Economy
Immigration Restrictionists Make Bad Environmentalists
Published July 08, 2009 @ 10:44PM PT
I hear a lot from organizations in the John Tanton network about how the best way to protect the environment is to restrict immigration to the U.S.
The argument isn’t intuitive, but it goes like this: Immigration leads to population growth, which harms the environment by transferring people from low-polluting nations to the high-polluting U.S. Poor people who stay outside the U.S. maintain a relatively low carbon footprint. But once they come to the U.S., they adopt the high-polluting lifestyle that Americans enjoy. Therefore, immigration causes global warming.
Walter Ewing at Immigration Impact doesn’t think much of this reasoning:
[A]ccording to the World Resources Institute, the United States is home to 23% fewer people than the European nations of the EU-15, yet produced 70% more greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, as of 2000. The production of greenhouse gases in the United States is a function not of population size, but of the degree to which we as a society rely upon fossil fuels, power plants, industrial processes, and automobiles that actually produce greenhouse gases.
I have also discussed the reasons I think it's wrong to focus on minimizing U.S. population growth instead of implementing smart, eco-friendly energy policies.
But there are other reasons to doubt the Tanton network’s commitment to the environment. One of these is the fact that the members of Congress that NumbersUSA, a Tanton outfit, rates most highly on immigration policy voted against the recent Waxman-Markey climate change bill by a margin of more than 5 to 1.
The American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), also known as the cap-and-trade bill or Waxman-Markey, is a landmark bill that represents the first national effort in the U.S. to seriously combat global warming. It is one of Barack Obama’s principal domestic priorities. The NRDC believes that ACES "has the major ingredients to generate millions of jobs, break our dependence on oil and reduce the pollution that causes global warming."
When I heard about the recent vote in the House on ACES, I wondered how the Representatives who tend to support immigration restrictions voted on the bill. As it turns out, the members of the House who get NumbersUSA’s highest ratings (a “B” or higher) voted against ACES 168-31, with one member not voting.
Temporary Tax ID Number (ITIN) Explained
Published June 30, 2009 @ 08:08PM PT
Immigration Impact has written your one-stop ITIN post. For the uninitiated, ITIN stands for Temporary Tax ID Number. If you are an immigrant in need of a way to pay taxes without a social security number OR if you are in need of a handy fact sheet to combat anti-immigrant falsehoods, then this post and fact sheet (pdf) are for you. A sample:
- Although many use ITINs to file their federal tax forms, ITIN holders are not eligible to receive most of the benefits their tax dollars go toward. For example, an ITIN cannot be used to get Social Security benefits or the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).
- An ITIN does not grant anyone legal status or work authorization.
- An ITIN cannot be used in lieu of an SSN on the I-9 work authorization form.
- An ITIN cannot be used to prove legal status.
And here is the IRS ITIN page, with the W-7 Form itself (pdf).
QOTD: Yglesias on Climate Change and Global Redistribution
Published June 29, 2009 @ 08:59PM PT
It’s very difficult to imagine Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) wading through the jungles of Vietnam slaughtering villagers and redistributing their possessions to the people of Missouri. It’s easy, by contrast, to imagine her tweeting complaints about Waxman-Markey being unfair to coal-dependent states like Missouri.
New American Media: Time for Immigration Reform Is Now
Published June 29, 2009 @ 08:00AM PT
[Editor’s Note: This editorial comes from New America Media, a national association of ethnic media, and is being published by ethnic media across the country this week to bring attention to the urgency of immigration reform.]
The White House and members of Congress must move quickly on enacting a just and humane immigration reform package that will reunite families, reinvigorate the economy, and remove the term “illegal or undocumented immigrants” from the dialogue in this country. Ethnic media, which reaches over 60 million adults in the United States, calls on Congress to move decisively on immigration reform because there are few issues as important to the nation's well-being as an overhaul of the inefficient, inhumane and economically debilitating immigration system. More importantly, we are also urging our readers and viewers to contact their Senators and Congressmen and let them know that immigration reform must be a national priority.
