Economics
America’s immigration policies are failing
Your browser does not support the <audio> element.
SO YOU WANT to come to America. Venezuela, your home country, is suffering under Nicolás Maduro’s violent kleptocracy. What to do? Good luck getting a green card: employers won’t bother sponsoring a low-skilled worker like you, and you have no immediate family in America to vouch for you. Your WhatsApp is filled with news of friends who have crossed America’s southern border. You decide to follow them and, after a hellish trip, make it to the Rio Grande. You could try to slip across undetected—about 600,000 “gotaways” managed it last year. Or you can tell the border agents who intercept you that you want asylum. Odds are that they will release you with a court date scheduled in several months’ time, kickstarting a process that may take years. Welcome to America.
In November 2023 nearly 250,000 migrants crossed the southern border. The surge—and the perception that America’s borders are open—is a giant political liability for President Joe Biden. Just 27% of Americans tell pollsters that they approve of his handling of the border. More than twice as many trust Donald Trump on the issue. The fact that surging migration over the southern border could cost Mr Biden the election in November has made the problem trickier to solve. Wrangling over a deal to fund Ukraine in exchange for tighter border security and asylum limits has dragged on for months. Although Senate leaders say an agreement is close, some Republicans—reportedly including Mr Trump—seem to want the border chaos to fester, to better beat Mr Biden over the head with it during the election campaign.
Several factors explain the surge: violence and instability around the globe; plentiful job openings in America; the accurate perception that Mr Biden is more welcoming than his predecessor; and cumbersome, limited pathways to come legally. An overwhelmed border apparatus also invites more crossings, notes David Bier of the Cato Institute, a think-tank. When people hear that they are unlikely to be detained and deported, more try their luck.
Decades of neglect and partisan rancour have crippled America’s immigration system and created a situation where immigrants view asylum-seeking as the surest way to get into the country, rather than a long-shot attempt. Congress last made meaningful reform to immigration law in 1990. Comprehensive, bipartisan reform has seemed close several times since, only to fall apart in the end. In 2006, 2007 and 2013 bipartisan Senate bills included a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, more visas for workers and stricter enforcement at the border. In recent years Democrats have largely been animated by the desire to protect daca recipients, immigrants who were brought to America as children, from deportation.
Mr Trump’s candidacy upended the politics of immigration. When he launched his campaign in 2015, the number of migrants apprehended nationwide was at its lowest level since 1971. That fact did not, of course, stop Mr Trump from declaring that migrants threatened the American way of life. (“They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”) In 2019 irregular entries at the southern border jumped. Mr Trump saw detention as a means of deterrence and made some migrants with pending asylum claims wait in Mexico. At one time during his presidency nearly 57,000 people were detained. The surge was so great that even Mr Trump released a quarter of migrants into the country immediately with a notice to appear (NTA) in immigration court.
Borderline, personalities, disorder
Mr Biden reduced detentions—the number in custody today is around 38,000—and scrapped the requirement to remain in Mexico. He has tried less effective deterrents. His administration wants to steer migrants towards ports of entry where they arrive for appointments made via a smartphone app. Most are admitted with permission to stay for a year or two. By contrast people caught crossing illegally are presumed ineligible for asylum, with a few narrow exceptions, and quickly deported.
At least that is how it is supposed to work. In reality most migrants who cross illegally are still being released into the country, and irregular arrivals far exceed those at official crossings. Once on American soil a migrant can request asylum, which involves a screening with an asylum officer. Because of Mr Biden’s reluctance to pursue detention and an insufficient number of asylum officers, in November seven in ten were handed an NTA and sent on their way.
Last year the Biden administration also began granting parole to up to 30,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans each month, if applicants identified a financial sponsor in America. Again the goal was to make flows more orderly and decrease illegal arrivals. Permission to stay lasts two years but can be revoked at any time. Illegal crossings by Haitians, Nicaraguans and Cubans plummeted. But Venezuelans, who are less likely to have social ties to America, continue to enter illegally. “Most of the Venezuelans arriving now don’t have family, friends, relatives,” says Theresa Cardinal Brown, who served in the Department for Homeland Security in the Bush and Obama administrations.
