason for their choice.
Singapore is far less democratic than India, but Indians line up to be able to move to Singapore. Your above statement smells of arrogance of cultural superiority.
well, perhaps the indians move to singapore because they prefer the values there! though i am skeptical that a large proportion of indian immigrants move for reasons of values as opposed to $$$ (no shame in that, fundamentally) i know many japanese who have immigrated to this country (i.e., within the last 20 years, not japanese americans who are 3rd generation) because the preferred the cultural values of america to the conformity of japan (they are often involved in the arts or people professions too).
I know several 1st gen desi women who say they’re happier in the U.S. without a controlling extended family.
I know several 1st gen desi women who say they’re happier in the U.S. without a controlling extended family.
now that you point that out, i have heard/seen/known of that too. and actually, my own father does offer that corruption was one reason he left bangladesh. his family has traditionally made a principled stand to not be corrupt and that has cost them a lot in economic and social status because they operate outside of the patronage system (one of my uncles has the bizarre situation of not being able to entertain his subordinates because they all live in palatial homes due to their enthusiastic participation in bribary rackets)….
would be nice to hear more women debate/weigh in about this last thread, rather than let desi guys take over the talkspace as they do in most traditional places
Who are we to say that outsourcing is preferable to immigration or the other way around? A little strange to say that given that many of us are sitting here enjoying life in America.
Our guiding philosophy should be that those who work should be treated with respect and dignity and be afforded or allowed the opportunity to gain access to the same rights and protections we all have. Especially given that our economy depends on this labor.
We settled this labor vs. rights debate a long time ago in our country- remember? This is just the less disgusting and gruesome version.
Also, it seems that there is some sort of consensus on this site that we need increased immigration enforcement and we need to crack down on employers. On what basis has everyone decided this? It seems that the real problem is that our need for labor greatly outweighs our supply. And that’s what has created this underground labor industry. So, this would mean that allowing those folks a way to earn status, and increasing the number of people we let in would solve the problems.
Also, in response to a lot of comments to this and Abhi’s article- please point to some data that says that undocumented immigrants are taking jobs from Americans. I just don’t think that is true.
I wonder if the increased penalities for employers will disuade them from hiring even legal immigrants. Employers may think it’s not worth the risk and trouble of investigating and verifying an immigrant’s legal status, and that it’s safer just to hire native-born citizens.
I’ve heard immigration lawyers say (as well as people on this blog) that legal status can be awfully fluid for some — drop a college credit, miss a deadline, and all of a sudden you’re “illegal,” at least for the moment. This bill might create a minefield for employers (not to mention immigrants themselves), and they may not want to run the risk of hiring someone who down the line might cause them legal jeopardy.
I think I see your point: it’s never nice to HAVE to immigrate (or to do anything) because of economic necessity. But people have always migrated, and they always will, for reasons both economic and non-economic, both rational and irrational. And in many ways, isn’t this a happy thing?
i know of first gen desi women in the US who miss india. there’s quite a few indians who prefer india to the us
forgot to say,
america is its own thing, and some people like it, some don’t. for instance, i love woody guthrie, walt whitman, and bruce springsteen because there work reminds me that america is a project. i guess its many projects, some good and some not, but i like those artists because i like their vision of america, and i share it to some extent
to me its not about the choice of india or america. i’m an american with everything that entails
Our guiding philosophy should be that those who work should be treated with respect and dignity and be afforded or allowed the opportunity to gain access to the same rights and protections we all have. Especially given that our economy depends on this labor.
sounds like you agree with the wall street journal. “there shall be open borders.”
and don’t tell me what my guiding philosophy should be. you have yours, and i have mine.
Outsourcing would be embraced by an internationalist left, if such a thing existed anymore. The populist pseudo intellectuals en-vogue now only extend their utilitarianism as far as their own borders.
Doesn’t this sound like an old leftest dream?-
As a 1st gen immigrant, I came here for the career, aka money, and am happy here in the US. I am even happier to realize that there are no statues in every street corner of a guy who said, “If you see a brahmin and a snake, kill the brahmin first”.
"Outsourcing would be embraced by an internationalist left, if such a thing existed anymore"
Its been written of approvingly by publications like EPW in India and Monbiot in Europe.
Kush Tandon – But does the Social Security money go back to the people who put it in, or does it help prop up the system for the documented contributors? Re-read what I said: illegal immigrants lack access to tax-funded resources; they don’t necessarily fail to help make those resources possible.
Also, I think there are differences among immigrants. Even between my parents, I would consider my father to have a more “American” personality and my mother a more “Indian” one. She still misses having a huge family network and those social traditions, whereas my dad sometimes is impatient with them.
RC – no cultural superiority, just a matter of what people prefer. I thought about linking something on the people who really did make good on their threats and immigrate to Canada after Bush’s win last year. They find the growing conservatism of the U.S. makes this country intolerable for them. One of my American-born friends is patriotically in love with the U.S., but has a personality more compatible with the UK and will move back there ASAP. To be able to do this is a privilege, but as other commentors noted, Indians do have preferences among the countries to which they choose to immigrate. If you value safety, cleanliness and a larger Indian population over abstractions like democracy (whoopty do for your one vote), you’d pick Singapore over the U.S.
brown fury – I mean that outsourcing is a preferable way to give people economic opportunity because it doesn’t force them to choose between what someone called “MONEY” and “VALUES.” With a more globalized economy, people can do well-paid work without the difficulties of immigration. Also, I would refer you to the comment I made on Abhi’s post, where I pointed out that if we prosecute employers for using illegal labor, they will be forced to lobby openly for increased immigration, just as tech companies lobbied openly for increased visas for their workers. There is much good in legal immigration, but no good peculiar to illegal immigration, unless you’re an employer who likes being able to screw over your employees and their having no recourse.
