Argumentative Essay On Open Immigration
America represents opportunity. It is a beacon of hope to people seeking a fresh start and a new way of life. In this country, citizens are able to choose for themselves what they want to do, and how they want to live. From the most northeast point in Maine, to the beautiful beaches of California, all the way up to Alaska, and out to the furthest islands of Hawaii, people here have the freedom to create their own fortunes. Is it any wonder that scores of people from all over the world come to America in search of a new home and a better life? Unfortunately, several of the people that do try to come here, legally, are denied and sent right back where they came from. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, in the year 2000 alone,
…show more content…
there were 399,670 potential immigrants denied entry into our country. Is it fair that our immigration policy denies them access to all the opportunity there is in the U.S., when many of them have the skill set and ability to contribute to our society? Not by any means. The problem lies with our nation 's strictness on letting outsiders in and the troublesome process foreigners are required to go through in order to gain legal status. Brad Darnell, a working electrical engineer from Canada was quoted saying this after his application for citizenship was denied and he was informed he would be deported, "It 's no wonder there are so many illegal immigrants, the legal method is so intolerant and confusing." Sadly, there are many other working-class immigrants, just like Brad, that are dealing with the same issue. However, there is a way in which we can fix that problem: stopping foreigners from coming and living here illegally. If we, as a nation, can prevent immigrants from moving into this country illegally, we can begin to utilize the potential benefits gained from foreigners that want to move here legitimately. With that said, Mr. President, I am proposing a few additions that I believe can help fix our immigration system: even tighter border control than we currently have so that no person can enter the country undocumented, deport all illegal aliens with criminal records, revise the current process needed for legal aliens to become a citizen so that it is far less complicated, and allow future immigrants that want to come to our country for employment to gain citizenship when, and only if, they find a job. I believe if we start with these things, we can rapidly improve the immigration problem and start to benefit economically from the addition of new workers and their production. After all, this country was founded by competitive capitalism, and putting more people in the work force would increase competition in the market for jobs. According to Steven A. Camarota, the Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the immigrant population of the U.S. reached 40 million (legal and illegal) in 2010, the largest number in our nation 's history. Of that 40 million, between 25 and 30 percent are thought to be illegal, or 10 to 12 million (Camarota). Numbers that big can mean only one thing: our borders are not secure enough. The National Immigration Forum released an update stating that your administration, Mr. President, called for a two percent increase in the budget for customs and border protections in the year 2013, making the budget just less than $12 billion. Will that increase be sufficient in securing our borders? It 's hard to say, but that 's a step in the right direction. The National Immigration Forum also stated in their update that your administration requested $11 million for immigrant integration, which includes the citizenship grant program. That request is also on the right track to immigration reform and goes hand-in-hand with my proposal to grant employed immigrants citizenship, but I believe more can and should be done. As a nation, I don 't think we fully realize all of the potential economic benefits to be had from granting working immigrants citizenship. Truthfully, I believe that majority of the nation views immigration negatively and is supportive of anti-immigration laws. Is America uninformed and narrow-minded on this subject? A recent article featured in the New York Times might suggest so. Texas Tribune writer Julian Aguilar points out a large opportunity missed by the city of Houston in his article, "A Divide on the Payoff of Legalizing Immigrants". He begins the article with a startling statistic about potential revenue the state is missing by not granting citizenship to immigrant workers in the Houston area alone. "Granting legal status to the illegal immigrants living in one of Texas ' largest metropolitan areas would generate at least $1.4 billion a year in revenue for state and federal agencies...” That study, completed by the Greater Houston Partnership, includes that the unused revenue would be available if the illegal immigrants in that area had the chance to work under legal terms and pay taxes. As expected, that study drew a lot of criticism from Texans that advocate stricter immigration laws. The executive director of the Immigration Reform Coalition of Texas, namely, Maria Martinez, accused the Houston Partnership of being "little more than peddlers of economic snake oil" for not including the costs of providing services to illegal immigrants (Aguilar). That claim was countered by a six-year-old study performed by the former state comptroller, Carole Keeton Strayhorn. Her research declared that if Texas went without the illegal immigrant population (roughly 1.4 million) that lived in the area in 2005, the state would have lost about $17.7 billion in gross domestic product that year (Aguilar). The study also included that the foreign-born workers produced more in-state revenue than what they cost the state in services, a difference of about $420 million (Aguilar). This article is based facts from only one city that has a high immigrant population. Given these statistics, how many other economic benefits do you think we 're missing out on? Even though information like this is out there and available for the American public to access, there are many citizens that are heavily opposed to a more open immigration policy. An article written in the libertarian journal The Freeman called, "Coming to America: The Benefits of Open Immigration", Thomas E. Lehman, a professor of economics and western civilization at Indiana Wesleyan University, identifies the different reasons why Americans are opposed to an open immigration policy. He begins the article by addressing the biggest reasons that Americans are not supportive of immigration: labor and the economy. He describes our current immigration policy as "nothing less than a tariff or barrier to entry" and continues to say that it harms America the same way other barriers and tariffs do (Lehman). Many Americans argue that open immigration forces our citizens to fight for jobs at lower wages. However, despite the public opinion, this is actually a good thing. Lehman argues that inviting competition to our labor markets helps to eliminate artificially inflated labor costs and increases efficiency in the work place. In turn, the higher level of efficiency in production allows consumer goods to be sold at lower prices, giving American consumers more purchasing power. He concludes this debate by saying that even domestic workers aren 't any worse off if they have to work for a lower wage because the prices of goods they purchase also decrease as a result of increased efficiency (Lehman). The next argument he presents is Americans resistance to immigration on the grounds that immigrants take advantage and abuse social services. He states that this argument of American opposition claims that the welfare system, not the economic opportunities that America provides, is "the lure which draws immigrants to the American economy (Lehman)." After, he provides a statistic to prove that the American opinion is theoretically and statistically flawed. Lastly, he concludes this dispute by suggesting that we eliminate the American welfare system altogether and prohibit anyone, "native or immigrant, from living at the coerced expense of another (Lehman)." Lehman 's arguments are controversial to many, but they do an excellent job of disputing the general opposition that Americans have to a more open immigration policy. On top of the position that immigration can help our country economically, you have to view the other side of the spectrum, the idea of human rights.
Kofi Annan, a graduate from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a master of science in management and a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize with the United Nations, gave a speech called "Lecture on International Flows of Humanity." In this speech, which he gave at Columbia University, Annan advocates a more open immigration policy as opposed to halting migration, a policy that he views as "bound to fail". He believes the answer to the problem lies in managing migration "rationally, creatively, compassionately and cooperatively". He goes on to say that this kind of policy is the only way to effectively address the problems surrounding immigration; problems that include: human rights, economic opportunity, refugee crisis, asylum seekers, human trafficking, human security, and national security. He closes his speech by appealing to tradition in a clever and effective way, "--a nation built by immigration, a land where constant renewal and regeneration are essential elements of the national character. That character must never be lost." Annan 's speech provides a different perspective on immigration in the sense that it presents a sympathetic appeal. It brings up the question: is it right for us to deny outsiders entry to our country when the people are only seeking a better way of life? I don 't believe that we should let everyone that desires to live here access, but I do think our difficult policy on gaining citizenship should be
revised. The fact that our economy can benefit from immigration and we, as in the American public, are not open to trying a more open immigration policy is saddening. Our country was founded by immigrants that were looking to escape authoritarian rulers and socialist economies in search of creating their own fortunes; in search of a better life. We, as a nation, should not be so opposed to an immigration policy that is much more open than the one we currently have. With that said, my proposal is not to create an open-door policy for all people, but rather an idea that can help change the negative opinion currently held by most Americans about immigrants. Mr. President, I 'm not suggesting that my ideas to revise our immigration system will solve all of our problems immediately; however, I am proposing ideas that I believe can get us on the right path quickly. Given the current economic situation and immigration policy, can it hurt to make a few changes?
Works Cited
Annan, Kofi. "Lecture on International Flows of Humanity." Columbia University. New York, New York. 21 Nov. 2003
Aguilar, Julian. "A Divide on the Payoff of Legalizing Immigrants." The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 28 Jan. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2012.
Camarota, Stephen A. "A Record-Setting Decade of Immigration: 2000-2010." Center for Immigration Studies. Center for Immigration Studies. Oct. 2011. Web. 14 Feb. 2012.
"Immigration Policy Update for February 17, 2012." National Immigration Forum. The National Immigration Forum. 17 Feb. 2012. Web. 16 Feb 2012.
