HessForGovernor Immigration Position Paper

Immigration

We are predominantly a nation of immigrants. Even the poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty proclaims, “Bring us your poor, your weak, your downtrodden…”

The real problem with immigration is the supposed association with: 1) Crime, 2) Welfare abuse and, 3) Displacement of our domestic Citizen workforce.

The first of these can be addressed by demanding of other nations a more complete record of just who is coming over. Based on this information, it Constitutionally falls to Congress to establish the criteria for coming to America—and to enforce such regulation.

The second is probably the most volatile emotionally. Americans do not want the mis-use or out-right theft of their hard-earned funds to go on.

While the professional politicians want to bring in as many “votes” as they can buy, a balance must be struck. We must remove the economic incentive to mooch off the contributing part of American society. People who don’t contribute, have neither right nor entitlement to be taken care of by government. As my grandfather said, “The lazy man raises skinny kids”. The phenomenal part is that historically, there were LESS POOR, by both count and percentage BEFORE the government got involved at all.

I propose we leave the matter of charity in the hands of the individual. Those sincerely in need of food, clothing and/or shelter can appeal to the generosity of individuals and private organizations. Of course simple verification that recipients are on the right track toward self-reliance will be a must.

We may as a society decide that we ‘have’ to do something for the needy, but I would not advocate giving them money. Wouldn’t it make more sense to provide barrack-style accommodations, food, clothing and shelter—basic needs? The stated goal must be to help the needy become self-reliant, as quickly as possible, not to provide them with a comfortable home.

Without the promise of “free money”, only those who attempt to bring value to the marketplace will want to come, and to participate in the American Dream. As has been demonstrated time and time again in our history. Those who have come from the most destitute of circumstances have many times gained dominance in achieving success. Witness the Vietnamese who once had the distinction of becoming the fastest growing group in America to gain the status of millionaires.

If they come from desperate circumstances, they will more fully appreciate what incredible opportunities are presented by just participating in American society.

The major problem is that those of us who have been here are to complacent and fail to recognize just how good we have it—in comparison with the rest of the worlds’ population. Why? Because of the Freedoms upon which the nation was founded.

The third is not a real problem, only a perceived one. We are fortunate to have people from other nations coming here who are willing to tend to the menial tasks (by and large) that natural Citizens have come to believe are beneath our dignity.

We must provide the incentives to bring back production jobs to America. Our manufacturing base is the foundation of our economy. We do not want to find ourselves in the unenviable position of being “cut off” from staples, by any nation or political body.

I do believe that human rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of nationality, and condemn massive roundups of Hispanic and other Americans by the federal government in its’ hunt for individuals not possessing the required ‘documents’, and I strongly oppose all measures that punish employers who hire such individuals, because such measures repress free enterprise, harass workers and gives excuse for the federal government to involve itself in the business affairs of employers.

I will welcome refugees to our country and condemn the efforts of US officials to re-create an iron curtain that keeps them captive in ‘un-Free’ societies. I will condemn any policy that prevents Americans from assisting in passage to help individuals escape tyranny or improve their economic prospects.

No individual should be denied the fundamental freedom to labor or to move about unmolested, nor be restricted for reasons of race, sex, religion, political creed, age or sexual preference. At the same time I will oppose government welfare and resettlement payments to non-citizens, just as I oppose government welfare payments to all other persons.

The benefits of open immigration
BY MICHAEL TANNER

America has always been a nation of immigrants. Thomas Jefferson emphasized this basic part of the American heritage, taking note of "the natural right which all men have of relinquishing the country in which birth or other accident may have thrown them, and seeking subsistence and happiness wheresoever they may be able, and hope to find them."

The Libertarian Party has long recognized the importance of allowing free and open immigration, understanding that this leads to a growing and more prosperous America. We condemn the xenophobic immigrant bashing that would build a wall around the United States. At the same time, we recognize that the right to enter the United States does not include the right to economic entitlements such as welfare. The freedom to immigrate is a freedom of opportunity, not a guarantee of a handout.

