"Vox explains the news." Or so they say. Last week a Vox writer tried to explain how Baby Boomers are dependent upon immigrants to fund their Social Security. This is untrue. The Social Security system is in dire straits, but immigration is not going to save it. In fact, our current immigration system is putting strains on the system, and more immigration would only make matters worse.
The Western Growers association is working to sabotage the effort to pass a House bill containing E-Verify, despite the fact that the rest of the agribusiness lobby has signed off on the bill. This Western Growers continues to try to defeat any serious attempt to end illegal immigration, and will only accept a permanent "solution" that amounts to indentured servitude for agricultural workers.
The Trump Administration's "zero tolerance" policy for illegal border crossings will reduce illegal immigration. If Congress takes action, it can ensure that parents and children are kept together while they await the outcome of their cases. If the President wants to pursue a "zero tolerance" policy against criminal employers who knowingly hire unauthorized workers, he must support the inclusion of E-Verify as part of any necessary reform bill.
President Trump has a clear choice. he can sign the Goodlatte bill, which would fulfill some of his campaign promises, or he can sign the Speaker Ryan "compromise" bill, which is a Gang of Eight redux. Ryan's bill does not include E-Verify, and it won't cut the number of green cards issued every year.
In 2017, Harvard economist George Borjas reexamined David Card's well-known study of the effect of the 1980 Mariel Boatlift on the Miami labor market. Unlike Card, Borjas found that the influx of Marielitos had caused wages for competing workers to drop. Earlier this month, Borjas, along with several coauthors, released a working paper that looks at employment prospects for workers in Miami in the years following Mariel.
Despite the unpopularity of sanctuary policies with the American people, California is leading the fight to nullify federal immigration law. The argument made in favor of sanctuary policies is that they make communities safer because illegal aliens are not afraid to report crimes to local law enforcement. There's a lot wrong with that argument, but defenders of sanctuary policies never let facts get in their way.
Is a labor shortage in American a good thing? There is no labor shortage, but there are "labor shortages" in some industries, and that is a good thing. It means the economy has improved enough that employers in certain sectors are having to increase wages and conditions in order to attract workers. That's referred to as a tightening labor market, and reducing immigration to take even more slack out of the labor market would be a great thing.
Recent economic numbers are encouraging, especially indicators that the long-term unemployed are reentering the labor market. Politicians and the media tend to fixate on the monthly job creation numbers and the official unemployment rate. These aren't inconsequential measures, but there is much more to the story.
If one relies on traditional media outlets, one will hear a very simple narrative --you can either be for or against immigration, and anyone who wants to reduce immigration falls into the latter category. In fact, most Americans want to see lower levels of immigration, and that view transcends political affiliation, ideology, religion, and race. Views on what "immigration reform" means are diverse, and so are the people who voice them. Fortunately, in the internet age it's easier to seek out these voices.
Barbara Jordan is a true hero of the Civil Rights Movement, an icon of American politics, and a guiding light to those who continue to fight for immigration reforms that put the interests of the American people first. Susan F. Martin, professor emerita at Georgetown University and former staff member of the Jordan Commission, wrote a piece last week attacking President Trump for a letter the White House put out praising Jordan's work. Martin was aghast that Trump would "intimate" that he and Jordan held similar policy positions on immigration. President Trump is a political lightening rod, no doubt, even more so than other modern Presidents, but in attacking him Martin misrepresented Barbara Jordan's views on immigration and the recommendations of the Jordan Commission.