Immigration is among the most debated issues in the United States of America today, more so, because the public has divided opinions concerning the issue at hand. Most people have different understandings concerning its impacts on the fiscal and economic situation of the country, and these two problems are that which raise more concerning dividing the public with divergent views concerning ways in which immigration should be handled. Moreover, the issue of immigration tends to reach more into the rates of employment for immigrants, the methods, and extent of their tax payment as well as the benefits they receive and their level of contribution to the innovation of the economy.
Benefits of Immigration in the US
The issues concerning immigration are debated differently in various countries, and the views concerning immigration continue to depict the history of the country as well as its experience with immigration. In spite of this, the issue rather reflects increased anxiety amongst the public as of now. Nevertheless, it is important to install a new immigration policy that focuses on ensuring that the country benefits from the stay of immigrants since this is their new residential country.
It is evident that immigration has an influence on the economy of the country; nevertheless, it is a compound job determining this impact, more so, considering that for over fifty years now, immigrants have significantly affected the economies of OECD countries on a neutral level. The implication of the statement is that every cost the immigrants caused in the country, they had it covered through their paid taxes. The areas in which immigrants have had an economic influence on the economy of the country, the effect rarely goes above or below 0.5 percent of the GDP. Despite the influence of the immigrants on the economy being neutral, its favorability in comparison to the native-born Americans is minimal. The implication herein is that in spite of them not being a significant burden on the spending part of the economy of the country, they are similarly, not an elixir of the improvement of the same (Ortega, Francesc, and Giovanni Peri 52).
Nonetheless, immigration results into the best benefits for the country, more so, in areas such as labor. Amongst the immigrants, the employment rate therein substantially determines the influence that immigration has on the country’s economy (Ortega, Francesc, and Giovanni Peri 52). The importance of immigration concerns its positive impact on the country’s economy because of the increasingly many people who have come to America to work and focus on their employment. On the other hand, immigration can be detrimental if the numbers of immigrants in the country are those not seeking labor. Another negative factor arises when a larger number of immigrants earn lower salaries and therefore, pay the lower tax. Such immigrants tend to live dependently on the social benefits that they receive, and this has a negative impact. To this effect, there is a greater need to ensure that the rates of employments for immigrants in the country, where applicable, reach at par, with that of the locals to allow immigrants reach their goals and positively drive the economy of the country.
Current US Immigration Policy and Laws that Need to be Changed
The state has entailed different ways that allow valuable skilled immigrants to enter the country and seek work. These various forms include a temporary basis as well as a permanent one. The current law that needs to be changed is the law based on the employment immigration of the immigrants, more so, the temporary classifications of visas. Work based on a provisional classification of a visa allows an employer not only to hire but also to also petition for the migrant a national stay for a particular limited time for working. Through this law, immigrants whose employers requested of them have no limited options of employment since they must work for the said business and if their visa status expires or if the employer terminates their employment, they must leave the country. Such a law needs to be changed because if consideration is put into the fact that the migrant employee has gained more experience regarding the job. He or she was doing, if she goes back to his or her home country after being terminated or after the visa status reads expired, and then the country faces a loss of labor. The loss of work, even if minutely affects the economy of the country since, the economy experiences a loss in productivity. Additionally, the state also loses a chance to ensure the development of the economy since as mentioned earlier on, the contributions of these individuals add to the economy under the right environment and conditions.
Current Debate on the Topic
Americans are currently divided concerning the immigration debate going on since the presidency campaigns were underweight (Faber, Daniel, et al. 7). The issue of immigration policies has seen both the most powerful and influential people in the country as well as the least influential persons therein either join forces in support of the immigration policies of banning immigrants or in opposition of the same. It follows that these issues despite being a topic of debate previously had not heated up as it has now. Some people are for the banning of migrants and deport those illegally in the country while others see these as a rejection of the longstanding beliefs that bond America for long. Those for the idea are focused on the arguments concerning the economic implications of immigrants in the country as well as other factors such as the safety of America and its people. On the other hand, those against the idea argue that many of the immigrants are innocent and should, therefore, not be allowed the sufferings of paying for the mistakes of others and that immigrants are not a burden to the country (Hagan, Jacqueline, Karl Eschbach, and Nestor 72). Moreover, the view pertains that these policies are inhumane because of their extreme nature and therefore, there is a doubt of the level of their legality.
