[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE IMPACT OF BIDEN'S OPEN BORDER
ON THE AMERICAN WORKFORCE
=======================================================================
HEARING
Before The
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH,
EMPLOYMENT, LABOR, AND PENSIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, SEPTEMBER 13, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-21
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
55-773 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina, Chairwoman
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania Virginia,
TIM WALBERG, Michigan Ranking Member
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,
JIM BANKS, Indiana Northern Mariana Islands
JAMES COMER, Kentucky FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
BURGESS OWENS, Utah MARK TAKANO, California
BOB GOOD, Virginia ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
LISA McCLAIN, Michigan MARK DeSAULNIER, California
MARY MILLER, Illinois DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
MICHELLE STEEL, California PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
RON ESTES, Kansas SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana LUCY McBATH, Georgia
KEVIN KILEY, California JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
AARON BEAN, Florida ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
ERIC BURLISON, Missouri HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico
JOHN JAMES, Michigan KATHY MANNING, North Carolina
LORI CHAVEZ-DeREMER, Oregon FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana
BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York
ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana
Cyrus Artz, Staff Director
Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EMPLOYMENT, LABOR, AND PENSIONS
BOB GOOD, Virginia, Chairman
JOE WILSON, South Carolina MARK DeSAULNIER, California
TIM WALBERG, Michigan Ranking Member
RICK ALLEN, Georgia JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
JIM BANKS, Indiana DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
JAMES COMER, Kentucky SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana
MICHELLE STEEL, California PRAMILA, JAYAPAL, Washington
AARON BEAN, Florida LUCY McBATH, Georgia
ERIC BURLISON, Missouri JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
LORI CHAVEZ-DeREMER, Oregon ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana KATHY MANNING, North Carolina
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on September 13, 2023............................... 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Good, Hon. Bob, Chairman, Subcommittee on Health, Employment,
Labor, and Pensions........................................ 1
Prepared statement of.................................... 3
DeSaulnier, Hon. Mark, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.................... 4
Prepared statement of.................................... 6
WITNESSES
Law, Robert, Director, Center for Homeland Security &
Immigration, America First Policy Institute................ 8
Prepared statement of.................................... 11
Camarota, Dr. Steven, Director of Research, Center for
Immigration Studies........................................ 17
Prepared statement of.................................... 19
Costa, Daniel, Director, Immigration Law and Policy Research,
Economic Policy Institute.................................. 31
Prepared statement of.................................... 34
Holtz-Eakin, Dr. Douglas, President, American Action Forum... 59
Prepared statement of.................................... 61
ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS
Ranking Member DeSaulnier:
Statement for the Record dated September 13, 2023 from
AFL-CIO................................................ 94
THE IMPACT OF BIDEN'S OPEN BORDER
ON THE AMERICAN WORKFORCE
----------
Wednesday, September 13, 2023
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and
Pensions,
Committee on Education and the Workforce,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call at 10:24 a.m., 2175
Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Bob Good [Chairman of the
Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Good, Wilson, Walberg, Grothman,
Allen, Banks, Bean, Burlison, Chavez-DeRemer, Houchin, Foxx,
DeSaulnier, Courtney, Norcross, Wild, Jayapal, Hayes, Manning,
and Scott.
Staff present: Cyrus Artz, Staff Director; Nick Barley,
Deputy Communications Director; Mindy Barry, General Counsel;
Michael Davis, Legislative Assistant; Isabel Foster, Press
Assistant; Daniel Fuenzalida, Staff Assistant; Sheila Havenner,
Director of Information Technology; Paxton Henderson, Intern;
Amy Raaf Jones, Director of Education and Human Services
Policy; Alex Knorr, Legislative Assistant; Georgie Littlefair,
Clerk; CJ Mahler, Professional Staff Member; Hannah Matesic,
Director of Member Services and Coalitions; Audra McGeorge,
Communications Director; Rebecca Powell, Staff Assistant; Kelly
Tyroler, Professional Staff Member; Heather Wadyka,
Professional Staff Member; Seth Waugh, Director of Workforce
Policy; Joe Wheeler, Professional Staff Member; Maura Williams,
Director of Operations; Jeanne Wilson, Retirement Counsel;
Brendan Fereday, Fellow; Savoy Adams, Minority Intern; Nekea
Brown, Minority Director of Operations; Ilana Brunner, Minority
General Counsel; Scott Estrada, Minority Professional Staff;
Stephanie Lalle, Minority Communications Director; Kristen
Lemus, Minority Intern; Raiyana Malone, Minority Press
Secretary; Kevin McDermott, Minority Director of Labor Policy;
Shyann McDonald, Minority Staff Assistant; Kota Mizutani,
Minority Deputy Communications Director; Veronique Pluviose,
Minority Staff Director; Jessica Schieder, Minority Economic
Policy Advisor; Dhrtvan Sherman, Minority Committee Research
Assistant; Clinton Spencer, IV, Minority Staff Assistant;
Banyon Vassar, Minority IT Administrator.
Chairman Good. The Subcommittee on Health, Employment,
Labor, and Pensions will come to order. I note that a quorum is
present, and without objection, the Chair is authorized to call
a recess at any time.
America's workforce and economy cannot flourish with the
unchecked, unfettered illegal immigration that is Biden's
border invasion. Through this hearing today I intend to give
the American workforce a voice by holding democrats accountable
for the disastrous open border policies.
There has never been a country more welcoming to immigrants
than America. Our legal immigration process has allowed
millions of immigrants to achieve the American dream for their
families. Approximately one million per year on average. Our
country has a unique American identity, a fact that it upheld
and reinforced with the robust merit-based citizenship process,
and a respect for the rule of law.
Under President Biden, American jobs are threatened.
Illegal aliens are competing against Americans for American
jobs. Illegal workers provide many advantages for some
employers since they cost zero additional dollars in taxes, and
often accept lower wages for more work.
American taxpayer dollars are also at stake. Americans pay
for each border crossing, whether it is through government
purchased iPhones, stays in four star New York City hotels, or
$450,000.00 monetary settlements, all of which are happening as
part of the democrat plan to incentivize more mass illegal
immigration.
These expenditures are in addition to the commonly accepted
costs that illegal aliens impose on American society, by
participation in our education and healthcare systems, and
overall illegal immigration is estimated to cost taxpayers
150.7 billion dollars per year.
Real wages for the working class have collapsed thanks to
the policies of the Biden administration. Under President Trump
blue collar real wages rose 5.6 percent. Under Biden blue
collar real wages have fallen 2.1 percent. Biden inflation is
largely responsible for the economic hardship middle class
Americans are dealing with.
Additionally, the decline of blue-collar wages is
significantly affected by 7 million illegal aliens pouring
across the border during this administration. Liberal democrats
used to recognize the depressing effect of illegal immigration
on American wages. Bill Clinton constructed portions of the
border wall in an attempt to curb illegal immigration during
his time in office.
The Obama Biden administration built over 100 miles of
border wall during its tenure. Where are those liberal ideas
now? Why has the other side completely abandoned all hope of
making our border secure? Why the democrat party has decided to
turn its back on American working class and taxpayers is the
political question of our time. I do not expect to answer it
with today's hearing, but I do hope to explain some of the dire
economic consequences of democrat policies for our rapidly
transforming country.
With that, I look forward to the hearing today, and I yield
to the Ranking member, Mr. DeSaulnier.
[The Statement of Chairman Good follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be
back here after spending time in our districts. While I hope we
can have a productive and respective discussion today, I would
be remiss if I did not note that this hearing will focus on
issues related to immigration and border security, both of
which are outside the subcommittee's jurisdiction.
As members of this subcommittee, our job is to uphold and
create legislation that benefits the American workforce. For
the vast majority of Americans, earning a paycheck is how
families are able to pay their bills. Since the 1970's however,
the highest income households in America have pulled ahead
further and further and even more dramatically after COVID than
average working families.
This is the problem of economic stagnation in America, is
the extreme concentration of greed and wealth in this country,
not immigration. The Congressional Budget Office shows that
between 1989 and 2019 the total wealth held by families and the
top 10 percent increased by 240 percent, while the other 90
percent barely increased at all.
Unfortunately, I am concerned that we are using our time
here today to talk in dangerous rhetoric that fuels racial and
prejudiced conspiracy theories, rather than focus on the
important, extremely important work for American families and
the workforce.
By contrast, the Biden administration and congressional
Democrats have made our priorities crystal clear. We have
priorities that prioritize that the needs of workers and their
families are delivered in meaningful solutions to grow our
economy from the bottom up and the middle out.
Last Congress, Democrats passed the Inflation Reduction
Act, which invested in our workforce and the economy while
lowering costs for working families. Moreover, because of the
Inflation Reduction Act, families are saving on energy bills
and prescription drug costs, thus giving them more purchasing
power.
Additionally, the American Rescue Plan provided a solution
to the multi-employer pension crisis, saving the pensions of
over 1 million workers and preventing the closure of thousands
of businesses. Today's hearing is also happening as we race
closer to the deadline to fund the Federal Government, an
obligation I know we all take seriously as Members of Congress,
or I hope we do.
Regrettably, once again we find ourselves in a precarious
situation with some in the majority threatening to hold our
economy hostage and risk a government shutdown, unless they
pass cruel and regressive immigration policies, severely
weakening critical Federal programs and protect workers.
I am unaware of anyone who believes in open borders other
than the marketing people by a small percentage of the majority
party, I hope. Research by the Joint Economic Committee
confirms that these dangerous tactics only lower consumer
confidence, reduce economic output, and interrupt essential
government operations, including Federal employee pay.
It is important to note that the last three government
shutdowns cost the government at least 338 million dollars in
additional processing costs and late fees. Also, Fitch Ratings
downgraded the U.S. credit rating for the exact type of
brinksmanship on the debt ceiling. Instead of wasting time on
political games, it is my hope that the congressional
Republicans and caucus and Democrats, we can join together as
we have historically in the past, in backing legislation that
builds on our unprecedented economic development, while also
ensuring American workers have access to fair pay, adequate
benefits, and workplace safety.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which will
repair and upgrade old infrastructure around the country, as
well as the CHIPS and Science Act, which will further boost our
economy and revive our manufacturing workforce, are examples of
what can happen when we move past the divisive rhetoric and
focus on what matters most to those we serve.
As we enter the next legislative session, let us put
politics aside and focus on improving lives of American workers
and their families. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
[The Statement of Ranking Member DeSaulnier follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Good. Thank you to our Ranking Member. Pursuant to
our Committee Rule 8-C, all members who wish to insert written
statements in the record may do so by submitting them to the
Committee Clerk electronically in Microsoft Word format by five
o'clock today, excuse me, by five o'clock, 14 days after the
date of this hearing, which is September 27, 2023.
Without objection, the hearing record will remain open 14
days to allow such statements, and other extraneous materials
referenced during the hearing to be submitted to the official
hearing record.
I will now turn to the introduction of our distinguished
witnesses. Our first witness is Mr. Robert Law, who is the
Director of the Center for Homeland Security and Immigration at
the America First Policy Institute in Washington, DC.
Our second witness is Dr. Steven Camarota, who is the
Director of Research and Center for Immigration Studies in
Washington, DC.
Our third witness is Mr. Daniel Costa, who is the Director
of Immigration Law and Policy Research at the Economic Policy
Institute in Washington, DC.
Our final witness is Dr. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who is the
President of the American Action Forum in Washington, DC, and
is here testifying on his own behalf. I thank all of our
witnesses for being here today. We look forward to your
testimony.
Pursuant to Committee rules, I would ask that you each
limit your oral presentation to a 5-minute summary of your
written statement. I would also like to remind the witnesses to
be aware of the responsibility to provide accurate information
to the Subcommittee. I will first recognize Mr. Law for your
statement.
STATEMENT OF MR. ROBERT LAW, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR HOMELAND
SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION, AMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE,
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Law. Thank you, Chairman Good and Ranking Member
DeSaulnier, for the opportunity to testify on the harmful
impact the Biden administration's open policy has on the
American workforce. Since taking office, the Biden
administration has systematically and purposefully dismantled
the securest border in our Nation's history.
Over the objections of career Department of Homeland
Security officials the Biden administration stopped building
the border wall, ended the revolutionary migrant protection
protocols, Will Remain in Mexico Policy, canceled the asylum
cooperative agreements with the northern triangle countries,
and nullified interior enforcement.
As a result of this failed border strategy more than 5
million illegal aliens have been allowed in American
communities in just 30 months. Migrant children are being
trafficked at record levels, and fentanyl, which is smuggled
across the southern border, is now the leading killer of young
Americans aged 18 to 45.
