May 24, 2006
The Privatized
Amnesty Pencedream
Mike
Pence is one of truest free market believers in Congress.
Exhibit
A: When asked about immigration reform, he said,
"It’s a safe bet the Senate will produce a bad bill
on any topic."
But
that was a few weeks ago. On Wednesday (May 23rd)
the congressman convincingly demonstrated that
Senators are not the only ones who don’t get it. At
a Heritage Foundation speech that afternoon, Pence
presented what he called "a rational middle
ground…between amnesty and mass deportation" that
would, in effect, reward illegal aliens for breaking the
law.
Pence’s
plan is essentially the
Kreible Foundation’s guest-worker plan, which
requires illegal immigrants to leave the United States
and then apply for re-entry.
While
acknowledging the essential nuttiness of expecting
illegals to obediently trot off for a
return trip to Mexico—oddly, no other country seems
to be mentioned—Pence insists private sector competition
can speedily vet re-entrants:
"Private worker placement agencies that we could call ‘
Ellis
Island Centers’ will be licensed by the federal
government to match willing guest workers with jobs in
America that employers cannot fill with American
workers. U.S. employers will engage the private
agencies and request guest workers. In a matter of
days
[my
emphasis!],
the private agencies will match guest workers with jobs,
perform a health screening, fingerprint them and provide
the appropriate information to the
FBI and
Homeland Security so that a background check can be
performed, and provide the guest worker with a visa
granted by the State Department. The visa will be
issued only outside of the United States."
[Renewing
the American Dream: The Real Rational Middle Ground on
Immigration Reform, May 23, 2006]
As
usual with guestworker proposals, there is
no mention of price—meaning that
American wages will be undercut.
Nor, of
course, is there any attempt to deal with the
Fourteenth Amendment problem, meaning that guest
workers will be having
U.S. citizen "anchor babies."
But
putting these fatal details aside, can Manpower, Inc.,
Kelly Services, and their clones—along with newly minted
agencies
spawned specifically in response to the guest-worker
business—really manage a guest worker program? Can
they complete the worker visa process "in a matter of
days"?
Needless to say: no.
Capacity:
Although the temp agency industry is larger and more
sophisticated than it was when the
"Kelly Girl" made her
1946 debut, it currently employs only
about 4 million workers—or less than one-third the
12 million illegals expected to line up for visas. (Or
maybe 20 million, if D.A. King and Bear Stearns turn out
to be right).
Pence’s
dogmatic vision of employment-agency entrepreneurs
filing the gap is fetching, but improbable.
Agencies are
particularly hard to start because fees are usually paid
only after their workers have been on the job for
30 days, meaning that significant working capital is
needed.
Conflicts of interest:
Private employment agencies usually bill clients on the
basis of how many individuals they’ve placed with them.
Volume is crucial; attention to legal requirements is
not. Already, the RICO lawsuit against carpet maker
Mohawk Industries accuses the company of conspiring
with employment agencies to hire undocumented immigrants
from Mexico.
Mohawk’s employment agencies
used forged
Social Security cards and recruited workers on the
border at Brownsville, Texas, the suit alleges.
Similar
suits are
pending against
Tyson Foods and
Wal-Mart.
Fraud
was
rampant when the
last amnesty was run by the government. A guest
worker program in private sector hands is a positive
incentive for more.
Three private hiring centers similar to those in Pence's
plan were put into place in southern California in the
early 1990s. Their goal: get those unsightly gaggles of
day laborers off the streets of Malibu. They may have
cleared the streets, but a UC San Diego study found that
the most successful of the three was (surprise,
surprise!) the one that
did not screen workers for legal status. In effect,
private companies used government funds to help illegals
find jobs.
A sign of things to
come.
Background Checks:
Sure, the internet makes them fairly cheap ($50) and
speedy. But it’s far trickier to do a
criminal records check—no national database is
available, and state and local prison systems vary as to
how computerized they are.
(And
for Homeland Security to make its database available to
private employment agencies is an
obvious security nightmare.) That leaves tedious,
extensive interviews of former coworkers, neighbors, and
associates.
Security checks—whether performed by Homeland Security
or private firms—are unavoidably time-consuming and
expensive…if done right.
This
"rational middle ground" of a one-week amnesty
turnaround is a silly and dangerous pipedream…or maybe a
Pencedream.
Edwin S. Rubenstein (email
him) is President of
ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis.