Homeland Security Watch

News and analysis of critical issues in homeland security

October 26, 2006

Foreign Affairs story: “Immigration Nation”

Filed under: Border Security — by Christian Beckner on October 26, 2006

Tamar Jacoby from the Manhattan Institute has a compelling article entitled “Immigration Nation” in the new issue of Foreign Affairs, one which argues for a comprehensive approach to immigration reform and border security consistent with the legislation that passed the Senate in mid-2006. It’s a convincing piece, one that carefully weighs each of the key issues within this broader debate, and provides reasoned choices for her proposed course of action. The key paragraph in the story:

This, then, is the essential architecture of comprehensive reform: more immigrant worker visas, tougher and more effective enforcement, and a one-time transitional measure that allows the illegal immigrants already here to earn their way out of the shadows. Together, these three elements add up to a blueprint, not a policy, and many questions and disagreements remain. But on one thing everyone who shares the vision agrees: all three elements are necessary, and all three must be implemented together if the overhaul is to be successful. Think of them as the three moving parts of a single engine. There is no tradeoff between enforcement and legalization or between enforcement and higher visa limits. On the contrary, just as enforcement is pointless if the law is unrealistic, so even the best crafted of laws will accomplish little if it has no teeth, and neither one will work unless the ground is prepared properly.

The one disagreement I would have with Jacoby’s analysis is her assumption that an illegal immigration flow of 400-500 thousand people per year is representative of the natural condition of the supply-demand equation. That amount is based in part on the labor demand pull in the U.S., but it’s also a reflection of the relative openness of the U.S. border. If the border were more open, those numbers would increase, and if it were tighter, those numbers would decrease, and the cost of labor would increase, reducing demand.

But other than that one point, it’s a very well-argued piece that argues convincingly in favor of a comprehensive approach for immigration and border security.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Print
  • LinkedIn

1 Comment »

Comment by William R. Cumming

October 26, 2006 @ 8:35 pm

Question in the context of immigration-Is there any info on numbers of US citizens living outside of the US and numbers of persons with dual citizenship? Reason for asking this in the context of immigration-legal and illegal- is what does citizenship really represent in the modern age? We drafted non-citizens when there was a draft in all past wars so exactly what are the ground rules for service now? Also there was a time when non-citizens could’nt get TOP SECRET clearances, now they can? So what is the total context of a citizens obligation vis-a-vis non-citizens? I really ask this only rehtorically (sic) because I think real issues of citizenship need discussion even before deciding on legal and non-legal immigration policy. What if instead of deportation able-bodied illegals knew they would be confined in labor battalions for two years (hypothetically speaking)? I think the whole immigration issue is too simplistic. Who is really studying this issue closely or is it just the bloggers without real analysis. Is it all just demographics at bottom or are there more complexities.
Sam Huntington says the question is what country do we want and I say we don’t even know what country we have?

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>