The Problem of Immigration and Texas, Research Paper Example

The question of immigration and the state of Texas is primarily about the issue of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is particularly problematic for the state because Texas shares a significant border with Mexico. Immigration policies established on the federal level have had a profound impact on how Texas copes with immigration. However, since illegal immigration is still a dilemma for Texas, the question remains as to what kind of immigration policy needs to be pursued. Furthermore, what makes the immigration question so difficult is that it incorporates many different political issues. As Reisinger notes: “The illegal immigrant situation has received much publicity and has become highly politicized.” (Reisinger, 196) This “high politicization” of immigration implies that the question of illegal immigration is not only about immigration, but also about ideological, economic, and national security issues. Each of these issues poses their own unique questions. For example, economically speaking, immigration may be beneficial or detrimental to the economy of Texas. In terms of national security, a bad immigration policy could lead to national security hazards. The ideological aspect of the problem asks: what is the vision of America that proponents or opponents of immigration advance? In the following essay, we shall discuss the immigration problem in Texas by considering such ideological, national security and economic aspects of immigration, because to take a pro or con position on immigration requires that all these factors be considered in order to provide a good argument. Accordingly, a comprehensive immigration law and policy is central to solving the problem. Yet this is only possible through thinking about all the diverse elements that make immigration so problematic.

The ideological part of the question can be summarized as follows: Firstly, is there a certain ideal vision of America that is threatened by illegal immigration?; Secondly, is there is a social and ideological divide that creates the different views on immigration policy? Foner and Rumbaut note that “four decades into a new era of mass immigration, it has become commonplace to observe that the United Sates is undergoing its most profound demographic transformation in a century.” (Foner and Rumbaut, 1) It is this demographic change that makes the immigrated debate so heated. The demographic shift to a more diverse America and Texas means that the balance between majorities and minorities is becoming less clear.  This affects what people think about the ”ideal immigrant.”  Studies, for example, show that “84 percent [of Hispanics] supported more liberal proposals to allow unauthorized immigrants to eventually gain citizenship” (Bibby and Schaffner, 246), while whites support these same proposals in much lower numbers. According to the rise in Hispanic Americans, this means that their opinions must be taken seriously. This also suggests that there is a significant ideological divide within American society regarding immigration, as different ethnic groups have different views of the problem. Because of these different opinions, there is an indecisiveness in how to approach the problem. David Spener writes: “In the case of the United States, the fact that it has not effectively barred illegitimate movement across its border with Mexico is not because it has lacked the coercive means to do so, but because it has not yet decisively directed those means to that end.” (Spener, 116) This would suggest that there are economic means to stop illegal immigration. But the fact that illegal immigration remains an important problem means that politicians are unsure how to address the issue. In other words, there is no consensus opinion as to how the problem should be decisively handled.

This does not mean that actions have not been taken. In Texas, actions such as Operation Hold the Line suggest a consensus decision on how to handle the problem. Operation Hold the Line can be viewed as relatively successful: “since 1993, U.S. border control initiatives have been inspired mainly by OTHL lesson numbers.” (Spener 119) This would suggest that OTHL had a clear influence on approaches to illegal immigration. The efforts in Texas seem to indicate the wish of the Texas government to limit and stop illegal immigration. But these actions are limited in how effective they are because there is a lack of consensus opinion on how to solve the problem.

Alongside this ideological and political indecisiveness, there are also economic factors in the immigration debate. The academic literature suggests that the main reason for illegal immigration is economics. For example, Lee Stacy observes that “attracted by the higher wages paid in the United States, many Mexicans have migrated across the border in search of work.” (Stacy, 449) It is because of the great economic difference between the United States and Mexico that illegal immigration becomes commonplace. In addition, these workers also benefit American companies looking for cheap labor. Calavita writes “U.S. policy makers were carefully crafting the Texas Proviso – thereby providing a loophole for the employment of undocumented workers and ensuring a plentiful supply of Mexican braceros to southwest growers.” (Calavita, 61) This means that even American companies have a long a history of supporting illegal immigration, despite it being illegal. American businesses place economic profit ahead of following American law. While these companies clearly benefit from cheap labor, the taxpayers in Texas do not see these same economic benefits. For example, Janda et al. note: “One report suggests that cost of illegal immigration to Texas exceeds $4.7 billion for education, health care, and incarceration.” (Janda et al., 649) In light of this absurd figure, the choice would seem to be to either legalize all these immigrants or revise policy. But this must be done democratically, and this again returns us to the problem of the split in public opinion on immigration.

