Estimating the Economic Impact of Presidential Administrative Action & Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Dr. Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda
|
"There has been ample opportunity for Congress to pass a bipartisan immigration bill that would strengthen our borders, improve the legal immigration system, lift millions of people out of the shadows so they are paying taxes and getting right by the law .... I indicated to Speaker Boehner several months ago that if, in fact, Congress failed to act, I would use all the lawful authority that I possess to try to make the system work better. And that’s going to happen." |
Introduction & Executive Summary
President Obama and the Congress stand at a historic crossroad that could significantly change decades of undocumented status for millions of immigrant workers, while also providing significant increases in output, employment, earnings and taxes, benefiting the U.S. economy as a whole. Acting within his legal and constitutional authority, President Obama can act to broaden the scope of temporary beneficiaries through expanding programs such as DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) instituted in 2012 and renewed in 2014. Such Presidential action would not impede Congress from voting on more permanent and comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) legislation, which in fact would generate an even greater positive impact for the U.S. economy.
In anticipation of such momentous actions, it is important that policy makers and the general public understand the dimensions of the economic impact of alternative scenarios of action open to the President and Congress. Towards these ends, this paper will provide estimates based on a variety of methodologies for the following policy alternatives:
1) In the two years since the President created DACA through administrative action, the program has had and will continue to have a positive economic impact on its recipients as well as the economy as a whole. However, we find that these positive outcomes are less than what would have been experienced had congress enacted the DREAM act, which was the legislative equivalent of DACA.[1] Our key findings related to DACA are:
|
|
3) While, the potential economic benefits of deferred action are significant, they can be enhanced though the passing of a permanent comprehensive immigration reform bill. Our key findings[4] related to the economic impact of CIR are:
This report will first review the available data for comparing the size and economic contributions of the undocumented populations that would be affected by various immigration reform policy alternatives, including the DACA program, a series of proposed administrative action scenarios and comprehensive immigration reform. Second, we will review the methodological approaches used to analyze the impact of DACA (dynamic human capital growth modeling), alternative administrative actions (short term input-output IMPLAN modeling) and CIR (long term CGE modeling and short term input-output IMPLAN modeling). Third, the report will estimate and compare the economic impact of administrative action that President Obama has already taken (DACA), the alternative forms that future administrative action might take, as well as the projected economic impact of future comprehensive immigration reform scenarios. It is critically important that policy makers and the general public understand the positive economic impact of administrative action, while also recognizing that these benefits are dwarfed by the potential impact of comprehensive immigration reform, and especially by a reform bill that includes a path to citizenship. Drawing on this analysis we can discern what lessons can be learned from this policy comparison, and provide policy recommendations for maximizing the effectiveness of administrative action going forward. |
SOURCES
[1] Raul Hinojosa, Paule Cruz Takash, and et al., No DREAMers Left Behind: The Economic Potential of DREAM Act Beneficiaries (Los Angeles: UCLA NAID Center, 2010).
[2] Throughout this report we use the alternative administrative action eligible population estimates of Randy Capps, Marc R. Rosenblum, and James D. Bachmeier, Executive Action for Unauthorized Immigrants: Estimates of the Populations That Could Receive Relief (Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute, September 2014). For estimates of undocumented employment by sector we use Passel, Jeffrey, and D’vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States (Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, 2009).
[3]Analysis of the economic impact of administrative action scenarios is based upon the methodology used in Raul Hinojosa and Marshall Fitz. Revitalizing the Golden State: What Legalization over Deportation Could Mean to California and Los Angeles County. (Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, April 2011).
[4] These findings are based upon: Raul Hinojosa, Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Center for American Progress and Immigration Policy Center, January 2010). Raul Hinojosa, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CATO Institute, Winter 2012). These findings closely align with the methodology and conclusions of: Congressional Budget Office, The Economic Impact of S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (Washington, DC: June 18, 2013)
[2] Throughout this report we use the alternative administrative action eligible population estimates of Randy Capps, Marc R. Rosenblum, and James D. Bachmeier, Executive Action for Unauthorized Immigrants: Estimates of the Populations That Could Receive Relief (Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute, September 2014). For estimates of undocumented employment by sector we use Passel, Jeffrey, and D’vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States (Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, 2009).
[3]Analysis of the economic impact of administrative action scenarios is based upon the methodology used in Raul Hinojosa and Marshall Fitz. Revitalizing the Golden State: What Legalization over Deportation Could Mean to California and Los Angeles County. (Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, April 2011).
[4] These findings are based upon: Raul Hinojosa, Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Center for American Progress and Immigration Policy Center, January 2010). Raul Hinojosa, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CATO Institute, Winter 2012). These findings closely align with the methodology and conclusions of: Congressional Budget Office, The Economic Impact of S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (Washington, DC: June 18, 2013)