Immigration Reform - Term Paper Example

Immigration Reform Introduction In general terms, immigration reform refers to political discussion that relates to the changes to existing immigration laws and policy of a particular country. Over the years, prosperous countries such as the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and the United States have been attracting immigrants in large numbers (Muwonge 10). This situation is attributed to the fact that such countries have better social, economic, and political environments that are more favorable for living and have more opportunities than the immigrants’ countries of origin. While these countries have immigration policies, they have often grappled with challenges brought about by the immigration. The main immigration problem that they have been facing relates to illegal immigration where the immigrants fail to follow the proper channels for immigration (Allport 19). The United States has been experiencing the problem of illegal immigration for many years as immigrants attempt or actually enter the country illegally through the border between the United States and Mexico, or entering the country legally but overstay their visas. It is against this background that the United States Reform debate is particularly targeting the challenge of between 12 and 20 million illegal immigrants within its borders (Stolz 21). The debate about immigration reform in the United States has been revolving around how to address the challenge of illegal immigration. While the focus of the debate is the same, the approach that is proposed by various individuals and groups differ in a number of ways. There have been different positions over the debate and how the reforms should be packaged (Hinojosa-Ojeda 178). A closer look at different positions point out to the fact that all the positions have taken either side of these two positions: on one side, there are individuals and groups who are focused mainly on the enforcement, while on the other side are those who are pro-amnesty. My position is that amnesty should be granted to the illegal immigrants, but efforts should be enhanced to prevent illegal immigration in the future. This position is informed by the view that this is the most practical solution to the problem of illegal immigration and considers all the aspects of the complex issue of immigration (Newton 41). This paper will be approached through comparative approach and analysis where various theories and perspectives will be analyzed in respect to this topic. After comparative analysis, solutions to this problem will be proposed. Comparative and Analysis One of the main theories that have been used in the immigration reform debate is social contract theory. This theory holds that the state has authority over its citizens and any other individual within its borders. It further argues that since individuals have consented to surrender certain freedoms to the state in exchange for protection of the remaining rights, they ought to submit to the state’s laws and policies. Those who use this theory in the debate believe that enforcement is vital in the immigration report and that the government should use its authority to regulate immigration and prevent illegal immigration (Allport 77). Classical liberalism theory has also been used by various individuals and groups in the debate about immigration reform. This theory advocates limited government and individual rights under the constitution and rule of law. The theory stresses minimal government and economic freedom. Those who subscribes to this theory are of the view that illegal immigrants should be granted amnesty (Muwonge 24). This view is informed by the argument of classical liberalism theory that emphasizes protection and guaranteeing of individual rights. While it is true that these individuals violated the law and were not procedural while entering into the United States, those who subscribe to this theory argue that their rights should be protected and they should be allowed to pursue their interests in a bid to gain economic freedom. Also, those who hold this view argue that protection of the individual rights of these immigrants would be critical in advancing the socio-economic interests of the United States (Hinojosa-Ojeda 182). The other theory that has been used mostly in this debate is faction or pluralism theory. This theory asserts that decision making process is primarily within the government’s framework, but many non-governmental organizations and groups exert influence through their resources. This theory is concerned with the question of how influence and power should be distributed in a political process (Stolz 22). Based on this theory, the debate has been mostly on how the interests of the illegal immigrants can be maximized without compromising the national interests. This theory has been used to moderate the views of the extremists. The competing and diverse interests in the immigration reform debate have to consider all the aspects of immigration reform and provide an amicable solution that advances the interests of all groups. Those who subscribe to this theory seek to ensure equilibrium is achieved in the immigration reform (Newton 56). Since the debate on immigration reform relates to groups of different socio-economic classes and diverse ancestry, elitism theory has been applied in the debate by certain individuals and groups engaged in the debate. Elitism holds that some groups or individuals, who are the elites and have more wealth, experience or training and higher intellect among other distinctive attributes have a higher moral authority in core issues affecting any society. Therefore, their views should be taken seriously. In this debate, the view of many elites is divided (Stolz 23). On one side, there are those elites who propose for amnesty because they believe that the presence of immigrants, whether legal or illegal, is beneficial to the United States and the economy in particular. Those elites proposing for amnesty argue that these immigrants provide cheap labor and market for goods and services, which is important for stimulating economic growth and development (Hinojosa-Ojeda 185). On the other side, there are elites who advocate enforcement because they believe that these immigrants are harmful to the American nation because they contribute to social ills such as crime, and also bring along poverty to the American nation. The federalist and anti-federalist positions have contributed to this debate considerably. The federalists favor amnesty while anti-federalists favor enforcement. The federalists favor amnesty because they believe that immigrants are important in advancing national interests in the social and economic spheres. However, anti-federalists differ with this view. They believe that illegal immigrants are a threat to the influence of the states and that their increasing presence may make states to lose control which they consider as key to the concept of democracy and constitutionalism (Allport 86). Apart from the aforementioned theories and perspectives, the constitutional and bill of rights perspectives have been extensively applied in the immigration debate. The constitutional perspective has been critical in the immigration reform debate considering the fact that constitution is the supreme law that governs the United States. This perspective favors the enforcement side of this debate as it aims at affirming the integrity of the United States’ international borders (Muwonge 33). Also, the constitutional perspective holds that the federal government has the constitutional authority to guard and protect the United States borders and regulate the number and qualifications of the immigrants. The Bill of Rights perspective tends to differ from the constitutional perspective as it emphasizes the protection of the natural rights of property and liberty of all people. Those holding this perspective are of the view that the immigration reform should contain provision for amnesty towards the illegal immigrants to ensure that their natural rights are protected (Newton 111). Solutions: The Principle of Compromise and Consensus It is no doubt that there is the need for solutions to the problem of illegal immigration in the United States. Illegal immigration has a potential of bringing more adversities in any society ranging from drug trafficking to crime among other social ills. That notwithstanding, appropriate regulation of immigration has the potential of boosting the social and economic prospects of any society (Stolz 24). It is in the light of this that there have been different perspectives regarding the appropriate solutions to illegal immigration. The federalism perspective holds that the best solution to the problem is amnesty. This perspective is pro-amnesty and holds that amnesty will be the most practical solution to this problem (Allport 101). It is informed by the argument that compromise is the best way of addressing problems that affect many people. America has over 12 million immigrants and the process of enforcement which includes deportation may not only prove to be expensive and cumbersome but also futile in the long run. Therefore, this perspective calls for amnesty and compromise on the part of the government (Hinojosa-Ojeda 190). However, the federalism perspective is opposed by the states perspective that holds that the federal and state governments should use their constitutional authority and enforce immigration policy that requires that all immigrants be deported back to their countries of origin (Newton 115). The states perspective is grounded on the view that illegal immigrants are the main cause of numerous problems that states are facing, such as increase in crime rates and straining available resources among others. Therefore, they consider enforcement as one of the ways that can help states to address challenges that they are facing. Enforcement approaches would help states tackle the problems of unemployment, poverty, and crime (Hinojosa-Ojeda 192). Moreover, the cooperative federalism perspective can be applied in addressing the problems that immigration reform is focusing on. This perspective is a constitutional and political concept that emphasizes the decentralization of power without necessarily through equal sharing of government responsibilities among local, state, and federal institutions and agencies. This perspective asserts that state and national governments should tackle the issues they are facing together through cooperation rather than through a system where policy is imposed by the federal regime (Muwonge 55). Besides, this perspective holds the view that federalism should provide multiple access points for citizens who are interested in influencing the policies, institutions, and laws of the states and federal government. Therefore, in respect to the immigration reforms, this perspective proposes the solution which calls for consensus by both the federal and state governments. In a nutshell, this perspective requires that state and federal institutions, policies, and laws should be aligned towards addressing issues arising from immigration process (Hinojosa-Ojeda 198). In the light of the discussion above, my proposal is that immigration reform should contain provision for amnesty to illegal immigrants. This proposal is informed by the federalist perspective as well as by the bill of rights perspective. Granting amnesty to the illegal immigrants would help the United States to reap the benefit of increased population which is widened market and availability of cheap labor being critical in stimulating economic growth and development. Also, the rights of these immigrants should be protected as stipulated in the United States Bills of Rights. Works Cited Allport, Alan. Immigration Policy. New York: InfoBase Pub, 2004. Print. Hinojosa-Ojeda, Raul. "The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform." CATO Journal 32.1 (2012): 175–199. Muwonge, Godfrey Y. Immigration Reform: We Can Do It, If We Apply Our Founders' True Ideals. Lanham, Md: Hamilton Books, 2009. Print. Newton, Lina. Illegal, Alien, or Immigrant: The Politics of Immigration Reform. New York: New York Univ. Press, 2008. Print. Stolz, Rich. "Reflecting on the Campaign to Reform Immigration For America." Social Policy 41.2 (2011): 21–26. Read More