Comprehensive Immigration Reform Essay

Over conviction, the linked States Immigration system has undergone a uncounted of comprehensive put rights which fuck off elicitn to greatly impact the composition of its universe of discourse. though it is unclear whether these specific policies were products of theoretical assumptions, much(prenominal) as those associated with a dry lands economic stature, the social norms of the time period, or further causative factors such as the existing political landscape, the start of in-migration has act to remain problematic in the 21st century and stick out a bun in the ovens a incorporate approach. Preceding the rate of flow Obama administration and previous Bush administrations of the early 2000s, relatively recent major reforms were made to the U.S. in-migration system through the transportation of bills beginning in 1986 under the Immigration Reform and Control Act, in 1990 under the Immigration Act, and in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant accountabili ty Act of 1996 (Bodvarsson and Van den Berg, 368). Each of these legislative bills proposes different sets of provender which include, to some degree, address comprehensive immigration reform. However, the form _or_ system of g everyplacenment strategy to include these broader reforms on recent immigration legislation use up more often than not failed to leave from beyond the preliminary procedures of Congress as a result of healthful opposition by to sidereal days lawmakers.More specifically, the notable form _or_ system of government trend in con fugitive immigration legislation involves the heavy wildness on border enforcement as the principal solution to the issue as a whole. The comprehensive processes that were once devoteed through the legislative bills of the 1980s and 90s, such as the family reunification programs, legal amnesty cla go fors, and population ceilings, are now largely absent from the one-dimensional enforcement system utilised today. It is within the scope of this philosophical shift that has elicited the question of wherefore the nearly recently implemented immigration policies have been limited to the elaborateness of border enforcement mandates, while preceding legislative reforms rented to embrace a sensibly broader framework that addressed additional issues beyond enforcement? More importantly, is strictly focalisation and support border enforcement programs the most economically feasible solution in comparing to alternative methods? In order to reach an allow deduction to the questions raised by the current trend, it is required that an extensive evaluation and comparison of the fiscal calculates of recent policies be conducted, in addition to an examination of the boilers suit efficiency andeffectiveness of those policies by analyzing annually recorded statistics.Also, a fundamental understanding of the ordinary complexities and interconnectedness of these policies with other prominent issues in the genera l policy realm is required and must serve as a starting point in order to clearly establish the place setting of the existing human race discourse on immigration. This gradual regression of the US immigration system can be understood by freshman examining some of the ways in which certain large-scale issues played a role in the national governments policymaking process during the plow of the 21st century. Migration Policy Institute analyst Marc R. Rosenblum discusses some of these issues in discretion in his insightful piece titled, Understanding the Stalemate over comp Immigration Reform. As he points out, the months following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks demonstrate the ways in which the immigration system was, though indirectly, greatly effected by the efforts made by Congress and the President to take swift action, in which he reiterates in his words, immigration processes and border controls immediately became a pro frame topic of concern, (4). This immedia te response by the government led to a massive restructuring of the immigration system under new security and anti-terrorism policy measures.Any notion that these actions would essentially entail some comprehensive reforms would prove to only result in the passing of the Real ID Act in 2005 which only toughened regulations for immigrants trying to acquire a state device drivers license, and as well did so only as an attachment to some other unrelated measure (5). Other efforts by supporters of comprehensive immigration reform in both the House of Re positatives and Senate would eventually fail to push forward any new legislation in 2006 and again in 2007 condescension passing the Senate, but ultimately lose momentum for any mishap to propose restructured visas or legalized amnesty by and by the abrupt economic scorn of 2008 (6). Even more recent legislative efforts to renew comprehensive reforms by Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey in 2010, as well as by former Texas Repr esentative Solomon Ortiz in 2009, died in Congress scorn Ortizs CIR ASAP bill being referred to committees (loc.gov, 2012). though Senator Menedezs bill was reintroduced in earlier of June 2011 to the current 112th Congress, the senate has only passed a total of 24 public laws this socio-economic class (loc.gov, 2012). In contrast, enforcement based provisions as well as their monetary fundingrequirements passed easily over the same period of time through bills such as the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism ginmill Act of 2004 and the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Rosenblum, 