Name:
Instructor:
Course:
Date:
Sample Essay on A Genuine Dictate of Wisdom
Amnesty is not just a word; it is a genuine dictate of wisdom. Amnesty is an admirable quality. This quality is significant in bestowing mercy on illegal immigrants and the Federal State. Arguably, America is a nation of immigrants. At one point in history, we were slaves or masters in a foreign land; therefore, punishing illegal immigrants lacks human legitimacy. Working illegal immigrants deserve temporary amnesty because they benefit themselves and a significant number of working-class Americans. Also, from the human perspective, they deserve temporary amnesty as the government plans for the ideal action. Most immigrants are fleeing violence and domestic abuse in their countries; thus, condemning them will not solve the issue. They will keep coming back. This research proposes amnesty, strict border patrol, and most important diplomatic and economic interventions in the country of origin to minimize the desire for illegal immigration.
The issue of illegal immigrants is a consequence of the failed implementation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act. This policy sought to halt the problem of undocumented illegal immigrants. IRCA’s mandate entailed legalizing some unauthorized immigrants. However, the Act and increased border patrol funding have proved ineffective. According to John Cornyn (2), illegal immigrants deserve a second chance. The problem lies with immigration reform proposals. John contends that amnesty accompanied by strict border control is an ultimate solution to the issue of illegal immigrants (2). Debatably, most illegal immigrants are hardworking human beings looking for greener pastures and a revelation of the American dream; they deserve amnesty. Despite reducing employment opportunities, let us consider the significant contributions they make toward the GDP via cheap labor and taxes. With ideal border control measures, the government will ensure amnesty does not beget future illegal immigrants.
The labor market for illegal immigrants, unlike the Market of the high, and low-skilled Americans is not perfectly competitive. The imperfection originates from wages way below the marginal product. This revelation proves the insignificant influence of illegal immigrants on the scarcity or competition in the labor market. Instead of denying amnesty to illegal immigrants, the U.S government in conjunction with the department of labor should devise measures or policies to regulate the hiring of illegal immigrants. Besides, most illegal workers face extreme discrimination and unfair compensation. According to Mukherjee (25), granting amnesty reduces welfare to the high-skilled workers because of high taxation with low wages and increases transfers for relatively poor agents; this compensates for the loss of wages and increases welfare gains. From this reasoning, we deduce that while Amnesty affects high-skilled workers, it benefits the low-skilled workers bringing about an element of equilibrium to the working-class economy.
As stated by Mukherjee (10), illegal immigrants pose similar consumption to the locals. However, they receive a fraction of low-level skilled wages. Also, illegal immigrants do not pay taxes, but they receive government subsidies provided by taxes of American citizens. That notwithstanding, illegal immigrants generate income for legal citizens through cheap labor. Also, despite their illegality, they account for the consumption tax based on their expenditure on consumption (Mukherjee 10). Granting illegal immigrants will subject them to income tax, or similar budget constraints to Native Americans. Deporting them removes them from the country while the policy of choice leaves them in a status quo; reception of a fraction of the marginal product associated with the related cost of documentation; therefore, the best alternative to deportation is Amnesty. Contrastingly, amnesty encompasses the fear of an influx of immigrants, and this fear primarily originates from poor immigration and border control measures.
On the contrary, amnesty will spur illegal immigration. According to Inserra (1), an amnesty approach to illegal immigration will favor more illegal immigration. First, illegal immigrants will use pardons as an excuse. This usage will subsequently weaken immigration laws. Besides, remission is an excuse for delayed reforms like the SUCCEED act (Inserra 2). Secondly, Amnesty goes against the constitutional provisions of fairness and equality before the law; thus, granting amnesty to illegal immigrants is constitutionally unfair to law-abiding citizens alongside legal immigrants. Some studies discuss that congress should not weaken the law. Congress should ensure that immigration laws serve the interests of Americans.
Conclusively, this research not only supports amnesty for working illegal immigrants but also proposes many significant reforms. Like, as enhanced border security by increasing customs and border agents, technology, and other barriers. Secondly, strengthened immigration enforcement. The strengthening is achievable through the expansion of law enforcement training programs, increased curbing of sanctuary cities, and the use of additional cost-effective measures for detention like GPS trackers. Thirdly, an improved legal immigration process. For example, the use of highly specialized and skilled labor. Also, the immigration department should devise strategies to cope with the trends and changes in illegal immigration. The best approach to illegal immigration is a streamlined, tested, and proven legal migration system.
Work Cited
Cornyn, John. "Immigration Reform: Back to the Future." Yale Law Journal (2020).
Das, Arpan Mukherjee. "On the Political Economy of Immigration Amnesty." (2018).
Inserra, David. "Dreaming of Amnesty: Legalization Will Spur More Illegal Immigration." Heritage Foundation Issue Brief 4777 (2017).
