How Immigration Reform Law Helps U.S. Workers

Foes of the remarkably effective 1986 immigration reform law are hoping that Congress may soon abolish it, or at least pull its teeth, on grounds that recent reports contend it is causing widespread discrimination against Mexican-Americans and other “foreign-looking” workers.

The chance of eliminating or even weakening the Immigration Reform and Control Act is negligible, in part because the reports are based largely on anecdotal evidence offered by those opposed to the law.

Ironically, instead of helping the law’s opponents, the allegations of increased discrimination are boosting chances that Congress will try to make the law more effective by requiring all workers to have a tamper-resistant employment identification card.

The proposed ID card would make it easier for workers to prove that they are here legally and also make it much more difficult for employers to refuse to hire workers by claiming uncertainty about the workers’ legal status.

Many of those who want to abolish the law say they oppose the ID card because it smacks of Nazi Germany’s use of identity cards to persecute Jews, who were among the few Germans required to carry their ID cards at all times.

That concern isn’t logical since the proposed card for Americans would be similar to the Social Security card that every worker must now have to get a job.

The new card would be made of plastic, like common credit cards, making them difficult to forge, unlike paper Social Security cards that are being forged in great numbers.

Rep. Bruce Morrison (D-Conn.), House immigration subcommittee chairman, says the employment ID card proposal has a good chance of passage, especially if Congress can be persuaded that employers are using the law as an excuse to discriminate against brown-skinned workers who are here legally.

The law’s opponents want to get rid of the teeth in the law: “employer sanctions,” which are fines and possible jail sentences for those who knowingly hire illegal aliens.

Discrimination against minorities and women is still a tragic fact, but it is far from clear that illegal discrimination is growing rapidly because of the immigration law, as some reports indicate.

One example: The California Fair Employment and Housing Commission supported that allegation in a recent report and recommended a moratorium on employer sanctions. But its findings were based mostly on unchallenged complaints from only 35 witnesses, all of whom oppose the law. Just two witnesses were there to deny the discrimination allegation in a general way--both from the immigration service, which helps enforce the law.

The commission apparently did not attempt to verify the witnesses’ specific charges.

Discrimination is forbidden under both federal and state fair employment laws, and is also illegal under the immigration reform act itself. The Justice Department has a “special counsel” office that investigates discrimination complaints stemming from the law. Only 787 complaints have been filed nationwide since 1986, and most of them were dismissed.

The special counsel needs more offices and investigators because, exaggerated or not, some employers do use the law as an excuse for not hiring minorities.

Andrew Strojny, head of the general counsel office, says more education is needed to spread the word about the law’s anti-discrimination provision. Those who want to file complaints or get information can call the toll-free hot line, 1-800-255-7688.

The law has two fundamental goals, and they are being reached: to give amnesty to millions of people who entered the United States illegally before 1982 (before 1987 for farm workers) and to curb the massive influx of illegal aliens.

The threat of sanctions discourages employers from offering jobs to undocumented workers. With fewer job opportunities, fewer people come here illegally.

Since the law was passed, the annual illegal alien flow has plummeted by nearly 50%, according to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. In fiscal l986, before any enforcement, there were 1.6 million apprehensions of illegals along the U.S.-Mexican border. In fiscal 1989, the number plummeted to 855,000.

Beyond passage of the law, there are no other significant factors to account for the sharp reduction in apprehensions.

In fact, many more come here illegally since the government estimates that three foreigners slip in for every one apprehended.

In recent months the illegal crossings have gone up again, probably due to worsening economic conditions in Mexico and turmoil in Central America. But the number is still at least 33% below previous comparable periods.

The impressive drop came without any major crackdown against employers who knowingly hire illegals. That is really just beginning.

If the effectiveness of the immigration reform law continues, domestic workers will face less unfair competition from foreigners who work hard and cheaply without complaints that might result in their deportation to even worse conditions in their native countries.

Congress is now considering action to allow more legal immigration--a good idea for humane reasons and to make sure there is no future shortage of workers.

So far, though, there does not seem to be a shortage due to the immigration reform act.

A week ago, the Departments of Labor and Agriculture reported that there is no shortage of workers in agriculture--raditionally the largest user of illegal aliens.

Often overlooked in the arguments over the law is that it has not only slowed the flow of illegals, but it also is providing amnesty to nearly 3 million workers who came here illegally.

According to the Immigration and Nationalization Service, this is by far the most generous amnesty program for illegal entrants in history.

Not a bad record for the still relatively new law, although it does need better enforcement.