Kill Bill, Part 2

We were driving back from our camping vacation in Cape Cod when I heard on the radio that the cloture vote was today and that it was a decisive rejection of the immigration policy that President Bush has been pushing since 2001. The comprehensive immigration reform bill is dead (again). The details are documented at The Corner, Michelle Malkin, and PoliPundit.

The President bet all his remaining political capital on a proposal he knew would tear his party apart. And the Senate came close to enacting very bad policy. It really makes me wonder: what the heck were they thinking?

There's something else worth pointing out. Here's a policy shift--amnesty and guest workers--that the entire political establishment as well as much of the mainstream media and academic elite wanted badly. It is seldom the case that something that the powers-that-be want so much fails to make it through. I am pretty sure there's a lesson in there somewhere. And the tactics used by the bill's opponents to fight the establishment's power and to weaken their control over key junctures in the information flow will provide lots of case studies that will be studied far into the future. No "Mission Accomplished" banners this time around.

Does this end the debate over immigration? No.

Why? Because our immigration system is truly broken.

Regardless of what happened at the Senate today, there are still 12 million illegal immigrants living in the country, and that number is increasing at the rate of about half-a-million a year. And there's no longer any need for the Bush administration to keep playing the charade of "more enforcement" that received wide media attention in the past few months. The economic and social dislocations caused by illegal immigration are not going to disappear simply because the issue is no longer in the political headlights.

Combine this with a legal immigration system that admits about 1 million immigrants a year--most of which tend to be low-skill workers. The economic pressures that both legal and illegal immigrants put on the low-skill labor market are severe, and have been ignored for years. I suspect that the immigration "problem" would have been long resolved had the labor markets for high-skill workers--say, for example, journalists and attorneys--faced the same pressures as those faced by low-educated workers.

Now that the debate is over, perhaps we can return some sanity and honesty into the intellectual discussion of what immigration does to the United States. A few simple rules to live by:

1. As Greg Mankiw nicely puts it in a post earlier this week regarding the economic effects of unions:

I have no doubt that making it easier for workers to form cartels would raise wages--at least for those workers in the cartels. But demand curves slope downward. When unions push wages above the equilibrium of supply and demand the side effects are not entirely benign.

Well, let's finally all join in and admit the obvious. There is no doubt that making it easier for more and more workers to enter the labor market will lower wages. "Demand curves slope downward" should be the new rallying cry. Perhaps now the economists at the CEA and elsewhere can recover from their amnesia regarding this fundamental law of economics.

(It is no coincidence that my 2003 paper that first reported the widely cited estimates of the labor market impact of immigration was entitled: "The Labor Demand Curve Is Downward Sloping").

2. There's also been a lot of fake fog thrown into the the question of whether immigrants pay their way in the welfare state. It's time for some sanity in this matter as well. The welfare state is specifically designed to transfer resources from higher-income to lower-income persons. Immigrants fall disproportionately into the bottom part of the income distribution. It is downright ridiculous to claim that low-skill immigrants somehow end up being net contributors into the public treasury.

3. And, finally, it's time to start worrying about the future. Even if immigration were to stop completely on its tracks right now, the consequences of what's happened in the past 30 years will continue for decades. What will happen to the children and grandchildren of today's immigrants? For instance, will the descendants of today's poor immigrant groups join the middle class or form a new underclass? How much ethnic inequality will there be 20 years from now, and how much social, cultural, and political conflict will arise as a result of this?

The debate is not yet settled. The Bush administration made a fundamental error of judgment by pushing this proposal so forcefully despite the fact that its detractors had valid doubts and were not bigots. For those of us who supported Bush in the past, such a misjudgment raises many doubts about the rest of the Bush legacy. Maybe those who faulted the Bush manner of governing--its arrogance, its lack of intellectual curiosity, and its obsession with having its way regardless of inconvenient facts--were right after all.

By the way, Cape Cod was absolutely beautiful. And we all had a great time!

Comments

[dissent]

I enjoy your blog.
What do you think of the 'Attrition Through Enforcement' approach to illegal immigration?
http://www.mnforsustain.org/cis%20attrition%20through%20enforcement%200406.htm#False%20Choice

[Ross W.]

Excellent Post. It does make you wonder about almost everything this administration has done. I wait with anticipation for something...anything new.

[save_the_rustbelt]

Us peasants in flyover country have a very simple idea - enforce the law.

Which I suppose is why I am not a lobbyist for the Chamberof Commerce.

[save_the_rustbelt]

Us peasants in flyover country have a very simple idea - enforce the law.

Which I suppose is why I am not a lobbyist for the Chamberof Commerce.

