The border crisis and illegal immigration were one of the primary political issues which brought victory to the Republicans in the 2024 elections. While many opponents of immigration control are ideological and think having a border is somehow “fascist,” other objections are made on more practical grounds, reflecting a belief that modern America cannot achieve basic tasks of governance. Perhaps this is accurate due to partisanship and political dysfunction, but such worries seem to have become a pathology which leads to the feeling that it is pointless to try and implement good public policies.
One place where this is clear is the claim that the economy couldn’t function without illegal labor, but it’s also not possible to allow enough temporary foreign workers for the economy to function. In reality, enforcing immigration laws while having a sufficient temporary worker system should not be a major challenge for our sprawling federal government. But perhaps they are too busy doing everything else to properly perform the most rudimentary functions of a state.
Our country’s reliance on immigrant labor is not an “all or nothing” matter. For example, it is fair to say that we should be training our own engineers—or Panda Express managers—instead of relying on Asians with H1B visas. However, regarding the claim, “There are certain jobs Americans won’t do,” it isn’t so much whether or not that is true as the fact that there is no social or economic good in encouraging more Americans to specialize in seasonal work commonly done by migrant labor, such as harvesting produce or cleaning rooms at resorts. It also needs to be noted that it is specifically Mexicans who are good at many of these jobs, because Mexico is a nearby country where the upper classes have lifestyles almost indistinguishable from our own. It is not the case that people from poor countries are inherently good at jobs our economy needs or that you can put twenty migrants from random countries together and they will successfully build a house.
Given that Mexico is our neighbor and our economies are highly integrated, in and of itself there is no reason to try and free our economy from the need for Mexican labor anymore than they should try to free theirs from the need for American tourism or access to our consumer market. While we don’t want a permanent underclass, it can be as necessary for labor to cross borders as it is for goods and capital. Further, despite what some believe, Mexico consistently works with the United States on transnational issues, even if U.S.-Mexico relations are sometimes contentious.
Mexico should be viewed as a partner in securing our border. Although the benefits for us are much greater than for them, immigration to the United States through Mexico also provides many challenges to their state. A good way to incentivize Mexico’s cooperation is to prioritize allowing Mexicans in as legal temporary laborers over citizens of other countries. While Mexico’s economy is less dependent on remittances than Americans tend to imagine, it is still a significant source of their income, and further, working in the United States supports people who may be unemployed and a burden on the economy if they needed to find work in Mexico. The alternative is the current system where people from all over the world pass into our country illegally through Mexico. It may be prudent to make similar agreements with other Central American and Caribbean countries, but Mexico by a wide margin is our most important partner in this regard.
We have an entire Department of Labor and Department of Agriculture that should be able to set a number of allowed laborers for Customs and Border Patrol to enforce. The “CPB One” app the Joe Biden administration used to let anyone get Temporary Protected Status was originally designed to simplify trade and can be used to inform foreign laborers about the number of legal entries available and track them when they work in our country. Recording the employment of migrant laborers doesn’t need it be any more difficult than scanning cards with a phone. If they disappear into our population it is just a matter of putting out a warrant, because immigration laws will be enforced. In short, all the mechanisms are currently in place.
All of the above sounds simple, yet in American political discourse there are endless objections.
“How do we know the amount of labor that will be required?”
There is an army of bureaucrats who are supposed to be doing this now and numbers can be adjusted as necessary.
“This would require political compromise.”
No, enforcing the law while also allowing in the necessary amount of laborers is not ideological, it is just governing. This shouldn’t require compromising any principle.
“This would require a vast surveillance apparatus.”
No, every legal border crossing is already recorded and you show an ID and provide a Social Security number (or in this case Tax Identification Number) to start any job, it just streamlines reporting for foreign laborers.
“They will just disappear after entering the country anyway.”
I suppose some might, but if immigration laws are being enforced, losing your right to work legally in the United States is not a trivial matter and it’s easy to know who has maintained employment and exited the country on the required timetable.
In short, implementing such policies requires little more than choosing to do so.
Immigration enforcement and migrant labor provides a strong example of this concept, but in reality anyone who focuses on public policy can almost instantly imagine endless idiotic objections to any policy which might improve the functioning of our country. Good policy is shot down because it might exclude some part of the population (while still improving the general welfare), it runs afoul of our endless regulations, government employees are unable or unwilling to do their jobs, or it doesn’t meet some narrow ideological requirement held by too many people with power. Meanwhile, when it’s something insane we shouldn’t be doing like shutting down the country over a virus or giving endless military supplies to Ukraine, it is suddenly full steam ahead and all guard rails are removed.
There isn’t an obvious solution to the broader problem, but I fear a country which studies every objection before doing anything wise but which rushes into folly is not long for this world. If a man believes it is impossible for us to guard the border and bring the harvest in at the same time, suffice to say, it’s hard to imagine that man believes we have any future at all. Unfortunately, it isn’t just one man holding this attitude: this paralysis and hopelessness has infected our political culture. What is perhaps even more concerning is that this cynicism seems to be warranted. Politicians love to use the expression, “I believe we can walk and chew gum at the same time,” but it is always about something where we are catastrophically failing at both of the activities. It is long past time that we, as Americans, decide if we are going to do things right or give up entirely.