By abandoning the previous administration's America First
policies, the Biden administration has ceded operational
control of the southern border to the Mexican drug cartels.
DHS's nationwide catch and release scheme encourages millions
of illegal aliens to be trafficked and smuggled to the southern
border and released into the U.S.
This is a crisis by design. It has made every State a
border State, and it is unsustainable. Do not just take my word
for it. Sanctuary city Mayor Eric Adams said illegal aliens
will, ``Destroy New York City.''
Another sanctuary city, Mayor Brandon Johnson, echoed that
alarm, ``Let me State this clearly. The city of Chicago cannot
go on welcoming new arrivals safely and capably without
significant support and immigration policy changes.''
Outrageously, instead of introducing deterrence policies,
DHS is conducting an unprecedented outreach campaign
encouraging illegal aliens to apply for work permits to assuage
fellow democrats who have started to criticize the
administration's broken administration policies.
As a result of this labor market distortion, more and more
Americans have fewer and fewer jobs available. Many might be
surprised to learn that illegal aliens are able to get work
permits despite being in the country unlawfully. Briefly, here
are the primary ways the Biden administration is getting
illegal aliens into the workforce to the detriment of American
workers.
One, fraudulent asylum claims to obtain a work permit.
Nearly every illegal alien apprehended at the southern border
claims asylum to prevent being quickly deported. No more than
10 to 15 percent of them actually qualify for asylum, a fact
that this administration is well aware of.
Because of the surge of claims, their immigration court
dates are years away. In the meantime, an illegal alien can
obtain a work permit known as an employment authorization
document once an asylum claim has been pending for just 180
days, regardless of how baseless the claim.
Two, DHS's unlawful categorical parole triggers immediate
work permit eligibility. The Biden administration is now hiding
the optics of the border crisis from the American people
through the DHS Secretary's unlawful use of the parole
authority. Section 212 D-5 of the Immigration Nationality Act
is clear that parole is a narrow authority, only appropriate on
a case-by-case basis for an urgent humanitarian reason, or
significant public benefit.
The Cuban, Haitian, Nicaragua, and Venezuelan parole
program is not a safe, lawful pathway as you may have heard,
but it is a blatant disregard of the law to allow the mass
release of 360,000 illegal aliens a year into American
communities. The same is true for the parole scheme DHS is
running via the CBP-1 Act.
According to reports, the Biden administration has already
paroled at least 541,000 illegal aliens into the U.S. and
intends to continue doing so by tens of thousands every single
month. What many do not realize is that the parole scheme is
even more lucrative to illegal aliens at the expense of
American workers.
Parolees are immediately eligible to apply for a work
permit. Additionally, through a combination of loopholes and
questionable statutory definitions, the illegal aliens with
parole become eligible for unemployment payments and other
taxpayer funded benefits that are not available to so-called
asylum seekers.
In conclusion, the legal immigration harms American
workers. The No. 1 priority for U.S. immigration policy should
be the American people. Instead, the Biden administration has
flipped this logic on its head, prioritized illegal aliens and
sidelines American workers.
Research shows that the current high levels of illegal
immigration harm U.S. workers without a college degree,
minorities, the young, disabled, and other marginalized
workers. Through its open border policies, the Biden
administration is opting to use unlawful means to import cheap,
illegal, alien labor.
This is the epitome of an America last policy. Thank you,
and I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Law follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Law. I would like to next
recognize Dr. Camarota for your statement.
STATEMENT OF DR. STEVEN CAMAROTA, DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH, CENTER
FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Camarota. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Committee. My name is Steven Camarota, and I am Director of
Research at the Center for Immigration Studies, and I want to
thank you for inviting me to testify on the very important
issue of illegal immigration's impact on the U.S. workforce.
Now, due in part to the enormous influx at the southern
border, we estimate that the illegal immigrant population
living in the United States has grown to 12.6 million by May of
this year, an increase of 2.4 million just since January 2021,
so less than two and a half years.
There are now likely 9 million illegal immigrants in the
U.S. workforce. Now traditionally, one of the most important
reasons to limit immigration, and then enforce those limits,
had always been to protect American workers. In terms of the
impact on the labor force, the illegal immigration primarily
adds lower skilled labor to the U.S.
Seven out of 10 illegal immigrants are thought to have no
education beyond high school, for example. As a result, they
mainly compete with less educated U.S. born and legal
immigrants in jobs such as construction, building, cleaning and
maintenance, groundskeeping, retail sales and food service and
food processing.
There is good evidence that immigration does reduce the
wages and employment of some U.S. born workers, though it is
difficult to distinguish the impact of illegal immigration from
immigration overall.
A 2007 comprehensive report by the National Academy of
Sciences cited over a dozen studies showing a negative impact
on American workers from immigration, mainly again on the less
educated. Now given their education level, and concentration
across occupations, it is important to know most Americans are
not in competition with illegal immigrants for jobs, but those
that are tend to be the poorest and least educated.
We estimate that in the 2,000 occupations where illegal
immigrants are most concentrated there are about 5.7 million
U.S. born workers still employed, and they are mostly people
with modest levels of education.
Now by increasing the supply of workers, and lowering
wages, immigration can increase profits for employers, or lower
prices for consumers. There is no free lunch here. These
benefits require some Americans, typically the poorest at the
bottom end of the labor force to lose out.
There has been a well-documented, long-term stagnation, or
even in some cases outright decline in wages for the less
educated, which by itself is problematic. Moreover, low-wage is
one of the reasons for the extremely troubling, decades long
deterioration in labor force participation, which measures the
share of working age people who are either working, or at least
looking for work.
There are now 44 million working age U.S. born Americans
not in the labor force, about 10 million more than in 2000.
These individuals do not show up as unemployed because they are
not actively looking for work. You have to look for work in the
last 4 weeks. If the participation rate overall of the U.S.
born would just return to say the level of 2000, it would add 6
million workers to the U.S. workforce.
Even among prime age, U.S. born men 25 to 54, the group
most likely to work, the share in the labor force if they do
not have say any education beyond high school, has declined
from 96 percent in 1960, to 82 percent now. A large body of
research shows the decline has enormous negative consequences
for society, including contributing to crime, drug overdose,
social isolation, welfare dependency, and suicide.
Illegal immigration is not the only reason for this decline
in work. However, using immigration to keep down wages makes
work less attractive. Further, filling jobs with immigrants,
many of whom are illegal, has allowed policymakers to ignore
the huge decline in labor force participation, even though it
is no secret. There are books written on it.
The Obama White House wrote about it. Either we undertake
the difficult--and it will be difficult, policy and social
reforms necessary to address the disastrous decline in labor
force participation, or we continue to allow in ever more
immigrants, and then somehow come up with various band-aids to
deal with all the social pathologies that come from having so
many working age people not working. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Camarota follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Good. Thank you, Dr. Camarota. Now we will
recognize Mr. Costa for your testimony.
STATEMENT OF MR. DANIEL COSTA, DIRECTOR, IMMIGRATION LAW AND
POLICY RESEARCH, ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Costa. Good morning, and thank you for allowing me to
testify. As the son of immigrants myself, I believe that the
United States has benefited greatly from immigration, both
economically and culturally. It is not just me who believes
that. There is a broad consensus among economists that
immigration has an overall positive impact on the long-run
economic growth of the United States.
While it is always important to assess how current
realities and policies impact workers' labor standards, it must
be noted at the outset of this hearing that there is little to
no evidence that recent arrivals to the U.S. border are having
a detrimental impact on U.S. workers, wages, or employment.
I wish to remind the members of the Subcommittee that the
vast majority of people arriving are turning themselves in to
border officials and requesting that they be assessed for
eligibility for the available forms of humanitarian relief that
are established in U.S. law, such as asylum.
Most are following the law and going through a legal
process, contrary to much of the rhetoric about lawlessness at
the border. If one listens to some of the current rhetoric that
is out there, including in this hearing, one would think that
the American economy was in the midst of a recession. In fact,
the major economic indicators reveal that the U.S. economy is
doing well, growing, and that workers are seeing wage gains.
According to the Bureau of Labor statistics, the 3.8
percent unemployment rate for August 2023 means that the
Nation's unemployment rate has been below 4 percent since
January 2022. That is the longest stretch of sub 4 percent
unemployment since the 1960's. Job openings hit record highs in
2022 and remain substantially above pre-pandemic records.
The labor force participation rate of prime age workers,
meaning those between the ages of 25 and 54, hit its highest
level in decades this summer. Strong nominal wage growth has
started delivering reliable gains in inflation-adjusted wages
for most workers in recent months as the inflationary shock of
2022 subsides.
In short, nothing in the labor market data in recent years
would indicate that the U.S. has too many workers relative to
jobs. This is, in fact, the most favorable balance between
labor demand and supply we have seen in decades. These economic
gains were largely achieved through policy choices that
prioritized rapid recovery and investments to make us more
resilient in the future.
Other indicators showed that the strong economy has also
reached traditionally disadvantaged groups. Wage growth in 2022
was by far the fastest among the lowest wage workers. The prime
age labor force participation rate and employment to population
ratio of Black workers has hit record highs in the past year,
and the unemployment rate of Black workers has hit record lows.
That is not to say that the economy is perfect. There is
still more we can do to lock in and improve on recent gains. We
should all be honest about the current State of the economy.
Immigrant workers are a vital part of the U.S. economy and are
responsible for 17 percent of total GDP in the United States
and have contributed to recent gains.
They work in jobs across the economic spectrum in a wide
range of occupations. When it comes to the U.S. immigration
system, I do not mean to suggest that the system is perfect, or
even working optimally. In fact, in some keyways our
immigration system is not working for workers, but it is
instead benefiting low-road employers who exploit the
immigration status of immigrants.
Thus, Congress should pass laws that reform the immigration
system in ways that lift standards, so that all workers can
have equal, enforceable rights regardless of immigration
status. Perhaps, most importantly for this hearing, I wish to
State in no uncertain terms that the problems facing the
America workforce are not what happens at the border, but what
happens at the workplace.
Threats to labor standards come from rampant law breaking
by employers who operate with near impunity, and this
Subcommittee has the authority and jurisdiction to move
legislation that could make significant, positive impacts in
the lives of working people, regardless of race, gender, or
immigration status, by lifting standards and holding law
breaking employers accountable.
Some of the key pieces of legislation that could achieve
this include the Raise the Wage Act, the Protect the Right to
Organize Act, the Fairness for Farm Workers Act, the Asuncion
Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury and Fatality Prevention Act, and
also the Combatting Child Labor Act.
In addition, as I discussed in detail in my written
testimony, Congress must appropriate more funding to labor
standards enforcement agencies like the Wage and Hour division.
Agencies like WHD, OSHA, and the NLRB need more investigators,
agents, and lawyers, which requires a sharp increase in
funding. Not providing them more funding, or by implementing a
de facto cut through a government shutdown, will have a
negative impact on the wages and working conditions of all
workers.
When Congress spends 25 billion dollars per year to enforce
immigration laws, but only 2 billion on the agencies that
protect wages and working conditions, it reveals what its true
priorities are.
Finally, I wish to note that the organizations pushing for
lower immigration levels and that scapegoat and demonize
immigrants, often cite protecting American workers as the
reason for their advocacy, falsely claiming that more worksite
raids and border enforcements will improve labor standards. For
some reason, I never hear those same groups mention solutions
such as these, whether to raise the minimum wage, or protect
labor rights, or to better fund the Labor Department, which
would clearly and obviously raise wages and improve workplace
standards.
That simple fact seriously calls into question the
credibility of anti-immigrant groups when it comes to the topic
of American workers and labor standards. Members of Congress
should thus be skeptical of their claims, including during this
hearing. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Costa follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Costa. For our final witness
we will recognize Dr. Holtz-Eakin please for your testimony.
STATEMENT OF DR. DOUGLAS HOLTZ-EAKIN, PRESIDENT, ACTION FORUM,
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Well thank you, Chairman Good, Ranking
Member DeSaulnier, members of the Committee for the privilege
of being here today. Let me make a few brief points, and I look
forward to answering your questions.
The first point is that work by illegal aliens is a
significant part of the labor force in the United States. You
can measure this in one of two ways. You can look at estimates
of the number here illegally, as a fraction of total employment
in the United States, and you get something like 4 to 7 percent
of the work is being done by illegal aliens, or you can look at
recent flows in 2022, and recent job creation in the same year,
and you get a much larger number, some as large as 13 percent
of the employment is being done by illegal immigrants.