You seem to believe that totally open borders are desirable, but I’m not quite on that boat, for security and other reasons. As for whether undocumented workers take jobs that Americans otherwise would have, show me a job position in which no citizens work and in which no citizens are interested. If you want more research into the question, start with this article.
arj – look at the bill itself, the parts relating to employers seem to make an effort for the verification process to be as easy as possible. Running a Social Security number doesn’t take much effort and the burden is put on the government to make it simple. If you were issued a SS#, it doesn’t disappear just because you dropped a credit or missed a deadline.
razib – note that the WSJ only wants to open NAFTA borders, and this pre 9/11. I doubt my cousins in Andhra necessarily are going to be welcomed to book a flight and stay as long as they like.
Jared – while this post shows off my pro-outsourcing tendencies, there are counter-forces as well.
razib – note that the WSJ only wants to open NAFTA borders, and this pre 9/11. I doubt my cousins in Andhra necessarily are going to be welcomed to book a flight and stay as long as they like.
PG, note this text: Indeed, during the immigration debate of 1984 we suggested an ultimate goal to guide passing policies–a constitutional amendment: “There shall be open borders.”
i article i linked to was the quickest one i could find that referred to that editorial, it has been standing policy at the WSJ to have open borders. as the late editor (who penned the piece above) declared: the nation state is dead (at least to the WSJ).
btw, i appreciate your guest posts, for what it is worth.
a negative review of the WSJ immigration stance from restrictionist mark kirkorian.
PG-
I don’t know enough about the completely open borders argument to know whether I support it. (If someone has their shpiel down on this, would love to hear it). My position at this point is more focused on after-entry, they deserve rights solely because they are workers providing their labor. It just doesn’t seem right to me that we benefit from someone’s labor but then deny them the privileges that we have.
I’m not really sure I believe your theory that by denying these workers the jobs in the short term will benefit them in the long term because employers will demand changes to immigration laws. It’s never worked like that in American history that a group of people bettered their position by standing idly by and waiting for someone else to help them. People have always had to fight for rights and equality. I don’t think this situation is unique.
I used to be in favor of outsourcing, being that it was great for the Indian economy. But after seeing what it is doing to my peers who graduate in science/technology from American schools and are finding it hard to find a job here in their field – I’m not so sure.
I love that India is thriving and that a lot of educated people are employed as they deserve to be. But living in America, taking advantage of its benefits and opportunities, it makes little sense for me to support policies like outsourcing, which greatly benefit Indian workers, but negatively impact middle-class Americans (and Indian-Americans like myself).
brown fury says,
It’s never worked like that in American history that a group of people bettered their position by standing idly by and waiting for someone else to help them. People have always had to fight for rights and equality.
Yes, except this isn’t waiting for someone else to help them out of charity — it’s out of self-interest. If the employers need the labor, just as the tech companies needed the labor, they will make the effort. It’s that simple: align your interests with those of the people in power.
Native Americans who want to smoke peyote find their best friends in conservative Christian attorneys, because the latter want to advance religious exceptions to general policies. They figure that if the government will make an exception to drug policy to let NAs smoke up, the government will have to make an exception to anti-discrimination policies for religious homophobes.
The NAs are too marginalized on their own to have the power to win on this, but the Christian conservatives got them the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and (after RFRA was overturned by the Supreme Court for violating Congress’s interstate commerce power) the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. Most exceptions made under these laws actually won’t benefit Christians, because they’re the majority and most laws are tailored to their preferences anyway, but they’re just waiting for the day when the government tries to make them do something and they can point to the law’s having been upheld for all the minority religions.
That may not be the most positive example, but that is how American politics works. The only way the business world will lobby for more legal immigration is if there’s no other way for them to meet their profit forecasts. They have to want to avoid significant fines and high cost of labor for their own reasons.
Also, you ought to have some idea as to whether you support open borders or not, because people generally suffer more in the process of evading Border Control than they do once they get here. I would like to have the “control” come from within the U.S. instead of the borders, because people are less likely to get starved and shot that way.
Amen! The sticker shock alone of recalibrating prices would be a pain in the keezer. But like I said, I wouldn’t be surprised if this bill is either gutted and killed, or gutted and passed with a series of hurdles to make life as an undocumented worker even worse – if that’s possible.
Also, for the outsourcers, I have to agree with Razib – you’d have to see the US fully transition its economy again to minimize its service-sector dependence.
And finally, I think Peter Andreas has done a lot of interesting work on the Southern Border and what (doesn’t) work, for those interested in the idea of an open border, or even a re-envisioned border. There’s also a very interesting argument for why increased militarization on the border actually increases long term undocumented migration stateside.
Strong enforcement of fair immigration laws is necessary to avoid animus toward immigrants. When too many immigrants are known to be illegal, citizens will start doubting the legal status of people they perceive as immigrants (due to accents, skin color, etc.) Add in the occasional economic recession and the result will not be good for anyone involved.
Particularly hurt are low income citizens, through wage pressure, and the illegal immigrants themselves, because an implicit promise is made to them when we wink at their border crossings, but clearly that promise will be broken during a recession, when they will no longer be welcome.