Author Categorical

/
Conjecture

(Do we have
a problem? –
Did it
happen? –
Does it
exist? –
What is it? –
How is it
defined?)
Definitiona
l
Causal /
Effect

(How did it
get this way?

What caused
this to
happen? –
What are/will
be the effects
of this?
Value /
Evaluational

(Is it good or
bad? – Is it
right or
wrong,
honorable or
dishonorabl
e – Is it
better or
worse, more
or less
desirable
than any
alternatives?
– Should it
be sought
out or
avoided?)
Action

(Call for
action –
What should
we do about
this? –
What actions
are
possible? –
What
proposals
shall we
make about
it?)
Jurisdictio
n

(Who can
do
something
about this?

Who
should
handle this
matter? –
Who has
the right to
decide this
matter?)
Biggs, Andrew – Resident
scholar at the American
Enterprise Institute &
contributor for the National
Review Online.
(Cites scholar George Borjas)
Immigration
reform will hurt
the poor /
uneducated
Americans
The existence of
11 million of
undocumented
immigrants.

The need to find
a solution to the
existing
immigration
laws

Immigration
reform may
not be a
positive policy
Consider
opposing
immigration
reform in the
light that it
appears that not
everyone will
benefit from it.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
Low-skilled
Americans will
face harsh
competition
against low-
skilled
immigrants.

The middle
class will
benefit ―lightly‖
and high earners
will take a small
loss, as they
would compete
with high-skill
immigrants.
Ewing, Walter –Senior
researcher at the
Immigration Policy Center.
(Cites a new report by the
Bipartisan Policy Center -
BPC)
Immigration
Reform will
help the overall
US economy
The existence of
11 million of
undocumented
immigrants.

The need to find
a solution to the
existing
immigration
laws

Decrease the
deficit, increase
housing
Immigration
Reform may
bea positive
policy
Support
immigration
reform because
it is an
economic
necessity.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
demand, and
will increase the
size of the labor
force.

Secure future
flow of needed
immigrant
workers,
taxpayers and
consumers.

It will also help
offset the aging
native-born
workforce.

Not acting can
cause severe
damage to the
US economy.
Khazan, Olga – Associate
editor at the Atlantic
(Cites data from a Pew
Research Center study)
Immigration
reform will
help offset the
aging
population rate
of the US (a
common
occurrence in
developed /
industrialized
The existence of
11 million of
undocumented
immigrants.

The need to find
a solution to the
existing
immigration
laws.
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Support
immigration
reform because
it will help
stabilize the
system by
balancing the
nation’s
biological
fitness.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
nations)
Immigrants
fertility rates are
balancing
American aging
population
because they
tend to have
more children
than Americans
do.

From 1960 to
2005,
immigrants
accounted for
51% of the
increase in the
US population.

Immigrants are
projected to
contribute 82%
of the total
increase from
2005 to 2050.

Will result in a
more efficient
and sustainable
system (social
security,
Medicare,
Medicaid).
Kugler, Adriana
Robert Lynch
Patrick Oakford – Scholars
at the Center for American
Progress
(Cite data provide by the
Department of Labor & Pew
Research Center)
Immigration
reform will
help the overall
US economy
The existence of
11 million of
undocumented
immigrants.

The need to find
a solution to the
existing
immigration
laws.

Granting legal
status to the
undocumented
immigrants
results in a 15%
income increase
and an
additional 10%
increase if they
become
citizens.

Their
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Support
immigration
reform because
it will improve
the lives of the
undocumented
immigrants
while boosting
the US
economy at the
same time.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
contributions to
the system will
surpass their
claims for
benefits, as the
average
undocumented
immigrant is 36
years old.
Hence, they will
be paying into
the system for
at least 30 years
before being
eligible for
benefits.
Surowiecki, James – writer
of the Financial Page at The
New Yorker
It is not true
that
immigration
reform will
have a negative
effect on
American jobs
or wages of
those with at
least a high-
school
education.

Immigration
reform will
The existence of
11 million of
undocumented
immigrants.

The need to find
a solution to the
existing
immigration
laws.