This is a significant phenomenon in the American labor
market. The second point is that we do not know as a matter of
economic logic, what the impact will be on work by the native
born. The obvious fact is that illegal immigrants get paid
less, about 11 percent less on average, and this leads to an
incentive to substitute illegal immigrants for domestic native-
born workers.
That impact is what most people focus on. However, those
employers willing to do that also get some cost savings in the
process, and may be able to employ more people overall,
including some domestic workers. You do not know without
actually looking at the data of that impact on native born
workers.
We do know, and this is the third point, that the presence
of those here illegally working has negative impacts on the
overall performance of the labor market. First of all, there is
a lot of skill mismatch when illegal aliens are employed. You
end up with the sort of stereotypical Ph.D. driving a taxi.
He would be much more productive in another part of the
economy if they were here legally, and that skill mismatch
lowers the overall productivity of the economy. It is a loss to
every American. Similarly, those who are here illegally tend to
have higher turnover. They leave jobs more quickly, do not
stay.
Employers faced with a labor force that is more volatile
are going to be less likely to hire people. That is a cost.
They have to train them, they have to go through the search
process, and so overall desired employee workers goes down,
that hurts everybody, and the lower training provided by firms
leaves fewer skills in the labor market as whole. That hurts
everybody as well, or we get lower wages and lower
productivity.
There are some costs to having a large fraction of the work
being provided by illegal aliens. The last point is the
interaction with the opioid epidemic, fentanyl in particular.
There is the obvious impact, and the fact that the border
crossings are illegal, and that is a big source of the
fentanyl, but there is an indirect impact as well. Work we have
done at the American Action Forum indicates that the opioid
epidemic could be responsible for the loss of up to 1.3 million
workers from the labor force.
That does two things. Obviously, it hurts the country's
ability to be successful and produce. It also raises the
incentive to hire people who are here illegally to replace
workers who are here in the force. This is an important issue.
I am glad that the Subcommittee is holding a hearing on it, and
I am pleased to answer your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Holtz-Eakin follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Good. Thank you, Dr. Holtz-Eakin. Under Committee
Rule 9, we will now question witnesses under the 5-minute rule.
I will wait to ask my questions, and therefore recognize Mr.
Wilson from South Carolina for 5 minutes.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Biden's open border
policies begets the mass murder of 9/11. It has allowed
hundreds of identified terrorists to cross every State in
America. These terrorists are highly skilled, well paid,
trained, mass murderers, and they're threatening every American
family.
Additionally, this hearing addresses destroying American
jobs. Dr. Camarota, you estimate that there are 9 million
illegal aliens currently in the U.S. workforce. Sadly, this
number continues to rise as the crisis at the border continues
to worsen due to the Biden administration's suicidal open
border policies.
Can you explain how the increase in the number of illegal
aliens would impact American workers?
Mr. Camarota. Yes. I mean basically what we are doing is
increasing the supply of labor at the bottom end labor market.
Now I agree with some of my panelists, there are lots of
problems at the bottom end of the labor market, and I think we
should look at everything from the deindustrialization of the
United States to our minimum wage laws, but adding all those
workers to the bottom end of the labor market has consequences,
and the two key is to reduce wages, and let us ignore the
massive decline in labor force participation.
One point, labor force participation for immigrants has not
declined in the same way, so a lot of people conflate it with
the overall because they put the immigrants in the data. When
you take out the native born and look at men, you see that the
current labor force participation rate looks terrible.
Mr. Wilson. Indeed, so often when I go to fast food
restaurants, or grocery stores or any store, I compliment the
workers there on the entry level jobs, because 1 day they could
be the leaders of our country. The entry level jobs are being
denied. Dr. Holtz-Eakin, there has been a shocking decline,
which is inconceivable to me, of the labor force participation
rate among Americans dropping from 77 percent to 70 percent in
just 20 years.
Meaningful lives are being destroyed. Are there any
strategies that we can consider to encourage Americans to re-
enter the workforce?
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. There are really two major issues. One is
the sort of whole of social welfare programs and others where
eligibility is not contingent on work. We can look at those.
Then there is improving the skills of workers, and their wages,
and to track them back into the labor force.
This decline has been concentrated in men. I think focusing
on the male labor force participation would be a good place to
start.
Mr. Wilson. Again, as said, how much this could benefit
their families because meaningful lives of persons who their
lives consist of being on a sofa with a remote control. How
horrific, and so thank you for your efforts. Mr. Law, since
taking office, President Biden has undermined America's border
security integrity of our immigration system at every turn.
I have previously practiced immigration law, and I have
seen a good system to welcome new citizens. Biden has
dismantled the successful America First border security
policies that he inherited from President Donald Trump, and as
a result he is overseeing the worst border crisis in American
history. Under President Biden, over five million illegal
aliens have come through our southern border.
How has the rollback of the successful Trump administration
enforcement policies fueled by this crisis--what is your
assessment of strict enforcement against illegal aliens, and I
need to add too, the southern border and the northern border. I
am really grateful that Congresswoman Elise Stefanik has
identified the northern border today, as an entry point into
our country.
Mr. Law. Well, thank you. You are absolutely right. There
is not a single deterrent policy of the Biden administration
when it comes to illegal immigration. They are in fact
encouraging it, which has made the cartels and the traffickers
billions of dollars. Then you are right, it is not just the
southern border anymore, the northern border is an exposed
access point, and as I mentioned through parole, they are now
flying in inadmissible aliens into, you know, international
airports, so they are not showing up at the southern border any
longer, and that dataset, but they are still being allowed into
the country despite not qualifying for a visa.
Mr. Wilson. Indeed, the issue of human trafficking is just
inconceivable to allow the cartels to have this ability. The
fentanyl coming into our country, nearly 100,000 people killed
annually, and complicit with the Chinese Communist Party
providing the drugs into our country.
The administration is overlooking all of this and putting
every American family at risk of a terrorist attack. They are
here. They are coming. They are just ignoring it. I yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. Now we will recognize
Mr. Courtney for your questions.
Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the witnesses
for being here today. Again, all of us just came back from a
break. Where we were all home and had a chance to sort of see
firsthand what is going on in terms of the labor market, and in
all of our corners of the country.
In eastern Connecticut, where again because of the Biden
budgets for Navy ship building, we had last Friday, we reached
the 4,000 mark for the first 8 months of 2023, in terms of new
hires at General Dynamics Electric Boat Shipyard. Their goal is
to be at 6,000 before the end of the calendar year, and they
are on track because of some really smart investments in terms
of metal trades job training through the Department of Labor
Workforce Investment Act, and also supplemented by Navy funds
in terms of giving people the right skills to take advantage of
these careers.
These are not temporary jobs by any stretch. The ripple
effect, in terms of what that means, in terms of the region,
and also the supply chain, which basically reaches out to all
50 states, is part of what I think is the good news story in
terms of the U.S. labor market.
187,000 jobs, new hires last month, defying all the experts
who have said that we are going into a recession. There is not
a, more workers than jobs. I was at a job fair also a couple
days ago, and again it was not just GD that was looking for new
employees, it was every sector, hospitality, healthcare, you
know, also other private sector firms that were there.
They still had actually pretty good foot traffic in terms
of people coming through. Mr. Costa, when we talk about what
the premise of today's hearing is, is that jobs are being
stolen from American workers, I mean the data just really does
not support that, that is sort of the State of play, and it is
not just my district where that is the case.
Mr. Costa. That is right. There is very little evidence to
show that, and you have many businesses writing letters, asking
for the people who are arriving to be able to have work
permits. You even have labor unions saying the same thing.
Labor unions, who represent American workers, are not decrying,
you know, more people arriving. They want them to have rights
and be able to work.
Mr. Courtney. We are also 2 weeks away from a government
shutdown. I have been through a couple of these. I think Mr.
Holtz-Eakin was around for a couple of those rodeos as well.
That external shock, which is what it really amounts to in
terms of the U.S. economy, even with essential workers still
going to work every day, you know, to me, if we really want to
do something important for American workers, we should do our
job.
I mean the good news is Senate Republicans, Senate
Democrats, and House Democrats are ready to move in terms of
avoiding a completely self-inflicted wound to the U.S. economy
if we do not give our appropriations bills the probably, the
three to 4 weeks they need to get negotiated and settled.
Again, Mr. Costa, could you comment in terms of what a
shutdown would mean to the U.S. labor market?
Mr. Costa. Well, for workers it would mean quite a lot.
Having a funding cut, or a de facto cut through a government
shutdown would mean less funding for the Federal agencies that
protect workers, like the Wage and Hour Division, which are
already vastly underfunded at 2006 levels after adjusting for
inflation.
How do you protect workers if you don't have staff and
funding for the agencies that make sure that they are paid
fairly for every hour that they work.
Mr. Courtney. Not for nothing, I mean border security would
be impacted with a government shutdown. I mean the Border
Patrol, ICE, again a lot of them would be designated as
essential workers. We know that but they would be forced to
come to work without a paycheck.
Mr. Costa. There is already a lack of investment in the
part of the immigration system to process asylum seekers and
benefits, and so the issue is that people are not--there is not
enough staff and time to process people fairly and humanely,
and so with budget cuts it is just going to be a mess.
Mr. Courtney. You are absolutely right. The kink in the
garden hose in terms of the immigration system actually is the
asylum process, which we have underfunded in terms of getting
these cases disposed of. The majority of which people fail to
actually succeed in their asylum applications, again a shutdown
is just going to aggravate that problem at the border, as well.
In page 12 of your testimony, you talked about actually
where there is a real problem for American workers, which is
the lax enforcement of the HB-1
[H1-B] program where again, sometimes high-tech jobs are
being taken away by companies who basically are using overseas
workers to come in and displace. I know I am running out of my
time here now, but hopefully we will have a chance to discuss
that.
If we want to do something useful on this Committee, we
should focus on that abuse, which really hurts American
workers. With that, I yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Courtney. I would now like to
recognize Mr. Walberg from Michigan for his questioning.
Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the
panel for being here. Since President Biden took office, more
than 300,000 migrant children have come alone to the United
States--alone to the United States. Alone to the United States.
On top of this, according to New York Times, the Biden
administration has lost contact with nearly 100,000 of these
unaccompanied minors.
A shocking number of these children are exploited by their
sponsors, who are often criminals, traffickers, and members of
transnational criminal organizations. They are forced to work
in order to pay debts to their sponsors. In May, Chairman Foxx,
myself, and Congresswoman Chavez-DeRemer sent a letter to the
DOL requesting documents related to DOL's coordination with
other Federal agencies regarding this serious matter.
To date, the Department of Labor has not provided any of
the internal documents requested in this letter. There are
answers. There is data. Nothing has been sent back to us. Mr.
Law, do you believe that President Biden's open border policies
created this humanitarian crisis?
Mr. Law. Well, there is no question. The change in
administration, the border situation, it is night and day. You
had the most secure border in our Nation's history. There are a
number of policies that I outlined in my oral and written
testimony, and the Biden administration on day one, over the
objection of career Border Patrol officials, tore it all down,
and encouraged a mass scale immigration asylum fraud.
They know that these people do not quality. They are
largely economic migrants, and while you may sympathize for
their circumstances, you are encouraging them to be connected
with traffickers to take on debts that they cannot afford, to
be allowed into the United States for a benefit that they do
not qualify for.
Then you put them in an uncertain situation where they are
supposed to be ordered removed, but then this administration
has essentially nullified and defunded ICE through their
policies as well.
Mr. Walberg. Our border agents are not allowed to do their
job. Kids--kids, are being hurt as a result of this. The Biden
administration has touted its creation of the interagency task
force to combat child labor exploitation. However, I am
concerned that this task force amounts to just window dressing.
It is my understanding that as of June 14th, there is only
been one meeting, and not a single full-time DOL staff person
dedicated to the task force. This is deeply troubling because I
am concerned that the Biden administration is failing this
vulnerable population, kids, and putting them in severe danger.
I have introduced the Enhancing Detection of Human
Trafficking Act, a bipartisan bill with my colleague,
Representative Sablan, that requires the Department of Labor to
ensure its employees are regularly educated on how to detect
and respond to the instances of human trafficking, and are even
interested in doing it.
This bill has passed the House previously with bipartisan
support, and it is my hope that we can do it again. Mr. Law, as
far as you know, is the Biden administration doing anything to
address the exploitation of these migrant children?
Mr. Law. I am not aware of anything productive. I would say
they are actually contributing to the problem. For example,
they have stopped any sort of DNA testing at the border, when
you have a claimed familial relationship of parent and child.
