Page images
PDF
EPUB

APPENDIX 9

RESPONSES OF TERRY L. MCCOY TO ADDITIONAL WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN YATRON

A. Specific questions

1.

2.

3.

How have past U.S. policies and relations with the Caribbean encouraged illegal immigration from the region?

Although I am not particularly knowledgeable on this topic, it seems to me that there are several ways in which the U.S. has encouraged illegal immigration. First, between the 1965 and 1976 amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act the procedures for acquiring an immigrant visa in the Western Hemisphere were so cumbersome and time consuming that applicants often opted for non-immigrant visas in order to get the U.S. and then overstayed and worked, thereby became illegals. Second, the screening process for non-immigrant visas was notoriously lax until recent years and the likelihood of being apprehended once in the U.S. was also very low. Consequently, there was little risk involved in abusing the non-immigrant visa. Third, there apparently was an abundance of jobs in the U.S. awaiting immigrants who entered illegally and they knew it. Finally, until recently our aid and trade policies, as they affect the Caribbean, were not labor intensive. As I indicated in my statement several of these factors have changed and, as a result, in my opinion fewer illegals are now entering the U.S. from the Caribbean than was true several years ago.

You indicate that Caribbean governments are concerned about stopping the flow of skilled migrants from their countries. Could you document this concern for the subcommittee?

It came to my attention in interviewing a Jamaican official who, when questioned about the efforts of his government to deal with the "migration problem," responded that indeed the Jamaican government was concerned about losing trained Jamaicans to the U.S. He then described the U.S. as having a two faced policy of welcoming one type of migrant and discouraging others. In his opinion it is a policy which effectively drains Jamaica of scarce and costly human capital. He concluded, however, that as a democratic country there was little which could be done to stop the brain drain encouraged by U.S. policy. Colombia, on the other hand, has an incentive program to encourage the return of trained expatriates. Because of wage differentials, especially for doctors and nurses, between Colombia and the U.S., the program is not very effective.

Do you feel that the U.S. has taken up the issue of illegal migration with the governments of the Caribbean source countries.

No, at least not at a very high level. In the four consular posts which I studied--Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Jamaica--there was little indication that resident U.S. officials, more specifically the Ambassador, had discussed the issue with local government officials. Where raised, it received very unsympathetic hearings. I have the impression, however, that Ambassador Young did raise the issue during his visit to the Caribbean, which took place shortly after President Carter announced his proposed changes in immigration policy.

APPENDIX 10

RESPONSES OF VERNON M. BRIGGS, JR. TO ADDITIONAL WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY CHAIRMAN YATRON

Question 1. One of the dominant models in immigration analysis
has been the push-pull model. I would like your reactions to
a complementary approach. In considering solutions to the
problem, wouldn't it be helpful to look at the factors which
inhibit migration?

Response: Under the present circumstances, it is clear that
whatever the existing inhibiting factors are, they are not
very effective. As I stated in my testimony, I regard the
"push factors" to be the more dominant factor for illegal
immigration. Labor surpluses exist and there is no immediate
policy that the United States can adopt to do much about it.
All that can be done is to desist from encouraging illegal
immigration (by doing nothing to deter aliens) and to offer
through foreign policy initiatives opportunities for foreign
nations to address the issue through job creation in a short
run and population control over the long run.

I do not see any benefit from a model addressed only at
inhibiting migration but I may not fully understand its
manifestations.

Question 2. The Mexican government has indicated that
petroleum revenues will be used to a large extent in funding
rural development. What impact will this have on the illegal
immigration phenomenon?

Response: If the government of Mexico actually does this,
there should be a lessening of pressures for illegal immi-
gration. Yet, frankly stated, if this is all that is done

there will be little noticeable impact on the flow. Some illegal immigrants are coming from rural areas but many are also coming from urban areas. Also, the relative gap between income and job opportunities in the two nations will still be immense. Other measures will also be needed as outlined in my testimony.

Question 3. In the Caribbean, the relationship between legal and illegal migration is important because most Caribbean illegals initially come to the U.S. by legal means. By comparison, what impact would increased quotas for legal Mexican immigration have on illegal immigration?

Response:

Increased quotas for legal immigration from Mexico are essential. Although it is true that visa abusers from other nations are numerous, I think Mexico still is a special case. The proximity of our two nations with the 2,000 mile common border as well as the substantial Chicano population of the Southwest means that family reunification pressures are likely to be a very strong factor in Mexican migration. They are less likely to be so with nations from the Caribbean. Mexico and Canada have, until January 1, 1977, always had a special immigration status. I think that they should again have this status. It is realistic to give them both special preference and it is good international relations with respect to our neighboring nations.

Question 4. What implications does the flight of human resources have for future economic development in Mexico? In other words, is illegal immigration more important as a positive release valve or a negative drain on human capital?

Response: As I see it, the flow of illegal immigrants from
Mexico is having both effects. It is a safety valve that

reduces domestic pressure in Mexico from the numerous social

ills confronting that nation. Yet, many of these aliens are the most

ambitious and, in some cases, talented and skilled workers that the nation possesses. Quantitatively speaking, the flow of immigrants

undoubtedly serves as a safety valve; qualitatively, it is also a human capital drain which Mexico cannot afford to continue to ignore.

Question 5. What is the correlation between economic costs of migration and the numbers of people who leave Mexico for the United States?

Response: This question, like many, is hard to address in
precise terms. Obviously, there are economic costs associated
with migration. But, it is also apparent that these costs
are being overcome by the expectation that short run hardships
can be compensated by long run gains. For many, the process
of illegal immigration is being institutionalized by organized
smugglers and document forgers. Often loan-sharking is
involved which only exploits further the horror of this
inhumane process.

The devaluation of the peso in recent years has only widened the economic gains from seeking work in the United States. Thus, although the costs are high, the benefits are much greater. As the situation currently exists, the prospects of receiving the benefits are so great that the specific costs are of relatively little consequence.

32-006 - 78 - 30

APPENDIX 11

RESPONSES OF HILBOURNE WATSON TO ADDITIONAL WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN YATRON

1. Your account of the export industries of the Caribbean on page ten suggests the futility of addressing the migration phenomenon through the development of those industries. Would you care to comment?

ANWSER:

The main assumption behind export industries is that factors of scale-size, population, market, etc. in developing are negative in their impact on the internal market process, becoming the motor of development. Hence, export industries are promoted to facilitate the growth of exports; to provide foreign exchange to purchase various kinds of imports, including payments on foreign debt; to encourage manufacturing industry; to development a market and industrial structure beyond the limitations of the scale impediments; and to generate employment opportunities apart from those associated with traditional activities that derive from given production activity.

Generally, export industries, which are a part of the general
economic process of these countries, have failed to live up
to expectations. The reason stems from the place of these
countries in the international division of labor and the
associated biases of international capital accumulation.
Growth dominates over creation of employment because it was
assumed that if growth levels are high then unemployment
would cease to be a major problem. Attempts to promote
economic growth including some measure of industrialization
led many of these countries to encourage direct foreign
investment and this has required providing expensive programs
in fiscal and monetary incentives to foreign investment.
These programs are conducive to the development of foreign
monopolies in the local economy.

In addition, foreign capital enterprises tend to employ
labor-saving practices through the application of capital
intensive technologies to the production process. This
practice reflects (a) the level of the development of the
production process in the source country and (b) the profit
motive that places a high priority on technology. This does
not relieve the problem of unemployment which is acute in
the host economy. The foreign enterprises tend to export
profits and to call for a political climate free from
labor-management conflict.

« PreviousContinue »