There are elements of immigration policy that have fairly broad bipartisan support and then there are elements that have very little support from Republicans. One area of general agreement is on attracting more scientists and engineers by granting green cards to college graduates who major in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics. The House might actually authorize a bill that eliminates the green card lottery and replaces it with a system that focuses on these STEM candidates. The Democrats will probably go along if the Republicans include more provision for current green card holders to bring their family members to the States.
I’m not sure how I feel about these proposed reforms. I wish more Americans would major in math and science, but they’re too busy playing Call of Duty, so…
My greater concern is passing the easy parts of immigration reform might make it harder to pass the difficult parts. If you can put elements in a comprehensive bill that have broad public support or that are considered vital to the business community, it will make it easier to pass.
Immigration reform is complicated because employers are using it to drive down wages and salaries, which makes folks already in those jobs become angry and susceptible to bigoted responses. A lot of the white anti-Hispanic feeling was from the rapid loss of jobs in the construction sector exacerbated by the loss of construnction jobs period.
Immigration reform has to be a piece of a larger economic package, which right now is unlikely because of the nuttiness of the Republican House, Blue Dog Democrats, and the self-interest of elite Democrats outside Congress.
Until that political logjam is broken, everything is going to be piecemeal and ineffective.
There isn’t in fact, a lot of good evidence that employers use immigrant labor to drive down wages. Most of the evidence that has been produced comes from partisan anti-immigrant research outfits. The Department of Labor is charged with investigating individual cases per law, and though they do find and cite occasional violators, one really can not make the statement that employers use immigrant labor to drive down wages instead of just stay in business.
There isn’t? Really? 15 years ago, my cousin got a summer job doing roofing. 5 years later, he couldn’t get a sniff. You know why? Because of cheaper labor. And cheaper and off the books to boot!!
That’s what’s called anecdotal evidence, and as I said, there are certainly cases where this happens in particular geographic areas. However, you also have to take into account things your cousin could be doing other than roofing to see whether his wages were really affected.
There is not good evidence that more than a few individual employers user immigrant labor to drive down wages. And those few often border on peonage.
Employers can and do use the way that immigration policy is structured by Congress to create a larger labor supply with fewer bargaining rights and labor standards. The supply surplus takes care of lowering the wages and salaries.
No one has to pay immigrants lower wages. But once one employer does, it puts pressure on others to follow suit or go out of business because those employers can under-price or under-bid the existing market. The same is true for dropping employee benefits.
That is why I argue that immigration reform must be part of a larger economic package to be effective.
Some employers are highly dependent upon immigrant labor and simply would have to close up shop altogether without such a source. Rural employers, for example.
But as a result of providing for the survival of such immigrant-dependent employers, a larger supply of labor becomes available to other employers as well, some of which will effectively drive down wages for those non-dependent employers, who gain a windfall profit as a result.
So there’s not really a documented intentionality on the part of employers to get these lower wage benefits. Rather, some benefit indirectly from the acute labor needs of others.
It is a very complicated thing. I am a 50 yo Software Architect. Right now there is a missing generation of senior lever people 30-40. Back in the late 90’s early 00s likely candidates for STEM positions saw a lot of H1B visa flying around and chose other professions. A ton of them went into finance and helped wreck the economy. To this day a lot of large tech companies routinely go to congress begging for more cheap tech labor ( even in an offshoring world ) by flat out lying that they can’t find candidates, there are a ton of 50 yo experienced people being forced out.
A lot of universities graduate programs are stocked with foreign students so hiring them here is a good thing for the overall tech demand. It just has to be at accepted wage norms. But that said the companies that hire need to hire local experience before others are taken.
Just my 2cents
I understand exactly what you are saying. I was in IT until I retired in 2008. In 2001, I was laid off and could not find work for three years, finally getting back at 2/3 my previous salary.
What I remember before the IT bubble burst was the business press screaming “labor shortage”. I now think that is a signal to start layoffs and “cost cutting” because the bottom line is not big enough for the bigwigs to get their inflated bonuses.
I faced huge age discrimination. They politely put it that I was “ovequalified”. And in trying to get financial aid to take a certification course, I was denied because I had “too much education”.
You too? Small world. I remember one posting that stated, “This is an entry level position. Senior people with more than 4-8 years experience need not apply.” Eight years and then go find another field. You’re too old. I know LOTS of people like us.
