Introduction
The United States has always been a magnet for people from all over world, who regard our country as the place, where they can fulfill their potential and find a better life. Many of them became part of the community and obtained American citizenship. For a considerable period of time, the inflow of foreigners suited the government, because the state was in need of labor force, both high and low skilled.
However, the situation took a different turn in nineties: it became apparent that the US could not simply find room for all immigrants, and apart from that, at this point there is no urgent necessity for cheap workers. It is very difficult to give the most accurate and up-to-date information about the number of illegal aliens but according to most recent statistical date there are more than 11 million people, who have no legal status, and more than 70 percent of them which is approximately 7,5 million come from Mexico (United States Accountability Office, p 2).
Again, we have to stress the fact that these data may not be exact, because more and more people keep coming. In 2001, Bush administration proposed a new policy, according to which those illegal aliens, who come from Mexico should be granted amnesty. In other words, they can eventually become full citizens of the country.
At this point, we have to draw a distinct line between two notions: first, we are not discussing the consequences of illegal immigration in general; on the contrary, we will need to focus on the effects of this reform: its advantages (if any) and disadvantages. The immigration debate is complex with few, if any, ‘right’ answers of how to both be pragmatic concerning the costs associated with illegal immigrants and compassionate with regards to people involved.
The issue lies squarely within the responsibility of the Federal government because individual states and local communities do not have the capability on their own. While analyzing this issue, we need to pay special attention to economics and labor market, infrastructure, education, and healthcare, because these spheres are most likely to be affected. Yet, at the very beginning, we should give at least a short historic overview of this question, as amnesty to illegal immigrants has only recently attracted attention of the public.
Historic Background
On the whole, it is quite possible for us to say that such policy is almost unprecedented for the US, because people in this country has a very strong aversion to any violation of the law, including illegal crossing of national borders. Therefore, for more than fifteen years since early nineties, the US has attempting to stop or at least to diminish the influx of people, coming from other countries and Mexico in particular. Moreover, we can stay that the government was often forced to accept the situation, and let illegal aliens stay within American borders. The thing is that even deportation cost are often very high and even such state as the US cannot afford to deport all illegal aliens (McDonald, p 7).
In 2001, the authorities of the US and Mexico announced some of their future plans especially the possibility of the treaty, according to which Mexican immigrants could obtain citizenship in the near future (Huelsemeyer p 3). In this regard, we have to discuss the so-called North American Union. This is a hypothetic multilateral treaty, which may be signed by the US, Canada, and Mexico. In part, this project is based the model of the European Union.
The major peculiarity of such international alliance is complete elimination of regional borders, which means that American, Canadians and Mexicans can move freely from one county to another (Huelsemeyer, 4).
This idea has been subjected to heavy criticism by economists and sociologists, who say that this union can exist only if every participants are at the same level in terms of economic development, social security, infrastructure, but the US and Mexico are clearly not equals, and in the future status quo will not undergo any changes. This is the reason why so many people resent the idea of Northern American Union and amnesty to illegal Mexican aliens. The pardon to illegal immigrants is an inherent part of this agreement.
Additionally, this reform has been criticized by many legal immigrants from other countries, because these people have to wait for years in order to obtain citizenship and they are clearly indignant with such policy of the American government because they do not understand what makes Mexicans so special. They believe that it is an example of discrimination. Even Spanish-speaking people do not approve of the amnesty as they think each person must deserve this right, and law violation is not the way to do it. In their opinion, this will erase the difference between law-abiding people and criminals.
Certainly, this decision was not fully implemented and one could hardly expect that it could receive approval. However, even now, this issue remains a subject of heated economical, sociological and heated debate, many sociologists believe that in this way the United States may lose its sovereignty, and many of them are firmly convinced that this amnesty would entail real invasion of the UN, thus, we need to discuss hypothetical outcomes of this reform.
Economics and labor Market
Possible adverse consequences
The opponents of amnesty advance an overarching argument that this policy will lower the standards of living in American citizens. First, they point out the legalization will contribute greatly to the overall population growth, which will subsequently resonate in health care, education and employment. In addition to that, they maintain that salaries will be driven down by illegal immigrants who will be willing to work for much lesser payment, especially in comparison with the citizens of the country.
And finally, it is the U.S. taxpayer who will have to fill the bill for their health care services, education of their children, social insurance and so forth. In addition, the large influx of illegal aliens burdens the already inadequate number of units classified as affordable housing and other welfare resources such as energy, water and land usage (“Illegal Immigration”, 2003).
It has been estimated that the added cost to the federal government will be more than $15 billion per year when the present illegal aliens become citizens and begin collecting welfare benefits (Rector, 2006). The proposed bill will add greatly to this number because it will encourage a new surge of low skilled workers through its guest worker program. Traditionally, immigrants to the U.S. were less likely than those born in America to collect welfare. This historic arrangement has radically changed over the past three decades. Today, immigrant families are at least 50 percent more likely to receive federal benefits than those born in this country.