[AgingITGuy]

I had to chuckle when I saw your comment above re: journalists. Today the San Jose Mercury News ran (another) editorial in favor of the Senate immigration bill. http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_6248756 There was no mention in the editorial about immigration's depressing effect on legal workers' employment and wages.

Ironically, 2 days ago, union workers of the News were protesting the outsourcing of some of their jobs to India: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/06/25/18430617.php

[Patoche]

this is a very nice post, thanks, but ahem it's only been 2 days since you said you would go offline and cyberfree for the family annual vacation... blogaddicted?

[edwardcropper]

Just became aware of your blog. Excellent article.Very thoughtful and far-sighted.

regards,

edward cropper

[Skye]

Borjas is absolutely correct in his assessment that our immigration policies are broken.

I'm not sold on the idea of President Bush losing political capitol over his support of this deeply flawed immigration bill. He is winding up his last years as POTUS and can throw his support to whatever legislation he likes with (political) impunity.

As for this latest debacle in our Senate - It was an already fractured GOP base that in 06 voted in a House and Senate that in very short order voted on a non-binding Iraq resolution , continually looks for new and unique ways to defund our troops during a war and now tried pass a deeply flawed immigration bill .

And all the pundits have to say is "what the heck were they thinking?".

Hello - the question that needs to be asked is 'What the heck was the public thinking when they voted these imbeciles into power in 06'? Quit your bitching - you voted for this change in 06, and now you are crying over the mess you created.

As a resident of Pennsylvania, I often sadly wonder if Senator Santorum was re-elected in 06, would such non-binding Iraq resolutions or flawed immigration bills ever have seen the light of day?

[gborjas]

Patoche

Very perceptive comment! We actually left early on Tues morning (before that blog post was actually posted, thanks to the wonders of modern technology!). None of us are real campers ("us" being my family and another family that we take this annual outing with), so a couple of nights is all we can really last. But it's really great for everyone, particularly the children. In fact, everyone is looking forward to next year's outing.

[jimbino]

If any new immigration policy is not blind with regard to sex, age, race, religion, national origin, marital status, family status and sexual orientation, it does not deserve support.

It's time to stop discriminating against muslims, gays, singles and the childfree, in particular.

[jimbino]

If any new immigration policy is not blind with regard to sex, age, race, religion, national origin, marital status, family status and sexual orientation, it does not deserve support.

It's time to stop discriminating against muslims, gays, singles and the childfree, in particular.

[jimbino]

If any new immigration policy is not blind with regard to sex, age, race, religion, national origin, marital status, family status and sexual orientation, it does not deserve support.

It's time to stop discriminating against muslims, gays, singles and the childfree, in particular.

[jimbino]

If any new immigration policy is not blind with regard to sex, age, race, religion, national origin, marital status, family status and sexual orientation, it does not deserve support.

It's time to stop discriminating against muslims, gays, singles and the childfree, in particular.

[jimbino]

If any new immigration policy is not blind with regard to sex, age, race, religion, national origin, marital status, family status and sexual orientation, it does not deserve support.

It's time to stop discriminating against muslims, gays, singles and the childfree, in particular.

[skh.pcola]

Why in the world would ANY country have a completely blind immigration policy, jimbino? That makes no sense, and neither does, "It's time to stop discriminating against muslims, gays, singles and the childfree, in particular." I'm pretty sure that the US doesn't specifically discriminate on any of those aspects, but feel free to prove me wrong.

[MarcZ]

Well I, for one, can understand jimbino's concerns. As a single, 28 year old gay man without children I can tell you that the oppression which our government and society inflicts upon the single, gay and childfree literally needs to be experienced to be believed. I do not exaggerate when I say that my hands are trembling as I type this. Of course I am commenting under an assumed name, lest members of the government's Marriage, Morality and Fecundity Police uncover my identity and--

OH MY GOD, A KNOCK ON THE DOOR OF MY BACHELOR'S PAD--WHICH I HAVE STYLISHLY DECORATED WITH ALL THE MONEY I DIDN'T HAVE TO SPEND ON A WIFE AND CHILDREN DESPITE MY HIDEOUS OPPRESSION!!! WHAT ORWELLIAN TORTURES AWAIT ME IN THE GOVERNMENT DETENTION CENTER?!!!

Oh, no, it was just the pizza delivery man with my calzone. Still, as a single, gay and CHILDFREE man living in a Christofascist society, I know that it could have been much, much worse.

[skh.pcola]

That's good, Marc. No wait...that is GREAT! *two thumbs up, with three snaps, and a pirouette*