Putting the E in the I

Immigration policy will take a back seat to the economy this year. Everyone says so.
We shouldn’t even mention immigrants when Americans are out of work.
But what if we could put the E (economy) in the I (immigration)? What if we could find a way for the immigration cause to help out in the economic crisis?
Here’s how: States are facing bankruptcy with governors running all over Washington looking for handouts, warning of certain catastrophe if aid is denied them. Instead of begging like this, they should try demanding. They should demand that the federal government reimburse them for all the immigrant services they pay for on behalf of the feds. When it comes to immigration the Federal government sets the policy but the states pay the cost. That’s not fair. Claiming reimbursement affords the states the high ground, a much better position to get money than begging on Pennsylvania Ave., pedaling fear.
For decades states have provided mandatory services to immigrants, teaching them, training them, and providing emergency room treatment as well as police and fire protection for them. These services have gone to all immigrants, both undocumented and on the path to citizenship. It’s work for which states seldom get credit, though it amounts to billions of dollars every year.
If states could win reimbursement, it would go directly into saving jobs. Providing services to immigrants is labor intensive. These are the jobs that are most vulnerable: teachers, social workers, police, firemen, and EMT workers. Keeping these folks employed benefits everyone not just immigrants. And federal reimbursement would free up state money to plug other holes. This is a win/win: good for immigrants, good for the states.
The National Governors Association and the United States Conference of Mayors should make federal reimbursement for immigration costs a top priority. It turns out that the states which would benefit the most are the most broke—think California and Florida, even Michigan. Full reimbursement for immigration costs would be huge for these states.
Sound crazy? It’s happened before. Washington reimbursed states for immigration costs in 1986 when immigration reform was last passed. The bill required the federal government to pay states for the costs for legalizing three million immigrants. Called State Legalization Impact Assistance Grants (SLIAG)—surely we can come up with a better acronym—the program allocated $4 billion to the states. It included money for public assistance, education, ESL training, health benefits, and more.

Why should immigration reformers care about helping states? Can’t their lobbyists do that? Don’t immigrants pay into states more than they take out? And how can we trust the states? Too many have passed laws harmful to immigrants. The Governor of Rhode Island sicked his cops on immigrants. Arizona wants to dump them over their border. Wouldn’t states just use the money for enforcement?
Some will go to enforcement but much more will go to pay for the mandatory servies so helpful to immigrants. For most state leaders including the Rhode Island Governor, the origins of their anti immigration policies are budgetary not racist. In fact, states desperately want what immigrants provide: population. From federal transfer payments to the number of congressmen, to the Electoral College, everything that makes a state powerful, requires increased population. State knows that immigrants are their only realistic bet to get it. This makes immigrants and states natural allies. Only the unfair way the federal government dumps immigration costs on the states keeps them apart.
If immigrants and states did strike an alliance, the future of comprehensive immigration reform would look much brighter. In the last go around the testimony of state authorities tended to support nativist arguments that immigrants were a drain on society. If states change sides and support reformers, the nativists will stand alone, a distinct minority. Reformers will never achieve reform unless they build these kinds of coalitions. It’s what President Obama expects.
So let’s put the E in the I. It turns out immigration reformers have something to say about the nation’s finances after all. Grab a seat at the economic table and start talking.

January 20th, 2009 by admin | Posted in immigration | Comments (0)

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.