Illegal Immigrants and the Death of the Middle Class

The immigration debate comes down to whether or not people who have come into the United States illegally should be given a chance to stay (amnesty), or if they should be forced to leave. This blog post will try to understand the reasons behind both positions. In a future post, I will offer my own thoughts on the matter. Whatever one believes on immigration, it is clear that President Obama is using the executive powers of the Presidency more than any other President. Other Presidents have, of course, used executive power, but it is clear that President Obama is using it to a much greater degree than any other President in U.S. history. Aside from the immigration debate, this is a frightening development for the American republic, as ably argued here.

Anti-immigration sentiment can be boiled down to three basic components. Most immigrants now come from Mexico and Central America, and the majority of these are poor. The more of these poor immigrants come, the greater the stress on entitlement programs. In other words, taxpayers will have to foot a higher bill if many poor illegal immigrants become eligible to receive benefits from both the federal and state governments. The working middle-class has been struggling in the past few decades, especially men. That has had horrific consequences for segments of American society. Anti-immigrant views are tied into a sense that there already very few jobs for high school graduates – amnesty will only increase the competition pool. Finally, there is a political argument: if poor Hispanic immigrants are naturalized, then they will overwhelmingly vote Democratic. Republicans who support amnesty are aware of this and are hoping to remind Hispanics that they too voted for amnesty.

Pro-immigrant sentiment can be summarized as well. The United States should welcome all people because we are a nation of immigrants. Crossing the border is not the greatest crime; it should be considered more like a speeding ticket, an infraction that can be expunged at some point. Democrats who support amnesty are also hopeful that illegal immigrants will, in the future once naturalized, vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

In 1986, Ronald Reagan’s immigration plan [that Congress passed] included amnesty for three million people. The plan failed to curb illegal immigration largely because it placed no restrictions on employers to verify if all workers were legal. Here is the main problem in getting meaningful reform.

The Chamber of Congress thinks Republicans should not even have a candidate in 2016, unless they support amnesty. Perhaps, it is the business community that wants cheap labor that is the biggest obstacle to immigration reform. It is clear that both parties are not serious about border security, the most important component. Not only President Obama, but President George W. Bush, and past Presidents could have easily secured the border with Mexico but chose not to rigorously do so. But, an unsecured border, allows radical jihadists [Al-Qaeda, ISIS, etc.] another portal to attack the homeland. Do you think that big business is what obligates politicians to never actually secure the border?