NEWS ANALYSIS : Many Obstacles to Wilson Plan on Immigration

Deny education and health care to illegal immigrants. Refuse citizenship to their children. Create a tamper-resistant identification card for legal immigrants. And, finally, link the North American Free Trade Agreement to Mexican cooperation in deterring border-jumpers.

In seeking to combat illegal immigration, Gov. Pete Wilson has assembled an amalgam of proposals that have long been part of the raging immigration debate. Some have been viewed as fringe ideas; others have invited more serious consideration; at least one appears to be a novel twist on a long-pending proposal to create a national identification card for employment purposes.

Underlying these ideas is an assumption that many immigration experts believe is dubious, yet forms the bedrock of Wilson’s proposals: “Massive illegal immigration will continue as long as the federal government continues to reward it . . . (by) providing incentives to illegal immigrants,” Wilson wrote to President Clinton this week in a letter laying out his proposals.

Most immigration experts believe that economic opportunity--jobs--draws most migrants to the United States. Yet in choosing his proposals, the governor pointedly omitted some mainstream suggestions to bolster laws and enforcement efforts against the hiring of illegal immigrants, thus reducing the employment magnet.

At this point, all the governor’s proposals face serious obstacles before enactment is possible. All probably require some action by Congress or the White House. The governor’s most provocative proposal--to refuse citizenship to the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants--would probably need a constitutional amendment. His plan to withhold education from illegal immigrant students would mean overturning a Supreme Court ruling.

What follows is a rundown of the governor’s major proposals.

Refusing Citizenship

This is the most incendiary proposal, because it seems to go against a national ethic: In a nation of immigrants, birthright provides citizenship. Indeed, the so-called citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution specifies that citizenship be granted to anyone born on U.S. soil. The post-Civil War measure was aimed at guaranteeing the citizenship of freed slaves, overturning the infamous Dred Scott Supreme Court decision.

Canada, Mexico and many Latin American nations also automatically confer citizenship based on place of birth.

Some countries--including many European nations--base citizenship largely on parentage. Thus, many so-called guest workers and other foreign laborers working in European nations have slim or no prospects of becoming citizens of their adopted nations.

Several bills pending in Congress would create a constitutional amendment to deny citizenship to the offspring of illegal immigrants. But most analysts give the idea slim chance of passage. Passage of a constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote of both the House and the Senate, plus ratification by 38 of the nation’s 50 statehouses.

In targeting the citizenship question, Wilson and other proponents maintain that the automatic citizenship requirement is an incentive for illegal immigrants to give birth in the United States. As U.S. citizens, the children are eligible for federal welfare payments and other benefits.

Besides calling the proposal contrary to U.S. tradition, critics say it is unworkable and counterproductive. Such a plan would create a second-class tier of stateless youths with little hope of advancement, detractors say, adding another explosive element to the nation’s population.

Denying Education

Proponents say education, like other social services, is a lure for illegal immigrants. The governor says it costs the state $1 billion annually to educate those here unlawfully.

But critics respond that new settlers come here primarily for jobs, not schooling. Moreover, critics say stripping illegal immigrants of education--like denying their children citizenship--would do nothing to deter illicit migration, but it would shut off newcomers from self-advancement and opportunity.

As with the citizenship proposal, those espousing an education cutoff face a long haul.

Specifically, proponents would have to mount a battle to overturn a landmark 1982 Supreme Court case, known as Plyler v. Doe, which found that all children are entitled to a free public education regardless of their immigration status or that of their parents. By a 5-4 margin, the justices in that case upheld a lower court ruling striking down a restrictive Texas law.

Observers say they know of no similar case wending its way through the legal system; at any rate, the court might be hesitant to overturn so recent a precedent.

Restricting Health Care

The governor would like to see health and other benefits stopped, contending that such payments encourage illegal immigration. But exactly what Wilson is seeking remains murky.

In his letter to the White House, Wilson urged the President to press Congress to repeal emergency services for illegal immigrants. But he added that “legitimate emergency services should be provided,” although the federal government should pick up the bill. Recipients then should be promptly deported, the governor added.