Once across the border, migrants head to cities. Shelter systems in New York City, Chicago and Denver are overwhelmed and their mayors want Mr Biden’s help. This is partly the doing of Greg Abbott, the Republican governor of Texas, who is busing migrants to Democratic-run cities. But big cities are also natural magnets for migrants.
With an NTA in hand, new arrivals enter the court system, where the backlog is growing faster than judges can keep up. Cases in immigration court surpassed 3m in November. It takes more than four years on average just to get an initial asylum hearing. Doubling the number of judges would clear the backlog—but only by 2032, according to an estimate from the Congressional Research Service.
Half of asylum cases are denied, and decisions are inconsistent. One judge in Houston denied 95% of her asylum cases last year; another in San Francisco denied just 1% of hers. But the immense wait, low chance of detention and the prospect of work in America encourage migrants with a weak claim to cross the border. Prioritising the most recent arrivals’ cases would reduce this incentive, notes Stephen Yale-Loehr of Cornell Law School. A long journey seems less worth it if the reward is deportation rather than an NTA.
The looming election, Mr Trump’s perceived strength on border issues and Mr Biden’s desire to arm Ukraine mean that the president wants to make a deal. His openness to tougher border enforcement is also no doubt fuelled by Americans’ rightward turn on immigration. Polling from YouGov suggests that more Americans favour building a southern border wall than don’t. Even 32% of Democrats now say they support the idea, up from 20% in 2022.
Whether the House and the Senate can agree on reform is questionable. A deal may include funding for more Border Patrol agents, the ability to shut down migrant intake if encounters reach a certain level, a higher bar for migrants to pass their interview—so that they are not released into the country unless they are likely to actually receive asylum—and limits on parole. Any changes to asylum rules will almost certainly be challenged in the courts.
But House Republicans have waffled, often insisting that they would accept nothing other than HR2, a hardline immigration bill passed along party lines last year that would be dead on arrival in the Senate. On the left, progressives do not want to tighten access to asylum. Both groups should beware. A new poll from The Economist and YouGov suggests that a plurality of Americans want Congress to pass a bill that both funds Ukraine and restricts asylum. The politicians should not ignore their voters. ■
Stay on top of American politics with Checks and Balance, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter, which examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.
Singapore-based online grocery retailer Webuy staff is offloading containers filled with goods shipped from China.
SINGAPORE — Vincent Xue runs an online grocery retail business, offering fresh produce, canned food, packaged easy-to-cook ingredients to cost-conscious local consumers in Singapore.
Xue’s Nasdaq-listed Webuy Global sources primarily from suppliers in China. Since late last year, one third of his suppliers, saddled with excess inventory in China, have offered steep discounts of up to 70%.
“Chinese domestic markets are too competitive, some larger F&B manufacturers were struggling to destock their inventories as weak consumer demand drags,” he said in Mandarin, translated by CNBC.
Xue has also gotten busier this year after sealing a partnership with Chinese e-commerce platform Pinduoduo that has been making inroads into the Southeast Asian country.
“There will be about 5-6 containers loaded with Pinduoduo’s orders coming in every week,” Xue said, and Webuy Global will support the last-mile delivery to customers.
At a time when steep tariffs are deterring Chinese exports to the U.S., while domestic consumption remains a worry, overcapacity has led Chinese producer prices to stay in deflationary territory for more than two years. Consumer inflation has remained near zero.
Still, the country is doubling down on manufacturing, and this production overdrive is rippling through global markets, stirring anxiety in Asia that a flood of cheap imports could squeeze local industries, experts said.