Once the unaccompanied alien children are transferred to Health
and Human Services, they are cutting them loose to sponsors who
are unvetted.
They removed the vetting requirements for people to work in
those facilities. There is a significant likelihood that our
Federal Government has essentially handed over these vulnerable
migrants to their trafficking networks to be subjected to
further abuse. The New York Times, I think, has several
articles that have exposed the horrific conditions that are the
result of open border policies, and not the compassion that was
claimed by this administration when they took office.
Mr. Walberg. To think that our government has been part of
the trafficking process. That is tragic, and that is something
that has to end. Thank you for answering the questions, and I
yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Wilson, or Mr. Walberg. Now
we will go to Ms. Hayes from Connecticut for her questions for
5 minutes.
Mrs. Hayes. Good morning. Thank you to everyone who is here
today and thank you to our witnesses. It is very difficult for
me to formulate questions for this hearing because it is all
over the place. It is outside of the jurisdiction of this
Committee, and much of what we are talking about today is
political theater that we cannot move on in this Committee.
With a looming government shutdown and everything that is
at stake, I am quite surprised that we are having this
conversation today, but yet we are here. I would like to use my
time just to talk about some of the things that have been
brought up in this hearing because I do agree that we have a
vulnerable population of children that we are failing in this
country.
A report came out yesterday that said child poverty rates
doubled in the last year when the child tax credit was not
extended. We have reports that talk about children who do not--
the number of preschool and childcare slots that will be cut in
this country, and we have the ability to fix those things with
the upcoming budget.
We do need to reform our immigration system, but I would
like to just speak to some of the things that have been said
today. About terrorists, and the connection to open borders and
September 11th. We are literally a week out from the
anniversary of 9/11, and I will just say that while all of the
hijackers who committed the 9/11 terrorist attack were
foreigners, all of them entered the country legally.
It is not the same as what we are talking about today, so
it is disingenuous to try to link our southern border and the
people who are seeking asylum through the southern border to
terrorist attacks on 9/11 and future attacks on this country.
We should pass the Raise the Wage Act, the PRO Act, universal
childcare if we want to address labor issues in this country.
Those are some real and substantive steps to do those
things. In my State, with the budget that is proposed going
from 2024 spending levels to 2022, we would eliminate 3,800
preschool and childcare slots, cut 44 million in funding for
schools serving low-income children, and reduce support for
80,000 children with disabilities.
I will ask a question to Mr. Costa. At the border, a 22
percent reduction in funds cut--in funding, cuts necessary
abilities to manage borders safely and securely, putting the
Department of Homeland Security at risk. The Wage and Hour
Division at the Department of Labor will see an across-the-
board reduction in funding levels that would result in 156
million less in back wages for 135,000 workers.
In your testimony, you mentioned the Wage and Hour Division
is already understaffed and underfunded, leading to backlogs
and delays, enabling exploitation in the workplace. Do you
believe that the proposed budget cuts that we are seeing today
would benefit U.S. and foreign workers? What do you think
Congress should be investing in to make sure that these things
are happening?
Mr. Costa. Without a doubt, I think that cuts to the Wage
and Hour Division will hurt all workers regardless of race,
gender, immigration status. I think much bigger investments are
needed.
Mrs. Hayes. We also saw that the role that H2-A and H2-B
programs that serve tens of thousands of foreign workers each
year. With fewer resources for enforcement, would that reduce
the employers' initiatives to comply with basic labor and
immigration laws that we're seeing?
Mr. Costa. That is correct. In addition to protecting our
workforce of 165 million people, the Wage and Hour Division is
in charge of the H1-B program, which has 600,000 workers, and
H2-A and H2-B which is close to 500,000 workers, it is a
herculean task, and without the ability to enforce. Those
workers on those visas, it is very hard for them to complain
because of their visa status. They are afraid of retaliation
and deportation, so employers will be able to get away
essentially with impunity to break the law.
Mrs. Hayes. Finally, I would just like to say thank you so
much for that answer, but I would just like to say we hear over
and over in this Committee, and in hearings related to this
topic, how asylum seekers and immigrants who present themselves
at the border immediately take advantage of welfare and
benefits, and social programs.
We all just know that that is not true. They are not
eligible for those benefits. After a person is granted asylum,
there are certain programs that they can apply for and receive
benefits, but it is not true that to use your words, an
illegal--I am not even going to say it. I am not even going to
say those words, but a person who presents themselves at the
border immediately begins to take advantage of benefits in the
United States. It is just a lie. With that, I yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mrs. Hayes. I would like to now
recognize Mr. Allen from Georgia for 5 minutes.
Mr. Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the
panel for being here. Obviously, we you know, whether we care
to admit it, we have a serious problem at our southern border,
and we have got a serious problem in this country as far as
workforce is concerned.
All I heard in my district was workforce. Why this
administration and Department of Labor are not addressing this,
I do not know. Let us talk about the border. First, you know,
you need to understand that these people who are seeking asylum
are seeking it through the cartels. The cartels are requiring
these people to be indentured servants, meaning that if they
come to this country and they find work, they are not paying
taxes, they are sending the money right back to the very
cartels and enriching them.
It is nothing more than human trafficking. When you enrich
the cartels then they are in every business out there,
agriculture, illicit drugs, how in the world this
administration can explain the fentanyl coming into this
country, and how they cannot stop this? I mean it has killed
100,000 people. How do you get away with that?
Mr. Law, again I do not quite understand the divide here. I
mean, I would hope all Americans would come together on this
issue because it is the biggest national security threat we
face today. If you do not believe that I do not know where you
are coming from.
You just talked to the intel people. The bottom line is,
you know, in comparison to what the policies that were put in
place by the Trump administration, and the securing of the
border. I mean is that not a national security issue?
Mr. Law. Well, thank you. Securing the border absolutely is
a national security issue, and I point specifically to the
known got away population, the people that do not surrender
themselves, and have been allowed to basically come across the
border, largely undetected.
There is a serious concern that those are your national
security threats, your public safety concerns. If I could just
briefly correct the mischaracterization of my prior testimony,
I did not say that all asylum seekers get on welfare. What I
said is that those who are being unlawfully paroled into this
country are considered to be qualified aliens after 1 year,
which makes them eligible for welfare. It is a distinction that
was mischaracterized.
Mr. Allen. Exactly. As far as the, you know, as far as
their work permit process, Mr. Camarota, can you explain how
that works? It is like how do they become--how do they get a
visa to work if they are here on asylum? Yes?
Mr. Camarota. Well, the way the administration, as I
understand it, is doing this is that after a period of time if
you have a pending asylum application, they are issuing the
work authorization, and the same with a number of parolees. Not
everyone is getting work authorization, but we know that a very
large fraction of people without work authorization can work in
the United States anyway, because this system, we do not
enforce our laws really against hiring illegal immigrants.
Mr. Allen. Yes.
Mr. Camarota. Even if they do not have work authorization,
they can still often work, and that is why of the 9 million who
are working in the United States who are here illegally,
millions of them do have work authorization. That is one of the
great contradictions. You are not allowed to be here. You are
not supposed to be here, but we let you work here, but millions
do not, so it is like roughly 50/50.
Mr. Allen. Right. The money they make is going to the
cartels and going back home. What we have is 45 million people
on some type of safety net program in this country and that
number varies obviously.
We know that there are a large percentage of those people
who are work capable. They are not getting the jobs, which
would obviously reduce mandatory spending because you know, the
mandatory spending are the safety net programs. We have people
coming in, getting work visas, taking the jobs away from the
very people who we are trying to get out of generational
welfare.
Who would allow a system like that to--Mr. Law, why would
we allow that, an administration to do that?
Mr. Law. I mean it is a baffling question when you think
that the administration's No. 1 goal should be the benefit of
the American worker, and the American people.
Mr. Allen. Exactly, thank you and I yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Allen. Now I would like to
recognize Ms. Jayapal from Washington for 5 minutes.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wd like to start
with the facts. I am extremely disappointed in the title and
the content of this hearing. This question of the net effect of
immigration on our economy has been studied over decades, and
the evidence is robust that immigration benefits American
workers and the economy, but that is not what you are hearing
from my colleagues across the aisle because what they want is
not for you to know the facts, but rather to drive up fear of
immigrants, to once again use that fear of immigrants as a
political football to score cheap political points.
What we know from the last administration is that when
policy is driven by xenophobia and fear, we all lose. As
President, Donald Trump cutoff most legal immigration, and
increased travel restrictions on immigrants during the
pandemic. Consequently, the U.S. economy saw lasting harms from
those missing immigrant workers.
Mr. Costa, can you explain how this lack of immigrant
workers has contributed to worker shortages and harm to the
economy?
Mr. Costa. Yes, except for temporary work visa programs,
President Trump cut many of the immigration pathways,
especially those that will lead to a green card where people
would have equal rights. Then none other than Jerome Powell,
the Chair of the Federal Reserve Board, said himself that the
main reasons for fewer workers was No. 1, immigration, and the
COVID pandemic, with many people dying and being sick with long
COVID.
The cuts to immigration have really led to the situation
that you are describing.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you. Can you dive into the specifics of
how immigrants create jobs, and actually create new
opportunities for workers?
Mr. Costa. Yes. There is a number of studies that show that
immigrants are creating jobs at higher rates than native born
workers, and then of course immigrants, you know, spend money,
and invest in the economy, buy homes, and that creates more
demand, which creates more jobs.
Ms. Jayapal. In fact, it is not just your institution that
believes this Mr. Costa, the findings that immigrants benefit
our economy comes from think tanks across the ideological
spectrum, including the Cato Institute. Two months ago, Mr.
David Beer of the Cato Institute said this, ``legal immigration
is so restrictive that the system punishes Americans who want
to associate, contract, and trade with people around the world.
Americans lose out on the social and economic capital that
immigrants bring. Our system deprives U.S. consumers of the
goods and services that immigrants would provide, and denies
our towns and cities, entrepreneurs, and small business owners.
This system has caused chaos at the border, harming Americans
and immigrants alike.''
The common conclusion is that the restrictive legal
immigration system that is what hurts the American people and
our economy, not immigrants themselves. I think what this
Committee should really be focusing on is the corporate greed
that is sucking dry our workers through stolen wages. A report
from the Economic Policy Institute showed that between 2017 and
2020, over 3 billion dollars in stolen wages was recovered for
workers by the U.S. Department of Labor, State agencies, and
class action litigation, and that wage theft--wage theft, costs
American workers close to 50 billion dollars a year.
Mr. Costa, how are corporations allowed to engage in this
level of wage theft, and what impact does that level of wage
theft have on our workers and our economy?
Mr. Costa. Those numbers you cite are likely just the tip
of the iceberg, and you know, we do not see CEOs being taken to
jail for stealing billions in wages unfortunately. The reason
it happens is because we have 800 Wage and Hour Division
investigators to police a labor market of 165 million people,
and their funding for Wage and Hour is at 2006 levels adjusted
for inflation.
They need a massive influx of money, maybe tripling the
number of investigators. It is really at a historic low. You
cannot protect workers. You cannot protect wages and working
conditions if you do not have, you know, people on the job
making sure that employers are following the law.
Ms. Jayapal. That is right. Actually, if we had a
functioning immigration system where we could provide the
pathway to citizenship for families, where we could provide
legal pathways for people to come in, you would not have
employers having the same opportunity to manipulate immigrant
workers, in particular.
How is the immigrant workforce disproportionately affected
by wage theft, and how does that hurt the entire workforce?
Mr. Costa. There is a very seminal study that showed that
unauthorized immigrant workers are more than twice as likely to
be the victims of wage theft. Legal immigrants are also more
likely to be the victims of wage theft, but even U.S. workers
suffer wage theft, low wage U.S. workers suffer wage theft at
very high rates at about 16 percent of low wage American
workers.
Ms. Jayapal. Well, here is the bottom line. Immigrants
contribute to our economy. What hurts the economy is a
restrictive, xenophobic immigration system, and I hope, Mr.
Chairman, that we can also honor the request----
Chairman Good. Thank you. The gentlelady's time has
expired. The gentlelady's time has expired. Thank you very
much.
Ms. Jayapal. For members to have a hearing on the rise of
child labor, on the rise of child labor.
Chairman Good. The gentlelady's time has expired. Thank
you. Now I will recognize Mr. Bean from Florida for 5 minutes.
Thank you.
Mr. Bean. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman, and good
morning to you, and good morning, Committee members and to our
guests, welcome. I thought this was going to be it. I thought
that this was going to be the issue that ties the two sides up
here, and you can see that we are apart on so many issues, but
this was the one. This was the one, the issue that is literally
destroying our country, an open border.