Lehman, Thomas E. "Coming to America: The Benefits of Open Immigration." The Freeman - Ideas on Liberty. Freeman - Ideas on Liberty. Dec. 1995. Web. 15 Feb. 2012.
there were 399,670 potential immigrants denied entry into our country. Is it fair that our immigration policy denies them access to all the opportunity there is in the U.S., when many of them have the skill set and ability to contribute to our society? Not by any means. The problem lies with our nation 's strictness on letting outsiders in and the troublesome process foreigners are required to go through in order to gain legal status. Brad Darnell, a working electrical engineer from Canada was quoted saying this after his application for citizenship was denied and he was informed he would be deported, "It 's no wonder there are so many illegal immigrants, the legal method is so intolerant and confusing." Sadly, there are many other working-class immigrants, just like Brad, that are dealing with the same issue. However, there is a way in which we can fix that problem: stopping foreigners from coming and living here illegally. If we, as a nation, can prevent immigrants from moving into this country illegally, we can begin to utilize the potential benefits gained from foreigners that want to move here legitimately. With that said, Mr. President, I am proposing a few additions that I believe can help fix our immigration system: even tighter border control than we currently have so that no person can enter the country undocumented, deport all illegal aliens with criminal records, revise the current process needed for legal aliens to become a citizen so that it is far less complicated, and allow future immigrants that want to come to our country for employment to gain citizenship when, and only if, they find a job. I believe if we start with these things, we can rapidly improve the immigration problem and start to benefit economically from the addition of new workers and their production. After all, this country was founded by competitive capitalism, and putting more people in the work force would increase competition in the market for jobs. According to Steven A. Camarota, the Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the immigrant population of the U.S. reached 40 million (legal and illegal) in 2010, the largest number in our nation 's history. Of that 40 million, between 25 and 30 percent are thought to be illegal, or 10 to 12 million (Camarota). Numbers that big can mean only one thing: our borders are not secure enough. The National Immigration Forum released an update stating that your administration, Mr. President, called for a two percent increase in the budget for customs and border protections in the year 2013, making the budget just less than $12 billion. Will that increase be sufficient in securing our borders? It 's hard to say, but that 's a step in the right direction. The National Immigration Forum also stated in their update that your administration requested $11 million for immigrant integration, which includes the citizenship grant program. That request is also on the right track to immigration reform and goes hand-in-hand with my proposal to grant employed immigrants citizenship, but I believe more can and should be done. As a nation, I don 't think we fully realize all of the potential economic benefits to be had from granting working immigrants citizenship. Truthfully, I believe that majority of the nation views immigration negatively and is supportive of anti-immigration laws. Is America uninformed and narrow-minded on this subject? A recent article featured in the New York Times might suggest so. Texas Tribune writer Julian Aguilar points out a large opportunity missed by the city of Houston in his article, "A Divide on the Payoff of Legalizing Immigrants". He begins the article with a startling statistic about potential revenue the state is missing by not granting citizenship to immigrant workers in the Houston area alone. "Granting legal status to the illegal immigrants living in one of Texas ' largest metropolitan areas would generate at least $1.4 billion a year in revenue for state and federal agencies...” That study, completed by the Greater Houston Partnership, includes that the unused revenue would be available if the illegal immigrants in that area had the chance to work under legal terms and pay taxes. As expected, that study drew a lot of criticism from Texans that advocate stricter immigration laws. The executive director of the Immigration Reform Coalition of Texas, namely, Maria Martinez, accused the Houston Partnership of being "little more than peddlers of economic snake oil" for not including the costs of providing services to illegal immigrants (Aguilar). That claim was countered by a six-year-old study performed by the former state comptroller, Carole Keeton Strayhorn. Her research declared that if Texas went without the illegal immigrant population (roughly 1.4 million) that lived in the area in 2005, the state would have lost about $17.7 billion in gross domestic product that year (Aguilar). The study also included that the foreign-born workers produced more in-state revenue than what they cost the state in services, a difference of about $420 million (Aguilar). This article is based facts from only one city that has a high immigrant population. Given these statistics, how many other economic benefits do you think we 're missing out on? Even though information like this is out there and available for the American public to access, there are many citizens that are heavily opposed