A policy of open immigration will advance the economic well-being of all Americans. All major recent studies of immigrants indicate that they have a high labor force participation, are entrepreneurial, and tend to have specialized skills that allow them to enter under-served markets. Although it is a common misconception that immigrants "take jobs away from native-born Americans," this does not appear to be true. In 1989, the U.S. Department of Labor reviewed nearly 100 studies on the relationship between immigration and unemployment and concluded that "neither U.S. workers nor most minority workers appear adversely affected by immigration."

Indeed, most studies show that immigrants actually lead to an increase in the number of jobs available. Immigrants produce jobs in several ways: 1) They expand the demand for goods and services through their own consumption; 2) They bring savings with them that contribute to overall investment and productivity; 3) They are more highly entrepreneurial than native-born Americans and create jobs through the businesses they start; 4) They fill gaps in the low and high ends of the labor markets, producing subsidiary jobs for American workers; 5) Low-wage immigrants may enable threatened American businesses to survive competition from low-wage businesses abroad; and 6) They contribute to increased economic efficiencies through economies of scale.

Confirmation can be seen in a study by economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Galloway of the University of Ohio and Stephen Moore of the Cato Institute. They found that states with the highest rates of immigration during the 1980s also had the highest rates of economic growth and lowest rates of unemployment. Studies also show that not only do immigrants not take jobs away from American workers, they also do not drive down wages. Numerous studies have demonstrated that increased immigration has little or no effect on the wages of most American workers, and may even increase wages at upper income levels.

Contrary to stereotypes, there is no evidence that immigrants come to this country to receive welfare. Indeed, most studies show that immigrants actually use welfare at lower rates than do native-born Americans. For example, a study of welfare recipients in New York City found that only 7.7% of immigrants were receiving welfare compared to 13.3% for the population as a whole. Likewise, a nationwide study by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics found that 12.8% of immigrants were receiving welfare benefits, compared to 13.9% of the general population. Some recent studies indicate that the rate of welfare usage may now be equalizing between immigrants and native-born Americans, but, clearly, most immigrants are not on welfare.

The impact of immigrants on taxes is more equivocal. Most immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive in government benefits. However, the majority of immigrant taxes are paid to the federal government, while immigrants tend to use mostly state and local services. This can place a burden on states and localities in high immigration areas.

However, the answer to this problem lies not in cutting off immigration, but in cutting the services that immigrants consume. The right to immigrate does not imply a right to welfare -- or any other government service. Moreover, this is not simply a matter of saving tax money. The Libertarian Party believes that most government welfare programs are destructive to the recipients themselves. Thus, immigrants would actually be better off without access to these programs. As Edward Crane, President of the Cato Institute, has put it:

"Suppose we increased the level of immigration, but the rule would be that immigrants and their descendants would have no access to government social services, including welfare, Social Security, health care, business subsidies, and the public schools. I would argue, first, that there would be no lack of takers for that proposition. Second, within a generation, we would see those immigrants' children going to better and cheaper schools than the average citizen; there would be less poverty, a better work ethic, and proportionately more entrepreneurs than in the rest of U.S. society; and virtually everyone in that group would have inexpensive high-deductible catastrophic health insurance, while the 'truly needy' would be cared for by an immigrant culture that gave proportionately more to charity."

Finally, any discussion of immigration must include a warning about the threat to civil liberties posed by many of the proposals to limit immigration. Recent legislation to restrict immigration has included calls for a national identity card for all Americans. Senator Diane Feinstein (CA-D) has suggested that such an ID card should contain an individual's photograph, fingerprints, and even retina scans. Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) has proposed legislation that would require employers to consult a national registry of workers before hiring anyone, effectively giving the U.S. government control over every hiring decision by every business in America. Other legislation has contained provisions penalizing people who fail to "inform" on people they "suspect" might be illegal immigrants. Such Orwellian nightmares have no place in a free society, but are the natural outgrowth of an obsession with restricting immigration.