VIDEOS

• Intro
• Opening Arguments
• Cross Examinations
• Moderator Questions
• Closing Arguments
• YouTube

Introduction of Debaters

(02:13)

Gov. Gerald L. Baliles, Director of the Miller Center of Public Affairs, describes the National Discussion and Debate Series and introduces moderator Robert MacNeil, former co-anchor of the MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour. MacNeil introduces the four participants in the fifth debate in the Miller Center's National Discussion and Debate Series. The event, held in the New York Public Library on May 15, 2008, examined the following resolution: "Our national interests require a path to citizenship for the 12 million illegal immigrants presently here." Tamar Jacoby, CEO and President of ImmigrationWorks, and Eliseo Medina, International Executive Vice President of the Service Employees International Union, argued for the resolution. Vernon Briggs, Emeritus Professor of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University, and Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies, argued against.

Immigration Debate: Background Video

(04:14)

This video, produced by MacNeil-Lehrer Productions, provides background information for the debate, surveying both the historical and recent debate over immigration policy in the U.S.

Medina opening remarks

(03:35)

Medina says the American immigration system is broken and does not benefit immigrants, businesses, or civil society. Millions of immigrants are living in the shadows and subject to exploitation, so it is critical to allow these immigrants to attain legal status. He cites three reasons: First, it is impractical to deport 12 million people. Second, the unintended consequences of deportation would be enormous on families and costly for government to rectify. Finally, removing undocumented workers would have a negative impact on the U.S. economy.

Krikorian opening remarks

(04:00)

Krikorian says a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants would lead to two problems: First, the INS would be unable to handle all the new applications for citizenship, so massive fraud would lead to a substantial increase of immigrants. Second, promises of enforcement tomorrow for legalization today would be abandoned and the problem will only get worse. The only realistic approach is a middle ground to legalization and mass deportation, and that is "attrition through enforcement."

Jacoby opening remarks

(03:43)

Jacoby asserts that it is in the national interest not to have 12 million people living on the wrong side of the law. It impacts security because these individuals have not been properly screened. It impacts the economy, and workers' wages and bargaining power. Most important, it discourages outsiders from assimilating into American culture. There must be conditions to citizenship, but we must handle this issue in a responsible and democratic way.

Briggs opening remarks

(04:36)

Briggs outlines four reasons why a path to citizenship is bad policy. First, it is unfair for the millions of immigrants waiting in line legally. Second, there is no ambiguity in the current law that requires more additional laws; today's laws should be sufficient. Third, there is no way the government could handle the process of legalizing millions of additional individuals. Finally, granting citizenship would also give the promise of citizenship to millions of other family members, thus increasing the number of immigrants exponentially.

Pro team rebuttal

(02:29)

Medina delivers the rebuttal for the Pro team, challenging the notion that illegal immigrants do not contribute positively to the American economy. They pay various taxes and provide important labor in the workforce. On the subject of fraudulent documents, keeping the system as is will only keep the black market for such documents in tact.

Con team rebuttal

(02:34)

Krikorian argues that the amnesty currently being proposed will fail just as previous attempts at amnesty have. If a path to citizenship were offered, there would be a virtually limitless number of people to apply. The idea of the Pro side that increasing visas would satisfy demand and limit future immigration is wrong.

Does U.S. need low-skilled workers?

(05:55)

Jacoby answers that less and less Americans are available to take low-skilled jobs, and these need to be filled by immigrants. It doesn't make sense to pay Americans for jobs they are overqualified for. Briggs and Krikorian respond that there is no such thing as jobs that will not be taken by American workers. Markets will always adapt to the type of workers available, but having illegal labor available will be detrimental to U.S. workers. Medina counters that if undocumented workers had legal status, employers would not be able to take advantage of them.

Do illegal workers hurt wages and working conditions?

(03:32)

Medina says immigrants have a desire to organize and improve their conditions just like American workers. Briggs counters that the very presence of workers who are happier with less will adversely impact wages and employment. Jacoby says there is a shortage of unskilled workers in the U.S., but Krikorian says that every major job category is filled by native-born workers.

Why do business prefer to hire illegal immigrants?

(01:48)

Briggs says that employers would much prefer an employee that is grateful for minimum wage, and they're typically immigrants. Medina responds that this is the reason reform is needed so that business cannot exploit immigrant workers.

