Jane the Actuary’s opinion on illegal immigration

Last updated on: January 18, 2018 at 10:33 pm by Jane the Actuary

Jane the Actuary’s opinion on illegal immigration 2018-01-18T22:33:19-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

800px-US-border-notice

Every so often I feel like I need to type this up: what I’d like to see with respect to illegal immigration.

My desired end state is, simply, an end to illegal immigration by preventing those who are in the country without authorization from working, either in the formal economy (that is, with forged IDs) or under the table. With respect to the former, it’s a matter of instituting an E-Verify mandate — and, no, having to prove that you are who you say you are, when starting a new job is not the first step towards a “show me your papers” police state. With respect to the latter, it’s not just a matter of preventing illegal immigrants from working, but policing tax fraud (on the part of the workers who don’t report their wages and the employers who don’t pay into Social Security, unemployment insurance, and workers’ comp) and welfare fraud (individuals who claim eligibility for food stamps and other benefits while earning unreported income), and stretches beyond illegal immigrants to all manner of other workers.

At the same time, I do believe that the United States has done a disservice to illegal immigrants in our persistent failure to institute such a system, and in the rhetoric of our politicians that illegal immigrants are doing honorable work that “Americans won’t do” and statements from Republicans and Democrats alike that have given them every reason to believe they were doing nothing wrong in crossing the border illegally or overstaying a visa, and making this country their home. Immigrants who have come here long enough ago that they no longer have the same relationships and connections back in their home country should be permitted to stay, not because they have the right to demand to be “given papers” but because it’s the right, humane thing to do, and because of our ongoing inaction, and because the de facto policy of years of government officials has been, “don’t commit any terrible crimes and we don’t care if you work using a forged ID.”

Who should be deported? Those who are recent arrivals, for one. Those who have no connections to their wider communities, who have not assimilated, who have not learned English.

And, again, these longtime immigrants should be permitted to stay not be cause they have any right, and certainly not because they’ve angrily demanded to be able to do so at rallies and marches, waving Mexican flags. (Doing so, as far as I can tell, only harms their ability to persuade others.) I further reject any claims that immigrants have some sort of moral right to come here, or that it’s immoral to deport someone who has no legal right to live here, and, what’s more, if someone was ordered deported many years ago, and has managed to evade that order, or has been given ongoing deferrals, that doesn’t somehow erase the deportation order or give them the right to remain. But nonetheless, it was the policy of the federal government to provide de facto amnesty, and it was politicians of both parties who extended words of welcome to illegal immigrants, and that’s what’s gotten us where we are today, and that can’t be undone.

But how do we get from here to there — the “there”, that is, being a state of affairs in which existing illegal immigrants, except for the newer, non-assimilated arrivals, are given residency but that illegal immigration is largely eliminated going forward?

The problem is that there are still too many politicians who are relatively indifferent to not just past, but also future illegal immigration. If a system eliminating employment of illegal residents is not truly implemented but just sits on the books with as much value as federal laws against pot, for instance, then we’ll create the expectation among future migrants that our system is just one of “paying your dues”: come here, work illegally until your “turn” comes for legalization. (As it is, periodically, one reads of surveys conducted in Mexico in which respondents say that there is nothing morally wrong with crossing to the U.S. illegally, and even stating that they have the moral right to do so if they wish.) And we’ll have a whole ‘nother wave of illegal immigrants.

So how do we ensure that the system is robustly enforced? My thought right now is that we need some sticks: assuming that the same federal officials and political interest groups who prefer indifferent enforcement also support immigration in general, legislation could add explicitly non-waivable stipulations that, if certain defined metrics measuring effectiveness of border control and workplace control are not met, then the federal government may not issue immigration visas, not for family reunification, not for H1-B special skills visas, not for anything except for maybe bare-bones “emergency”-type visas.

Is this pie in the sky? Maybe. But it avoids the difficulty that, if legislation provides for immediate legalization and a promise of future enforcement, we have to trust the government to implement the latter; and if legislation provides for immediate enforcement and a promise of future legalization, we have to trust that the enforcement won’t harm those who would be slated for later legalization.

Image from Wikimedia Commons.

Uncategorized

illegal immigration

Previous Post

January 18, 2018

SROs and the line between fit and unfit housing

Next Post

January 19, 2018 What would an immigration policy designed for the future look like?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was healed by touching the hem of Jesus’ garment?

Select your answer to see how you score.

A centurion A woman with an issue of blood A blind man A leper