David Frum on the Obama immigration order:
The decision to grant residency and work rights to young illegal aliens
who meet certain conditions is an amnesty in all but name. A conditional
amnesty, yes, but amnesty. The trouble with amnesty has always been the
incentive effects. It's possible that amnesty may be a necessary final
stage in immigration reform, but to put amnesty in place before
effective enforcement measures are in place—and before authorities are
certain that as many illegals as possible have voluntarily
repatriated—is to invite another wave of illegal migration just as soon
as business conditions improve.
Frum also argues that the middle class could suffer the most from this:
In a time of very high unemployment, it seems simply reckless to
invite future waves of migration—and especially of the low-skill,
low-wage migration that America has mostly attracted over the past four
decades.
Every serious economic study of immigration has found that the net
benefits of present policy are exceedingly small. But that small net is
an aggregate of very large effects that cancel each other out. The
immigrants get higher wages than they would have earned in their former
country. The affluent gain lower prices for in-person services.
Lower-skilled native-born Americans face downward wage pressure. In any
other policy area, people who consider themselves progressive might be
expected to revile a policy whose benefits went to foreigners and the
rich, and whose costs were born by the American poor. Immigration policy
baffles that expectation.