The immigration system is broken not just for 12 million undocumented immigrants, but also for specialized workers blocked from joining the American economy because of narrow quotas, and mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens who must wait for years before being reunited with their families.
Our nation needs comprehensive immigration policies that will replace a broken system of raids and roundups with one that protects all workers from exploitation, improves America's security and builds strong communities. It’s time to end the division between workers, which has allowed big business to exploit both sides. Clearly, working-class citizens and immigrant workers have much in common – dreams of better homes, education for their families and quality healthcare. There is more that brings us together, than separates us. United we can be a strong force for change, changes that that bring more workforce safety and humane conditions.
Immigration is often portrayed as an explosive, divisive issue. In reality it's not. Since the repeal of the national origins quota system in 1965, which discriminated against certain immigrants, a consensus has been building towards an immigration system that respects the country's core values. These include economic opportunity, equality under the law regardless of ethnic background, and an embrace of the world's most innovative, energetic and ambitious workers. Now, with the country facing serious competition from workers abroad, it's more important than ever to create a world-class immigration system. It's for the good for families, good for communities and good for America.
[Ed.: Two caveats here: (1) There is a role for business in the immigration reform puzzle (Who employs the workers who come to the U.S.? Why would they come if not to work?), and a bill is not likely to pass without the support of the business community; and (2) the "protect America from competition abroad" argument in favor of immigration reform has never struck me as a sensible argument. Otherwise, all good!]
Americans Traveling to Mexico for Health Care
Published June 12, 2009 @ 09:00AM PT
Check out Tim Foley's great post on medical tourism--people leaving the U.S. to get needed medical care:
where you travel to care has a lot to do with your situation. If I were a king or a celebrity looking for an expensive and dangerous medical intervention, yes, I’d come to the United States. Money would be no object. If I’m struggling to make $35,000 a year, have no health benefits, and need that exact same expensive and dangerous medical intervention, I’d want to be in any industrialized nation other than the U.S. There, I’d be treated. Here, I wouldn’t just be sick; I’d be ruined.
Tim links to an interesting study of California residents traveling to Mexico for health care. "Everybody knows" that undocumented immigrants are responsible for California's budget crisis, largely because they clog emergency waiting rooms and use up valuable public services.
Except that they don't.
"What the research shows is that many Californians, especially Mexican immigrants, go to Mexico for health services," said lead author Steven P. Wallace, associate director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, which conducts CHIS. "We already know that immigrants use less health care overall than people born in the U.S. Heading south of the border further reduces the demand on U.S. facilities."
Cost and lack of insurance were primary reasons both Mexican and non-Mexican U.S. residents sought health services across the border.
The one concern I would raise is that the study is based on info from 2001, but it has become much more difficult to cross the border without inspection since then. However, our health care system is at least as dysfunctional as it was then because George Bush basically ignored the problem for all eight years of his presidency.
Even Governor Schwarzenegger acknowledges that immigrants are needlessly scapegoated on budget issues (via Shadow). But try telling that to some of California's rabid restrictionists like Lupe Moreno, who hates teh Gay at least as much as she despises immigrants.
In Defense of a Guest Worker Program
Published June 01, 2009 @ 11:49PM PT
Prerna wonders why the pro-migrant community sometimes falls into unnecessary divisions.
Senator Durbin–a great advocate of the necessary DREAM Act for undocumented kids–is nonetheless also the chief sponsor of a bill to curb H-1 B visas. I can’t stand behind Durbin when he sponsors one group of immigrants over another.
The H-1 B system is badly in need of reform–the tethering of the Green Card immigrant to her/his employer oftentimes becomes a decade-long exploitation with no guarantee of permanent residency down the road.
Like Prerna, I believe the H-1B visa should be reformed, not eliminated. This viewpoint is a direct result of working with H-1B visa applicants for whom a temporary worker visa with a path to permanent residence was the best means available of advancing their career goals and supporting their families. I can confirm that not every H-1B visa holder comes from a privileged background.