National security is another important factor in considering the question of border control. One of the growing problems on the Texas-Mexico border involves Mexican drug cartels and activity. Reisinger writes: “Illegal immigration is widespread across poorly policed borders.” (Reisinger, 166) In this case, the fortified borders that would result from a new immigration policy could also have the positive effect of increasing security on the border against drug dealers. This security problem is relevant as, Ray Leal observes: “while the drug cartels’ border violence has created uneasiness in border communities and decreased tourism along the Texas-Mexico border, it has brought the issue of border security to the forefront of the national political debate.” (Leal, 319) While it is important to not confuse the immigration debate with issues related to drug trafficking, it is important to think about how these two issues are related. Some illegal immigrants are also involved in the drug trade, but not all, so it is unfair to paint all illegal immigrants as drug dealers. Although both are committing criminal acts, it is a mistake to confuse the two. However, they are related and this helps make the problem of illegal immigration even more difficult to solve.

As we have seen, the debate of illegal immigration and Texas is extremely complex. For example, someone who favors a diverse America may at the same time be concerned about border security and understand the connection between tightened immigration laws and the possible lowering of drug trafficking along the Texas-Mexico border. This is why the problem of immigration cannot be simply approached in a greater pro or con way: the issue is multi-faceted. However, one common thread is that democratic law must be respected. For example, if the majority favors a reformed immigration policy, the principles of democracy would state that these opinions should be followed. At the same time there must be a respect for the laws that are passed. For example, the fact that American companies violate labour laws by hiring illegal immigrants is also an illegal act. The choice then must be clear: either penalize these companies for breaking the law, or, to recognize the benefits of migrant workers to the U.S. economy and legalize them. The crucial point here is that the democratic and legal principles of both Texas and America must be consistent with an approach to immigration policy, otherwise these democratic and legal principles devalue themselves. In other words, the law must mean something, and in the case of immigration, what is needed is good laws, not laws that are broken by both illegal immigrants and American companies. In addition, the law must reflect democratic consensus. Yet the problem in this regard is obvious: what is a “good” law in the case of illegal immigration? Should America be an inclusive country; should it be dominated by economic interests; or should it protect the rights of Americans who already live in the country? In our view, our above discussion demonstrates that good laws must be created and then be enforced, which means that all factors must be considered in the debate to produce the best policy possible. Without the enforcement and respect for the laws, the laws that are passed mean nothing. Consensus opinions need to be formed and put into action. Strategies used to address the immigration problem must be supported with carefully thought-out policy, ones that benefit America, Texas and the immigrant population.

Works Cited

Bibby, John F. and Brian F. Schaffner. Politics, Parties and Elections in America. Boston: Cengage Learning, 2007.

Calavita, Kitty “U.S. Immigration and Policy Responses: The Limits of Legislation”, In Controlling Immigration: A Global Perspective. In Eds. Cornelius, Wayne A., Martin, L. Phillip & Hollifield, James F. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1994.

Foner, Nancy, Rumbaut, Ruben G., and Steven J. Gold. »Immigration and Immigration Research in the United States.« In Foner N., Rumbaut, Ruben G. And Steven J. Gold. Immigration Research For A New Century: Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2000.

Janda, Kenneth and Jeffrey M. Berry and Jerry Goldman. The Challenge Of Democracy: American Government in a Global World, Texas Edition. Boston: Cengage Learning, 2008.

Leal, Ray. “The Other War: Texas-Mexico Border Security.” In Eds. W.E. Maxwell, Crain and A. Samos. Texas Politics Today: 2009-2010 Boston: Cengage Learning, 2010,

Reisinger, Mark E. “Latinos in America: Historical and Contemporary Settlement Patterns.” In Eds. Frazier, John W. And Tettey-Fio, Eugene L. Race, Ethnicity and Place in a Changing America. Binghamton, NY: Global Academic Press, 2006.

Spener, David. “The Logic and Contradictions of Intensified Border Enforcement in Texas.” In Eds. P. Andreas and T. Snyder The Wall Around The West: State Borders and Immigration Controls in North America and Europe. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2000.

Stacy, Lee. Mexico and the United States. Terrytown, NY: Marshall Cavendish, 2002.