Additionally, immigrants can adapt themselves and rely on the welfare system. To further aggravate the situation, when an illegal immigrant becomes a citizen, he can legally bring his parents who also have the right to become citizens. The estimated long-term cost of overall federal benefits could exceed $50 billion per year for the parents of the 10 million beneficiaries of amnesty. “In the long run, the bill, if enacted, would be the largest expansion of the welfare state in 35 years” (Rector, 2006).. Welfare use among this group and for low-skill immigrants granted amnesty is three times the rate for the U.S. born citizens.
Over the past two decades, about 10 million people who do not possess a high-school diploma have entered the country and predictably end up on welfare. Illegal aliens drain social services paid for by legal citizens, $2.5 billion from Medicaid, $2 billion from food aid programs and $2 billion in hospital care from the federal coffers in 2002 alone. States along the southern border pay out hundreds of millions of dollars every year providing social services for illegal aliens. This reasoning seems to be quite convincing as it indicates that the financial system of the United States will incur heavy losses, if the governments gives legal status to Mexican aliens. Naturally, we cannot pinpoint exact amount of money, but it would be very difficult to afford it.
Hypothetical benefits
Nevertheless, there is another side of this debate, which claims that by offering amnesty for illegal immigrants, the government may improve financial situation in the country. Their argument is mostly based on the assumption that illegal Mexican immigrants, who will receive American citizenship, will also become taxpayers. In other words, they will not only receive social support and subsequent services but they will also contribute to the well-being of this country (Oskamp, 55). It has to be admitted that the United States will hardly be able to deport more than seven million people to Mexico, and amnesty is one of the ways in the US can benefit by them.
Apart from that, we should not forget about hypothetical changes in the labor market. First, at the moment, many employers hire immigrants because these peoples are practically outlaws, who would agree on any terms, such as low salary, long-working hours, unsafe workplace conditions and so forth. Naturally, it is quite advantageous for those who employ them. Many scholars maintain that amnesty would force American companies to abandon such policies, because hiring immigrants will no longer be so profitable (Papademetriou). It is very unlikely that a person with legal status will be content with scanty earnings.
Furthermore, the pardon to undocumented aliens can bring more skilled labor force into the country. Among those, who come to the United States illegally, there are many individuals who have the diploma of higher education and they are quite competent in their profession. Many of them simply have to take menial jobs because there is no alternative variant. Thus, amnesty may create equal chances to find a job for all applicants, and companies will have to judge by the candidates skills and not only his or her wage expectations.
Nonetheless, we have to acknowledge that this policy (if it is ever put into practice) covers more than seven million people and we can hardly account for all its effects. Many economists believe that American has already passed through the stage when country was strongly dependent of immigrant labor, either legal or illegal (Schlafly, 1). At this stage, the state no longer requires the services of these people. At first glance, such statement can sound heartless or cruel, but this is the reality. America has always been perceived as some land of promise, a place where everyone has a chance for prosperity, but the United States cannot room all people.
The impact on infrastructure
Prior to analyzing possible impacts of this amnesty on the US infrastructure, we should first give clear definition of this concept. On the whole, it can be interpreted as a set of institutions and organizations, which support the functioning of the society (Likosky, 13). These institutions can deal with various spheres, such health care, education, transport, communications, and so forth. In this paper, we should pay special attention to education, and health system, because they are currently immensely influenced by the tide of illegal or legal immigrants.
Healthcare
The opponents of this policy state at present the overwhelming majority of American hospitals are overcrowded, especially if we are speaking about non-profit organizations. This question should be analyzed not only in terms of economics but also in terms of ethics. Naturally, medical workers cannot possible refuse assistance to those who need help, because this contradicts the core principles of their profession.
However, we have to admit that they cannot possible assist everyone, because their resources are exhaustible. Those people, who object to the amnesty, emphasize the fact that it may only overload the US hospitals. Again many scholars say that American currently faces acute shortage of medical workers, in particular nurses, the inflow of undocumented Mexican people will only make things even worse (Gorin, 225).
Many hospitals are currently underfinanced and even now many American citizens cannot obtain qualified treatment, mostly because they do not have insurance. If the number of uninsured people will increase this may eventually strike a very heavy blow on American health care system. Thus, on the one hand, it is quite possible for us to argue that the amnesty will have only detrimental effects on health care system in the US.
