Illegal immigration legislation in Utah

Rep. Stephen Sandstorm, R-Orem is planning to introduce an immigration reform bill, primarily patterned on the Arizona law, which will require state law enforcement officers to check the immigration status of anyone detained or arrested for anther illegal act. The officer must have a “reasonable suspicion” that a person is an illegal alien. In addition, law enforcement agencies will be fined $5000 a day if they do not follow through with the law. However the law has an escape clause. If US Immigration and Custom Enforcement Agency (USICEA) does not want to deport the undocumented person, he or she “would be charged with Class A misdemeanor …with an order to appear and be set free.”This bill makes no economic sense or even legal sense. Economically it does nothing to reduce the incentives to illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants come here because, relative to their homeland, they have better employment opportunities and economic security for themselves and their children in the US. On the supply side of the labor market, illegal immigrants are willing to compete for work with the natives in the US labor market in term of wages, hours and nature of work. On the demand side, employers are willing to employ them because they get their services at lower wages with long hours and sometimes in an unpleasant work environment. Therefore the supply and demand side of the labor market works in illegal immigrants’ favor. Rep. Sandstorm’s bill does not address this root cause, and hence it may pacify some Utahns but it will not solve or even diminish the problem.

The bill also does not make legal sense. When you pass a law against unlawful activity the lawbreakers must face penalties for the crime. The legislation calls it Class A misdemeanor but with no penalties unless federal authorities are willing to deport the illegal immigrant. If states like Utah pass such laws, federal authorities will be swamped with such cases, and without federal appropriations to USICEA most of the cases will languish in the pipeline. That means that either most of them will be released or put in temporary holding facilities before deportation with expenses paid by taxpayers. Businesses will face labor shortages in some occupations. Hence Utah’s effort to curb illegal immigration without any federal legislation to deal with the root cause is bound to fail.

A recent study by Peter Dixon, Martin Johnson and Maureen T. Reimer in the journal Contemporary Economic Policy, January 2011, examines various alternatives including enforcement to reduce illegal immigration. They conclude that the best policy would be to impose a tax and fines on employers of illegal immigrants and use the proceeds to improve the welfare of legal residents by tax cuts and public spending. Tighter security measures, deportations and prosecution of illegals’ increases wages of remaining illegals in the state and the country and increases costs without any benefits to the legal residents.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Illegal immigration legislation in Utah

  1. Bob Becker says:

    The recommendations of the Dixon et al. study are right, of course, but I doubt it will have much effect. The business interests which benefit from employing illegals have a remarkably successful record of lobbying [i.e. buying] members of Congress to protect their resulting profits.

    Example: For three and a half decades, US emigration law provided that transporting or moving within the US or in any way “harboring” an illegal alien was a felony punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. But the law also said this: “Provided however, That for the purposes of this section, employment (including the usual and normal practices incident to employment) shall not be deemed [to] constitute harborings.”[8 USCS 1324]

    So, picking up illegal immigrants and driving them to your fields to harvest your crop was not a crime. Driving them anywhere else was.

    The law’s been changed now, but I’m not optimistic that effective enforcement against employers of illegal immigrants will happen anytime soon. [E-verify for example it seems is often a voluntary process at the moment.] That serious penalties/fines will be widely assessed against businesses knowingly hiring illegals is not likely to happen anytime soon.

  2. Erick Kuhni says:

    From previous comments made by Rep. Sandstrom in the past, I’ve never been impressed that he undestands why exactly he so opposed to the illegal immigrant population. Even when he has had seemingly legitimate points to make, he has failed to show an appreciation of the scope or intricacy of the problem. Mr. Mathur is absolutely right that any efforts to curb illegal immigration, which do not address the incentives inherent in our current system, are useless. I think his suggestion based on the research quoted, is the most rational approach to cutting immigration, but I think we need to also bear in mind that the level of entrenchment illegal immigration has on the US economy may be greater than we are aware. In other words, there could be serious long-term ill effects of cutting that labor supply off. One seriously potential problem is potential offshoring of American business. This has already been somewhat detrimental to the overall economy, and could be exacerbated if business chooses to follow the cheap labor supply over to Mexico.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>