Stuart Anderson at the National Foundation for American Policy--as near as I can tell, a pro-business, liberal-immigration-policy think tank--has an interesting proposal: implementing a fully portable, 5-year temporary work permit that would legalize and regulate existing migration into the country.
Just like anyone else who possesses an Employment Authorization Document, to be employed the individual still must find an employer willing to hire the worker. The length of the work permit would be 5 years. It would allow an individual to travel back and forth to his or her home country. A provision can be included to require an individual who is without employment for 60 days to leave the U.S. Work permit holders would not be eligible for any type of welfare benefits while in the United States.
(p. 2)
The other side of the equation would include:
bilateral administrative agreements with Mexico, followed by El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and potentially other countries, to distribute an agreed upon number of work permits annually in conjunction with additional commitments on immigration enforcement and security issues from these nations.
(p. 1)
This would be a full-fledged guest worker program, an idea which has come under fire from both the restrictionist Center for Immigration Studies and groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center. The unions stand firmly against any guest worker program, causing Anderson to rail at length against the unions' favored approach of a commission that would set levels of employment visas.
The three key elements of any workable guest worker program would be:
Immigrants Help Revitalize Philadelphia
Published May 25, 2009 @ 09:30PM PT
The Plain Dealer reported last week that community leaders in Cleveland have seen the positive impact immigrants have had on the city of Philadalphia, and are looking for ways to duplicate Philly’s success.
Not long ago, demographers packaged Philadelphia with Cleveland as a "former gateway" on a downhill slide. Then, in November, they spied a surprising trend. Immigrants were coming, bringing a culture of entrepreneurship and high-tech skills. The Brookings Institution declared that Philadelphia was poised to re-emerge as a destination city.
What happened? Some Cleveland civic leaders would like to find out so they can replicate the pattern here.
. . .
All agree, Cleveland has a people problem. The city lost half its population between 1950 and 2000 and became nearly entirely native-born. The slide continues. In 2006 and 2007, the city lost more people than any other big city in America. It could slip below 400,000 at the 2010 census.
Philadelphia once shared a similar trajectory. It shrank by 30 percent between 1950 and 2000. But in recent years, its population has stabilized. Immigrants began replacing people leaving. Today, they make up 11 percent of the city.
Behind the numbers are people like Calvin Pham, who opened an air freight service in a city shopping center astir with immigrant entrepreneurs.
Virtually every shop in New World Plaza, in South Philadelphia, is owned by a couple from Vietnam or China. Pham came from California three years ago, lured by word that Philadelphia was friendly to immigrants.
Well, we try!
My clients work hard. Most of them take little for granted, knowing they will have to be twice as good as the next person in order to find success. Philly still has a lot of problems. But it has turned a corner in the last 10 or 15 years, and much of that change can be attributed to the revitalizing force of new immigration.
Matt Yglesias picked up on the story:
In national policy circles, immigration is often discussed as a “problem” wherein we need to deal with the terrifying phenomenon of people coming to the United States in order to do work in exchange for money. In urban policy, however, the reverse is more often the case. A city wants to be a place where immigrants want to come. It’s a sign of some of the relative failings of policy in Washington, DC—especially of crime control and education policy—that such a huge proportion of the metro area’s Asian immigrant population prefers to live in the suburbs.
My guess is the zero-population-growthers who rail against immigration haven’t met too many urban planners. Or mayors of large cities. When was the last time you saw Mike Bloomberg or Anthony Villaraigosa put up the “No Vacancy” sign and turn away aspiring New Yorkers or Angelenos?
But the desire to attract residents isn’t just an urban predilection—the Plains states are bleeding workers and trying to figure how to stop population loss. Towns like Postville, Iowa, or Riverside, New Jersey, have experienced the negative impact of having an immigrant population driven away.
Now someone just needs to let Joey Vento know that his restaurant now sits in a Mexican neighborhood.