High-skilled
immigrants are
proactively
contributing to
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Support
immigration
reform because
it will create
jobs for native-
born
Americans.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
foster
investment and
job creation.

entrepreneurshi
p and
innovation.

The H1 – B visa
program must
be redesign to
match the needs
of the current
size of the US
economy.

The program
should
encourage high-
skilled
immigrants to
come to the US
and allow them
to stay.

Chen, Michelle - doctoral
student in the history
program of the City
University of New York
Graduate Center, specializing
in modern U.S. social
history. Her other
publications include
contributions
to the anthology Labor
Immigration
reform may not
improve
immigrants
lives but
instead create
an environment
of pseudo-
slavery.
The bill keeps
a guestworker
system that put
immigrants in a
vulnerable
position. Unlike
the
new W-Visa
workers, H-2B
guestworkers
Immigration
reform may
not be a
positive policy
Consider not
supporting
immigration
reform because
it is being
propose
exclusively for
economic
reasons without
any
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
Rising (New Press) and a
forthcoming issue of the
Journal of Urban History.
does not allow
change
employers, so
immigrant
workers may be
subject to
abuse.
The basic
structure
of the labor
force keeps
immigrants
disenfranchised
politically and
marginalized
both legally
and socially.
The
marginalization
of immigrants
is a political,
legal, and
cultural
project—one
that
documentation
alone cannot
fix. As long as
they lack equal
rights, they are
intrinsically
humanitarian
considerations.
Therefore, it
has the
potential to
produce harm
to immigrants
due to the
subpar legal
frame in which
it is being
conceived.
more exposed to
labor violations.

The Senate cut
of Reunification
visas (principal
way for women
to enter the US)
may trigger a
demographic
disaster.

Although many
immigrant
women work,
they are more
likely to be
employed in
informal
sectors, such as
domestic work.
Reflecting
general
discrimination
in the
workforce,
women
immigrants
also earn less in
many cases,
which would
likely make it
more difficult to
qualify for
provisional
status on the
basis of
earnings or
employment
status—even if
they are the
main providers
for their
families, just
―off the books.‖

By privileging
formal wage
work, the
Senate
bill prioritizes
male workers
over their
female
colleagues
along with their
partners and
relatives.
While there
may be an
economic
rationale
to this gender
gap, it is blind
to the social
complexities
of migrant
communities.
For immigrant
workers who
see labor as a
means to
support their
families, cutting
families out of
the
reform equation
undoubtedly
misses the
point.
Ewing, Walter –Senior
researcher at the
Immigration Policy Center.
(Cites a new report by the
Bipartisan Policy Center -
BPC)
The United
States needs a
new
immigration
policy that is
based less on
wishful
thinking and
more on
realism.
Spending vast
sums of money
trying to
The decision
made by the
authors of the
Brookings-
Duke
report to ―trade‖
family-based
immigrants for
high-skilled
employment-
based
immigrants
(Brookings-
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Consider
support a bill in
immigration
reform which
considers that
is
flexible limits
on immigration
that rise and
fall with U.S.
labor demand,
coupled with
strict
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
enforce
arbitrary
numerical
limits on
immigration
that bear no
relationship to
economic
reality is a
fool’s errand.
Duke
Immigration
Policy
Roundtable
2009)
underestimates
the economic
value of family-
based
immigration.
Studies have
found that
family-based
immigrants,
compared to
employment-
based
immigrants,
have higher
rates of
entrepreneurshi
p and Regets
1996a),
earnings growth
(Duleep and
Regets 1996b),
and upward
occupational
mobility (Jasso
and
Rosenzweig
enforcement of
tough wage and
labor
laws that
protect all
workers,
regardless of
where they
were
born. We need
to respect the
natural human
desire for
family
reunification,
while
recognizing
that even
family based
immigrants are
unlikely to
come here if
jobs are not
available. And
we need to
create a
pathway to
legal status
for
unauthorized
immigrants
1995). As
economist
Harriet Duleep
puts it,
―family-based
immigrants
meet labor
market needs in
an
ongoing,
flexible fashion
that contributes
to a vibrant
economy and, at
the same time,
fosters
permanence
with
its associated
benefits…
Those who
enter via
kinship ties
are more likely
to be permanent
and permanence
confers a
variety of
societal goods
(House
Committee on
who are
already here so
that
they can no
longer be
exploited by
unscrupulous
employers
who hang the
threat of
deportation
over their
heads.
the
Judiciary,
Subcommittee
on Immigration,
Citizenship,
Refugees,
Border Security,
and
International
Law 2007).‖
Gary P. Freeman
–Professor and chair of
Government at the
University of Texas at
Austin.
Liberal
immigration
reform will be
achieved at the
cost of
overriding
public
preferences.
For this reason
the proposed
Standing
Commission, a
deliberate
attempt to push
immigration
policy
development
out of the
public arena
and
enhance the
Immigration
reform poses
extremely
complex
technical
challenges:
selecting the
correct mix of
carrots and
sticks to
discourage
unauthorized
entry and work,
providing
sufficient
support for new
immigrants
without creating
the
moral hazard of
disincentives to
Immigration
reform may
not be a
positive policy
Consider
opposing
immigration
reform in the
light that it
appears that not
it is not a
democratic
policy as it is
being imposed
onto the
majority of
Americans who
do not approve
of it.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
prospects of
liberal reforms,
is a bad idea.
work and
endangering the
integrity of the
social welfare
system, fitting
the needs of
employers to
the correct
number and
qualifications of
migrants,
ensuring that
responses to
employer
complaints
of labor
shortages do not
undermine
native wages
and
working
conditions, and
operating a just
asylum policy
while also
pursuing the
foreign policy
interests of the
nation.
Rodolfo O. de la Garza
-Eaton Professor of
What measures
must be taken
A ticket holder-
based policy
Immigration
reform may be
Consider
support an
Congress,
Media,
Administrative Law and
Municipal Science and
Professor of International
Public Affairs at Columbia
University
to create
a new policy?
First, we must
establish its
dual
focus: the
economic and
social well-
being of
the nation, and
respect for the
civil and
human
rights of
immigrants.
The former will
provide
the basis for
meeting
employer
demands for
low- and high-
skilled labor.
The latter will
validate our
overstated
claim of being
a nation
that welcomes
immigrants,
which requires
could be
(gradually)
enacted if all of
the trade-offs
were clearly
presented. The
U.S.
government
would have to
launch a full-
scale campaign
to
educate the
public about the
kinds of returns
this program
could bring.
Those who
oppose
the program out
of self-interest
or nativistic
racism must be
challenged
frontally.
Outrightly
shaming their
bigotry may not
lead them
to change their
positions—but
a positive
policy
immigration
reform bill that
views reform
as an
ongoing
socioeconomic
process, rather
than as a
national
security issue
to be
attacked and
controlled.
General
Public
ensuring that
anti-immigrant
discrimination
is reduced and
immigrant-
worker rights
are
respected. No
reasonable
interest group
should
reject these
objectives.
Secondly,
existing
national
employment
laws should be
enforced,
restricting jobs
to
citizens, legal
residents, and
authorized
guest
workers. This
generates
opposition on
two
fronts:
agricultural,
it could help
reduce the
number of
Americans who
might
otherwise
support them.
Still, this
proposed
reform will not
be
enacted in the
foreseeable
future.
Opposition to
change has
hardened along
ideological
lines,
which means
we will
continue with
the failed
policies of the
past—or create
new policies
that are even
worse. We are
most likely to
see
temporary
construction,
and service
(i.e., hotels and
restaurants)
industry
employers
depend on large
numbers of
undocumented
immigrants,
who are often
the only
workers
willing to take
such poorly-
paid, low-status
jobs; and then
there are the
pro-immigrant
and
human rights
advocates who
fear the
potential
human and
civil rights
violations that
may
result from the
enforcement of
current law.
modifications
that will not
address
the broad,
fundamental
issues raised
here. And
then, at some
point much later
down the road,
immigration
reform will
once again take
the
forefront as a
major political
issue—will we
be ready then?
Pia M. Orrenius and
Madeline Zavodny
- Pia M. Orrenius is a
Research Officer and Senior
Economist at die Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas.
Madeline Zavodny is a
Professor of Economics at
Agnes
Scott College.
Immigration
policy reform
has reached an
impasse
because of
disagreement
over whether to
create a
pathway to
legal permanent
residence
and eventual
U.S. citizenship
for
unauthorized
immigrants.
The United
States first—
and last—
offered a large-
scale amnesty
as
part of the
Immigration
Reform and
Control Act
(IRGA) in
1986.
Despite
increased
border
The main
economic effect
of legalization
programs is an
increase
in beneficiaries'
earnings. Latin
American
immigrants who
legalized
their status
under IRCA
experienced
wage increases
in the range of
6 to 13 percent,
with slightly
larger effects
among women
than men
(Amuedo-
Dorantes,
Bansak, and
Raphael 2007;
Barcellos 2010;
Kossoudji and
Cobb-Clark
2002; Rivera-
Batiz 1999).
Earnings also
increased for
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Consider
support
immigration
reform
considering
that it seems to
be the only
viable way to
deal with an
already
existing
problem.

Congress,
Media,
General
Public
enforcement
and provisions
for employer
sanctions, the
law failed to
curtail
unauthorized
immigration.
The
9/11 terror
attacks renewed
the emphasis
on national
security and led
to stricter
policies
regarding
undocumented
immigrants.
Over the
past decade,
border and
interior
enforcement
has increased,
while
avenues that
allowed some
illegal residents
to adjust to
legal status
men likely to
have legalized
their status
under
NÁCARA
(Kaushal 2006).
Labor Market
Effects
Legalization
removes the risk
of employer
sanctions and
allows
immigrants to
move to better
jobs and earn
higher returns
on their
education. The
earnings gains
after
legalization are
bigger among
well-educated
immigrants than
among less-
educated
immigrants
(Kaushal 2006,
Pan 2010).
Much of the
have been
eliminated, and
a growing
number of
states have
adopted
laws aimed at
driving
unauthorized
immigrants.
gains appear to
be due to
amnesty
beneficiaries
moving to
higher-paying
occupations
(Lozano
and Sorensen
2011).
Consistent with
this, the benefits
of having legal
status are larger
for workers in
skilled
occupations
than those in
in unskilled
occupations
(Orozco-
Alemán 2010).
Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda
- is Founding Director of the
North American Integration
and Development Center at
the University of California,
Los Angeles.
Comprehensive
immigration
reform
generates an
annual
increase in U.S.
GDP of at least
0.84 percent.
This accounts
The current
enforcement-
only
approach to
unauthorized
immigration is
not cost-
effective and
has
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Support
immigration
reform because
it is an
economic
necessity.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
for
$1.5 trillion in
additional GDP
over 10 years.
It also boosts
wages for both
native-born and
newly legalized
immigrant
workers. The
effects would
generate a $5.3
billion increase
in
California, a
$1.9 billon
increase in Los
Angeles
County, and a
$1.68 billon
increase in
Arizona.
• The
temporary
worker
program
generates an
annual increase
in U.S. GDP of
0.44 percent.
This amounts
not deterred
unauthorized
migrants from
coming to the
United
States when
jobs are
available.
Rather,
enforcement-
only policies
have wasted
billions of
taxpayer dollars
while pushing
unauthorized
migration
further
underground.
These policies
have produced a
host
of unintended
consequences:
more deaths
among border
crossers,
greater demand
for people
smugglers, less
"circular
to $792 billion
of
additional GDP
over 10 years.
Moreover,
wages decline
for
both native-
born and newly
legalized
immigrant
workers.
• Mass
deportation
reduces U.S.
GDP by 1.46
percent
annually.
This amounts
to $2.6 trillion
in lost GDP
over 10 years,
not
including the
actual cost of
deportation. (2)
Wages would
rise for
less-skilled
native-born
workers, but
migration" in
favor of more
"permanent
settlement"
among
unauthorized
immigrants,
and further
depressing of
wages in low-
wage labor
markets.
To date,
significant
declines in
unauthorized
immigration
have
occurred only
during
downturns in
the U.S.
economy when
labor
demand is
dampened.
Ironically,
demographic
trends in
Mexico will
likely
would decline
for higher
skilled
natives, and
would lead to
widespread job
loss. California
would lose 3.6
million jobs
under this
scenario and its
economy
would shrink
$302 billion.
Los Angeles
County would
suffer
1.3 million job
losses at a cost
of $106 billion
to the county
economy.
In Arizona,
mass
deportation
would amount
to 581,000 lost
jobs and a
$48.8 billion
contraction of
the state
accomplish
what tens of
billions of
dollars in border
enforcement
clearly have
not: a decline in
the supply of
migrants from
Mexico who are
available for
jobs in the
United States.
economy.
Vignaswari Saminathan
-University of Houston Law
Review — MBA, Oklahoma
City University, Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma, 2005; LLM,
University College London,
London, U.K., 1998; LLB,
University of Sheffield, U.K.,
1990; BS, University of
Science Malaysia, Penang,
Malaysia, 1985.
Over the years,
two diametric
objectives have
emerged within
the U.S.
employment
immigration
system:
protectionist
measures to
safeguard or
protect the
interests of the
U.S. workers
(which have a
corollary
purpose of
protecting the
interest of
international
workers) and
competitive
measures to
attract and
retain highly
skilled workers.
Currently, the
system is out of
sync in meeting
the needs of the
Immigration
reform should
focus on these
two aspects: (1)
leveling the
playing field
between the
U.S. workers
and
international
workers by
tightening the
protectionist
measures
against wage
suppression and
adverse
working
conditions, and
(2) liberalizing
the quantitative
limitation.
These would
have the effect
of ensuring
optimal
protection for
the U.S.
workers and the
international
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Support
immigration
reform which
focuses on the
promotion and
retention of
high-skilled
workers under
the philosophy
of
competitivenes
s and NOT
protectionism.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
(1) U.S. as a
global
competitor; (2)
domestic
industry; (3)
U.S. workers;
and (4)
international
workers.

The
quantitative
restraints have
led to a decade
or more wait
for legal
permanent
residence,
which is
impeding the
U.S. from
attracting and
retaining highly
skilled workers.
On the other
hand, the U.S.’s
global
competitors are
in the position
to offer
immediate
workers, as well
as improving
the
competitiveness
in attracting and
retaining highly
skilled workers
to meet the
needs of the
domestic
industry.
permanent
residency or at
least permanent
residency
within a
relatively short
period of time.
The burgeoning
new
economies,
such as in India
and China,
have an impact
on the flow of
immigrants.
Already there is
evidence of
reverse brain
drain from the
U.S. to these
countries,
although that
flow, at
present, may
have been
exacerbated by
the deepening
worldwide
recession.
Further
compounding
these changes
is the looming
threat of the
world’s aging
population. All
these
developments
may heighten
the competition
for highly
skilled workers.
Lisa Lopez Levers & Debra
Hyatt-Burkhart
-Debra Hyatt-Burkhart
Ph.D. is an Assistant
Professor in the Department
of Counseling, Psychology,
and Special Education.
Dr. Lisa Lopez Levers is a
Professor of counselor
education and supervision in
the School of Education at
Duquesne University.
Immigration-
related
divisiveness
has sprung
from the
controversy
surrounding
Arizona Senate
Bill 1070 (ASB
1070), which
was signed into
law
on April 23,
2010 (State of
Arizona, 2010).
What is lacking
in the
discussion in
favor of
aggressive
Social science
researchers
have the
potential to
contribute to
this discourse in
positive ways.
the researchers
offer several
research
implications
below.
First, upon
reviewing the
extant literature,
we discovered
that there is a
great
deal of recent
scholarship that
Immigration
reform may
not be a
positive policy
Consider not
supporting
immigration
reform in the
light that in its
current form,
the bill may
produce
irreparable
psychological
damage to the
families of the
immigrants.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
reform is a
humane
consideration
of the people
who are central
to this issue. It
is important to
notice that at
the center of
this issue are
human beings
who most
likely suffered
traumatic
experiences due
to the migration
process and
that under the
new bill might
put through
more stress due
to harsh
enforcement.
crosses the
boundaries of
specific
disciplines,
thereby having
the potential to
facilitate a more
informed
discussion
regarding
the reality of
immigration in
the United
States and
related policy
reform.
However,
because much
of this
information is
erudite,
sometimes even
esoteric,
and tends to be
so discipline-
specific,
important
considerations
of the matter
have not yet
entered the
discourse. We
believe that
translational
research in this
area could offer
relevant cross-
disciplinary
input to assist in
explicating
what currently
is known,
especially for
the purpose of
humane and
socially just
policy
reform.
Second,
situational
analyses of
high-
immigration
areas in the
United States
could contribute
to a better
understanding
of the risk and
protective
factors
involving
groups of
human beings
and their
intergroup
relations. While
this article
has emphasized
the risk factors
involving
vulnerability
and
immigration, we
see
how situational
analyses could
illuminate
matters relating
to the resilience
and
hardiness of
immigrants.
Randy Capps and Michael
Fix
-Randy Capps
(rcapps@migrationpolicy.org
) is a
senior policy analyst and
demographer at the
Migration Policy Institute, in
Washington, D.C.
Michael Fix is the institute’s
Although the
short-term costs
of insuring
immigrants
before they
become
permanent
residents may
seem high,
both fiscally
If the
Affordable Care
Act is fully
implemented,
and millions of
people
gain access to
coverage
through new
private
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Consider
supporting
immigration
reform in light
that it will
expand health
coverage for all
Americans at a
lower cost.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
senior vice president
and director of studies.
and politically,
choosing
not to insure
them also
involves
substantial
costs. It is easy
to focus only
on the
ten-year score
of the
Congressional
Budget Office.
But keeping
health coverage
beyond the
grasp of so
many people
will have long-
term
consequences
for
state and local
budgets, the
Affordable
Care Act’s
implementation
, and the
health and
well-being of
immigrants.
insurance
options or an
expanded
Medicaid
program, under
the law
unauthorized
immigrants will
still be frozen
out. Legally
present
immigrants
without
permanent
resident status,
such as students
and temporary
workers, will
also
be excluded
from Medicaid,
as will
adults and, in
some states,
children
who have been
permanent
residents
for fewer than
five years.
Glen, Patrick J
-Professor at Georgetown
University School of Law
The question of
whether illegal
immigrants
should be
entitled to some
form of health
coverage in the
United States
sits at the
intersection of
two
contentious
debates: health
reform ahd
immigration
reform.
Proponents of
extending
coverage argue
that the United
States has a
moral
obhgation to
provide health
care to all those
within its
borders.
Conversely,
those
against doing
so argue that

The question of
whether health
coverage should be
extended to
illegal immigrants
will continue to
rankle in the
political arena for
the
foreseeable future.
With the divisive
political climate
now prevailing,
"there is little
chance that
legislators will
offer funding to
provide health
care services to the
undocumented
immigrant
population."^"'
Nonetheless,
this Article has
argued that
extending such
coverage is sound
policy, even if
there is no
colorable claim
that illegal
immigrants are
legally entitled to
these public
benefits. The
inclusion of the
illegal immigrant
Immigration
reform may be
a positive
policy
Consider
supporting
immigration
reform in light
that it will
expand health
coverage for all
Americans at a
lower cost.
Congress,
Media,
General
Public
immigrants
illegally present
in the country
should not be
entitled to
public benefits.
This Article
seeks to chart a
middle course
between these
extremes while
answering two
questions.
First, does
constitutional
law mandate
extending
health coverage
to illegal
immigrants?
Second, even if
not legally
mandated, are
there
compelling
policy reasons
for extending
such coverage?
This Article
concludes that
while health
population may
lower costs in
numerous ways,
including
lower insurance
premiums, lower
emergency medical
expenditures, and a
switch from
expensive late-
stage treatments to
cost-effective
preventative
and ambulatory
care. Coverage will
obviously benefit
illegal immigrants,
but the entire US
population will
also reap the
rewards of a
broader risk
pool comprising
individuals with
comparatively low
medical
expenditures
and usage trends.
coverage for
illegal
immigrants is
not required
under
prevailing
constitutional
norms,
extending
coverage as a
matter of policy
would serve the
broader
interests of the
United States.
Extending
coverage
would be
beneficial as a
matter of
economics and
public health,
generating
spillover
benefits for all
US citizens and
those in the US
healthcare and
health
insurance
systems.