Immigration reform: Which states would feel it most? California, for one.

If immigration reform is implemented, and newly documented workers start paying taxes, the money flowing into state coffers will increase, as will the demands on state social services.

|
REUTERS/Robert Galbraith
Anais Arias-Aragon poses for pictures after receiving proof of U.S. citizenship during a ceremony in San Francisco, California. President Barack Obama said on Wednesday that he believes it is possible to get an overhaul of the U.S. immigration system by the end of the year.

With immigration reform now firmly on the agendas of both the Senate and White House, a key question is how to assess its possible impact on states, particularly in two of the most important areas, the labor market and fiscal policy.

Who will be the most affected? While every state would feel some effect, the states with the most illegal immigrants are the most obvious to register the impacts of any changes to immigration law. California tops that list with nearly a quarter of the nation’s illegal immigrant population of roughly 11 million.

Ultimately the most significant political impact California would feel would be a slew of new Democratic voters, Steve Camarota, director of research at the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, says with a laugh.

But while that may affect elections many years in the future, he says, the two places to watch for the more immediate impact of immigration reform are in fiscal policies and the labor market.

As the newly legal residents begin to pay taxes, they will eventually qualify for state health and welfare benefits, which will raise costs to the state. Beyond that, this same pool of workers – 80 percent of whom do not have education beyond a high school level – will compete directly with the native population of workers with similar education and skill levels for jobs that have demanded documented legal status.

“California already has a very low level of participation in the work force by this group between the ages of 18 and 29,” he says. He notes that in 2000, the native-born cohort of workers in that age group and with no more than a high school education was 64 percent. Last year, that figure dropped to 43 percent. “This is below the national average of some 50 percent,” he says, adding that reforms would greatly increase the numbers of workers who can compete at that level.

“Now you will have many more people competing for low wage jobs such as the local security guard at an office building or a UPS delivery person,” he adds.

On the flip side, this influx of documented workers would fill tax coffers in many states, in particular the ones with large undocumented populations, Texas and Florida being the next largest after California, points out Ian Macdonald, co-chair of the global mobility and immigration practice at the law firm Littler Mendelson.

“This will have a direct impact on state funding for health care and education, as well as on certain industries such as construction, agriculture, hospitality, and others where unskilled workers are needed,” he says via e-mail.

New burdens of government paperwork to process applications for legal status are sure to cost current state budgets, while requirements for employers to screen applicants for that status may bring their own problems, he says. A question currently on the table is whether to make E-Verify, a digital screening tool, mandatory for employers to use on new hires only or on the entire workforce, notes Mr. Macdonald.

By having employers run both existing and new hires through this comprehensive database, many employers will likely find that many of their existing employees were in fact undocumented workers who had escaped detection, he says. This could be a hardship for a company experiencing a sudden drain on its employee base.

Some politicians support this, he notes, adding that US workers will no longer be competing against undocumented workers “and good corporate citizens will no longer be competing against companies that build business models around undocumented cheap labor.”

 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Immigration reform: Which states would feel it most? California, for one.
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2013/0130/Immigration-reform-Which-states-would-feel-it-most-California-for-one
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe