Illegal Immigration Policy: What Are We Teaching People?
By Phil Randell
Special to The Epoch Times
Mar 01, 2008


Before I state anything else, please note that the focus of this opinion article is illegal immigration, not legal immigration, which are two very different topics. However, I have noticed that in many debates and discussions, the dividing line between the two topics has become blurred or nonexistent. Because of this, many people who wish to address illegal immigration policy are wrongfully labeled as "anti-immigrant."

Have you ever waited patiently in traffic to merge onto a crowded roadway, only to be further delayed when drivers who have not waited cut in? Have you ever stood in line for a movie or to pay for your items in a store and have people cut in? What did you think when that happened?

The woman who cuts my hair immigrated to the United States from Poland many years ago. Her sister applied multiple times during more than 17 years before she was allowed to join her.

Many proposals regarding the estimated 12 million who are here without legal status include amnesty for them, allowing them to stay. Is this fair to those who waited and abided by the law? What will this type of amnesty teach people? It is likely to teach many that following the law is not worthwhile.

Some amnesty proposals include stiff fines and many other stringent requirements, but the essence is that the plans allow people who should not be here … to be here ahead of innumerable people who have been applying for a long time. Amnesty is still a reward. And rewards increase behavior. If we reward circumventing the law, we will only receive more of the same behavior. The problem will increase.

Numerous enterprises, particularly in construction and agriculture, go bankrupt and close because they cannot compete with businesses that are exploiting illegal immigrants by paying substandard wages. So, what have we taught the bankrupt, honest businesspeople who hired workers according to the law and paid them at least minimum wage? The message to legal businesses often is that honesty does not pay.

It has been stated countless times that we should allow illegal immigrants to stay because they fill jobs that U.S. citizens will not apply for. Many economists state that to a significant extent, that assertion is a reversal of cause-and-effect. An underground economy based on illegal immigration created an environment of exploitation in many occupations, which pushes other workers away.

Moreover, illegal immigrants can be oppressed in many other ways besides low wages and poor working conditions. Many die while being smuggled across borders. The smugglers charge exorbitant fees for transport. When people are here illegally, they can easily be victimized because they cannot report crimes to the authorities. How do we know how many illegal aliens have been, robbed, beaten, raped, or even killed?

I have no doubt that there are also innumerable employers who are hiring illegal immigrants for benevolent reasons and who treat them well, but the overall picture ought to be the focus.

In regards to solutions, our country needs to proceed humanely. We should ensure that those who would be in danger to return to their countries of origin have comprehensive opportunities to apply for refugee status or asylum here and elsewhere.

I suggest a different amnesty—an amnesty for those here illegally to return to their home countries without any penalty if they wish to apply for any of the legal routes to returning to the United States. And this could also be an amnesty for those who have been employing illegal aliens. They would not be penalized. In short, everyone would be able to start fresh and on equal footing.

However, like any amnesty, there needs to be an endpoint after which I believe that one of the primary focuses needs to be employers who knowingly hire illegal workers, often fueling the underground system of exploitation.

How many people realize that since Nov. 6, 1986, according to federal statute, the penalty for purposely employing illegal aliens is $3,000 per illegal hire, and that the employer can spend up to six months in jail?

After an amnesty, the United States could rigorously enforce this law. If you think this is unkind, please think of the desperate people dying during botched smuggling operations or the honest employers being bankrupted. We need to dry up the demand for the exploitation. However, any increase in enforcement should be preceded by lengthy and comprehensive warnings, through the media, inserts in relevant federal mailings, and other expedient means.

Many people have already suggested this: We also need to create more legal ways for people to enter the country temporarily to fill any real gaps in our labor pool. This needs to be a cornerstone of weakening the exploitation. We already do this for technical jobs; we need to develop a similar system for general labor. However, we should simultaneously create a system to help unemployed U.S. workers to relocate to fill the same jobs if they wish to.

In short, when applying solutions to this complex problem, we need to understand what rewards and incentives we are giving. Whatever we reward, we will get more of. What we should be rewarding is honesty. For those who are hiring illegal immigrants for benevolent reasons, kindness and honesty need to be balanced.
http://en.epochtimes.com/news/8-3-1/66824.html