In my case I was lucky enough to land a Union job with the one employer than doesn’t have hiring discrimination, the Federal Government. As a side effect, I have been enriched by exposure to a true rainbow workforce.
When I was 10 years old, in 1962, I got in a physical fight with my cousin, who was visiting us from Kentucky. My dad said ‘that’s it for you’ and dragged me off to go to work helping him build houses. From then on I was on the job after school and weekends, and summer, if the houses were at a stage I could help. I got my contractors license in 1976, and have been in the business all that time. I worked today.
I can only speak from Southern Calif., which is the only place I have plied my trade, going on 40 years now.
And I will tell you Tar, that is a pretty simplistic statement on the issues facing the construction industry. Frankly, it’s misinformed. I would be blunter on my assessment, but I respect you and will bite my tongue.
.
Democrats should be sued for malpractice for failing to use this as a wedge issue for the last dozen or so years. It would be so easy to turn the crazies against their oligarchical overlords by putting up bills to crack down hard (with real teeth) on employers who hire illegals.
The advantage of piecemeal immigration reform is it gives Republicans no cover in dealing with the issues that anger Latinos. It forces them to face up squarely to issues like deportation and amnesty.
It’s a vexing question, but I am siding more now with accepting the piecemeal approach, mostly due to the disappointment over the last comprehensive proposal that GWB (who is still by far the most progressive President regarding immigration, ever, even if Pres. Obama is a close second) pushed. The hold up there was a temporary work permit and the Democrats in congress refused to support the bill because of it, losing a decade in the process. In retrospect, it would have been much better to get a foot in the door and fix the injustices later from a better organizing standpoint than trying to parse a strategy game of keeping coalitions together.
Once skilled workers are let in, it will be only a matter of time before the mostly GOP employers of less skilled immigrant labor in agriculture, food, etc. push for the same benefits.
The problem is not that the US doesn’t have produce enough STEM students, and needs to import more.
It’s that we produce too many lawyers and MBAs and need to EXPORT more.
To China, Antarctica, Easter Island, it doesn’t really matter where.
This is a pernicious myth propogated by tech companies used to justify suppressing wages by expanding H-1B even while thousands of American tech workers are unemployed because of the downturn.
Plus sneering at the kids for being lazy and playing video games is just so Boomer.
And not the fun kind.
How many people have gone into math of computing fields because of video games?
This grumpy old Texan could reluctantly stand hitched for the sort of selective admissions you mention. I doubt if garden-variety Mexican-American politicos or the catholic hierarchy would be supportive. They want numbers, constituents and parishioners and seem to me to have little regard for U.S. laws.
I have given up my knee-jerk objection to the Mexican invasion. Santa Ana is getting his revenge. What the general failed to achieve by fighting his decendents are accomplishing by fucking. I do wish that the newcomers showed more interest in becoming Americans rather than just residents. And I wish the best and brightest would stay home and work to salvage their own benighted country.
I’m sure the residents of San Antonio del Bexar wished that Davy Crockett and the boys would show more interest in becoming Mexicans and learning Spanish.
must be to go big on this issue with the idea that immigration reform to Hispanics may be to African Americans what Civil Rights Reform is.
The GOP is not going to want to fight this issue.
Hit them hard: this part of the base has every right to expect nothing less.
Not sure if piecemeal is the way to go or not, but I will say “no” if they say, “Secure the border bill first, then your bills.”
Either way, there is a lot of outright hostility to immigration on the progressive side due to non-existent wage pressure that only exists in high unemployment situations, and it kind of saddens me. Want to fix SS? Screw raising the cap, we need a younger workforce and for the boomers to retire. If anything, higher immigration and a lower retirement age is the way to go to both increasing wages and ensuring we don’t need to cut Social Security.
Then again, unlike my fake-free-trade Republicans, I actually believe in free-trade all of the way. That means taxing negative externalities like CO2 with a carbon tax, having true free movement of labor with lax immigration policies, and true free trade that doesn’t involve favoring one industry over the other like NAFTA or other free trade agreements do. Also, as Dean Baker suggests, want premium support? Fine. Allow people to travel to other countries to get medical care on the US’ credit card.
I say do it all at once, get 11 million people out of the shadows and into the workforce and on the tax roll. The Latino community expecting true reform, not one piece at a time.