Responses and Policy Options
As mentioned earlier on, the ban on immigration has resulted in mixed differences of opinions on the issue. The primary responses, however, have been criticism concerning the prohibition placed on the seven countries. The responses to the issue vary from their tonalities to their mild rebukes and stern denunciations of the same (Berman, Ron, et al.). These reactions depict the mixed feelings and opinions that people have concerning banning immigration. Moreover, some counties and states have retaliated against the orders and have decided and embarked on offering themselves to immigrants as a haven for them to live in without being asked of or having to endure questions about their immigration status therein. Such moves have annoyed many while many have come out in support of the sanctuary cities idea (Anonymous). Despite all these, the policy options that should have been put in place concerning the issue pertains instituting further measures that would ensure that immigration occurs yes, but on an adjusted basis. Such measures could involve visas to the United States among other things. Moreover, the policies should focus on ensuring that the immigrants migrating to the United States offer substantive information and reasons as to their migration. Therefore, the best thing would be to tighten the regulatory measures instead of issuing a ban.
Summary of what has been done about the Issue
The President has already signed the executive order, which is focused on restricting immigration severely from occurring from seven countries. Moreover, through the executive order, the president suspended the admission of refugees for 120 days, and he also barred all the Syrian refugees indefinitely. The seven countries under severe restriction were Islamic countries (Chacko, Priya, and Kanishka 4). After the executive order had been signed into effect, many people with legal documentations at airports were detained. However, all the legal challenges made against the detention succeeded. The executive order does several things that affect different people. For instance, those affected by the law are those without citizenship and therefore, those not affected here include everyone with a U.S citizenship whether the individual was born in the United States or not (Silva). Additionally, as mentioned above, the order barred refugee entry in the country for 120 days, even those seeking to resettle in the country. The seven countries banned include Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia. People from these seven mentioned countries according to the order, cannot enter the country by the use of any visa (Calamur). The other thing that the law does is put into deeper scrutiny green-card holders, more so, those traveling for the sole purposes of work or visiting their families. The scrutiny that these people will undergo according to the order is a one by one-case investigation. Nevertheless, there has been a miscommunication on this area because the law does not clearly offer any stipulation pertaining those with green cards.
List of Recommendations
The president should consider reviewing the issue of immigration as well as his order because not everyone from the banned countries among others is guilty of the burden that America has had to endure. Moreover, he should also consider not deporting every immigrant because no one should ever pay for the mistakes of others.
On the other hand, states that have not yet raised their voices concerning the issue at hand should do so to ensure that the voices of the people are heard. It is important to do so, to make sure that change comes about and the policies on immigration are given another thought. Speaking up will help in preventing a division among Americans since everyone has a different view, a view that should be heard and put into consideration.
Advocacy groups should concern themselves with the issue, more so, concerning those being treated unfairly because of the immigration ban placed. Moreover, the support group should help in shedding light on matters pertaining immigrations.
Anonymous. “Texas governor threatens Austin sheriff for ‘sanctuary city’ policies”. RT, RT. 26 Jan, 2017, https://www.rt.com/usa/374980-texas-austin-sanctuary-city-sheriff-hernandez/
Berman, Ron, et al. “Make America Tweet Again: A Dynamic Analysis of Micro-Blogging During the 2016 US Republican Primary Debates.” (2017).
Chacko, Priya, and Kanishka Jayasuriya. “Trump, the authoritarian populist revolt and the future of the rules-based order in Asia.” Australian Journal of International Affairs (2017): 1-7.
Calamur, Krishnadev. “What Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration Does;and Doesn’t Do”. The Atlantic. The Atlantic. Jan 30, 2017, https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/01/trump-immigration-order-muslims/514844/
Faber, Daniel, et al. “Trump’s Electoral Triumph: Class, Race, Gender, and the Hegemony of the Polluter-Industrial Complex.” (2017): 1-15.
Hagan, Jacqueline, Karl Eschbach, and Nestor Rodriguez. “US deportation policy, family separation, and circular migration.” International Migration Review 42.1 (2008): 64-88.
Ortega, Francesc, and Giovanni Peri. “The effect of income and immigration policies on international migration.” Migration Studies 1.1 (2013): 47-74.
Silva, Mark. “Issue: The Trump Agenda the Trump Agenda.” (2017).