Today we see the written testimony that it is destroying
wages for the American worker. It is breaking the back of the
American taxpayer, so surely republicans and democrats would
come together and say how can we fix the problem, but yet this
hearing has already been labeled political theater.
Maybe if you go to the border one of the first things, and
I am just new guy. I have only been here 9 months, but one of
the first things that I did honoring a commitment to my
constituents, was to go to the border and see it first-hand,
and it is devastating. Things we saw earlier are just being
overrun. Our border, our border patrol, and how heartbreaking
it is to see kids that are dropped off and used as pawns coming
forward.
If you thought this was going to be it, as did I, you would
be incorrect. We have got to fix it, and we have got to go
forward. Mr. Law, why is it, and I do not know if you can do it
in a short period of time, but why is it that it is surged
under Biden? Under the current administration the border has
just surged. Why is that? Is there a simple explanation why
that is?
Mr. Law? Yes, there is. Specifically, the Remain in Mexico
policy was completely destroyed, and any illegal alien that
claimed asylum at the border was allowed to be released. Our
immigration laws only give two options for those who show up at
the border and claim asylum. You can detain them, or you can
make them wait in Mexico.
This administration is doing neither. They are releasing
them into American communities, and then making them eligible
for work permits, and there is no interior enforcement, so
there are no repercussions that they will likely ever be
returned to their home country anytime soon.
Mr. Bean. When I talked to--when I was in South America
over the last couple of months and talking to people who are
migrating, or making the journey, they have already talked to
people that are here, and they believe the United States is
open, and all they do is get there.
It makes sense that they would believe that because that is
true, Mr. Law?
Mr. Law. Absolutely. Word travels fast, and that is when
you see somebody gets in, that encourages the next flow,
whether it is a relative, a neighbor, friend, whomever it may
be. That is exactly why the Trump administration policies were
so successful at securing the border.
When you were presented with the opportunity of you can
wait in Mexico, instead of getting released into American
communities, we saw so many asylum claims abandoned. They just
asked to be returned home. When the asylum cooperative
agreements were reached and we said okay, well you can seek
humanitarian relief at a neighboring country where there is
shared language and other similarities. All of a sudden, they
said I would rather just be returned home.
Again, they are just not fleeing persecution, they are
seeking out economic opportunity. While you can sympathize,
they do not qualify for humanitarian relief under the law as it
is currently written.
Mr. Bean. It is sad. In South America we saw the wristbands
where they, in their mind, they have paid their fare to the
cartels, which are becoming increasingly stronger, and
increasingly do bad things, both to South Americans and to
Americans.
Mr. Camarota, you have done extensive work in your written
testimony, really illustrates the winners and losers of an open
border. Winners, of course, are illegal aliens, but losers are
taxpayers and the American worker. Can you explain? I do not
know if you can do it in just the brief time we have.
How does it push down--because some say it is great. Some
say, I will not mention any names on this Committee, but some
say this is a great thing that we have an open border, but yet
it is destroying wages. Can you explain so everybody can
understand how it destroys wages for the American worker?
Mr. Camarota. Look, historically progressives from Eugene
Jabs to A. Phillips Randolph, they got that if you do not have
lot of immigration you tend to push down the wages, and there
is a reason, unfortunately a lot of progressives are aligned
with corporate America on this, they want low wages, and they
are perfectly happy to ignore this crisis of non-work among
working age people, particularly the U.S. born.
Immigrants have not suffered the same problem, particularly
U.S. born men without a college degree. We know it is a social
disaster. In his seminal book, Nick Eberstat, at AEI asked the
question why do we ignore it? One of the key answers is we have
the immigrant labor. If we curtailed immigration, and enforced
our law, we would be forced to draw these people back in, which
will not be easy.
They have substance abuse problems, some. Some are abusing
the welfare system. Some just have not worked for a while,
consider the population of people who have criminal records. We
have got to draw those folks back into the labor market as
well. Less immigration would be enormously helpful, but it is
not the only issue.
Mr. Bean. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, I
yield back. Thank you very much.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Bean. I would like to
recognize now Ms. Manning from North Carolina for 5 minutes.
Ms. Manning. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks to the policies
that we put in place during the last Congress, we are living in
a time of historically low unemployment. What I hear over and
over from my constituents is their inability to find workers
who are trained and qualified to fill the good jobs that are
out there, particularly jobs we are seeing growing in my
district: advanced manufacturing and clean energy.
Now we have made progress over the past 2 years, in
providing funding for apprenticeships and other programs that
will help those who are not in the workforce, prepare
themselves for those good jobs. What I heard during the recess
is that what my constituents are really worried about are not
just the lack of ability to find workers, but the budget cuts
that are being proposed that could hurt the progress that we
are making.
Budget cuts that will hurt our K through 12 schools, our
colleges, our apprenticeship programs. My constituents are also
worried about the lack of mental health resources, and the
violence in our communities that need more investment, not
less. I would like to start by focusing on the budget cuts that
will have a negative impact on our workforce and my
constituents.
Mr. Costa, how will eliminating the WIOA adult youth and
job training program impact the ability to meet our current
workforce demands?
Mr. Costa. Well, really any investments like that, cutting
them and taking them away is going to make it harder to hire
more qualified workers.
Ms. Manning. What about eliminating the Women's Bureau,
which included apprenticeship programs for women, particularly
in non-traditional occupations. How will that impact our
workforce?
Mr. Costa. Well, that will hurt, that will make it more
difficult to hire, and for women in particular to access the
workforce.
Ms. Manning. How would the 95 million dollar cut to OSHA
impact our ability to keep our workers safe?
Mr. Costa. That would be a disaster by making all
workplaces less safe. There is already not enough OSHA
enforcement nationwide, and it needs to be increased, not cut.
Ms. Manning. My colleagues want to focus this hearing on
immigration, and I would like to point out that before the
recess, we had a hearing in this committee where my colleagues
excoriated the Secretary of HHS over reports of child migrants
being put to work in dangerous jobs in violation of our U.S.
labor laws.
Mr. Costa, what impact will cutting 3.3 billion dollars
from the HHS Unaccompanied Children program, as well as the
refugee support services, have on the ability of our government
to ensure that child migrants are not being exploited?
Mr. Costa. Right. I think we are all concerned after seeing
the New York Times reporting about HHS and oversight with child
migrants, and I think that we need more investments to have
more staff and more attention, and also I have to mention in
that context that we need to be enforcing child labor laws and
improving them, not rolling them back.
Ms. Manning. Dr. Camarota, you stated that the American
workers who are most impacted by undocumented immigrants are
those who are least educated and those who are least prepared
for work. Would cutting funds for apprenticeship and job
training programs help get those unemployed workers into the
workforce?
Mr. Camarota. Well, speaking for myself, I have always been
supportive of ideas of job training. We should look at raising
the minimum wage, and things like that. I suspect you and I
agree on those kinds of issues, but we are much less likely to
do it if we have access to immigrant labor.
Ms. Manning. Well, let me ask you, but would cutting those
funds help those people out there who are American workers, who
are not currently trained and ready for the workforce?
Mr. Camarota. Yes. I mean I think that we should look very
hard at whether or not the program's effective, and if it is
ineffective, we definitely should keep it in my opinion.
Ms. Manning. Okay. Would cutting funding for Title I
schools help get those untrained workers into the workforce?
Mr. Camarota. If it is an effective program, it should
definitely be kept, and we should focus on that because
clearly, we have a crisis at the bottom end of our labor
market.
Ms. Manning. Would you agree with me that cutting funding
for mental health services is going to prevent people from
getting the access they need to mental health services to get
them back in the workforce?
Mr. Camarota. I State this in my testimony, mental illness
is one of the impediments to improving labor force
participation. We definitely need more treatment options.
Ms. Manning. Thank you. In closing, I would agree that our
immigration laws are broken and terribly outdated, and that is
why I am one of the co-sponsors of the Dignity Act, the first
bipartisan immigration bill to be introduced in more than 10
years. I would encourage my colleagues to look at this
bipartisan approach and to do something proactive to solve this
problem by joining on the bill. Thank you, and with that I
yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Ms. Manning. Now I would like to
recognize Ms. Houchin from Indiana for 5 minutes.
Ms. Houchin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the
Committee for having this hearing, and to our witnesses. I have
said this before, and I will say it again. The Biden border
crisis has made every single State, including my State of
Indiana, a border State. Every State is not impacted by an open
southern border.
It does not matter if we are in Eagle Pass, Texas, or back
home in my home of Salem, Indiana, which is 1,288 miles away
from the border. I was able to visit Eagle Pass and Uvalde,
Texas earlier this year. I can tell you first-hand, as I am
sure you know, the border is not secure.
I have said to my constituents at home, if the President or
anyone else had seen what I have seen and heard at the southern
border, they would declare a national crisis, and do whatever
was necessary to secure our border and restore the sovereignty
of the United States.
That is certainly a mission that I am on, having been there
and seen it first-hand. We are also well aware of the impact
our border crisis has had on opioid and fentanyl related
overdose deaths. 220 of my constituents alone have died from
drug related deaths in the last year.
What is not talked about enough is the impact of the border
crisis on our workforce, so I am glad we are having this
discussion today. Dr. Camarota you estimate that there are 8.8
million illegal aliens currently in the United States
workforce. How did you come to calculate that figure?
Mr. Camarota. Yes. It is based on data collected by the
U.S. Census Bureau on a monthly basis for the Bureau of Labor
Statistics. It is imperfect, but they do attempt to try to
capture illegal immigrants, and then they ask questions about
are you working, what kind of job you do, so that is how we can
get everybody from Pugh to the Center for Migration Studies,
the Migration Policy Institute.
We all use that data essentially, that survey and another
one, to try to figure out what is going on with illegal
immigration. It is certainly imperfect, and there is a big
caveat that I mentioned. The way the survey is weighted, even
though I have data for it through this year, it does not take
into account the border surge.
All the people being paroled and released, but it is the
best we have, so there is probably an underestimate there. I do
try to control for that, but I think that is an open question.
It is clear that there has been a surge of illegal immigrants
in our workforce if you look at that data.
Ms. Houchin. I expect these numbers will continue to rise
as the crisis at the border continues to worsen when we are
continuing to be under destructive, or what I would consider,
destructive open border policies. How concerned should we be
about further increases in undocumented workers into the United
States?
Mr. Camarota. Well, obviously there are many issues, right?
We have touched on some of them, but I am focusing here on the
labor force, and again we have a crisis of non-work. They do
not show up in employment. There is this silly, superficial
analysis. We have this many unemployed, and this many job
openings, and look, there is incongruity there, and what do you
know, we do not have any workers.
They are ignoring all the people on the economic sidelines.
This has been a deterioration for six decades for men. There is
some deterioration for women, more recently, particularly the
less educated, particularly people who say only a high school
education.
One of the things immigration is doing is it is holding
down wages. There is some crowding out. I am not arguing they
are stealing jobs. That is a silly straw man argument as well,
but I am arguing it is letting us ignore this problem. If we
did not have access to all this immigrant labor, employers and
the American people, American society would demand that we try
to re-instill the value of work, raise wages was one of the
most important things to make work more attractive.
Immigration, let us not do any of that, including the
current massive flow of illegal immigration.
Ms. Houchin. Dr. Camarota, it is sometimes said that
illegal immigrants only take jobs that Americans do not want.
Can you respond to that claim? Is it true that American workers
do not compete with undocumented workers?
Mr. Camarota. As I said, most Americans more educated do
not compete with illegal immigrants, but even if you were to
look at the two dozen occupations where we think illegal
immigrants are most concentrated, there are nearly six million
U.S. born Americans in those same occupations, and it is
construction labor, and building, cleaning, and maintenance.
Right?
There is at least two million legal immigrants in those
occupations. The majority, overwhelming majority of workers
there are U.S. born. The idea that if you have a majority of
people being U.S. born, and somehow Americans do not do that
work is absurd on its face.
Ms. Houchin. With the remaining time I have, I would like
to turn to Mr. Law. When I visited the southern border, I met
with Border Patrol agents. I visited the unaccompanied minor
processing station. I am very concerned about the more than
300,000 children that have come alone to the United States. On
top of this, according to the New York Times, the Biden
administration has lost contact with nearly 100,000 of these
unaccompanied minors.
As far as you know, is the Biden administration doing
anything to address this issue?
Mr. Law. No. They are not. They are actually making it
worse, and it just goes to show that when you have an open
border, and a volume that is unsustainable, you cannot keep
track of it, whether it is the unaccompanied alien children, or
single adults as well. If you are allowed into this country
this administration is losing track of you one way or the
other.
