SB1070 Update: For G.I., silence is still Gold-en

by David Safier

W.W.B.D.? What Would Barry Do? One reason Barry Goldwater's reputation has grown over the years is because of his willingness to speak his mind, consequences be damned, with a candor rare in politics.

The Goldwater Institute, on the other hand, is still hiding from SB1070. I think I can say with reasonable assurance, G.I. has not made a peep about the hottest issue in Arizona and, were it not for a huge oil spill, the hottest issue in the country.

That to me smacks of cowardice. Based on its history, G.I. would most probably come out against SB1070 and for a national immigration law which includes a path to citizenship. (It supported the McCain/Kennedy immigration reform bill.) But the folks at G.I. are almost wetting themselves out of fear that, if they take a stand, they'll alienate their donor base.

And when you get something like $5 million in contributions a year and your top staff members are making 6-figure-range salaries, G.I. employees are the kind of people who are more than willing to store their principles in a safety deposit box somewhere and retrieve them when things calm down a bit.

I want to be helpful. I really do. I know G.I. has a libertarian bent, and I know it's got lots in common with a more prominent national organization, the Cato Institute. So here is some material about immigration I found on Cato's website.

I know how much G.I. likes economic studies from libertarian institutes, so here's one from Cato that says if we increase enforcement and kick out immigrants, we will be a poorer nation, and legalization of immigrants will mean income gains for American workers.

This study finds that increased enforcement and reduced low-skilled immigration have a significant negative impact on the income of U.S. households. Modest savings in public expenditures would be more than offset by losses in economic output and job opportunities for more skilled American workers. A policy that reduces the number of low-skilled immigrant workers by 28.6 percent compared to projected levels would reduce U.S. household welfare by about 0.5 percent, or $80 billion.

In contrast, legalization of low-skilled immigrant workers would yield significant income gains for American workers and households. Legalization would eliminate smugglers' fees and other costs faced by illegal immigrants. It would also allow immigrants to have higher productivity and create more openings for Americans in higher skilled occupations. The positive impact for U.S. households of legalization under an optimal visa tax would be 1.27 percent of GDP or $180 billion.

If G.I. wants something other than an economic analysis, here's a Cato page on immigration with lots of links to explore, including a chapter on immigration from the Cato Handbook for Policymakers, 7th Edition (2009).

If the folks at G.I. are already overburdened and don't want to work that hard, here are a few short pieces.

Arizona Turns Immigrant Workers into Criminals.

Making and enforcing immigration law is a federal responsibility. State and local police should focus their resources on preventing crime and apprehending real criminals who pose a danger to public safety.

And Misguided Fears of Crime Fuel Arizona Immigration Law.

The crime rate in Arizona in 2008 was the lowest it has been in four decades. In the past decade, as the number of illegal immigrants in the state grew rapidly, the violent crime rate dropped by 23 percent, the property crime rate by 28 percent. (You can check out the DoJ figures here.)

Census data show that immigrants are actually less likely to commit crimes than their native-born counterparts, as I unpacked a few months ago in an article for Commentary magazine titled, “Higher Immigration, Lower Crime.”

I hope that helps, folks. No need to thank me for the work I've done on your behalf. You're more than welcome.