It is unclear how such deportations would be accomplished, although presumably it would be the hospital or other care providers’ responsibility to notify immigration authorities.

But experts say federal health benefits to illegal immigrants are largely limited to emergency care, pregnancy-related services and some migrant worker programs. The costs of such care is undoubtedly large; the governor stated that two-thirds of babies born in Los Angeles County public hospitals are the offspring of illegal immigrants.

To immigrant advocates, denying basic health care benefits is an untenable approach that would leave other residents vulnerable to communicable diseases and would result in a national public health nightmare. But many have joined Wilson in calling on the federal government--the ultimate arbiter of immigration policy--to pick up a greater share of the costs for medical, education and other benefits provided to those here illegally.

As for other federal benefits, laws already render illegal immigrants ineligible for federal welfare payments, food stamps and unemployment insurance. But illegal immigrants are eligible for public housing because of a recent federal court decision.

Issuing Identification Cards

In this instance, the governor seems to be adopting an oft-suggested, albeit controversial, idea--issuing a national work identification document--and tailoring it for use in weeding out illegal immigrants who seek benefits. Several observers said they had never seen the plan in the form proposed by Wilson, however.

Experts said the governor’s plan--which would require that only non-citizens possess the card--initially appears unenforceable. They say identification card plans won’t work unless everybody is required to have one.

For years, U.S. immigration officials have sought creation of some kind of tamper-resistant national work identification document--such as an improved Social Security card--that would enable employers to determine if prospective employers are in the United States legally. The prevalence of forged documents has hindered the effectiveness of laws prohibiting the hiring of illegal immigrants.

But the costs of creating such a work document ($2 billion or more), plus civil liberties objections--many fear a Big Brother outcome--have hindered efforts to create such a document.

Ratifying Trade Pact

In one of the most controversial aspects of his plan, Wilson--a strong supporter of the North American Free Trade Agreement--suggested using the pending negotiations as a lever to encourage Mexico to limit immigration into the United States. The trade accord would liberalize trade among Mexico, the United States and Canada.

The governor did not delineate what kind of assistance Mexico could provide. But others have called on Mexican authorities to deter illegal border-crossers with police and with barriers along the nation’s almost 2,000-mile border with the United States. Mexico is the homeland of the great majority of illegal immigrants residing in the United States.

In Mexico, the governor’s proposals tread on sensitive grounds of sovereignty and nationalism. Mexican officials, declaring that citizens have a fundamental right to emigrate, have long refused to cooperate with U.S. efforts to stem the northward exodus.

In fact, the massive emigration has long served as a safety valve to quell social unrest in Mexico, providing an economic alternative for millions of dissatisfied residents. The emigration also provides one of Mexico’s principal sources of foreign revenue: billions of dollars in remittances shipped home each year by expatriates.

To date, negotiators have deliberately kept questions of immigration out of the trade pact negotiations.

The United States has considerable leverage, however. Approval of the trade pact may figure in the future of Mexico’s long-dominant Institutional Revolutionary Party in next year’s presidential elections.

Wilson’s Immigration Plan

Gov. Pete Wilson this week proposed to deter illegal immigration by denying what he called federal “incentives” to violate immigration laws. Here are the key elements and how they might be accomplished.

* Refuse citizenship to children born on U.S. soil to illegal immigrants.

* How: Constitutional amendment, which would require a two-thirds vote of each house of Congress and ratification by the legislatures of three-fourths of the 50 states.

* End legal requirement that the state provide emergency health care to illegal immigrants.

* How: Congressional action. Wilson says doctors would voluntarily provide such care and bill the federal government. Immigrants getting such care could be deported.

* Deny public education to children of illegal immigrants.

* How: A 1982 U.S. Supreme Court ruling requires such benefits, but Wilson believes that today’s court would support a fresh challenge.

* Create tamper-proof identification cards for legal immigrants so they can receive benefits.

* How: Congressional action. The broader idea of a national identity card has always been rejected amid controversy.

* Use ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement as a lever to get Mexico to control emigration to the United States.

* How: Negotiations with Mexico. Mexico has resisted a role in keeping immigrants out of the United States, and border controls have been relatively ineffective.