Guest Commentary in the Yakima Herald-Republic

Proposals to deal with the immigration mess in this country are now under discussion in Washington.  To avoid having them called “amnesty”, which implies avoidance of punishment, the various proposals require that the illegal alien beneficiary pay a small fine.  Thus, he is allowed to buy his legal status, for unlike paying a fine for most crimes, he is allowed to benefit from his offense by remaining in the country.  While these proposals may not technically be amnesty, they certainly are not immigration reform, either.  So let’s just call them “legalization”.

 

Regardless of what it is called, legalization is a terrible idea.  There are good reasons this is so, but let us focus on rebutting the primary argument made for it. 

 

Proponents tell us that aliens do jobs Americans won’t do.  That is a slander of the American worker.  Anyone who says it should be ashamed of himself - Americans have done any job held by an illegal alien.  And they would do them again for a fair wage – but not a wage debased by the copious supply of labor provided by illegal aliens.

 

The law of supply and demand applies to sweat just as it does to anything else.  Paul Samuelson specifically addressed this his influential book Economics (1964):  “By keeping labor supply down, immigration policy tends to keep wages high. Let us underline this basic principle: Limitation of the supply of any grade of labor . . . can be expected to raise its wage rate; an increase in supply will . . . tend to depress wage rates.” 

 

The presence millions of illegal aliens for decades has distorted the domestic wage structure badly downward.  In that connection George Borjas (Professor of Economics and Social Policy, Harvard University) states, “Any sizable increase in the number of immigrants will inevitably lower wages for some American workers . . . The reduction in earnings occurs regardless of whether the immigrants are legal or illegal, permanent or temporary. It is the presence of additional workers that reduces wages, not their legal status.” (Emphasis added)

 

The argument over legalization ought to end right there, but, of course, it does not.

 

Farmers say they can’t get U.S. workers to do agricultural work.  But within memory U.S. workers did those jobs.   What changed?  

 

What changed was that a vast supply of labor came to the U.S. in a growing flood across a border that no one took seriously.  Cesar Chavez, founder of the United Farm Workers, understood the situation when he said in testimony to Congress in 1979:  “ . . . employers go to Mexico and have unlimited, unrestricted use of illegal alien strikebreakers  . . .” Chavez was against illegal immigration, for he got it:  an essentially unlimited supply of labor damages wages and working conditions.

 

The situation has expanded far beyond agriculture since then.  The service industry and construction and other jobs that require limited skills or education feel the crunch.  For instance, the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, D.C. estimates that nationwide about one in five illegal residents works in construction — five times the number working in farm jobs.

 

Proponents of legalization claim there is a labor shortage, and the nation needs foreigners to fill the jobs.  We don’t believe that.  Let’s look at some trends.

 

Construction wages - despite the housing boom of recent years and high demand for labor, average construction wages have fallen.  The Electronic Library of Construction Occupational Safety and Health reflects that as of 2000 construction wage levels were lower than in 1973.  Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reflects that those wages have generally remained flat since 2000.

 

Financial Times (May 10, 2005) reported that real wages in the US were falling at their fastest rate in 14 years.  Falling wages reflect a labor surplus. 

 

There are other indications.  Early this year the BLS reported there are fourteen million Americans who can’t find jobs.

 

Chicago Business on Jan. 25, 2006, said that when Wal-Mart posted ads for 325 positions at a new store twenty-five thousand applicants showed up.  The article quoted the Chicago-area manager for Wal-Mart as saying that it was typical for there to be three to four thousand applicants for jobs at a Wal-Mart opening. 

 

Some argue that with the departure of baby boomers from the labor market the U.S. will see a shortage of workers.  That’s doubtful.  The economy is not creating jobs like it used to.  According to the BLS, U.S. jobs only grew by 1.5% from 2001 to 2005.  By historical standards, that is pitiful; it doesn’t even keep up with our population growth by births, much less including legal immigration. 

 

American jobs are going overseas by the millions in this era of globalization.  Every job that can’t be exported is precious.  American workers should not have to face foreign competition for them in their own hometowns.  Say “No!” to legalization. 

Visit our website for additional information.

 

Kent Lundgren

Chairman,

National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers

http://www.nafbpo.org.