But we should take into account that even now many illegal immigrants receive health care services in American hospitals. It stands to reason that these people cannot cover their expenses especially considering the fact they are working for very cheap salaries. Provided that they receive legal status, they will have an opportunity to find well-paid or at least better jobs, and subsequently, illegal Mexican immigrants may be able to pay their fees. Again we have to discuss this question in connection with labor market. It seems that an employee, who receives more or less decent salary, will be able to take insurance.
Yet, we should bear it in mind that this cannot be accomplished in a relatively short period of time. The government has to remember that such large-scale reform can be carried out at once. Seven million people cannot accommodate themselves even if they have legal status. The major disadvantage of this policy is that it is too rash. Certainly, we cannot predict the exact scenario, but undoubtedly, the amnesty may spread havoc in the US health care system.
Education
The negative impacts of the amnesty for undocumented workers from Mexico will surely make American schools even more overcrowded. First, it should be pointed out that many children of illegal Mexican aliens have limited English proficiency and many of them can hardly speak this language. This will force educators to develop and launch drastically new training programs which may help these children to accommodate themselves, and no one can guarantee that these programs will succeed.
Many officials cry against this policy, because even now schools have extremely high drop out rates, and Hispanic students have rather poor academic performance due to several factors such as i, low income and limited English proficiency (Christle, 327). If there will be even more students coming, American schools will hardly be able to meet compulsory academic requirements. Even now teachers in public schools cannot cope with the amount of work, and the amnesty will only aggravate the situation.
Of course, every child, irrespective of his parents’ legal status has a right to receive free and appropriate education but it seems that the amnesty for illegal Mexican aliens may ruin education system in the country, because institutions simply will not perform their functions properly. The supporters of legalization try to convince the public that this is inhumane to reject them right for education, and that we should disregard their legal status.
Nevertheless, in this case, academic performance in the US will significantly drop, and we run a risk that school graduates will not meet the standards of colleges and universities. The question arises whether this is humane. We can observe a very curious paradox: by trying to be compassionate for foreigners, they reject this compassion to American citizens.
Conclusion
To conclude, in this essay we have tried to analyze the outcomes of amnesty for illegal Mexican immigrants. We have focused on economics, labor market, health care education. We may say that that legalization of undocumented aliens may have almost catastrophic effects on the United States. First, as we have previously noted this will definitely increase the states and expenses. Naturally, this is likelihood that this people will eventually become taxpayers but this can happened only after a long time.
As regards the impact on infrastructure, especially health care education we may say that this will only create more difficulties because even now these spheres are understaffed and underfinanced. Methods to stem the flow of immigrants such as building a border fence, deporting them, and implementing a federal identification system might appear severe to some but they are necessary steps in safeguarding America for Americans. Legislators should consider the net effect on society and encourage the immigration of high-skilled and well educated people who will contribute to the economic health of the nation rather than low or no-skilled workers who are a heavy economic and social burden.
The debate seems to go the way of the American example. It only makes sense that if immigrants, much as their forbearers work hard and assimilate into American society. In this case, they should be not only allowed but encouraged to stay. It’s an American tradition that made this country what is today, the greatest economic power the world has ever known. Immigrants built the country but the country has changed immensely in the course of the twentieth century and there is no shortage of skilled labor force and educated people, and the United States cannot provide room to everyone.
Bibliography
Demetrios G. Papademetriou. The economic and labor market effects of immigration on the United States. National Forum, 1994, 3.
Erler, Edward J. “Amnesty for Illegal Aliens.” The Washington Times. (2004). Web.
Christle. C. “School Characteristics Related to High School Dropout Rates”. Remedial and Special Education, 2007. (28), 6, pp 325-330.
Gorin. S. Universal Health Care Coverage in the United States: Barriers, Prospects, and Implications. Health and Social Work, 1997, (22), 3, pp 223-230.
Huelsemeyer. A. “Toward Deeper North American Integration: A Customs Union?”. Canadian-American Public Policy, 2004, (59), pp 2-15.
“Immigration Reform.” Word Press. 2009. Web.
Likosky. M. “Law, infrastructure, and human rights”. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Marshall, I. H. “Minorities, Migrants, and Crime: Diversity and Similarity across Europe and the United States” Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (1997).
McDonald, W. F. “Crime and illegal immigration.” National Institute of Justice Journal. Vol. 232. (1997). pp. 2-10.
Oskamp, Stuart “Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination” Publisher: Lawrence Erlbaum (2000). P. 55.
Rector, Robert. “The Wrong Course: The Senate’s Proposed Amnesty Will Cost a Fortune.” National Review Online. (2006). Web.
Schlafly, Phyllis. “No Argument Justifies Amnesty for Illegal Aliens.” Copley News Service. (2004). Web.
Small, Dennis. “What’s Behind the ‘Hispanic Immigration Crisis?” EIR Economics. (2005). Web.
United States Government Accountability Office. “Estimated the undocumented population ”, 2006. Web.