| So what's the progressive populist framework? To the extent that it exists, it has been put forth by the Progressive States Network and the Drum Major Institute.
Here's the bottom-line: immigration causes problems. We need policy solutions that address those problems. But we must be careful to not automatically blame immigrants for concerns related to immigration. Instead, we need solutions that are pragmatic and alter incentives in the right way to protect Americans -- while being smart about anticipating unforeseen consequences of crack-down policies.
So what are the problems with America's immigration system?
- Lack of border security, including the potential for terrorists to come into the U.S.
- The giant sucking sound -- Poorly built trade agreements send American jobs into sweatshops overseas. Poorly structured immigration policy sends jobs into sweatshops here at home. The impact to workers is the same: some lose their jobs and some end up in sweatshops.
- Large populations will involve some crime -- this isn't to say that I think undocumented immigrants are more likely to perpetrate non-immigration related crimes than non-immigrants, just that big groups of people contain both perpetrators and victims.
- Budgetary concerns -- social services cost money; are immigrants paying their share for their services or are they getting a free ride?
Some of this stuff becomes pretty obvious when you look at the data. Undocumented workers, for example, generally pay more in taxes for the benefits they receive than other workers, partly because they still typically pay taxes but have difficulties receiving services.
The crime issue is a bit different. While plenty on the right raise the specter of the undocumented immigrant criminal, the bigger concern is probably the undocumented crime victim. Harsh policies that treat local police as border patrol prevents undocumented victims from coming forward -- fearing deportation. Second-class status thus protects real criminals -- criminals who actually do threaten all of us.
As for border security, it is important to keep terrorists out, but focusing so much on non-threatening foreign workers seems like a bad way, at least to me, of actually catching terrorists.
As for jobs, I've been through this before, but here's the reality: mass identification and deportation of foreign workers is really, really difficult, and only provides incentives and means for sweatshop operators to drive their workers even further into the underground economy, where they compete even more with native workers and become more likely to be victimized.
What's the response? My friend Ezra Klein has suggested offering a free green card to any undocumented worker who reports labor abuses that can be proven -- a quick way to scare the hell out of any employer looking to exploit foreign workers. Punishing the exploitation removes the financial incentive -- it makes as much sense in this scenario to hire better-skilled native workers while also putting an end to economic exploitation.
Having made this argument elsewhere, I've been criticized for promoting a system that has as one of its results a loss of jobs for immigrants. At the end of the day, it is too bad that some people may find themselves out of work. But the question is one of comparing these different systems and asking which best accomplishes our goals.
If our goal is human dignity and economic strength and fairness, I think the progressive populist route is the one to go with.
But then again, I suppose it's not surprising that this is where I come down. |
