Since the pandemic, there has been a surge in the number of undocumented individuals crossing the border from Mexico into the United States. Per most recent figures, there are about 10-11 million undocumented workers in the United States. Many cities, including New York and Chicago, are dealing with a considerable influx in migrants. According to recent Pew Research survey data, there are many Americans, particularly those who lean Republican, who believe that the solution is to beef up border security and make it more difficult for migrants to enter.
I do not think that the solution is that simple as that. The Left-leaning Brookings Institution brings up a few reasons as to why there will continue to be a persistent border issue. Here is one major reason Brookings details. While it is historically true that Mexicans made up for most of the crossings on the border, that is no longer the case. There is a broader demand from multiple countries to migrate to the United States. As I have brought up before, these migrants are facing gang violence, high crime rates, shaky institutions, and for many, economic opportunities that do not justify the living conditions. This is why we saw an uptick in repeat crossings at the border under Trump's Title 42: because taking the risk beats heading back home.
There is also the matter of it being more difficult to hire border patrol agencies than other law enforcement; the surge management issue (i.e., maintaining a workforce with a fluctuating labor demand); and the backlog in immigrant courts to hear asylum cases. If greater border security does not solve the issue, what would? Allowing for more immigration. This is not my mere opinion. This is from a recent study from Peterson Institute senior fellow Michael Clemens, who is one of the foremost immigration economists. Here is an excerpt from his paper (Clemens, 2024):
"Using statistical methods designed to distinguish causation from simple correlation, it finds that a policy of expanding lawful channels to cross the border by 10 percent in a given month causes a net reduction of about 3 percent in unlawful crossings several months later. Fluctuations in the constraints on lawful crossings can explain roughly 9 percent of the month-to-month variation in unlawful crossings. The data suggest that policies expanding access to lawful crossings can serve as a partial but substantial deterrent to unlawful crossing and that expanding access can serve as an important tool for more secure and regulated borders."
This is important to consider given that the idea that there is some front door that people can enter to migrate legally or that there is some path to citizenship that people are too lazy to follow is a joke. As I brought up last July, 99.4 percent of those who would like to migrate to the United States have no legal means to do so. This being the reality of the U.S. immigration system shows that there is much improvement to be had in terms of comprehensive immigration reform and granting more immigrants citizenship to the United States.
It is more than expansive immigration that helps those in need, closes the gap on the labor shortage, and that grows the U.S. economy, including for the citizens that currently live in the U.S. Allowing for more expansive immigration policy translates into fewer border crossings, thereby draining fewer resources on border regulation while booming the economy. That way, we can boost the economy while living up to the American Dream of being a nation of ingenuity driven by immigrants, or to channel former President Ronald Reagan, to be "a shining city on a hill."
No comments:
Post a Comment