Nativism and the immigration issue

San Diego Union-Tribune ^ | 10/17/5 | Phil Kerpen

[Crackingham]

The results of the recent special election in California's 48th Congressional District are a sober wakeup call to economic conservatives who believe in the free movement of goods, capital and labor. Self-appointed, vigilante immigration restrictionist Jim Gilchrist received a sizable 14.4 percent of the vote for Congress on a single-issue, immigrant bashing platform. Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, who endorsed Gilchrist, is trying, with some success, to raise immigrant-bashing to a top-tier issue in the 2008 elections.

Anti-immigration sentiment is one symptom of a larger neo-Mercantilist disease that is also threatening the globalization of trade and capital flows. Unless true free-market conservatives tame these emotional arguments with the force of logic, much of the economic progress of the past century could be reversed.

America enjoys unprecedented diversity. After decades of increasing prosperity, most Americans feel comfortable with this diversity, but some, reacting to immigrants who are increasingly bypassing traditional immigrant-friendly coastal cities to settle in traditionally white rural and suburban communities, are uncomfortable with demographic change.

Anti-immigrant groups and demagogues like Gilchrist and Tancredo have capitalized on this discomfort in newly emerging immigrant communities. They have falsely attempted to blame immigrants for everything from suburban sprawl to environmental degradation and most recently have taken advantage of the fears of the American public to blame immigrants for terrorism.

Immigration is a moral imperative and an economic necessity. Geographic location of birth is a morally arbitrary fact, and it is wrong to limit an individual's freedom to pursue his or her interests based on it, particularly in a country whose civic identity is based on providing opportunities to people from around the world.

The economic benefits of free movement of people, like the benefits of free trade and capital flows, are clear. Each immigrant who comes to the United States expands national output more than he or she personally consumes, which benefits everyone.

A landmark National Academy of Sciences report found that immigrants contribute more than $10 billion annually to the economy. Other estimates range as high as $80 billion. The NAS study examined every aspect of the issue, from job displacement, to wages, to entrepreneurship, to taxes and consumption of social services. The economic contributions of immigrants have been particularly notable in midsize to large cities, whose populations and economies have been buoyed by immigration.

Immigrants have revitalized urban economies throughout the United States and particularly improved important sectors such as small business, import/export, finance, construction and manufacturing. Immigrants also have founded many of the largest and most successful technology companies, the lifeblood of our 21st century economy.

With unemployment rates remaining near historic lows and legal immigration quotas far too low to meet the demand for labor, it is clear that reforms are needed to reconcile public policy with economic reality. President Bush has proposed a compromise approach that would create a legal guest worker program to meet this demand for workers. Included in this program would be a route to earned legalization so that undocumented workers can adjust their status and become legal permanent residents. These principles are embodied in Senate legislation sponsored by John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. Bush should endorse this legislation, and explain to the American public that the correct conservative, free-market position is pro-immigration.

[Colorado Buckeye]

Bump for later.