States and local governments with heavy concentrations of illegal immigrants
have long clamored for comprehensive federal immigration reform. But with such
reform on the doorstep, many of these states and localities are complaining
that they are in line to bear the brunt of the costs for providing healthcare,
education and other services to immigrants who would become legal residents.
"The federal government tends to protect itself from expenses and shift
them to states and local governments," observes Ann Morse, an immigration
expert in Washington, D.C, with the National Conference of State Legislatures
That's exactly what Congress would do in the current language of a bipartisan
bill to provide a path to citizenship for an estimated 11 million immigrants
who reside in the United States without legal authorization. The Senate has
begun debating the bill, and a vote is expected within a month.
When the federal government at President Ronald Reagan's behest last overhauled
immigration laws in 1986, states and local governments received $4 billion in
impact aid to help defray costs. The present bill includes no such
Lack of impact aid could impose financial hardships on states and localities
that only recently emerged from years of belt-tightening during the Great
Recession. Need for such aid is especially acute in California, Arizona and
Texas and the counties and cities in these states that border Mexico or are
significant destinations for immigrants. New York State and Florida also have
significant populations of unauthorized immigrants.
Los Angeles County alone has 1.1 million unauthorized immigrants, a tenth of
the nation's total, and its officials are worried. "The federal government
is going to be protecting itself against costs, and we're going to be left
holding the bag," Mark Tajima, an analyst with the county's administrative
office, told the Los Angeles Times.
Much of the impact aid would relieve added costs in healthcare and education.
Illegal immigrants are ineligible for coverage under the Obama administration's
health law, the Affordable Care Act, but some experts believe that Obamacare,
when fully implemented in 2014, will spur demand for more immigrant health
services. Morse says the extent of this demand is "the great
unknown," while also citing several known costs that immigration reform
would impose on states and local governments with high numbers of unauthorized
For example, healthcare screening is required of everyone who applies for U.S.
citizenship. This would boost medical costs at a time when states are strained
by Medicaid, the federal-state program that provides healthcare for the poor
and disabled. English-language proficiency is another citizenship requirement
of the bill. This means additional adult-education spending, which in many
places has been cut for budgetary reasons.
The political fault lines on immigration reform shifted after the 2012
election, in which an overwhelming percentage of voters of Hispanic and Asian
heritage cast their ballots for President Obama and other Democrats. Many
Republicans who had previously opposed providing a path to citizenship for
unauthorized immigrants abruptly found merit in this idea; one of them,
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a conservative and potential GOP
presidential candidate, is a prominent co-sponsor of the bill pending on the
The seismic shift on immigration has been felt in the states. After momentous
Republican statehouse victories in the 2010 midterm elections, most of which
were preserved in 2012, legislatures passed numerous laws restricting
unauthorized immigrants. Vestiges of this approach persist in the South.
Earlier this year the Georgia Legislature passed and the governor signed a bill
barring such immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses, public housing and
retirement benefits in the Peach State.
Overall, however, the mood in the states in 2013 has changed to one of offering
immigrants a helping hand. Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval of Nevada recently
signed a bill that would allow immigrants to obtain driver's licenses, bringing
to six the number of states that now permit this. Oregon and Colorado have
passed laws allowing immigrants to pay in-state college tuition. A South Dakota
bill that would have made it a felony for an employer to hire an undocumented
worker was killed in committee.
Even when states rebuff immigrants, they now tend to do so in anticipation of
federal action. In Florida, for instance, Republican Gov. Rick Scott vetoed a
bill known as the "Dream Act Driver License Law," passed almost
unanimously by the Legislature, that would have allowed children of
undocumented immigrants to obtain driver's licenses. Scott's rationale was that
President Obama's 2012 executive order suspending deportation for non-citizens
brought to the United States as children did not have the full force of law
absent congressional approval. These "Dreamers," as they are known,
would be high on the list for citizenship under the pending congressional immigration
Earlier this year, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert (R) signed SB 225, which postponed
for two years a law that would have created a guest worker program for
undocumented immigrants in the Beehive State. Utah growers, like those in other
states, complain of a shortage of domestic agricultural workers. The Obama
administration signaled it would challenge any state attempt to establish a
guest-worker program on grounds the federal government has pre-empted the
issue. Utah's postponement reflects a belief that the pending federal law,
which includes a guest-worker provision, will address their concerns.
But will the federal bill, while dealing with these issues, also help pay the
bill for states and local governments? Lobbyists for states and cities hope so.
After meeting with Los Angeles county and city officials, California Sen. Diane
Feinstein (D) directed her staff to look into the possibility of creating a
"state impact assistance fund" similar to the one in the 1986 bill.
Such impact aid, backed by organizations representing state and local
government, is expected to be offered as an amendment on the Senate floor. Such
a floor amendment was added to the 2007 immigration reform bill proposed by
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). The amendment
passed, although the bill did not.
Immigration reform, as they say of old age, is not for the faint of heart. More
than 300 amendments were offered to the immigration bill in the Senate
Judiciary Committee, of which 140 were adopted. And even though bi-partisan
support for the measure appears to be rising, some Republicans insist on beefed
up security on the Mexican border as a condition of support. The U.S.
government, spending $18 billion in 2012 alone, already has built 650 miles of
border fence and deployed 21,000 Border Patrol personnel.
Immigrant-advocacy groups say that illegal immigration has been dropping since
2007 due less to the border enforcement than a scarcity of jobs in the United
States and a reduced Mexican birth rate. Even so, the pending bill would
provide another $3 billion for drone surveillance and additional patrol
Although advocates on both sides of the issue are passionate, much remains
unknown about illegal immigrants in the United States, according to a report by
Jeffery Passel, a senior demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center. The 11-million
figure so widely used is at best a rough estimate, he says. Of this number,
Passel estimates that 55-60 percent, between 5 million and 6 million people, are
from Mexico and that many of these are families with children who have come to
the United States to settle.
Under the bill as now written, these immigrants would be eligible for
provisional status if they paid fees, fines, and taxes. They could gain legal
residency a decade after the border was declared secure and be eligible for
citizenship after 13 years. These provisions, absent from the 1986 bill, seem
onerous to immigration advocates, who note that illegals have been paying taxes
all along. In fact, Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security
Administration, has estimated that undocumented workers contribute about $15
billion a year to Social Security through payroll taxes while taking out only
$1 billion a year since few of them are eligible to receive benefits.
At the same time, however, it's clear that costs for providing health care and
educating unauthorized immigrants impose an added financial burden on the
states and local governments in which they are concentrated. Compensating these
governments for these costs should be part of immigration reform.
The above article is provided by the State Net Capitol Journal. State Net
is the nation's leading source of state legislative and regulatory content for
all states within the United States. State Net daily monitors every bill in all
50 states, the District of Columbia and the United States Congress - as well as
every state agency regulation. Virtually all of the information about
individual bills and their progress through legislatures is online within 24
hours of public availability.
To subscribe to the
Capitol Journal and access archived issue go to the State Net Capitol
If you are a lexis.com subscriber, you can access State Net Bill Tracking, State Net Full Text of Bills, or State Net Regulatory Text. If you are interested in
learning more about State Net, contact us.
For more information about LexisNexis
products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.