What is meant by enforcement?

(03:06)

This question is addressed to Krikorian, who answers that it has three layers: overseas, at the border, and in the interior. Interior enforcement has been neglected the most. He says we need to have better verification systems in place to make it difficult to enter the labor market illegally. Jacoby agrees about the need for greater enforcement, but says it must be concurrent with realistic quotas of immigrants.

Isn't the Social Security card too easy to counterfeit?

(01:38)

Briggs suggests that we're ultimately going to have to create a counterfeit-proof identification card with biometric data. But this will only be effective if we begin to enforce the current laws against employers.

Should we try an ID card before amnesty?

(01:37)

Medina criticizes the Con team for their inconsistency in thinking the government is incapable of running the legalization process, yet capable of implementing a national identification card. A national ID card is not a solution; enforcement-only has failed. We need a comprehensive solution which includes much more than harsher enforcement.

Is enforcement-only just a delay tactic?

(02:19)

Krikorian says that legalization would dump millions of new applications on an already exhausted INS, but enforcement measures can be phased in over a period of several years. We have never seriously tried comprehensive enforcement, particularly in the interior, so let's try it for several years and see if it has worked. Attrition is beginning to work. Jacoby says it is wrong to not confront a security or law issues simply because it is difficult.

Do state and local immigration laws help or hurt?

(01:51)

Briggs says the states are trying to handle this issue in small ways due to federal inaction, but it is difficult to handle the costs associated with it. Ultimately, immigration is a federal responsibility, but the federal government won't act for political reasons. Briggs asserts that those who favor citizenship are really opposed to strict enforcement of current laws. Medina retorts that that is incorrect and that piecemeal action will only make the problem worse.

Briggs closing statement

(02:08)

In his closing remarks, Briggs says immigration is ultimately a jobs issue, and that is what often gets lost in this discussion. There is no shortage of native-born low-skilled workers. Briggs says we need to follow the recommendations of the Jordan commission on immigration, which said that we should prohibit unskilled immigration to the U.S.

Jacoby closing statement

(01:50)

In her closing remarks, Jacoby argues that the U.S. needs to recognize the reality of illegal immigration and handle it in a responsible and beneficial way. Immigrants are not the problem; they are good people and good for the country. The problem has been our response. We must create a system that minimizes the costs, maximizes the benefits, and allows us to continue competing in the global economy.

Path to citizenship in America's interests

(00:36)

It is in America's national interests to provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, but it should not be easy to earn citizenship. There must be some kind of assimilation program for new immigrants to become properly Americanized.

Question for the debaters

(00:11)

If you don't think illegal immigrants should not be given benefits and/or should be deported, why? And do you think it is feasible to deport that many immigrants, especially when they are contributing to the American economy and culture?

Immigrants are good, but we need limits

(00:36)

Immigrants are good in that they take certain jobs that Americans will not take, but there needs to be a better way to limit and regulate the total number that comes into the U.S. so that it remains helpful rather than flooding the workforce. It is not practical to deport 12 million illegal immigrants, so there needs to be a legal path to citizenship for those already here.

WHITE PAPER

Immigration, Citizenship and the National Interest

America proudly claims identity as a nation of immigrants. Measured against other countries, in this era and in earlier eras, the United States has been strikingly successful in welcoming new populations, integrating them and especially their children into the social... Read More

GOVERNING AMERICA IN A GLOBAL ERA: COLLOQUIUM

Unstable Boundaries: Skin Color, Immigration, and Multiracialism in the American Racial Order

The boundaries within and across racial and ethnic groups in the United States are at present unstable, and the traditional American racial hierarchy may be loosening. By that claim, we mean three things: First, differences within the Black and Latino populations... Read More

MILLER CENTER FORUM

Is Immigration a Problem? Are the Minute Men the Answer?

On June 16, 2005, Peter Brimelow, President of the Center for American Unity, spoke on the role of the Minute Men in controlling the influx of immigrants into the U.S. Brimelow argued that the current immigration policy "makes absolutely no sense economically."... Read More

PRESIDENTIAL RECORDINGS PROJECT

LBJ on Immigration

America proudly claims identity as a nation of immigrants. Measured against other countries, in this era and in earlier eras, the United States has been strikingly successful in welcoming new populations, integrating them and especially their children into the social... Read More