to a more open immigration policy. An article written in the libertarian journal The Freeman called, "Coming to America: The Benefits of Open Immigration", Thomas E. Lehman, a professor of economics and western civilization at Indiana Wesleyan University, identifies the different reasons why Americans are opposed to an open immigration policy. He begins the article by addressing the biggest reasons that Americans are not supportive of immigration: labor and the economy. He describes our current immigration policy as "nothing less than a tariff or barrier to entry" and continues to say that it harms America the same way other barriers and tariffs do (Lehman). Many Americans argue that open immigration forces our citizens to fight for jobs at lower wages. However, despite the public opinion, this is actually a good thing. Lehman argues that inviting competition to our labor markets helps to eliminate artificially inflated labor costs and increases efficiency in the work place. In turn, the higher level of efficiency in production allows consumer goods to be sold at lower prices, giving American consumers more purchasing power. He concludes this debate by saying that even domestic workers aren 't any worse off if they have to work for a lower wage because the prices of goods they purchase also decrease as a result of increased efficiency (Lehman). The next argument he presents is Americans resistance to immigration on the grounds that immigrants take advantage and abuse social services. He states that this argument of American opposition claims that the welfare system, not the economic opportunities that America provides, is "the lure which draws immigrants to the American economy (Lehman)." After, he provides a statistic to prove that the American opinion is theoretically and statistically flawed. Lastly, he concludes this dispute by suggesting that we eliminate the American welfare system altogether and prohibit anyone, "native or immigrant, from living at the coerced expense of another (Lehman)." Lehman 's arguments are controversial to many, but they do an excellent job of disputing the general opposition that Americans have to a more open immigration policy. On top of the position that immigration can help our country economically, you have to view the other side of the spectrum, the idea of human rights.
Kofi Annan, a graduate from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a master of science in management and a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize with the United Nations, gave a speech called "Lecture on International Flows of Humanity." In this speech, which he gave at Columbia University, Annan advocates a more open immigration policy as opposed to halting migration, a policy that he views as "bound to fail". He believes the answer to the problem lies in managing migration "rationally, creatively, compassionately and cooperatively". He goes on to say that this kind of policy is the only way to effectively address the problems surrounding immigration; problems that include: human rights, economic opportunity, refugee crisis, asylum seekers, human trafficking, human security, and national security. He closes his speech by appealing to tradition in a clever and effective way, "--a nation built by immigration, a land where constant renewal and regeneration are essential elements of the national character. That character must never be lost." Annan 's speech provides a different perspective on immigration in the sense that it presents a sympathetic appeal. It brings up the question: is it right for us to deny outsiders entry to our country when the people are only seeking a better way of life? I don 't believe that we should let everyone that desires to live here access, but I do think our difficult policy on gaining citizenship should be
revised. The fact that our economy can benefit from immigration and we, as in the American public, are not open to trying a more open immigration policy is saddening. Our country was founded by immigrants that were looking to escape authoritarian rulers and socialist economies in search of creating their own fortunes; in search of a better life. We, as a nation, should not be so opposed to an immigration policy that is much more open than the one we currently have. With that said, my proposal is not to create an open-door policy for all people, but rather an idea that can help change the negative opinion currently held by most Americans about immigrants. Mr. President, I 'm not suggesting that my ideas to revise our immigration system will solve all of our problems immediately; however, I am proposing ideas that I believe can get us on the right path quickly. Given the current economic situation and immigration policy, can it hurt to make a few changes?
Works Cited
Annan, Kofi. "Lecture on International Flows of Humanity." Columbia University. New York, New York. 21 Nov. 2003
Aguilar, Julian. "A Divide on the Payoff of Legalizing Immigrants." The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 28 Jan. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2012.
Camarota, Stephen A. "A Record-Setting Decade of Immigration: 2000-2010." Center for Immigration Studies. Center for Immigration Studies. Oct. 2011. Web. 14 Feb. 2012.
"Immigration Policy Update for February 17, 2012." National Immigration Forum. The National Immigration Forum. 17 Feb. 2012. Web. 16 Feb 2012.
Lehman, Thomas E. "Coming to America: The Benefits of Open Immigration." The Freeman - Ideas on Liberty. Freeman - Ideas on Liberty. Dec. 1995. Web. 15 Feb. 2012.