Ms. Houchin. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Ms. Houchin. Now I would like to
recognize my good friend from Virginia, Mr. Scott, for 5
minutes.
Mr. Scott. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Costa,
we have heard about the cost of illegal immigration. Can you
tell me what the economic benefits are of immigration?
Mr. Costa. Yes. There is a broad economic consensus that
immigration is good for the economy in the long-run, and I am
not sure I have a specific figure for you on that though.
Mr. Scott. In fact, there is some industries that would
not--that there is so many people undocumented, construction,
hospitality in certain areas. What would happen to these
industries if you really crack down on eliminating all improper
immigration?
Mr. Costa. I think many key industries, including the ones
that were considered essential during the pandemic would
essentially collapse, and there is a mix of both undocumented
and legal immigrants working in those occupations.
Mr. Scott. The title of this hearing implies problems with
the economy. Can you say a word about how many jobs have been
created during the Biden administration?
Mr. Costa. In 2021 and 2022 were record numbers, between
two and three million jobs per year, and those are records, and
the economy is doing great when it comes to job creation.
Mr. Scott. The unemployment rate?
Mr. Costa. Historic lows, longest stretch of sub 4 percent
unemployment since the 60's.
Mr. Scott. If the other side of the aisle describes the
economy as bad, does that make it bad?
Mr. Costa. I do not believe so, sir.
Mr. Scott. The Fair Labor Standards Act, 85 years ago, was
established and established minimum wage and overtime. There
were exceptions for domestic workers and agricultural workers.
Should that exemption be corrected?
Mr. Costa. I wish it would be corrected, yes. That
exemption is a relic of racist exclusions of those workers when
the Fair Labor Standards Act was enacted.
Mr. Scott. As Long as jobs exist here what can really be
done with the laws that we have now to keep people from trying
to get into the United States to get the jobs?
Mr. Costa. I am not sure I understand your question, sir.
Mr. Scott. Well, if there are jobs here and people are
coming, talking about it and complaining is not going to solve
anything. We have had--we have heard a lot of complaints about
immigration. The last solution we have had was about 15 years
ago when the Senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill
that collapsed when several of the sponsors of the bill started
running for President and found that the rhetoric did not match
the primary voters.
In the absence are we not always going to have a problem
unless we do comprehensive immigration reform?
Mr. Costa. I do think we need comprehensive immigration
reform. There are so many changes that need to be made in the
immigration system, especially to improve labor standards
across the system, so that workers have equal rights and
enforceable rights regardless of their immigration status.
Some of the solutions that are out there now will require
executive action like for temporary protective status and
giving work permits to people who are arriving.
Mr. Scott. Now if we fail to enforce labor standards for
those that are undocumented, how does that affect people who
are actually here legally?
Mr. Costa. Yes, so many, many workplaces, probably most,
are actually mixed workplaces where you have undocumented
workers and U.S. born workers, and sometimes legal immigrants
who are on temporary visas. If you have this multi-tiered or
two-tiered system, people who do not have rights cannot speak
up and complain when things go wrong on the job when they do
not get paid the wages that they are owed.
That degrades standards for all workers, and the weak
bargaining power of people who do not have rights also then
sort of seeps over to the workers who are American workers.
Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Scott. I would now like to
recognize my friend Mr. Burlison from Missouri, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thought this
situation was crazy before I ever came to Washington, DC. and
now that I am here, I think it is even more, it is just the
height of lunacy for a nation to basically commit suicide in
the way that we are doing so with our border situation and
being a welfare State.
Milton Friedman, the famous economist said it is just
obvious that you cannot have a free border State and a welfare
State. It is just obvious to anyone who understands math, and
yet here we are in a situation in which I am asking the
question who benefits? Who benefits?
Why in the world would any political party, or any
President of the United States decide let us open up the
borders, right? Especially from your testimony, we hear the
impact on uneducated, lower wage workers, now that they are
being crowded out by immigrants, okay?
Not only that, but we have our schools that are being
overrun in many parts of the Nation. We have our centers who
normally provide care and access for the homeless populations,
are now the homeless Americans, many of them are vets, are
being displaced by people that are coming here illegally.
In addition, we also know that the impact on our healthcare
system is enormous. We have laws no one can be turned away. Why
in the world? This begs the question, why would someone--why
would anyone have the political lunacy to take on this public
policy? What is the self-interest here, Dr. Camarota, I see you
laughing. What do you think?
Mr. Camarota. Oh, it is a complicated question. I do not
doubt the sincerity, right? I mean for progressives they see
desperate people fleeing desperate circumstances, and I think
that is to their credit, but they do not consider the
consequence of saying well if you arrive at the border, we will
let you in.
If you use this app, we will let you in. They do not
appreciate the impact on American workers, or the fiscal impact
of doing that, but I do think their motives probably are off.
Sometimes you could say well, maybe it is political, they are
hoping for votes. I do not think that is what is happening.
I also think that obviously corporate America, which is
aligned with progressives on this issue, that more immigration
is always better, lower wages are better, it is that kind of
perspective.
Mr. Burlison. That is what I cannot get my brain wrapped
around. If you were the champion of the working man, or the
forgotten man, to use a political term. If you are the champion
of those people why in the hell would you flood the Nation with
competition to those individuals, and drive down their wages?
We talk about increasing minimum wage laws like it is some
lofty idea, but at the end of the day you are not going to do
that if you keep flooding the market with cheap labor, right?
Mr. Camarota. Right. I mean look, you can make an argument
that we need to do more to enforce fair labor standards. That
seems like a good idea to me, but it's a little bit of a non-
sequitur because you are still avoiding the fundamental
increase in the supply of workers, and this enormous problem of
these people who do not show up as unemployed, but are working
age, and doing nothing.
Mr. Burlison. Back home you have got people that are, you
know, that I would say lower wage labor, right? They might be
doing oil changes. They might be doing tire rotations. They
might be working at a restaurant. This is the forgotten man,
and they are the ones that are asking the question why am I
paying for some of the benefits that these illegal immigrants
are receiving?
Can you elaborate from the moment--because I went to the
border, and I saw it first-hand as well. From the moment they
get here what are the different welfare benefits and aid that
are provided, what's the dollar amounts associated?
Mr. Camarota. Yes. I mean we do not have great dollar
amounts. Obviously, you have all these immediate and emergency
care, whether it is housing or immediate healthcare that
obviously runs into the millions. Immigrants, including illegal
immigrants, are not supposed to be using these programs unless
they get asylum, or they are refugees. Then they get access
immediately.
Mr. Burlison. They are fast tracking everyone on asylum.
Mr. Camarota. Right. What happens is if we look at the
actual data, like the survey of income and program
participation, and look at non-citizens headed households, yes
their use rates, over half of them, access one of the major
welfare programs. What often happens is they get benefits on
behalf of their U.S. born children, or they fall into one of
the other categories.
I do not think it is fair to say that people come for
welfare, and yet it is true that not surprisingly, immigrants
with modest levels of education, not because they are lazy, but
because they have low incomes, they have U.S. born children,
they make very extensive use of those programs.
It is not a conspiracy, they just do, and there is no way
to have lots of unskilled immigrants come in, and not end up
with a significant burden on taxpayers.
Mr. Burlison. Well, I think that you have been very
reasonable today. We do not agree on everything, but I think
can agree that Milton Friedman was probably right when he said
that you cannot possibly have an open border nation and a
welfare State.
Mr. Camarota. Of course.
Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Burlison. I would like to
recognize now Ms. Wild from Pennsylvania for 5 minutes.
Ms. Wild. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe I just heard
one of the witnesses say that we now have corporate America
aligned with progressives on this issue, and the issue of
course is immigrants working in this country. My reaction to
that is when you get a coalition like that, maybe we in
Congress should actually pay attention and come up with a
comprehensive immigration reform plan.
I would commend your attention, the New Dignity Act, which
is a bipartisan bill, which actually would take care of some of
the issues that we are talking about here today. Mr. Costa, I
wanted to ask you about the essential work sector. According to
a report produced by the Joint Economic Committee, immigrant
workers make up a disproportionate percentage of the essential
job workforce.
In 2020, nearly 70 percent of all immigrants were employed
in that sector. First, can you just give us a description of
the types of essential work that immigrants are doing?
Mr. Costa. Sure. Jobs like manufacturing, construction,
agriculture, leisure and hospitality, restaurants, really,
really, all of the occupations that got so much attention
during the pandemic, that you know, really were the backbone of
society functioning.
Ms. Wild. I believe one of the occupations you listed was
agriculture, right?
Mr. Costa. Yes, of course.
Ms. Wild. Interestingly, I just met with a group of small
farmers in the ante room during this hearing, and clearly, they
are in need of additional workers. You mentioned a number of
other essential areas, and I would like to specifically focus
on the childcare crisis.
In my district anyway, we have a terrible crisis. As I
often say, sometime in the early 1960's we stopped having the
situation where one parent stayed home with the kids, and where
we started having more and more two-parent working families. We
have never, ever in this country done anything to create a
cohesive structure for childcare for working families.
Before I get off too far on the childcare area, I would
like to hear from you about how you think that immigrant
workers might be able to contribute to helping us solve this
particular workforce crisis.
Mr. Costa. Sure. I will say that the provisions that were
in the Build Back Better Act actually made really important
investments in childcare, and it is a tragedy that they did not
become law. That would have helped so many working families. It
would have helped so many working parents, and allowed more
people to have children, if they wanted to.
I think that immigrants also play an important role in
those sectors, domestic workers and people working in the home,
people working in nursing facilities, different home and
medical care facilities are in fact immigrants. It is one of
the fastest growing occupations. It is where we are going to
need workers, so immigrants could really contribute there.
Ms. Wild. You know my colleague who questioned just before
me talked about--this is a quote from him, ``flooding the
market with cheap labor.'' I just want to make it perfectly
clear that is not what I am advocating for. I am not suggesting
that we bring immigrants here to work and then we pay them
substandard wages.
What I am hearing from every employer across my district,
essential industries and not, although most of them are, either
healthcare, manufacturing facilities, and so forth, is that
they simply cannot get enough workers. To your colleague's
point, what I am seeing is that corporate America is actually
aligned with others, and specifically progressives on this
issue.
I see that as a good thing because it might actually pave
the way toward some sort of sensible approach to work visas,
and making sure that people are able to come here and earn a
living, and not be dependent on social welfare programs, and
that kind of thing. With that, I yield back Mr. Chairman, thank
you.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Ms. Wild. Now I would like to
recognize Mr. Banks from Indiana for 5 minutes.
Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Camarota, you have
written at length about the decline in the labor force
participation rate among Americans, especially working aged
men. Senator Rubio put out a report just last week that expands
on this. In fact, it affirms that the influx of millions of
low-skilled immigrants, both illegal and legal, has had an
undeniable impact on tens of millions of Americans, and their
ability to find work.
You were cited in the report, just how badly can you tell
us have pro-open border lawmakers and politicians, like Joe
Biden, hurt the job prospects of working aged Americans?
Mr. Camarota. Right. Well, you are fundamentally increasing
the supply of workers. If you somehow all of a sudden made them
legal, that could be better right? Then they would not
necessarily be as easy to exploit, but you still have
fundamentally added maybe 10 million people who have no
education beyond high school.
That has an impact at the bottom of the labor market. The
reason corporate America wants it is they want lower wages.
They are happy if they were all legal. It is not really; they
do not want illegality. They would be happy. Why that is bad is
two fundamental reasons. It reduces the job in terms of wage
and benefits it is likely to pay and makes it less attractive.
Second, and I would argue this is this more sociological
question again, when we hear that the employers are telling
Congressmen we cannot find any workers, give us more
immigrants, what you are not hearing them say is we need to
figure out how to get all these Americans who are not counted
as unemployed, but are out of the labor force.
Obviously, we cannot get them all back. There are all kinds
of issues going on there, but like I said, if we could just
return the labor force participation rate to what it was in
2000, they would have had 6 million people to the labor force.
That is a reasonable thing we could try to do, get back to what
it was just 20 some years ago.
Mr. Banks. Why is it that the elites, the corporate America
are not interested in those working class Americans who are off
the--who are not employed, what is their motivation for not
winning?
Mr. Camarota. It is striking to see progressive
organizations cite the unemployment rate, and not the massive
decline in work for 60 years. It is striking. In fairness, I
mean the Obama White House put out a good report on this years
ago, and others. There have been books. It is not a secret.
Senator Rubio has pointed it out.
