Part 3: What would work
*

By William C. Shelton

(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries of The Somerville Times belong solely to the authors of those commentaries and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville Times, its staff or publishers)

All political factions acknowledge that our immigration system doesn’t work. Yet this 113^th Congress will be another one that does nothing to fix it, even though honest political leaders on both the left and the right agree on the essentials of a workable system.

Conservative analysts who work with verifiable evidence, like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Cato Institute, and the Americas Majority Foundation come to conclusions similar to those of their liberal counterparts. Propaganda shops like the Heritage Foundation, Center for Immigration Studies, and the talk show demagogues fictionalize their “evidence.” Their purpose is often not to solve the problem, but to gain political advantage for politicians who exploit their base’s nativist anger.

Most Republican Congressmen from states with the largest populations of illegal immigrants understand the complexities of the issue and are ready to deal. But their Republican colleagues from states where illegal immigration is an ideological issue rather than a practical problem get too much political mileage from feeding ignorant rage. And they have cowed the House leadership into blocking legislation.

Crafting effective immigration policy requires understanding what we want to accomplish with it and why the system we have doesn’t work. That system does not respond flexibly to the economy’s needs or the labor market’s conditions. The number of permanent employment-based visas that it issues annually has not changed for 25 years. The number of temporary employment-based visas changes rarely.

Although immigration has been a family affair since the founding of the Republic, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) did not allow family reunification. This is a major reason why 10-to-11 million people are here illegally (down from 12 million before the great recession). Extensive research concludes that immigrants best integrate into U.S. society with the support of their families.

The current immigration bureaucracy is slow, inefficient and backlogged. Both applicants and detainees wait interminably, adding to the system’s costs and to immigrants’ adversity.

The current system imposes a hardship on honest employers. Dishonest competitors exploit undocumented workers’ and impose substandard wages and working conditions on them to achieve greater advantage and higher profits.

Because the current system focuses enforcement on how immigrants enter the U.S. rather than why, it is unenforceable. Since IRCA’s passage, the federal government has spent over $200 billion on immigration enforcement while the undocumented population has tripled. Unenforceable laws weaken the moral authority of the entire legal system.

All of these problems can and must be solved. Without immigrants, both legal and illegal, the U.S. economy would collapse. And as baby-boomers retire, we will need more immigrants to sustain economic activity and to pay into the Social Security trust fund to compensate for the shrinking pool of native-born workers. So it’s increasingly important that we get immigration reform right.

A first principle is that American citizens should always be given first consideration to fill labor market needs. This includes providing education, training, and relocation resources so that Americans can qualify for emerging opportunities.

Filling labor needs that cannot be met by Americans will require a flexible system that adjusts visa issuance to changing conditions, allowing immigration to rise and fall with economic cycles. That means being guided by rigorous and continuous research that tracks worker shortages and industry trends.

The current system obligates foreign students who our colleges and universities educate in science and technology to return home where they compete against U.S. businesses. Congressman Capuano says this is “insane.” He’s right.

If we are to preserve the integrity of our economy and our legal system we must grant legal status to the 10-to-11 million people who are here illegally. That poses a trade off. On the one hand, they have broken U.S. law and must account for that. On the other, if the penalties are too harsh and the requirements for legal status too onerous, many will remain in the shadows.

It’s critical to get as many of the currently undocumented into the legal system as possible while identifying those whose criminal behavior should exclude them. This would save billions of government dollars now focused on immigration enforcement and level the playing field for U.S. workers and employers.

One way to balance the tradeoff would be to impose fines that are substantial enough to be punitive, but could be paid off in installments over a specified period of time. Applicants for legal status should know that they are on a path to a green card, provided they demonstrate commitment by learning English, paying taxes, and staying out of trouble. Without a clear path to permanent legal status, many if not most of the undocumented will not apply, defeating the purpose of the reform.

A family-based immigration system is also critical to maximizing participation because it removes a key motivation for coming here illegally. We don’t have to sacrifice an employment-based system for a family-based one, or vice versa.

Immigrants come here to work, and that’s the focus of truly successful enforcement. We can see a rough precursor to effective enforcement in E-Verify. Operated by the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security, it’s an internet-based program that compares information on a job applicant’s Employment Eligibility Verification Form I-9 to government records.

At present, E-Verify is voluntary and rife with errors. Only about 5% of American employers use it. Effective enforcement would make E-Verify mandatory, while requiring every employee in the U.S., citizen or immigrant, to obtain a tamper-proof, biometric federal work authorization card and number.

Every employer would be required to confirm the authenticity of each job applicant’s identity. An employer who hired without confirming an employee’s ID number, gender, and birth date would be liable for serious penalties.

Civil libertarians will probably object that such a card gives the government too much reach and power. But they aren’t the one who are blocking immigration reform.

Making this enforcement system work would require well-managed investment in digital technology. The Obamacare website fiasco comes to mind as an example of how poor implementation can undermine program goals.

And it would require rigorous employer compliance enforcement. But those investments would be a fraction of what we spend on border agents, sensors, fences, and drones, and they would leave law enforcement along the border to focus on real security risks, smuggling, drug trafficking and gun running.

Many Republican lawmakers deflect calls to give undocumented workers legal status by insisting that we must first intensify border enforcement and punish those who have broken the law. Many Democratic lawmakers deflect calls for stricter enforcement by insisting that we must accommodate the reality of an economy that depends upon millions of undocumented workers whose status makes them frightened, vulnerable, exploited, and separated from their families.

To me, it’s all mostly political gamesmanship. There’s no reason why we can’t bring hard working immigrants into the system and ensure that our laws are enforced. It’s time for both sides to put up or shut up.