[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 133 (Thursday, November 18, 2004)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2017-E2018]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E2017]]



                  ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION--FRIEND OR FOE?

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. THOMAS G. TANCREDO

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, November 17, 2004

  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, a friend of mine recently sent me an essay 
that his granddaughter drafted for her college English composition 
course on the issue of illegal immigration. I was thoroughly impressed 
upon reading the article, written by a Ms. Karen Berg--so much so that 
I have decided to insert it into the Congressional Record so that other 
members might be able to review it. I would encourage them all to do 
so, Mr. Speaker, as it appears to me that this 19-year-old woman has a 
better grasp of this issue than many people--including opinion leaders 
on the subject--that I have met.

                  Illegal Immigration--Friend or Foe?

       America, since its inception, has been viewed as a land of 
     opportunity for those driven to find freedom from tyrannical 
     rule, as well as those seeking to expand their wealth and 
     influence. Today, little has changed with these motivations 
     but much has changed in regard to the population, 
     infrastructure, and perception regarding the management of 
     U.S. borders. This is a new era, where immigration control 
     needs to be orchestrated more effectively than at any other 
     time in America's history due to diminishing resources, 
     threats of terrorism, and the socio-economic imbalance that 
     can result from unregulated influx. In regard to the later, 
     it is believed that the immense and continuing immigration 
     from Mexico is the single most immediate and most serious 
     challenge to America's national identity. Therefore, the 
     question arises; what are the true economic, social, and 
     resultant political impacts of immigration, and in particular 
     the unique issues and problems posed by contemporary Hispanic 
     immigration.
       When Vicente Fox was elected Mexican President, he ended 
     the Institutional Revolutionary Party's, or PRI's, seventy-
     one year monopoly on executive power, thereby elevating hope 
     for economic development (Wall 3). Fox promised Mexicans an 
     employment boost, as well as the eventual opening of the 
     U.S.-Mexican border. However, if employment opportunities 
     increased, then the need for migration would decrease (Wall 
     3). In 1994, the United States, Canada, and Mexico 
     implemented NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. 
     NAFTA promised hundreds of thousands of new high-wage jobs, 
     an increase in living standards, improved environmental 
     conditions in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, and 
     transformation of Mexico from a poor developing country 
     into a booming new market for U.S. exports (The Mexican 
     Economy, Agriculture and Environment 1). Mexicans were 
     promised that NAFTA would increase trade and investment 
     inflows which would in return create better jobs, raise 
     wages, and lift millions out of poverty (The Mexican 
     Economy, Agriculture and Environment 2). Although NAFTA 
     did stimulate trade, economic growth did not materialize. 
     Fox had promised a 7 percent per year economic growth, but 
     two and a half years after his inauguration, growth 
     averaged less than 1 percent (Faux 2). From there, NAFTA 
     concentrated economic growth along Mexico's northern 
     border by opening factories called maquiladoras, which 
     processed and assembled goods for the booming U.S. 
     consumer market, thereby doubling Mexican employment (Faux 
     3). But after the U.S. economy slowed down in 2000, 
     employment in maquiladoras decreased (Faux 3). Since then, 
     hope that NAFTA would enable Mexican prosperity had 
     vanished. Therefore, Mexican workers who could not support 
     themselves in Mexico turned to the United States for 
     greater opportunities. Currently, Fox is trying to 
     convince U.S. President, George W. Bush, to ``liberalize 
     migration, create guest-worker programs, and provide 
     migrants with civil rights and social benefits'' in order 
     to encourage Mexican immigration to the U.S. (Faux 4).
       Debate over Mexican illegal immigration to the United 
     States consists of two opposing sides. Supporters of illegal 
     immigration believe it is not fair to prohibit immigrants 
     from entering the United States, since the U.S. was founded 
     by immigrants. Second, illegal immigrants take the low-paying 
     jobs other Americans are not willing to take. They help the 
     American economy because the amount of skilled and unskilled 
     workers created by high levels of immigration contributes to 
     the nation's prosperity (Masci 1). Alan Greenspan, 
     Federal Reserve Chairman, states, ``As we are creating an 
     ever more complex, sophisticated, accelerating economy, 
     the necessity to have the ability to bring in . . . people 
     from abroad to keep it functioning in the most effective 
     manner increasingly strikes me as [sound] policy'' (Masci 
     1). Greenspan reasons that immigrant's work ethic and 
     motivation make them the cornerstones of America's 
     economic prosperity. Finally, illegal immigrants provide 
     cheap labor to employers, thereby lowering the cost of 
     goods and services.
       Opponents of Mexican illegal immigration believe that even 
     though the United States was founded by immigrants, 
     immigration of the past is not the same as it is today. 
     First, Mexican immigrants are not here legally. Second, most 
     Mexicans do not take the dangerous journey across the border 
     to become American citizens, but rather to help provide for 
     their families in Mexico. Also unlike former immigrants, 
     Mexican illegal immigrants are able to remain in contact with 
     their home localities because of the close proximity of the 
     two countries (Huntington 2). Opponents of illegal 
     immigration also believe the United States doesn't need a 
     million illegal immigrants each year to ensure a strong 
     economy. The majority of illegal immigrants are not well 
     educated entrepreneurs, but rather, ``poorly educated people 
     who take low-skilled jobs for little money,'' says Dan Stein, 
     executive director for the Federation for American Immigrant 
     Reform (Masci 1). Illegal immigration opponents also reject 
     the argument that illegal immigrants are willing to do the 
     jobs that most Americans wouldn't do. In parts of the country 
     where there are small amounts of immigrants, low wage jobs 
     are filled by native born residents (Masci 1).
       After analyzing the history, causes, and contrasting sides 
     of illegal immigration, one might wonder if Mexican illegal 
     immigration hurts the United States. The conclusion made, 
     from extensive research in specific areas, is Mexican illegal 
     immigration is a detriment to the United States. But, the 
     reasons why illegal immigration hurts the United States 
     still need to be addressed.
       First, many discussions of immigration fails to take into 
     account the attitude towards immigration in the sending 
     countries. For example, the Mexican media and political elite 
     portray the United States negatively, and therefore 
     dissention between the two countries in regards to 
     immigration is amplified. Second, manipulation of American 
     politics might occur through Mexican immigrants that become 
     influential in American government. Third, if the United 
     States continues to allow illegal immigrants to take 
     advantage of government provided benefits in states like 
     California, there is a possibility the entire country will 
     have similar economic misfortunes in the future. Finally, 
     since Mexican illegal immigrants have monopolized specific 
     areas of employment, Americans have difficulty pursuing and 
     acquiring those jobs--especially with the prospect of guest-
     worker programs which would intensify their monopoly.
       In Mexico, the media and political elite pay close 
     attention to illegal immigration to the United States, and 
     have created a one-sided, unfavorable portrayal of the United 
     States. The United States' attempts to control their borders 
     are presented as ``racist, xenophobic, and anti Mexican'' 
     (Wall 1). Mexican citizens even blame the U.S. for the deaths 
     of illegal aliens who die crossing the border, and Mexican 
     politicians have called the U.S. border a ``slaughterhouse, 
     or modern Nazi zone'' (Wall 1). In Mexico, all political 
     parties support immigration to the United States, amnesty, 
     and government benefits for Mexicans in the United States, 
     regardless of migratory status (Wall 2). Common slogans 
     Mexicans use to justify illegal immigration are: ``Mexican 
     illegal aliens are not criminals, they only do the work the 
     gringos won't do,'' and ``they are obliged to cross the 
     border'' (Wall 2). Because the Mexican media and political 
     elite portray illegal immigration to the United States in 
     this manner, dissension between the two countries is 
     amplified.
       Throughout history, Mexican-Americans had always been 
     viewed as an embarrassment. They were a sign of Mexico's 
     economic failure, or ``exiles who had thrown in the towel'' 
     (Castaneda 2). The last president of the PRI, Ernesto 
     Zedillo, declared that, ``we will not tolerate foreign forces 
     dictating laws to Mexicans,'' referring to Mexican immigrants 
     in the United States (Wall 3). However, towards the end of 
     the PRI's reign, Mexican-Americans became a sign of 
     opportunity--an opportunity for the Mexican government to 
     gain influence in the United States over migration policy, 
     and therefore keep the gates open for continued immigration 
     (Wall 3).
       After Vicente Fox was elected, he stressed a greater 
     importance associated with Mexican immigration to the United 
     States. His intentions are not only to govern Mexicans 
     resident in the United States, but also American citizens of 
     Mexican ancestry (Wall 3). In essence, Fox intends to 
     manipulate American politics through Mexican immigrants that 
     become influential in the American government. Thereby, 
     naturalized American