It is well-studied, it is very complex what is going on. It
is not just simply that wages are too low, or that immigrants
are displacing natives, it is a much more complex question, but
immigration is part of that story, and it is letting us ignore
it. If you ask me the No. 1 reason we ignore it as a society,
is we have the immigrants--and remember, the immigrants are
eager to work.
Unfortunately, I think we can get a lot of the folks
quickly back in, but there are a lot of people and that it's
going to take effort. Job training, some hand holding,
substance abuse treatment, mental health issues, so it is going
to be hard, and we are never going to do that if we have access
to the immigrants.
Mr. Banks. What industries have been most affected by the
influx of immigrant labor, both legal and illegal?
Mr. Camarota. Well, as I said initially, it would be like
construction labor, building, cleaning and maintenance, retail
sales, food processing and preparation, and food service, these
are jobs. Agriculture is also affected, but it often drives the
immigration debate, but just to be clear, less we think, Pugh
and myself, we all estimate that less than 5 percent of illegal
immigrants even work in agriculture.
In a workforce of over 160 million, it is less than 1
percent of the total workforce. Only 4 percent of illegals work
there. When you think of illegal immigration, agriculture is
not the place to be thinking about it. If you want you could
tweak the guest worker program, the unlimited guest worker
program. We would have H2-A. If you think that would be better,
but it is mainly in the service sector, and some forms of light
manufacturing, and that is precisely where less educated, or a
large share of, less educated Americans work.
Mr. Banks. According to a Gallup poll earlier this year the
percentage of democrat voters who said they favor less
immigration jumped from virtually non-existent to almost 20
percent of democrat voters today, which is a significant shift.
Just this week Eric Adams warned that the influx of economic
migrants would ``destroy New York City.''
With that being said, what will having hundreds of
thousands of new migrants mean for workers in a big city like
New York City?
Mr. Camarota. Well, it means a lot of demand on public
services, and it means a lot of people competing in a city
where the native-born workforce, that is very low, the less
educated native-born workforce has a very low labor force
participation. It is likely to exacerbate that problem.
Mr. Banks. Thank you. My time has expired.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Mr. Banks. I would like to now
recognize Ranking Member DeSaulnier for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Costa, in
2017, the National Academies released a 642-page paper on
immigration in this country, and I wanted you to--you mentioned
it in your opening comments. Maybe you could speak to that a
little bit more.
Before you do, just again, we have an immigration problem
in this country. We have gone through this before in our
history. It requires us to work together, Mr. Chairman, and I
think I have a deserved reputation of being willing to work
with people. In our perspectives, this hearing is surreal.
I agree, we need to have a thoughtful immigration policy in
this country. Mr. Scott mentioned S. 744, the so-called gang of
eight. Mr. Rubio, Mr. McCain on the Republican side, Durbin and
Schumer, leaders in the Senate side, in 2013 it passed the
Senate 68 to 32. We know now that Steve Bannon and others put
pressure on the then Speaker, Mr. Boehner, not to have it come
to the floor.
We have had other attempts. I remember there have been
multiple attempts by Republicans and Democrats to have a
thoughtful immigration policy bill come to the floor. Whenever
we get to that point, colleagues on the other side, in my
perspective, do not want to be on the record for a thoughtful
compromise approach to this.
Mr. Costa, with that just as an introduction talk to the
National Academy. This is why it is there. This is what it is
respected for. What did it say on its analysis?
Mr. Costa. That study was--it is one of the most seminal
studies on the impact, on the fiscal and economic impact of
immigration on the United States. It did a number of different
scenarios of looking at how immigration could play out in the
economy. Its essential takeaway was that the impact on
employment and natives, of U.S. born natives, is not very much,
but the economy grows very well, and most workers do just fine
in almost all of the scenarios.
Mr. DeSaulnier. Let us speak a little bit about California,
we lots of problems, lots of challenges, but on this, at least
in my experience again, having been the Chairman of the Labor
Committee in the State Senate, 80 percent of the members in the
California building trades are now minorities and women. They
are actively recruiting people who are here legally, or in the
process, to come into their unions.
Coming from the hotel and restaurant business, same thing.
I meet with colleagues in that service industry, as others have
mentioned, people without a high school--with a high school
degree, but no college degree. They are entering that
workforce. When I talk to colleagues either in the construction
business, or in the service industry, like other colleagues
here, they say we need a good workforce. We do not have enough.
How do we do this? I am reminded of listening to my
grandparents in Lowell, Massachusetts, mostly Irish and the
French, talk about the same issues in the early 1900's. If you
do what you have always done, you get what you have always got.
We are repeating history here.
A more thoughtful approach would be we have got demographic
challenges in this country. We need immigrants. We need them
here lawfully and thoughtfully. Why would not we work together
to do that? Speak a little bit about, at least in the western
United States, and the west coast where we have a lot of
immigration, both the successes and challenges.
Mr. Costa. Sure. As a Californian myself, and you know,
there are 10 and a half million or so immigrants in California,
including two of whom are my parents, and they make up about a
third of the entire workforce in California. They work in just
about every single industry there.
Sure, there are challenges. Unauthorized immigrants who are
there who make up about 6 or 7 percent of the workforce, they
do not have rights in the workplace that they can enforce, and
that is a real issue, but there are very easy policy solutions
for them, and Congress needs to come together and pass a broad
legalization to give rights to the workers who do not have
them.
Mr. DeSaulnier. One of the other witnesses mentioned about
lack of enforcement. That is not my experience as an employer.
I know one of our former colleagues from California, Mimi
Walters, we worked on this a lot about the underground economy,
and enforcement mostly in California, for employers who are
actually doing the right thing and making sure people are here
legally. Could you speak about that briefly? That is not our
experience in California. We enforce the law.
Mr. Costa. The Division of Labor Standards enforcement in
California is probably one of the best labor standards
enforcement agencies in the country. That is true. They are
also underfunded and understaffed, and I will say that not
every employer is a bad employer, but there needs to be a
system in place for enforcement.
Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield.
Chairman Good. Thank you to our Ranking Member, and I now
recognize Chairman Foxx for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank our
witnesses for being here today. Dr. Holtz-Eakin, there is a
fentanyl epidemic in our country. In 2022 alone the Drug
Enforcement Administration seized enough fentanyl to kill
almost 400 people. For working age Americans, fentanyl overdose
is the leading cause of death.
Fentanyl has not only had a devastating impact on our
society, but also on our workforce. In your written testimony,
you said that between 2013 and 2021, opioid use accounted for
the loss of more than 1.3 million workers. Could you discuss
the impact that synthetic opioids like fentanyl have had on
working age Americans in the American workforce as a whole?
Keep in mind I only have 5 minutes.
Mr. Holtz-Eakin. I will be brief. Since 2013 we have seen
overdoses go up by about 200 percent, and this is the leading
cause of death as you mentioned, for some prime age workers.
This has contributed to the labor force participation rate
going down, particularly through the pandemic. We saw a sharp
spike in the synthetic opioids, fentanyl in particular.
Mrs. Foxx. Well, thank you very much. Mr. Law, in your
written testimony you highlighted that the Biden administration
inherited a secure border, yet in President Biden's tenure,
more than 5 million illegal aliens--and that is the appropriate
term to use, have been apprehended crossing the southern border
with approximately 3 million of them being released into
American communities.
Additionally, an estimated 2 million got aways bypassed
Border Patrol agents and made it into the country. How have the
Biden administration border and immigration policies put
Americans last, and fueled this catastrophe?
Mr. Law. Thank you. Again, the complete lack of deterrence,
the ending of the migrant protection protocols, in particular,
which required asylum seekers to wait in Mexico until their
immigration court dates. Our immigration laws are very clear.
You can either be detained, or you may wait in Mexico until
your immigration court date.
This administration has ended that policy, and allowed
millions of illegal aliens into this country, and now they have
undergone an unprecedented campaign to get them work permits
and into the labor market. I think there has been an
interesting shift in the conversation here on the other side of
the aisle conflating legal immigration with illegal
immigration, and what we are talking about today is the fact
that every illegal alien who is in this country is someone who
should not be here because they are in violation of our laws,
and they should not be in the workforce, and that is a
potential job that an American worker could have.
Mrs. Foxx. Thank you very much. Dr. Camarota, in your
written testimony you noted that the labor force participation
rate of working age Americans has reached historic lows, and at
this rate tended to decline the most among the least educated.
Without work these individuals tend to have higher rates of
substance abuse, welfare dependency, crime and even early
death.
Can you discuss how the influx of illegal aliens across the
southern border has made this pressing societal issue easier to
ignore?
Mr. Camarota. Right, so we need workers, right? We know the
unemployment rate is low, and we're talking about the bottom of
the labor market here and let us not discuss immigration
generally. We are talking about illegal immigration, and
employers want workers, right?
What we keep hearing is they keep saying to Congressmen and
their elected leaders, give us more immigrants, and not hey, we
need to get a lot more of these folks who used to be in the
labor market, back into the labor force. What immigration does
is it shifts the debate.
Instead of trying to improve the lives of all these people
on the economic sidelines, which is not necessarily easy all
the time, it takes a lot of effort. Partnerships, State and
local, you know, Federal, and public, private. It is a big
issue, but we are not doing it because we have access to so
much immigrant labor, and the illegal immigration just adds to
that.
I doubt that we will ever deal with it unless we actually
enforce our laws, and then force the business community to
address this problem. As you say, it is clearly a problem. We
know it is linked to all these social pathologies that you
mentioned.
Mrs. Foxx. Thank you. I will say again what republicans
have said over and over and over again, we cannot talk about a
``comprehensive'' immigration policy and overhaul until the
border is shutdown. That is the key to everything that we need
to be doing. We need to close the border and make sure that
that is done before we do anything else. With that, I yield
back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Good. Thank you, Chairwoman Foxx. I now recognize
myself for 5 minutes. Mr. Law, in your testimony you mentioned
the Biden administration's decision to issue EADs, or
employment authorization documents to millions of illegal
aliens, in order to mask the true invasion numbers.
Secretary Mayorkas is misusing his parole authority, which
is supposed to be offered to illegal aliens on a case-by-case
basis, but instead the Biden DHS is releasing entire groups of
illegal Americans into the country on parole, which removes
wait times from asylum laws, and instead immediately makes
these illegal aliens eligible to work legally. Is that an
accurate reflection of your testimony understanding the
situation?
Mr. Law. Yes, thank you Chairman. Largely so. I would add
the qualifier with parole that it is not just case by case
basis, but it must be for either an urgent humanitarian reason,
or a significant public benefit. The lack of detention space,
or the fact that somebody wants to come here, but does not
qualify for a visa, meets neither one of those criteria as
well.
Chairman Good. Yes. I would point out that it is not really
a question of not having laws, it is our laws not being
followed as you know. EADs can be issued to all aliens who
request asylum in the U.S., pending the review of their asylum
claims, and it is my understanding the Federal Government
continues issuing EADs to aliens after they have been issued
final orders of removal. In other words, even after a Federal
immigration judge has found that an illegal alien is in the
United States, again illegally, and orders him to leave, that
alien can still get an EAD and keep working. Is that correct?
Mr. Law. Yes. That is correct. That is one of the work
permit categories that--and then of course, the notion of
giving someone with an order of supervision, which means they
have already received the final order of removal. They have
exhausted all avenues of you know, attempts to stay in this
country, and this is it.
If you have given them a work permit, they are not going to
cooperate with getting their visa, they are not going to
cooperate with their home country. I believe we are approaching
pretty close to 2 million illegal aliens with final orders of
removal that remain in the country.
Chairman Good. There's nearly 2 million. There is nearly 2
million illegal aliens in the country who have been literally
ordered to remove, be removed by a Federal immigration judge,
but they are still authorized to work by Joe Biden's Department
of Homeland Security? Right?
Mr. Law. I believe that is the approximate number. It might
be, you know, it is hard to tell. This administration that
promised to be the most transparent has gone out of their way
to hide the work permit data that the Department of Homeland
Security keeps track of, but it was--there is over a million
that they inherited through the difficulties that the sanctuary
city states like California, but impeded President Trump's
ability to deport illegal aliens, and it is only grown from
there because this administration is not removing anybody.
Chairman Good. You would agree that if an illegal is here,
but they have got that piece of paper from the government that
lets them work legally, they are unlikely to ever leave?
Mr. Law. That is absolutely correct.
Chairman Good. Jumping to Dr. Camarota, I wanted to ask you
a question with respect to you conducted a report that showed
that median weekly earnings for U.S. born workers without a
bachelor's degree increases more during periods of lower
immigration, than in periods of higher immigration. Can you
discuss a little bit more about that?
