Summary:Given the wide range of the panelists' backgrounds and experience, it was not surprising that it took only a few minutes before major differences emerged on the topic of illegal immigration. There were, however, some areas of agreement among those with otherwise opposing views.
Most of the panelists, for instance, agreed that the reality of illegal immigration and the political rhetoric are not in sync. Prof. Rubén Rumbaut noted that about 3,200 work visas were granted to Mexican immigrants over the past year, while 400,000 Mexicans entered the country illegally over this same period. That enormous disparity, he said, illustrates the serious disconnect between the reality on the ground and the political rhetoric regarding solutions for illegal immigration.
Former Gov. Gray Davis and Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher voiced a different view of the nature of the disconnect; both agreed that while American politicians talk tough on immigration, the actual economic and social incentives that draw immigrants to the United States far outweigh the empty threats of political rhetoric.
Panelists agreed that illegal immigration has not been seriously addressed in Washington because too many Americans benefit from the current system. They failed to agree, however, on who the recipients of those benefits are, with Rohrabacher maintaining that the wealthy, who employ undocumented nannies and gardeners and day laborers, are the chief beneficiaries, and that the middle-class and disabled workers are most hurt by illegal immigrants who push down wages and take their jobs. It's easier to train an illegal immigrant, he stated, than to train and provide special equipment for a disabled worker.
According to Perry Wong, all Americans benefit from the work of illegal immigrants in the form of lower produce and other food prices. Market forces have historically defined the political will, he said. And Arnoldo Torres suggested that the beneficiaries of illegal immigration include corporations, the middle class and even political parties. The children of these immigrant, after all, grow up and become voters.
There was a stark division among the panelists over whether illegal immigration is a net positive or negative for the United States. Davis asserted that while the overall impact of illegal immigrant labor on the American economy is a "slight plus," the negative impacts of the strain placed on the public health care and educational systems outweigh that slight positive economic impact.
Rohrabacher took the governor's view a step further and declared that illegal immigrants are destroying the nation's educational, health care and criminal justice systems. Moreover, he noted, the immigration system is so backlogged that it now takes an applicant from the Philippines 20 years to receive family reunification approval.
Conversely, Prof. Rumbaut suggested that immigration fills a necessary labor market in the United States. And the changing demographics of the American population make the importation of younger high- and low-skilled labor essential.
A look forward to the future of the illegal immigration issue yielded few certainties among the panelists. Most agreed that before a real solution is found, two conditions must be met: first, the problem must reach a crisis level. Second, the federal government and people must have a thoughtful debate and reach a strong consensus on the type of solution needed. Even if the problem is not solved within the next decade, however, Wong suggested that discussing the issue openly is a sure sign that the United States is on the right track and has not acted rashly on this divisive issue.
