Daina Goldenberg

LSJ 329: Immigration Law

 

     This class was eye-opening (so many classes were - but this class is not exception). In particular, this class asked me to reassess my notions of what constitutes membership or citizenship within a particular society, and most importantly, to recognize that rules governing citizenship are a double edged sword: while on one hand, they confer rights of citizenship to many, they also just as purposefully exclude the possibility of membership. We explored membership from the perspective of excluded parties, including Mexican laborers during the 1960s, Japanese-American subject to internment during WWII, and refugees across a variety of times and places, and engaged with philosophical ideas concerning migration theory, "docile bodies" (Foucault), and social and cultural membership within society. Like ENGL 131, this class effectively problematized practices that are common today, forcing me to question systems of immigration, and citizenship policy, that I had taken for granted. Though immigration law is not a part of my current trajectory as a prospective attorney, I want to ensure that I look at any issue with the critical lens and healthy skepticism that this class encouraged. The essay below is a reflection on immigration and the economy. An argument that had always frustrated me was the (often unsubstantiated) claim that immigrants "steal jobs" and don't pay taxes. I used this essay as a space to discuss that immigrants both in primary and secondary sectors contributed a great deal to the United States' wellbeing, incorporating new sociology themes I had learned while engaging with a topic I was interested in. I believe this paper was ultimately successful, but more importantly, it was a chance to apply economic and immigration theory in a focused and practical way. 

​

Check out the essay below: 

​

         Immigration and the operation of the economy are integrally linked. Economics becomes a major factor when considering theoretical frameworks that strive to explain motivations driving immigration. As a result, we note the many personal and structural ways in which immigrants enter a nation’s economy, make economic contributions, and personally allocate their earnings and resources. Several theories are prominent; neoclassical economic theory encompasses its subjects in the “rational actor” mindset which guides the immigrant’s decision to move, given that their economic “benefits” outweigh the risks; thus regarding migrational shifts, workers operating in a high-labor, low capital structures will move toward high-capital, labor-sparse communities (Massey). In contrast to this somewhat austere analysis, we do not find a real-life equilibrium that reconciles labor and capital effectively in the sending and receiving nations; The United States maintains a persistent need for low-skilled labor, and additionally, for high-skilled labor; it subsequently finds its need satisfied, continually, by immigrants leaving countries whose capital development and growth may often be stagnant. Immigrants contribute heavily to both the primary and secondary areas of the market (Massey). In this way, it helps to apply themes of segmented labor theory, highlighting the particular areas of the economy in which migrants contribute, and how they continue to be integral to, the growth of the United States economy.

​

            Low-skilled labor comprises most of the jobs within the “secondary sector”, and is undertaken in very large part by immigrants. Arguments against low-skilled laborers entering the country and the economy are often based upon factors such as risks to unemployment for Americans, increased tax burdens due to undocumented (and thus presumably tax-avoiding) workers, and reductions in wages. Though it is noted, as written in the 2013 NY Times, that low-skilled workers have influenced a reduction in wages for Americans without a high school diploma, author Adam Davidson makes it clear that the overall effect of low-skilled labor in the U.S. is otherwise very positive. Clarifying the tax assumption by stating that undocumented workers contribute $15 billion to Social Security Funds, Davidson also mentioned that immigrant involvement in low-skilled labor influenced 10 percent increases in income for complementary, higher-skilled jobs. In addition, a major positive influence mentioned is the economic process of specialization that is enhanced and made possible by the acceptance of low-skill jobs by immigrant laborers. Many entrepreneurial endeavors as well as daily contracting assignments and tasks benefit from a more effective allocation of employee skillsets in this way. As for the wage reduction caused by immigrant labor in the secondary market, I would argue that this is a problem at least partly caused by unethical and ineffective wage practices by businesses; family-based motivation, immediate need, and subsequent awareness that their labor and presence in the US may only be temporary, often leads immigrant labors to accept unfairly low wages as they prioritize the more short-term goals of getting money back home (Massey). Fair wage practices can possibly improve the currently depressing effect of low-skill labor wages in other low-wage sectors.

​

            Immigrants also make major contributions to the primary sector of the United States economy. Matthew Slaughter and George Hanson highlight, in “Talent, Immigration, and U.S. Economic Competitiveness”, the very high proportion of foreign-born people in the US who achieve significant success in academic realms, particularly in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields. They point out that, overall, immigrants hold 40 percent of STEM occupations requiring advanced degrees. Among those with a STEM tertiary education, 68.6 percent of immigrants obtain PhDs as opposed to native-borns, who obtain only 42 percent. They also mention the incredible educational prospects for young immigrants who enter on student-visas upon acceptance to college, and very often pursue STEM educations that bolster research, development, and as a result, economic growth and innovation. Diana Furchtgott-Roth, author of the Fiscal Times article “How Immigrants Boost Economic Growth” reconciles and praises the benefits created in both economic sectors by immigrants when she states: “Increased immigration expands the American workforce and encourages more business start-ups…immigrants increase economic efficiency by raising the supply of low- and high-skilled immigrants. In many cases, immigrant’s education backgrounds complement, rather than displace, the skills of the native-born labor market”. By highlighting the opportunity for specialization created by performance of low-skill migrant labor, and re-affirming the clearly significant contributions of highly skilled immigrants, though still within the framework of a native-focused workforce, Furchtgott-Roth establishes that the US economy’s foundation and structure is continuously reinforced and grown by immigrants, benefiting the vast majority of the US.

​

            Though different immigrant communities make up employment in these two sectors, and though different motivators (often, immediate need vs. opportunity for upward mobility) may guide each, it is clear that both the primary and secondary areas benefit from immigrant employment in the United States. Currently, documentation and naturalization of present and future immigrants continues to create political tension; future legislation may determine direct and indirect economic shifts in a currently positively reinforced and immigrant-supported economy.

 

 

Reflection

 

             I was not surprised about the fact that, in both the high-skill and low-skill labor markets, immigrants make very large contributions and play a major role in the economy. However, I was overwhelmed by the amount of data that was available to me, and was not sure what statistics I could use to best enhance my understanding, nor where I could look to find a kind of counter-argument within the statistics that I could reconcile with my stats and use to enhance my argument. I was also surprised (though in retrospect, maybe I should not have been) when many of the “current-events” type articles mentioned specialization in the market; though specialization is very real, and is a major factor describing how the modern economy functions, it was mentioned very mechanically, and the social elements of immigrant involvement in the economy seemed not to be considered in many discussions regarding economic development. Neoclassical economics definitely drives the numbers and the economic arguments that comprise many short news articles out there.

 

Works Cited

 

Davidson, Adam. "Do Illegal Immigrants Actually Hurt the U.S. Economy?" The New York Times. The New York Times, 16 Feb. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2015.

 

Furchtgott-Roth, Diana. "How Immigrants Boost U.S. Economic Growth." The Fiscal Times. The Fiscal Times, 2 Dec. 2014. Web. 22 Jan. 2015.

 

Hanson, Gordon, and Matthew Slaughter. Talent, Immigration, and U.S. Economic Competitiveness (2013): 23-24. Compete America Coalition, 2013. Web. 22 Jan. 2015.

 

Massey, Douglas. "Why Does Immigration Occur? A Theoretical Analysis." The Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience. By Josh DeWind. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1999. 34-52. Print.

​

​

​