Mr. Camarota. Yes. The period 2017, 18, and 19 is
interesting because it is a strong economy, and yet the level
of immigration actually fell. We do not find that at any other
time in the data. Usually, immigration goes up when the economy
is strong. Some of it seems to have been a reduction in illegal
immigration, and some of it seems to be a reduction in legal
immigration.
It is hard to parse out exactly. Looks like it is both.
That decline in overall immigration was a period of higher wage
growth for Americans without a college degree. It grew much
faster than in the four and 5 years before that when the
immigration level was higher, even though the economy was also
expanding at that time.
Interestingly enough another paper in the Economic Review
recently comes to pretty much the same conclusion. They look at
areas that have traditionally been getting a lot of immigrants
in the earlier period, than when there was the slowdown in 2017
to 19, in those high immigration areas where they got less
people, wages seemed to have done much better.
I also found that labor force participation improved during
that period when immigration was lower, so it is kind of a
real-world test, and the test seems to show that less
immigration is good, at least for the less educated in the
United States.
Chairman Good. Well, I would just add comments on some of
what has been said in the hearing. My friends on the other side
often want to conflate immigration with the illegal border
invasion, and they want to suggest if you criticize the
invasion, then you are somehow against immigration when we are
the most generous country in the world historically, and
currently, where we allow some one million legal immigrants
into our country.
As Mr. Costa has pointed out, we are a nation of
immigrants. We have got many--millions of immigrants in our
country, and just because you believe that we should control
whom we allow into our country, and for it to happen lawfully,
that does not mean you are against immigration or merit-based
immigration.
With that I would like--that concludes our time of
questioning our witnesses, and I would like to recognize--oh,
thank you very much. Mr. Grothman has slipped in while I was
talking. I would like to recognize my good friend Mr. Grothman
for 5 minutes please.
Mr. Grothman. Thank you. We are going to work our way to a
question for Mr. Law, but I will give kind of a buildup to the
question. Earlier this year on my subcommittee, regarding
oversight, at the time we learned the Biden administration lost
contact with almost 100,000 unaccompanied minors, however the
Director of Office of Refugee Resettlement did not seem to know
that.
A shocking number of these children appear to be exploited
by their sponsors, and they are forced to work to pay debts to
their sponsors. I am concerned the Biden administration's
failing this vulnerable population. I mean if a minor comes
across the border, and they are unaccompanied by anybody, that
should be a real dangerous sign in the first place.
It appears that they have waived background checks, and
addressed verification requirements for potential sponsors,
similarly. The Office of Homeland Security has ended familial
DNA testing at the southern border. I do not know why you would
do that. Further reports show Secretary Becerra personally
pushed for faster processing, and discharging of unaccompanied
minors, to the detriment of the children's safety, pressuring
staff at ORR to treat UAS processing like a factory.
The Secretary was quoted as saying if Henry Ford had seen
this in his plants, he would never have become famous and rich.
This is not the way to do an assembly line. When asked about
those comments, an HHS spokesman stated he wouldn't hesitate to
do it again.
Mr. Law, do you believe that the administration's policies,
such as those I described, have created a humanitarian crisis
among minors coming across our southern border?
Mr. Law. Thank you. I would say it is not just isolated to
the minors, it is everyone. There is not a single, illegal
alien that makes it across the southern border without having
to pay debts to the cartels and human traffickers. The
exploitation begins the moment they get into that connection.
It goes throughout the entire journey, and in many cases,
especially with the unaccompanied young children, the
exploitation continues once this administration quickly
releases them to their traffickers.
Mr. Grothman. In other words, a 15 year old crosses the
southern border, how much do you think you are on the hook for
with the cartels you think?
Mr. Law. My understanding it varies depending on where,
what part of the world you are from, but at the end of the day
most of these people are coming from far, poor countries than
the United States, and these debts are in the $5,000.00 to
$20,000.00 range, money that they do not have, and the only way
that you pay that back is through, sex slavery worker,
indentured servitude, things of that nature. It is really
horrific.
Mr. Grothman. A case worker at the Office of Refugee
Resettlement claimed HHS regularly ignored obvious signs of
labor exploitation, including red flags such as single
sponsors, sponsoring multiple UACs. Hot spots in the country
where most unaccompanied minor sponsors are not the children's
parents, and even direct reports of trafficking.
Do you believe, Mr. Law, that HHS and ORR turned a blind
eye to signs of unaccompanied minor exploitation to maintain
good optics for their agencies?
Mr. Law. Well, having not been there it is hard to know if
they were turning a blind eye, but one thing that is absolutely
clear is that the sheer volume is unsustainable. This is an
administration that is trying to process and manage its way
through the border crisis it created, and you just cannot do
it. Whether they are turning a blind eye intentionally, or just
the fact that they are overwhelmed at the end of the day, they
are streamlining the release of unaccompanied minor children to
unvetted sponsors, and frankly that seems to be a highly
irresponsible decision.
Mr. Grothman. This is exponentially higher than it was 2
years ago at this time. I mean it is just unbelievable. Do you
believe their policies are what is causing so many people to
come here, including so many minors to come?
Mr. Law. Well of course, open borders is a great business
model for the cartels and the traffickers, which is why you
know, human smuggling and trafficking has turned into a multi-
billion dollar industry. As I have mentioned repeatedly, there
are no enforcement policies on the books. All they are doing is
trying to funnel the legal immigration to the ports of entry,
claiming that that is lawful. It is not.
Then they are trying to hide those who would otherwise
across the border by paroling them, which basically means if
you have an international airport, you are a border State
because they are just being flown in.
Mr. Grothman. I will ask you. How do these people find out
about it? Okay. If I am in Bangladesh, if I am in Nigeria, how
would I find out that the U.S. border is essentially open?
Mr. Law. A combination of things. Those who came before you
successfully got in, have been released quickly. Have reunited
with other family members, working, et cetera. Then the
cartels. They are highly sophisticated. They are well aware of
the policies.
That is why you saw a slight blip in border crossings after
Title 42 ended. Even their blip was the worst reported times,
and then they saw no, there is actually no enforcement.
Mr. Grothman. Are they advertising for people to come here
illegally around the world?
Mr. Law. The cartels? Absolutely. They are using a lot of
social media platforms to do so.
Mr. Grothman. Okay. Thank you.
Chairman Good. All right. Thank you, Mr. Grothman. Now I
would like to recognize Ranking Member DeSaulnier for his
closing remarks.
Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the
witnesses for being here today. Before I close, I would like to
insert a statement from the AFL-CIO into the record that offers
real solutions to the issues impacting today's workers, that's
the AFL-CIO, people who protect American workers.
I also want to mention that we would, we have asked for a
hearing on child labor, and the issues surrounding that.
Colleague Alma Adams has written a letter to the Chair, so I
would like to mention that as well, and hopefully we could have
a response to that. Just a moment to recognize the tragedy last
night for someone who used to be on this Committee, Alaska
Representative Mary Peltola, who tragically lost her husband
last evening in an airplane crash, so I want to mention that. I
forgot to mention it in my opening comments.
Mr. Chairman, this is unquestionably an issue that needs to
be addressed by the Congress. My reading of American history
and immigration is it was not a perfect situation at any
moment, it evolved over time. We are a country that was formed
on freedom and cheap labor.
Some of that aspirational, some of that part of our
national history that is not something that any of us would--
are proud of in many instances. The issue that has been brought
up about conflating legal versus illegal, I think that is part
of the, as I listened to that, Mr. Law and Mr. Chairman, that
is a fair assessment in so much as they are interrelated from
my perspective.
How do we deal with the issue of aging and demographic
changes in this country in a robust workforce that benefits
everybody? Other industrialized countries struggle with this.
The Japanese foremost, and a lot of the EU, so how do we do it
in a thoughtful way that is based on research like the National
Academy, so that we can address these issues in a way that in
the long-term benefits this country.
I am reminded of the early 1900's when we established the
first immigration sort of to stop Eastern Europeans after the
influx of immigrants of the Irish and then the Italians and the
Eastern Europeans that people would pay to get on ships. They
would get to New York or Boston, and if ships had already come
in and the quota was met, they would send back.
Just as a thoughtful process, let us acknowledge that we
have a difference of opinion and perspectives. There are people
who want to utilize that for their own reasons, that in my
perspective is based on a lot of race-based subjective
opinions. Again, not unusual in this country.
We have overcome that when we have come together and tried
to be analytical about what benefits this country in total.
With that, I would offer that when it comes to workforce, I
think there is an opportunity hopefully sooner, rather than
later, to go back to where we meet as the Senate did in 2013,
in a comprehensive real world, thoughtful analysis where
Republicans and Democrats got together, and that maybe both
Houses would not be frightened by independent expenditures that
mispresent what individual Members of Congress did when they
voted and participated in that effort.
With that, I would just like to remind people who may be
listening that members on this side of the aisle have laid out
a legislative agenda that puts the workers and families first
in the United States. Congressional Democrats have proposed
bills that put more money in workers' pockets, protect workers
on the job, and penalize low road employers for engaging and
exploiting child labor practices and exploiting our workforce.
With that, I yield back.
Chairman Good. Thank you and without objection, your
request is approved, and thank you Mr. DeSaulnier for your
comments.
[The information of Mr. DeSaulnier follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Good. Thank you everybody, for participating in
what is a very important issue addressing some of the impacts
of what is one of the most important crises facing America,
Biden's open border crisis. We may all sympathize with
individuals who are desiring to come to America in search of
economic opportunity and in search for a better life.
However, we are a nation of laws, and without laws being
followed we have the anarchy that is on display at our southern
border. Secretary Mayorkas says the border is under control,
and it is under control, but unfortunately and sadly, and
dangerously it is under control by the Mexican crime cartels.
Echoing the sentiments of some of the members who spoke
today, it is baffling to understand quite frankly, the
perspective of the other side. In addition to the strain and
the stress placed on border residents. I have been to the
border five times in the last two and a half years to see it
for myself.
The strain and the stress on border states who are bearing
the brunt of the situation, local law enforcement, along with
law enforcement even in my community in Virginia, hundreds of
miles from the border. The strain and the stress on our social
services, our healthcare systems, our education systems, not to
mention the explosion of drugs pouring across our border, and
the resulting overdose deaths in our country some 100,000 a
year.
Then there is the 150-billion-dollar cost for a nation that
is bankrupting itself with its spending and borrowing some 2
trillion dollars a year currently. I would further just ask
with the open border situation what about the 1.5 million got
aways over the last two and a half years, who are not
surrendering to Border Patrol, are not using the CBP-1 app.
They are not taking advantage of all that is offered to
illegals by this administration. They wear the carpet shoes and
the camo head to toe, they are trafficking things across our
border. They have got the criminal ties, terrorist ties and so
forth. What is the national security impact of that?
How could any Member of Congress defend that? Would someone
take the bet that 90 percent of those are here for just a
better life? Then there is only 10 percent that wish us harm?
150,000? Or maybe you really think that 99 percent are here
just for a better life, of the got aways, the ones that evade
apprehension at the border, that would be 15,000.00.
One of our colleagues, I believe as Mrs. Hayes pointed out,
the perpetrators of 9/11 referenced them, 19 which did that. If
99 percent of the criminals who got away are wonderful
individuals seeking a better life, that would be 15,000. What
kind of harm could they do?
I would submit irreparable harm has been done to this
country that will only be revealed in the future with what has
happened so far. I want to read the words of New York City
Mayor Eric Adams, who last week at a town hall he spoke at, he
spoke about the unprecedented number of illegal aliens that are
pouring into his city, which pales in comparison again to what
is happened in border states.
Of course, you could say that every State is a border
State. My sheriff's, my local law enforcement in my district in
Virginia, would say that they feel like a border State. He,
Eric Adams, the Mayor of New York said, ``I'm going to tell you
something New Yorkers. Never in my life have I had a problem
that I didn't see an ending to.''
I do not see an ending to this. This issue will destroy New
York City. 110,000 migrants we have to feed, clothe, house,
educate the children, wash their laundry sheets, give them
everything they need, healthcare, it is going to come through
your neighborhoods.
All of us are going to be impacted by this. I said it last
year when we had 15,000, and I am telling you now with 110,000,
the City we knew we are about to lose. That is the Mayor of New
York City located some--over 1,000 miles away from the border.
I am concerned that New York City is a case study for the
country.
He is expressing what many feel. I would like to thank all
of our witnesses for being here today, and for your
participation for the Subcommittee, and without further
objection or further business, this Committee--Subcommittee
stands adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon at 12:28 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]