[[Page E2018]]

     citizens' political power could possibly be diluted, 
     resulting in more favorable immigration and trade regulations 
     for Mexico.
       The state of California is already on its way to 
     bankruptcy, and the inability to control illegal immigration 
     is doing more than ``some damage'' to the state's weakening 
     budget (Coleman 1). More than half of the Mexican 
     undocumented workers do not have taxes withheld from their 
     wages, and are able to take advantage of expensive taxpayer-
     supported government benefits (Izumi 1). The result of this 
     has escalated economic troubles in California creating a 
     ``welfare and healthcare state'' benefiting non-Californians 
     (Coleman 1). According to the Auditor General, Mexican 
     illegal immigration costs California taxpayers $3 billion 
     annually (Izumi 2). This cost estimate includes benefits like 
     education, health-care, social services, and criminal 
     justice.
       If the United States allows this situation to propagate to 
     other states, the entire country will likely have similar 
     economic misfortunes as California. Evidence of this is 
     already beginning to show. Harvard Professor George Borjas 
     claims illegal immigration costs American taxpayers $133 
     billion annually just in wage depression and job loss 
     (Wooldridge 1).
       Mexican illegal immigrants have monopolized jobs that don't 
     require skilled labor--through acceptance of low wages and 
     ethnic camaraderie--preventing unemployed Americans from 
     pursuing and acquiring those jobs. Even though U.S. employers 
     hire illegal immigrants for reduced wages, the average 
     American wage still exceeds the average Mexican wage by a 
     factor of ten--thereby creating an incentive for Mexicans to 
     find jobs in the U.S. (``Wages and Poverty'' 1). Also, 
     communities of legal immigrants create immigration networks 
     for illegal immigrants so they can conveniently enter the 
     United States, and find jobs and housing easily (``Illegal 
     Immigration'' 1). These combined factors result in a 
     situation where job competition prevents Americans from 
     obtaining jobs that don't require skilled labor.
       However, this monopoly could be intensified if the Bush 
     administration follows through with the implementation of 
     guest-worker programs. Under these programs, illegal 
     immigrants would be granted a three-year renewable permit 
     allowing them legal rights to work in the United States 
     (Eccleston 2). Guest-worker programs were proposed in 
     response to Vicente Fox's request for legalizing Mexican 
     immigrants in the United States, and the assumed shortage of 
     unskilled workers--especially in agriculture (Briggs 2). 
     However, Mark Krikorian of The Washington Post, believes 
     guest-worker programs cause severe social and economic 
     problems for the U.S., as well as pose a threat to America's 
     agricultural competitiveness. ``By artificially inflating the 
     supply of labor, the government's interference in the 
     labor market keeps wages low, resulting in slowed 
     mechanization, and stagnating productivity in fruit and 
     vegetable production'' (1). Two reasons why guest-worker 
     programs intensify the monopoly illegal immigrants have on 
     low paying-employment opportunities are: they increase the 
     amount of illegal immigrants to the United States because 
     many of the participants elect to stay in the U.S., and 
     more illegal immigrants are encouraged to come in the hope 
     that amnesty programs will be enacted again in the future 
     (Briggs 2).
       Throughout time, legal and illegal immigrants have crossed 
     America's border in search of opportunity. Recently, however, 
     Mexican illegal immigrants are migrating to the United States 
     in increasingly larger numbers in order to take advantage of 
     the opportunities America has to offer. The economic, social, 
     and political results of illegal immigration--in particular, 
     the unique issues and problems posed by contemporary Hispanic 
     immigration--are detrimental to the United States.


                              WORKS CITED

       Briggs, Vernon and Lawrence Harrison. ``Immigration 
     Policies Affect Unemployment.'' Pittsburgh Tribune--Review. 
     28 Mar 2004. 3 May 2004. http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/
tribune-review/opinion/columnists/guests/s_186510.html.
       Castaneda, Jorge. ``Both Nations Need to Vault Immigration 
     Hurdles.'' Los Angeles Times. 7 Apr 2004. 1 May 2004. http://
www.newsday.com/news/opinion/
 nyvpcas073743956apr07,0,5700657,print.stor 
     ?coll=nyviewpoints-headlines.
       Coleman, Noelle C. ``Illegal Abomination.'' American Daily. 
     16 Aug 2003. 28 Apr 2004. http://www.americandaily.com/item/
 1997.
       Eccleston, Roy. ``Bush visa `ploy' to win Latino voters.'' 
     The Australian. 9 Jan 2004. 1 Mar 2004. http://0-web.lexis-
     nexis.com.library.lib.asu.edu/universe/printdoc.
       Faux, Jeff. ``How NAFTA failed Mexico.'' The American 
     Prospect. 1 July 2003. 27 Apr 2004. http://www.prospect.org/
print/V14/7/faux-j.html.
       Huntington, Samuel P. ``The Hispanic Challenge.'' Foreign 
     Policy. Mar/Apr 2004. 3 May 2004. http://foreignpolicy.com/
story/cms.php?story_id=2495.
       ``Illegal Immigration.'' Center for Immigration Studies. 2 
     May 2004. http://www.cis.org/topics/illegalimmigration.html.
       Izumi, Lance, and Alan Nelson. ``How California Can Lead 
     the Way Against Immigration.'' 20 Oct 1992. 27 Apr 2004. 
     http://adnetsolfp2.adnetsol.com/ssl_claremont/gsp/gsp18.html.
       Krikorian, Mark. ``More Guest Workers? Not What We Should 
     Pick.'' The Washington Post. 25 Feb 2001. 3 May 2004. http://
www.cis.org/articles/2001msk02-25-01.html.
       Masci, David. ``Debate Over Immigration.'' The CQ 
     Researcher Online. 14 July 2000. 1 Mar 2004. http://0-
     library.cgpress.com.library.asu.edu:80/cqresearcher.
       ``The Mexican Economy, Agriculture and Environment.'' The 
     Ten Year Track Record of the North American Free Trade 
     Agreement. 8 Apr 2004. http://www.citizen.org/documents/
NAFTA-10-mexico.pdf.
       Wall, Allan. ``Undue Influence--the Government of Mexico 
     and U.S. Immigration Policies.'' The Social Contract. Winter 
     2002. 23 Apr 2004. http://www.thesocialcontract.com/cgi-bin/
showarticle.pl?articlelD=1122&terms=.
       Wooldridge, Frosty. ``Illegal Immigration Costs to American 
     Citizens.'' MichNews.com. 5 Dec 2003. 3 May 2004. http://
www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article-1879.shtml.

                          ____________________