FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Trump’s Immigration Plan Will Harm Americans and the Economy

by

Photo by Fibonacci Blue | CC BY 2.0

Claiming that the United States takes in too many low-skill immigrants, president Trump endorsed the RAISE Act on August 2, which would reduce legal immigration by half over the next ten years. At a White House event, he said he wanted immigration policy that “puts America first.” But Trump’s immigration plan does not put America first. If the RAISE Act passes, it will harm the U.S. economy without making Americans safer. Instead of blocking workers from entering the country, the government should expand legal, low-skill immigration.

Freer flow of labor creates wealth for both migrants and domestic citizens. Immigrants are twice as likely to start a business as natural-born citizens, and they generally fill education gaps rather than displacing workers. An Indiana University and University of Virginia study found that 1.2 jobs are created for every one immigrant that enters the country. They also raise local wages.

If Trump relaxed immigration laws rather than tightening them, the U.S. would enjoy more of these private sector benefits, more tax revenue, and a healthier economy overall. By shying away from foreign migration, the government will directly deprive U.S. citizens of jobs and prevent businesses from hiring suitable workers. That’s hardly putting America first.

Additionally, immigrants aren’t nearly as dangerous as the secure-the-border crowd would have us believe. The idea that people are entering the U.S. to rape and pillage just plays upon fear––it isn’t backed up by data. Every national census since 1980 shows that native-born Americans are incarcerated at a rate two to five times higher than foreign-born, legal immigrants.

Immigration restrictionists also overstate the danger of terrorism through immigration. Alex Nowrasteh, immigration policy analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute, published a study on the risk of terrorism via immigration. He found that the chance of being killed in a terrorist attack by a lawful permanent immigrant in America between 1975 and 2015 was one in over 1.3 billion each year. The yearly odds of being murdered were 252.9 times higher than being killed by any foreign-born terrorist.

If Americans are too afraid to play those odds, we shouldn’t be drinking alcohol, going to swimming pools, or living in major cities. We certainly shouldn’t be driving cars. The fears surrounding immigrant terrorism and crime are irrational, and perpetuating them is dishonest.

Trump’s assertion that the U.S. already admits too many low-skill workers simply isn’t true. Though some temporary visas are available, the government issues a maximum of just 5000 permanent, low-skill visas each year. If migrants can no longer come into the country through family connections, they will have to rely on the mind-numbing maze of low-skill immigration visas. The U.S. needs low-skill labor, and much of that labor comes from migrant workers. Slowing this immigration to a trickle will be a blight to American businesses, and many domestic-born citizens will suffer in the economic aftermath.

Critics of increased immigration claim that letting more people come to the U.S. will increase the welfare state. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, however, provides evidence to the contrary. Immigrants currently cannot collect federal food stamps, Medicaid, or child care cash assistance until they’ve been in the country for five years. These immigrants are paying taxes into a welfare system that natural-born citizens draw from.

Looking back on United States history, we find many instances of unfounded anti-immigration sentiment. The 19th century push against German and Irish Catholic immigrants, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, and the 1924 ban on Asian immigration all seem ridiculous today, but Trump and his supporters are pushing for similarly laughable policies with a straight face.

When Americans look back on historical instances of immigration restriction, they can clearly see the country had lost its way. It’s not so easy to recognize the same kind of panic when it’s happening currently. The U.S. promise of freedom becomes nothing but lip service in hard times—real or imagined. Now we’re at a crossroads. The U.S. can allow more people to enter the country to create wealth or strike a blow to its own economy in the name of “putting America first.”

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine


bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

September 21, 2017
Matthew Vernon Whalan
Five Basic Differences Between Education and War … and One Similarity
Jimmy Carter
Stop the War-like Rhetoric: It’s Time to Talk to North Korea
September 20, 2017
Ajamu Baraka
The Empire’s Hustle: Why Anti-Trumpism Doesn’t Include Anti-War
Jonathan Cook
How Netanyahu’s Son Became the Poster Boy for White Supremacists
Michael Uhl
Hué Back When: Vietnam’s Pivotal Battle Reconsidered
Russell Mokhiber
Single Payer, the Democratic Party and the Nonprofit Industrial Complex
John W. Whitehead
We Are All Prisoners of the Police State’s Panopticon Village
Tim DeChristopher – Suren Moodliar
After Harvey & Irma: Mitigation, Adaptation & Suffering
Yoav Litvin
To Punch or Not to Punch – The American Left’s Existential Crisis
Patrick Cockburn
Why International Powers Fear Kurdish Independence Vote Could Derail Fight Against ISIS
Thomas S. Harrington
Forced Takeover of Catalan Government Institutions by Spanish Police
Steve Early
Report From Winsted: Nader’s Museum
John Davis
On the New Party Pledge
Gary Leupp
Manafort News: a Blockbuster or Nothingburger?
Ted Rall
No Man is Above the Law, Except on College Campuses
Kenneth Good
The Annulment of Kenya’s August 2017 Elections
Ha-Joon Chang
South Koreans Worked a Democratic Miracle. Can They Do It Again?
Binoy Kampmark
Donald Trump at the UN
Ezra Kronfeld
China’s Persecution of the Uyghur People
Kim C. Domenico
The White Liberal’s Dilemma: How To Be Shamelessly Different
September 19, 2017
Gregory Elich
Trump’s War on the North Korean People
Michael Yates
What We Sow is What We Eat
James M. Williamson
Getting the Gulf of Tonkin Wrong: Are Ken Burns and Lynn Novick “Telling Stories” About the Central Events Used to Legitimize the US Attack Against Vietnam?
Benjamin Dangl
How Top Food Companies Fail to Protect Environmental Activists in Supply Chains
Robert Fisk
Nikki Haley, Israel and Lebanon: When Ignorance is Not Bliss
Jack Rasmus
Greek Debt Crisis: Why Syriza Continues to Lose
Rev. William Alberts
The Greatest Threat Facing America
Julian Vigo
iPhone Ergo Sum
Andre Vltchek
In Bangkok – “No Speak Your Language, Speak Thai or Die!”
Mel Gurtov
Dealing with North Korean Missiles
Mike Whitney
Rohrabacher vs. The Machine 
Fred Gardner
Intertwined Issues: VietnaMarijuana
Manuel E. Yepe
Cuba Recovered and Open for Business
Binoy Kampmark
The Genuine Article in Australian Politics
September 18, 2017
Jason Hirthler
Condemned to Repeat It: History as Rerun
Rannie Amiri
The Saudi Project Has Failed
Mike Whitney
Starve Them to Death: Wall Street Journal’s Solution to North Korea
Gary Leupp
Why Would 58% Favor U.S. Bombing of North Korea?
Patrick Cockburn
ISIS is Stepping Up Its Atrocities to Compensate For Its Defeat
Manuel E. Yepe
Hurricanes and the Blockade Against Cuba
Janet Contursi
No, Antifa, This is Not the 1930s and We Don’t Need to Punch a Nazi
Binoy Kampmark
The CIA Wins: Harvard, Chelsea Manning and Visiting Fellowships
Chad Hanson – Mike Garrity
Logging Won’t Stop Wildfires
Patrick Howlett-Martin
Nazis Art Plunders: All That Belongs to the Past ?
Radha Surya
Too Late, Mr. Modi
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail