That accounts for a lot of cheap labor, and many claim that without it fruit and vegetables would rot in the fields, toddlers would be without nannies, linens at hotels would go unlaundered, commuters would be stranded as taxis sat driverless, and construction would come to a halt (Murphy 2004). However, Borjas claims that this ripple effect would not last long, noting that in states such as Iowa, where foreign-born residents are rare, there are people working in hotels, restaurants, and all the other jobs that supporters claim can only be filled with illegal aliens (Murphy 2004). In fact, according to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 87% of illegal immigrant live in just 15 states (Murphy 2004). Borjas points out that if there were no illegal aliens to tend the gardens, Californians who wanted nice lawns would simply pay more for it, eventually drawing low skilled workers from other parts of the country. Adding that American workers would be the better for it, Borjas states, "the workers would be slightly wealthier, and the employers would be slightly poorer, but everything would get done" (Murphy 2004).
Laura Hill, a research fellow at the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California agrees, stating that although there would be a spike in fruits and vegetables, eventually farmers and agricultural companies would find cheaper ways to harvest the crops, perhaps even turning the quest into the development of new technology (Murphy 2004).
Many immigration experts, such as Mark Krikorian, executive director of Center for Immigration Studies, suggest that American taxpayers would be better off financially if the illegal immigrants in the United States returned to their homeland, arguing that there would be far less stress on the social-welfare system (Murphy 2004). According to Krikorian, "Immigrants overall use at least one major welfare program at a rate 50% higher than natives" (Murphy 2004). Referring to an analysis of 2001 data by his center that found Medicaid use particularly high among immigrants, Krikorian claims, "That is not because they are morally defective. It is because they are poor and don't have any education, and they end up inevitably stumbling and having needs for the system" (Murphy 2004).
However immigrant advocacy groups disagree, claiming that the economic impact of immigration plays out differently at the local and national levels (Murphy 2004). Although local hospitals and clinics bear huge health-care costs associated with uninsured illegal immigrants, the federal government enjoys a 'bonanza' from many of the same immigrants who pay federal taxes but receive no benefits in return (Murphy 2004). Raul Yzaguirre, president of the National Council of La Raza, a Latino civil rights organization, notes that contrary to popular perception, many illegal aliens do have payroll taxes deducted from their paychecks (Murphy 2004). Yet, many undocumented workers use false Social Security numbers. Nevertheless, Yzaguirre claims that without illegal immigrants, all Americans would be punished by having to pay more for everything, from hamburgers to new housing (Murphy 2004).
While many believe that illegal alien have not right to health benefits because those who are here illegally have no right to benefits in the United States, others argue that access to health care is a basic human right and should be provided to everyone, including illegal immigrants (Dwyer 2004). While it is true that illegal aliens have violated a law by entering and remaining in the Untied States, many people break many different laws and still are entitled to health care (Dwyer 2004). Proponents of California's Proposition 187 stated that "while our own citizens and legal residents go wanting, those who chose to enter our country ILLEGALLY get royal treatment at the expense of the California taxpayer" (Dwyer 2004). Proponents also noted that the legislature maintained programs that included free prenatal care for illegal aliens while at the same time increased the amount that senior citizens had to pay for prescription drugs (Dwyer 2004).
While the United States is a country of many prospects and possibilities, there must be rules to ensure order and prosperity (Porter 2006). In 1952, the federal government established the Immigration and Nationality Act, which serves as the basic framework for U.S. immigration law. At the time of its adoption it was favored by both sides of the political fence. The Democrats supported it because it made all races eligible for naturalization, and eliminated discrimination between sexes with respect to immigration (Porter 2006). Republicans supported it because it revised the quota system of the National Origins Act of 1924 and introduced a means of selected immigration by giving a quota preference to skilled aliens whose services were needed in the U.S. (Porter 2006). Lakeisha Porter points out in the March 2006 issue of International Social Science Review, that it also outlined procedures for "adjusting the status of nonimmigrant aliens to permanent resident aliens, added significantly to the existing classes of nonimmigrant admission, and established a central index of all aliens in the United States for use by security...
Individuals who are arrested for a deportable offense can be held under mandatory detention by the U.S. Immigration Services until the immigration proceeding takes place, even though their only crime may be that they entered the U.S. without a visa or stayed without a visa (Steadman pp). Aliens in such proceeding may get a lawyer, but unlike in criminal cases, the government is under no obligation to provide one for
In addition, many lawmakers fear that revealing the possible presence of aliens living amongst normal American citizens might create a panic of monumental proportions, and no reasonable Congressman wants that to happen either. Nevertheless, the growing body of evidence to the contrary indicates that the time has come to recognize the truth and take proactive steps to address the situation rather than just twiddle the nation's collective thumbs in hopes
5 ounces of steel in them. The bill did not pass, but eventually a compromise bill went through requiring all handguns to have at least 3.7 ounces of steel. No completely plastic gun has ever been produced, although guns with a plastic frame are popular because they weigh less. The legislation was unnecessary because, again, no problem existed. Apparently, the gun debate is not the place to look for facts. The
Alien Chestburster Scene Analysis Analysis of the Chestburster Sequence in Alien Ridley Scott's Alien (1979) is one of the most riveting and horrifying sci-fi film of the 20th century. While the film's title points to an unknown alien creature, the audience is not introduced to this threat until approximately 52-minutes into the narrative during the infamous, and one of the most recognizable sci-fi scenes of the film -- the chestburster scene. Despite
Civil Rights Movement Civil rights since 1954 with special reference to California's role A growing Cause, 1776-1865 The Declaration of Independence asserted that "all men have been created equal," as well as in 1788, the U.S. Constitution presupposed to "secure the blessings of liberty" towards the United States citizens. These rights as well as liberties, nevertheless, had been meant just for white individuals of property. The actual Founding Fathers by no means thought
Civil Rights Act of 1964 enforced the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution by ensuring a legislative act that would prevent discrimination and extend equal protection under the law. The bill in its entirety protects all Americans, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, national background, and gender. It was and still is considered to be a landmark bill, in spite of the fact that the Fourteenth Amendment already technically guarantees equal protection
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now