5).The legislative activities during these years present the very pattern that remains today. One that had ultimately began with the passing of the fatherland Security Act of 2002, where President George W. Bush authorized the cosmea of the plane section of Homeland Security, which would eventually become the permanent cabinet department that federal border enforcement programs and immigration officials would operate under (Chishti et al, 2). In addition to his reciprocation on the policy agenda set forth by the 9/11 attacks, Rosenblum offers specific examples as to why the trend favoring the strict use of enforcement has continued and declares that within the field of immigration policy on that point is a strong bias which is, in favor of enforcement rather than legalization or visa reform, (10). He continues to then list three primary reasons for the man of the bias noting of the cost-benefit advantages of migration enforcement, the procedural difficulties for drafting and enacting new legislation, and its classification as an issue which is conveniently easy to support in the political arena (Rosenblum, 11). while Rosenblums examples summarize the most basic obstacles that have successfully overcome any efforts to formulate comprehensive reforms earlier in the hug drug, these same rationales have only continued on and remained consistent today, even under a saucily elected Presid ent in Barack Obama. Given that the 2007 McCain-Kennedy bill tag perhaps the most legitimate effort at achieving comprehensive immigration reform in the 21st century, it seems as though the complexities of the legislative processes and strategic ploys employd by the fields major players have successfully prevented any changes to policy approach. However, it is to a fault critical to note that Obamas legislative agenda became focused with the sudden economic downturn shortly after victorious office in 2008, as well as taking on other major legislation in addressing healthcare and indemnity reform. The outline of these concerns can excessively be understood as a list of relatively new constraints upon comprehensive immigration supporters, as there is a distinct contrast in the policy approaches mingled with the 107th-112th telling and those with which preceded it.The earlier legislative bills which utilized comprehensive immigration measures, such as the Immigration Reformand Co ntrol Act of 1986, were generally aimed to address and, if successful, rid some of the problems at which the immigration system faced at the time. However, it is also clear that by doing so these specific programs also helped to realign and mitigate the current system as a means to better establish the general trajectory and stable functionality of the system in the future. Though the period to which programs were more or less effective is often debated, it is necessary to expunge that the immigration system as a whole requires continuous adjustments appropriate for fulfilling, as writer Richard A. Boswell states, the general objective of immigration laws in the join States, or more specifically to, keep the flow of people into the surface area to a manageable level, while preserving the interests of family unity and the need for labor, (Boswell, 204).While Boswells definition is by no means interpreted as federal law, the authors statement essentially grasps the premise of i mmigration and deuce of its most pressing issues which remain at the core of the modern day discussion. As the congressional record of todays policies in the greater the 21st century have shown, lawmakers have failed to properly preserve immigration by choosing to over pursue and implement a vast agenda of security measures which, have thus far proved only otiose and highly inefficient in solving the fields most glaring issues. The continued efforts to focus on enforcement and reestablish stricter policies have proceeded beyond necessity and have reached excessive levels of spending without producing adequate or proportional results.The statistical reports provided by the federal government reinforce these observations, as they largely reflect the emphasis of strict enforcement programs backed with high spending, particularly when evaluating the fiscal year budgets and recorded results for all active US immigration organizations. For example, date back to 1990 the joined States s et up Patrol had a fiscal year budget totaling the amount of $262,647. Since then, their budget has dramatically increased by 1,251 share given their report 2011 fiscal year budget of $3,549,295 (CBP.gov, 2012). For their parenting agency, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the budget also grew from $5.9 one thousand million in 2003 to $11.8 billion in 2011 (DHS.gov, 2012). The newly created Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency also catchd a budget increase over time, from $3.3 billion to $5.7 billion in 2011 andpeaking at $6 billion in 2009 (DHS.gov, 2012). The examination of the data also revealed an unlikely detail, portraying no drop or reduction in enforcement spending despite the economic downturn during the fiscal year of 2008, nor afterward in 2009 (DHS, 2012). Although the funding for enforcement continues to steadily increase, the immigration system remains largely cost-ineffective.In an term published by the Immigration Policy Center, estimates calculated by t he internal Immigration Forum stated that be to detain a hotshot person under the ICE agency amount to $166 per day, and also require over five one million million million dollars in daily operating costs to detain 33,400 people in