With the national spotlight on the Republican Iowa caucuses, a group of prominent Iowans are also entering the immigration fray. On Tuesday they produced the Iowa Compact, a proposal that calls for federal immigration reform that increases legal immigration and refocuses law enforcement on security threats--and away from trying to keep out farm workers.
The Legal Arizona Workers Act and SB 1070 made immigration a state level issue in the 21st century. Since then, numerous states--Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and others--have passed restrictionist laws modeled on SB 1070. Frustrated with the federal government's inability to enforce its own unworkable laws, these states moved further restrict immigration by penalizing businesses, forcing everyone to comply with E-Verify, and other coercive actions.
Unfortunately, federal lawmakers seem willing to only consider restrictionist policies and President Obama is more concerned with enforcing existing bad laws than with changing them. As a result, state policy makers opposed to SB 1070-style laws have had to come up with their own approaches. Iowa is the latest state to do so.
The Iowa Compact would shift undocumented immigration from the black market into the legal market by creating legal alternatives through increasing work visas and green cards. Today, the vast majority of potential immigrants are not legally able to come to the U.S. The law, quite simply, doesn't let them. The Iowa Compact wants to eliminate unauthorized immigration by authorizing it.
These Iowans have made a good start in coming to terms with this contentious issue. The fury over immigration--both legal and undocumented--is out of all proportion to the supposed costs. There is no immigrant crime wave, no across-the-board decrease in wages, and no underclass of undocumented immigrants on welfare. Some conservatives are realizing this and changing their tune.
The Iowa Compact took its inspiration from a similar proposal in Utah. In November 2010, former Republican Governor Olene Walker, members from the Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce, Republican legislators, Democratic legislators, and myriad others signed the Utah Compact, which became the model for Iowa's version.
In early 2011 Utah took the unprecedented step of passing a milder version of SB 1070 with many of the most onerous parts exempted but also added a state-level guest worker pilot program. The program would allow Mexicans from the state of Nuevo Leon to temporarily work for Utah businesses with state-issued identity paperwork.
Providing a legal and comprehensive guest worker program would diminish undocumented immigration greatly. Many undocumented immigrants do not come legally because there is no legal avenue to do so. Utah is trying to eliminate the black market by allowing a legal one to exist.
Another state level group making an impact is Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform (AZEIR), a non-partisan group that holds conferences around the state. Todd Landfried of AZEIR has testified in Texas, Kansas, and other states in opposition to SB 1070-style laws. Landfried regularly invites conservatives, Republicans, and libertarians (like myself) to speak at AZEIR events and discuss SB 1070-style laws from different perspectives.
In California, some prominent conservatives are supporting a proposal strikingly similar to the Utah and Iowa compacts. Robert Loewen, the president of the Orange County Lincoln Club, recently said, "[I]mproving the flow of legal immigration based on businesses' demand would ease the flow of illegal immigration considerably, making border security easier and cheaper to manage." He went on, "[W]e do believe that conservatives have a unique opportunity to lead on this issue by making market forces work for us, instead of trying to stifle them."
Indeed, immigration restrictions were largely supported by anti-capitalist progressives, Democrats, and labor unions in the early 20th century, and, as Loewen says, "[A]ll too often, Republicans have fallen into their trap by either remaining silent about real solutions and/or adopting harsh rhetoric and aggressive measures to enforce flawed immigration laws that were enacted by Democrats in the first place."
While these state-level efforts are developing spontaneously, there long has been a steady and consistent intellectual voice influencing many of the conservative efforts: that of Helen Krieble, founder and president of the pro-free market Vernon E. Krieble Foundation. Her Red Card Solution would create a fast and secure guest worker program, partly run by private employment agencies, that would direct temporary workers to American firms and employers who need their labor. The system would be an updated version of the Bracero Program, which successfully eliminated undocumented immigration during the 1950s and early 1960s. (Disclosure: CEI has received some contributions in past years from the Vernon E. Krieble Foundation for our work on immigration.)
Krieble, a consistent and principled conservative, pushed this reform idea after dealing with the monstrous federal immigration bureaucracy while hiring legal guest workers. She was once delayed in the process of hiring guest workers because the bureaucrat folded the form incorrectly. Like a true conservative, she realized the government's rules and regulations were the problem and privatization was the solution. Her speeches have influenced the Orange County Lincoln Club, California conservatives, Newt Gingrich, and many others on the state and local level who are coming around on immigration.
In reaction to increasing restrictions at the state level, many state level organizations are rising to push for more legal immigration and a solution that doesn't double down on a failed enforcement-only strategy. Federal lawmakers appear paralyzed on immigration reform--all they seem to do is to put more resources toward enforcement. The push for restrictions is on the state level, so the push for a better system has to come there too. With the intellectual weight of Helen Krieble's ideas, a nationwide, pro-immigration movement with conservatives involvement is gaining strength in the states.
Follow Alex Nowrasteh on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AlexNowrasteh
We have every right to limit immigration based on the needs of this country and every right to enforce our immigration laws. Immigration laws are in place to protect our citizens not to placate the needs of foreigners.
Mr Nowrasteh, if you have even attempted to research the issue you would know that immigration enforcement has been the responsibility of local and state police since before the 1800's. Immigration was explicitly the province of state authorities under the Articles of Confederation and even the constitution merely gives the Federal government the power to regulate naturalization and foreign trade.
It is the federal authorities that only really became involved since the 1930's with the establishment of the ICAC with the aim of sharing fingerprint information. In the 60's the Feds expanded the system to form the NCIC - a database to share information more efficiently, but tellingly run by local enforcement agencies.
