Thread: Arizona could survive without illegal workers

Arizona could survive without illegal workers
Jul. 20, 2007 12:00 AM
Robert Robb
The business community is reluctant to make an honest argument against the new state legislation imposing sanctions on employers who knowingly hire illegal workers.

If they were to make an honest argument, it would be this: Arizona's economy depends on illegal workers. Therefore, without amnesty and a generous guest-worker program, we shouldn't be denied access to an illegal workforce.

It's worth noting that this is, in essence, a concession that requiring employers to use the federal program to electronically verify work eligibility will work - that it will cut off access to illegal workers.

But what about the broader claim, that Arizona's economy is dependent on an illegal workforce?

A recent study by the Udall Center at the University of Arizona purports to shed some light on that question, evaluating the effects of immigration, legal and illegal, on state finances and the state economy.

The study reasonably treats foreign-born non-citizens as a proxy for illegal immigrants in Arizona. According to the study, foreign-born non-citizens cause $1.246 billion in annual education, health care and incarceration expenses. They generate $1.076 billion in state taxes, for a net deficit of $170 million.

I understand that the Udall study will be revised to increase the calculated tax contribution from illegal immigrants, but an argument can be made that the current figure is already overstated. It includes not only taxes paid directly by illegal residents but also the taxes paid by others supposedly as a result of their economic activities.

Additionally, education expenses are substantially understated. English-language learners are used, again reasonably, as a proxy for the children of illegal immigrants in the school system. However, only the state's basic support level and direct English-learner supplemental funding is counted. That excludes all capital spending and funding from other state and local sources. Illegals would, of course, pay part of the local contribution, but since such revenues are derived principally from property taxes, which skew toward business, not much.

The Udall report cites a figure of $544 million for the overall cost of educating the children of illegal immigrants. The true pro rata share of all state and local taxpayer costs would be closer to $1 billion.

National studies increasingly indicate that low-wage workers consume more in public services than they contribute in taxes. There's nothing in the Udall report to suggest that Arizona is any different.

According to the study, illegal immigrants are responsible for about 8 percent of Arizona's economic output. It asserts that, if the illegal workforce were to dry up, most of that output would disappear as well. That's because illegal workers tend to be poorly educated compared with legal workers, so the assumption is that their labor is not substitutable.

However, the occupation analysis in the study belies that conclusion. Illegal workers are reported to constitute 48 percent of the Arizona farming workforce and 44 percent in landscaping. The next highest figure is only 31 percent. That means that for most jobs currently being done by illegals, at least two-thirds of the workers in that occupation are legal.

If the illegal workforce went away, wages would probably increase, attracting a larger number of legal workers to Arizona. The true substitution effect would likely be substantial.

However, let's assume the entire 8 percent contribution evaporated. Since 1990, when illegal immigration began to surge, Arizona's economy has increased by 235 percent, 78 percent faster than the national average. In fact, during this period, Arizona has had the second fastest-growing economy in the country, ranking behind only Nevada.

If today's economy were 8 percent smaller, removing the increment the Udall report attributes to illegal immigration, Arizona's economic growth still would have been 58 percent faster than the national average and still would have ranked fourth highest among the states.

This is not to sugarcoat the potential economic consequences of the employer-sanctions bill. More workers mean more output. Cutting off access to illegal workers will result in a smaller economy. Reducing access to an estimated 12 percent of the existing workforce will make for a very difficult transition.

Overall, however, the state's business community has the relationship in reverse. Arizona does not have a strong economy because it has a large number of illegal immigrants. Arizona has a large number of illegal immigrants because it has a strong economy.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... bb20.html#

Finally....someone writing an article calling businesses what they are. Liars with no legitimate argument!!

Of course AZ will survive without illegals, just ike every other state will survive without them. Americans and legal residents built this country one state at a time. We did the work, there were no jobs we wouldn't do.

But go ahead, keep the illegals around like business wants to do. See how long Arizona, and every other state, survives then.

I keep hearing people say"we wouldn't be able to survive w/o the illegals".My reply to people who say that to me is always-We(the US) became the best country in the world without them and the world superpower without them!
I have yet to have anyone dispute that and it usually makes the person change the subject or walk away.

If they were to make an honest argument, it would be this: Arizona's economy depends on illegal workers. Therefore, without amnesty and a generous guest-worker program, we shouldn't be denied access to an illegal workforce.

Interesting. If you substitute the word slave for illegal this would be the same argument that was heard in the 1860s. We have survived pretty well since that time.

Excellent point Txkayaker.

Originally Posted by wolfbaby

I keep hearing people say"we wouldn't be able to survive w/o the illegals".My reply to people who say that to me is always-We(the US) became the best country in the world without them and the world superpower without them!
I have yet to have anyone dispute that and it usually makes the person change the subject or walk away.

You got that right Wolf! I love hearing this argument because the statement of "...the workforce can't survive w/o cheap illegal labor." makes the business world sound like a bunch of drug addicts.

America can survive without illegals. We might have to mow our own lawns or hire teenagers to do but it will get done. we have to clean our houses but the excerise would be good for all of us. America can and will survive without illegals and we will not have to support so many people.

Beckyal-I hire a kid in my neighborhood to mow my lawn,I figure it helps foster good neighbor kinda stuff and I have always cleaned my own home.I kinda thought everyone did but I have recently learned I am apparently in the minority on that.
-Kinda off topic-I was speaking to a neighbor recently who just got a dog and he was telling me how the cleaning ladies that come to his home must have thought he was cruel or something because they let his puppy out of its kennel while they were cleaning and never put it back in.So when he got home and the kennel was empty he was frightened til he found her.

I say lets take a chance and send them home and find out, then if by some fat chance we need workers and only if Americans are being paid a decent wage and benifits in that paticular industry give them an employment card to work in that industry at the same pay and benifits and they work in that job discription only, if that industry slows they go home. No more going from guest worker to citizenship, if you want citizenship get on the request for citizenship list and go through all the health and backround checks and prove you can support your self and family!!

The fact is - our country can survive without illegals.

The fact is - our country will not survive WITH the illegals.

Those are our choices. It isn't a matter of whether some small business owner can get his business off the ground by breaking the law. It isn't a matter of whether that large corporation can gobble up more companies by breaking the law.

It is a matter of whether we want America to continue as a free, prosperous, and lawful nation - or whether we want to become a lawless, poor, and even more corrupt nation.