“Every economy around the world is concerned about being swamped by Chinese exports … many of them [have] started to put up barriers to importing from China,” said Eswar Prasad, senior professor of trade policy and economics at Cornell University.
But for inflation-worn economies, economists say the influx of low-cost Chinese goods comes with a silver-lining: lower costs for consumers. That in turn could offer central banks some relief as they juggle lowering living costs while reviving growth on the back of rising trade tensions.
For markets with limited manufacturing bases, such as Australia, cheap Chinese imports could ease the cost-of-living crisis and help bring down inflationary pressure, said Nick Marro, principal economist at Economist Intelligence Unit.
Emerging growth risks and subdued inflation may pave the way for more rate cuts across Asia, according to Nomura, which expects central banks in the region to further decouple from the Fed and deliver additional easing.
The investment bank predicts Reserve Bank of India to deliver additional rate cuts of 100 basis points during rest of the year, central banks in Philippines and Thailand to cut rates by 75 basis points each, while Australia and Indonesia could lower rates by 50 basis points, and South Korea by a quarter-percentage-point.
‘China shock’
In Singapore, the rise in costs of living was among the hot-button issues during the city-state’s election campaigning in the lead up to the polls held last month.
Core inflation in the country could surprise at the lower end of the MAS forecast range, economists at Nomura said, citing the impact of influx of cheap Chinese imports.
The city-state is not alone in witnessing the disinflationary impact as low-cost Chinese goods flood in.
“Disinflationary forces are likely to permeate across Asia,” added Nomura economists, anticipating Asian nations to feel the impact from “China shock” accelerating in the coming months.
Asian economies were already wary of China’s excess capacity, with several countries imposing anti-dumping duties to safeguard local manufacturing production, even before the roll-out of Trump’s sweeping tariffs.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the world economy experienced the so-called “China shock,” when a surge in cheap China-made imports helped keep inflation low while costing local manufacturing jobs.
A sequel of sorts appears to be under way as Beijing focuses on exports to offset the drag in domestic consumption.
Chinese exports to the ASEAN bloc rose 11.5% year on year in the first four months this year, as shipments to the U.S. shrank 2.5%, according to China’s official customs data. In April alone, China’s shipments to ASEAN surged 20.8%, as exports to U.S. plunged over 21% year on year.
These goods often arrive at a discount. Economists at Goldman Sachs estimate Chinese products imported by Japan in the past two years to have become about 15% cheaper compared to products from other countries.
India, Vietnam and Indonesia have imposed various protectionist measures to provide some relief for domestic producers from intense price competition, particularly in sectors facing overcapacity and cheap imports.
While for a large number of countries an influx of Chinese goods is a trade-off between lower inflation and the adverse impact on local production, countries such as Thailand could be facing a double-edged sword.
Thailand will likely be the hardest-hit by “China shock,” even sliding into a deflation this year, Nomura economists predict, while India, Indonesia and the Philippines will also see inflation falling below central banks’ targets.
Trump-Xi call isn’t enough to resolve critical mineral shortage
World could be facing another ‘China shock,’ but there’s a silver-lining
Tax Fraud Blotter: Prep perps
New 2023 K-1 instructions stir the CAMT pot for partnerships and corporations
The Essential Practice of Bank and Credit Card Statement Reconciliation
Are American progressives making themselves sad?
-
Accounting1 week agoHighest paid jobs in corporate accounting
-
Economics1 week agoElon Musk says Trump’s spending bill undermines the work DOGE has been doing
-
Blog Post5 days agoCommon Bookkeeping Challenges and Solutions for Small Businesses
-
Economics1 week agoHow young voters helped to put Trump in the White House
-
Personal Finance1 week agoHarvard, Trump international enrollment battle affects college applicants
-
Economics7 days agoWhy the president must not be lexicographer-in-chief
-
Personal Finance1 week agoCrypto in 401(k) plans: Trump administration eases rules
-
Finance1 week agoVail Resorts, GameStop and more