The NYPD had their own bureau dedicated to investigating illegal immigrants. Border state police all had their own departments that investigated and enforced immigration. Local police all had policy directives covering the subject and an abundance of legal precedent exists, so there can be no argument that immigration enforcement is within the realm of the states authority.
If you want to be accurate in your reporting, the copy should read "Recent events have made Federal involvement in immigration enforcement a 21st century issue for debate".
As to your criticism of the first sentence on the second paragraph, that's why I used the word "issue," as in a political issue. I also used the prepositional phrase "in the 21st century" to differentiate it from other state level actions in different centuries. Specifically, laws like California's early 20th century attempts to prohibit Asian immigrants, particularly Japanese, from owning property and other restrictions.
For most of the time you describe during the 19th century there were not immigration laws that required internal enforcement. Deportation wasn't even established until 1882. The Feds and the states have usually acted in tandem to enforce immigration laws since then, but to say that the Feds are newly beginning to enforce immigration laws is laughably false.
Also, this piece is not "reporting" as in writing a news piece. This is an opinion piece. Kindly learn the difference.
More legal immigration. Which means the chamber of commerce is thrilled as that will do more to keep wages low and destroy the middle class than any other single thing this country could do.
No enforcement to speak of for our borders or for those who are successful in being criminals. Which means yet more undercutting of wages and higher unemployment.
The author speaks of an emphasis on leaving ag workers alone yet he is obviously uneducated about that part of immigration law. Of the 12-20 million illegals most estimates place only 3% of that total working in ag. Then we already have UNLIMITED ag visas for those exact same workers. They only need to have the farmer apply. Farmers refuse because that would mean they have to treat workers fairly, follow OSHA rules, pay them fairly and house them. If they use illegals they can abuse them and this author thinks that is great?
We need to educate more people, dream act is a necessity. If a not so dedicated American born kid does not want to put the effort to better himself and just play Nintendo, yes, he will lose his place. Competition is knocking the door.
I can't back up with links or data but no immigrant will be lying around doing nothing, this huge recession almost stopped the flow of new immigrants, not the enforcement.
We don't the competition for jobs. There is nothing wrong with an American desiring to do manual labor jobs. Not everyone is cut out for a desk job. We should never have to compete with foreigners whether they be here legally or illegally for jobs in our own country.
---True. Farmers and other business owners who depend on immigrant labor or cater to immigrant communities are fed up with the status quo or enforcement-only policies a la Arizona and Alabama that have created multi-million dollar losses for business owners and state coffers. They demand reform including broad legalization and visa reform.
1 Pay prevailing wages
2. Provide workmen's com
3. Put a roof over the worker's heads.
Thus far, farmers have chosen to meet their labor needs by going to the spot market for illegal labor rather than sponsoring people legally.
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/27/fixing-americas-immigration-bl
The E-verify Law, the I.C.E. Deportaton Program, Tens of Thousands of vacated Immigrants Homes, The Foreclosure Crisis, the start of all of the Stumulus/Bail Out Programs, and "Tthe Worst Recession in U.S. History" All began January 2008.
This is our I.C.E.'d Economy!
The Hard Labor Immigrants used to gladly do for America was the very Foundation of our once Strong Economy, and this Hard Labor supported all other American jobs.
Fact: For every hard working Immigrant Deported since January 2008 America has lost over four times as many American jobs!
This trend will continue.
"America is great because it is good, when it ceases to be good, it ceases to be great."
Alex De Tocqueville
Deporting good hard working "Human's" even away from their legal Citizen Children, and Families is not good.
This Great Nation of Immigrants was Built on Far Better Principles, and Values.
If I wanted to read more about that what would be a good reference?
- Personal, sales and general tax revenues have risen steadily every month
- Unemployment has dropped 1.5%
- The boycott did not even show up - hotel occupancies in Phoenix have risen at amongst the highest rates in the country to recent record highs
- 100,000 (25%) illegals self deported.
To me - right there is the proof, not some string of random vitriol and platitudes!
There is a distinct difference between immigrants and illegal immigrants as even the great bastion of open borders, the EU, is finding out:
- Denmark has reintroduced border controls
- France is mass deporting illegals.
- Holland is charging illegals the cost of their deportation
- The UK is deporting illegals back to their country of entry into the EU
- Greece is busy building border fences
- Italy is deporting illegals en mass
http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&met_y=unemployment_rate&tdim=true&fdim_y=seasonality:S&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+rates#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=unemployment_rate&fdim_y=seasonality:S&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=state&idim=state:ST040000:ST350000&ifdim=state&tstart=1253332800000&tend=1318996800000&hl=en&dl=en
There is a legal and comprehensive guest worker program. It already allows farmers to get as many guest workers as they need. They just don't want to use it because they don't want to pay fair wages. What we're missing is ENFORCEMENT of those laws and programs so that folks won't continually try to cheat the system.
The current law doesn't work. It's bad for the immigrants and it's bad for society at large. The immigrants need to spend their hard worked money here. They need to pay rent/food/gas/power as everyone else. If by ingenuity they establish their own business, we badly want that kind. Let the exploitation be legal, stop this black market. We buy products form Apple that are all made in China from not well paid workers our corporate persons do that all the time and you want to enforce what ?? Reality on the ground proved the law useless, outdated and completely dead.
It is the same that we by law or enforcement will stop the use of dope. It doesn't work!