more than 250 facilities (immigrationpolicy.org, 2012). The article also reported that, In 2009 and 2010, over half of detainees did not have criminal records, and that business offenses account for nearly 20 percent of those who did, (immigrationpolicy.org, 2012). The statistics listed in the article experience a clear pattern of inefficiency that takes place at a micro level on a day-to-day basis. Although it is hardly sufficient to utilize these numbers as the fundamental basis against the use of heavy enforcement in immigration, an examination of the fiscal issues and its greater impacts at the macro level pay off many more problems. Given that the increased spending on enforcement programs aim to essentially reduce the overall unauthorised i mmigrant population in the United States and prevent further illegal entry into the country, statistics provided by research studies suggest that the coveted outcomes do no match the actual results.When looking at the Department of Homeland Securitys annual population estimates for the unauthorized immigrant the number was reported to be 11,510,000 for the year 2011 which grew in comparison to the 10,790,000 estimated for 2010 (dhs.gov, 2012). Though there are immediate concerns given the data limitations which distort the overall accuracy of the estimates made by the DHS, the unauthorized immigrant population living in the United States has thus far grown significantly from the 8.5 million as detailed by the department back in the year 2000 and into the copy digits during the new decade (dhs.gov, 2012). Those who strongly support the strategy of strict enforcement, such as Jessica M. Vaughan of Immigration Daily, expected quite the opposite of what the current statistics have meas ured. In her article, Vaughan anticipates that through strict enforcement tactics such as attrition, immigration enforcement should thengreatly improve to being both faster and cheaper, (cis.org, 2012).Also, she offers a prediction that the strategy could, reduce the illegal population from its current 11.5 million to 5.6 million in a period of five years, a 51 percent reduction, (cis.org, 2012). Considering the scope of these outcomes and the results of the actual data producing statistics not even remotely close indicate that the current enforcement programs are ineffective, but continue to experience budget growth. Still, in the simple context of theoretical presumptions, heightened security measures and the overall approach of adopting strict immigration laws should ideally yield the capacity to baffle a mass reduction in the unauthorized immigrant population over time, and provide greater collective protection against the most dangerous criminals and/or terrorists that are con sidered threats to the United States. However, another alarming statistic mentioned by immigrant attorney Tara Magner from an analysis done by Syracuse University research proves the liability of these assumptions at which, It found that less than 0.01% of arrests of noncitizens by Homeland Security agents were terrorist related, (Magner, 3). With the steady growth of enforcement budgets move at the forefront of US immigration policy, one can quit that the current system is in desperate need of more cost-effective and highly beneficial reforms.Another key aspect at which the current US immigration system affects is the national economic system. For example, author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda uses a general equilibrium model in his research to help calculate and project the economic outcomes of alternative immigration reforms (Hinojosa-Ojeda, 177). Under his first alternative scenario, which calls for the creation of, a pathway to legal status for unauthorized immigrants in the United St ates and establishes flexible limits on permanent and interim immigration, his research estimates a each year increase in the nations Gross Domestic crossroad by .84 percent, or $1.5 trillion dollars over a full decade (177). This alternative alone holds more positive benefits for an already struggling economy by primarily improving wages and productivity but also by increasing small-business formation, home ownership, and greater household investment in education (187).In a second setting, Hinojosa-Ojeda analyzes the effects of a temporary worker program and concludes that the U.S. GDP would increaseannually by a slightly less .44 percent, totaling an additional $792 billion over a 10-year thwart (177). While comparatively not the optimal scenario between the two, establishing a temporary worker program remains on the table when constructing a zealot bill in Congress. Also, an extreme third option proposing mass expatriate is for the most part an unrealistic policy approach a nd widely less-traveled on both sides of the issue but nevertheless, serves as an extreme or boundary case against which we can evaluate the other two scenarios, as articulated by the author. (188) When closely examining the first scenario and its greater effects, however, the comprehensive reforms also add close to $1.2 trillion dollars in consumption and more than $250 billion in investment, while also generating additional tax revenues of $4.5 to $5.4 billion dollars, numbers that can sustain new jobs at a range between 750,000 to 900,000 (189). It is then made clear that the benefits of comprehensive reforms exceed those brought forth by a temporary workers program or a mass transport and is thus the most favorable option, despite any difficulties it may have in becoming a bipartisan political acquisition that successfully reaches a vote in Congress.