Reactions to My Proposal for a New Visa to the United States

January 25, 2010

Yesterday in the Washington Post I proposed a new kind of visa, a Golden Door Visa. It would ensure that at least a few of our immigration slots go to people from the poorest countries, such as Haiti, people who need opportunity the most.

Predictably, I’ve been flooded with vicious personal attacks, both private and public. My inbox has burst with emails like this one, whose author concealed his or her identity:

You America hating scum. Millions of people out of work and you want more uneducated, unskilled people to flood America. … We have given billions of dollars to Haiti. Poverty is not to blame. The corrupt government is to blame. … Is Mao one of your favorite people also? You don’t care about these people. But why waste a disaster, right. Use them to your convience [sic]. And destroy America while doing it. You turn my stomach. You are where you are because of America and yet you will help destroy it.

On the public side, Mark Krikorian wrote a personal screed against me.  Mr. Krikorian directs the “Center for Immigration Studies”, an anti-immigrant pressure group with financial and intellectual ties to extremist racists. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a respected civil rights organization that monitors hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan, maintains an informative web page about Mr. Krikorian and his organization.

Perhaps these people are so ferocious because the idea of letting more Haitians immigrate is gaining real traction in the aftermath of the unspeakable disaster in Haiti. The calamity in Haiti showed with unusual clarity the effects of U.S. immigration policy on the poorest people overseas. The U.S. government actively forces real people to live in those circumstances you’ve seen on television. That is an act of enormous gravity that should be contemplated solemnly, not with Mr. Krikorian’s smirking sarcasm.

This issue is not going away. Desperate Haitians will be getting on boats in large numbers to try to escape Haiti in the weeks to come. But most of them will be forced to do so without permission, because there is no provision in current U.S. immigration policy to reserve even a single visa to the U.S. for people simply because economic opportunity is abysmal where they are. (Refugee visas are only for people threatened by war or persecution, and don’t apply to natural or economic disasters.)

A Golden Door Visa would change that. It doesn’t need to mean more immigrants, though it might; it could be made “numbers-neutral” so that the number of all immigrants stayed the same but became slightly weighted toward places where people need more opportunity. It could be given in more limited numbers when the US economy is weak, greater numbers when it’s strong.

Creating some degree of flexibility in this way would help avoid the international embarrassment of indiscriminately forcing all of the desperately poor people who will be trying to leave Haiti back into the disaster zone. The alternative is to keep trying to hermetically seal the U.S. Even if that were possible, it would require us to do shameful things. Think for a moment about whether you, personally, would be willing to stand at the border and use the threat of violence to deny opportunities to people vastly poorer than yourself. A high-school dropout in the United States enjoys about eight times the living standard of the average worker in Haiti.

Everyone wants a poverty reduction strategy for Haiti that will lift people out of poverty in Haiti. I do too. The sad fact is that no one has found one, despite decades of aid and trade preferences for Haiti. Emigration from Haiti, as Lant Pritchett and I have calculated, has been by far the number one source of poverty reduction for Haitians to date. People mock the idea that any visa could be the basis of a real poverty reduction strategy for Haitians. I would respond that if anyone is designing a poverty reduction strategy for Haitians and does not focus that strategy on what has worked the best to bring Haitians out of poverty in the past, their strategy is not a serious one.

Some of the people who responded to my proposal have made substantive comments. A common objection is that immigration to the U.S. can’t be the solution to the world’s problems. That is certainly correct. But there is no reason to leave 10 empty seats in a lifeboat simply because 100 people are in the water. Why not do what we can? There is no evidence at all that the U.S. cannot possibly take limited numbers of additional low-skill immigrants who thirst for opportunity.

If you think there should be no immigration to the U.S. as long as there is unemployment in the U.S., then you are in favor of zero immigration forever, because unemployment was never nil in the recorded history of the country. A zero-migration world is not just a fantasy world; it’s a dark and sad world. No one knows that better than the immigrant ancestors of most Americans.

[Update: For more on the research underlying these views, see this new working paper.]

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1. HappyOutlier Says:
   January 26th, 2010 at 12:31 am

   Michael,
   You are my top candidate for The Atlantic’s Brave Thinkers list!
   Over the curse of human history our major breakthroughs were championed by people brave enough to defy outdated ideas, conceptions and prejudices.
   Challengers of a flat Earth, slavery and the Inquisition already showed that we need your thinking!

2. Nandini Oomman Says:
   January 26th, 2010 at 9:42 am

   Great op-ed piece and blog post, Michael. Your critics might want to take a look at this interesting Haitian immigrant story that can be found at: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122937646 to see how an Haitian American immigrant, \Michael Gay is about to become one of the busiest, most sought after men in Haiti. The lanky 62-year-old Haitian American owns GDG, the countrys largest concrete plant. Its his concrete that went into the two most prominent buildings that survived the quake – the massive new American embassy and the 12-story Digicel Building.\ NPR reports that \Gay rushed from his home in Naples, Florida to Haiti last week, and has been in high level meetings ever since, with the Haitian president, international aid agencies and big engineering firms, all quietly planning how to resurrect the city of his birth.\

   I know this is just one example, but as I follow the news, I hear everyday about other Haitian Americans who are helping in their own way like Haitian American nurses and doctors who have rushed to Haiti to care for the injured survivors. Haitian Americans are playing a key role in the impressive U.S. response to Haiti’s crisis. I see some very clear lessons emerge from the Haiti example, in addition to the other well-documented evidence of benefits of immigration for development:
   #1: Immigrants give back in different ways to their countries of origin: regular remittances to their families, philanthropy (a la George Soros), investments in country and of course disaster relief (funding and actual emergency services).

   AND, at the same time

   #2: Immigrants also give back to the U.S.: Immigrants who invest in their countries of origin can be vital links for the U.S. to markets that they perhaps understand better than another American investor i.e. the Haitian American cement producer and builder, the Indian American IT investor, etc. I’m sure we can find many such examples, and document net gains to the U.S in many sectors from immigration.

   Ultimately, it’s not just about other people’s development, it’s also about our relevance and growth in the world today. Like you say, zero immigration will kill the dynamic and innovative economy that we have. Opening our world to immigrants allows us to flourish, and contributes to the development of poor and less fortunate countries. It’s not rocket science.

3. Gonzalo Fanjul Says:
   January 26th, 2010 at 11:24 am

   I have reading these days A. Hoschchild’s fascinating book on the campaign that ended British slave trade in the early 19th Century (’Bury the Chains’). At the verge of a key victorious vote at the Commons, the abolitionist MP James Stephen appeals \not to the conscience of a British Stateman, but to his prudence alone\. Incidentally, Stephen bases his strategy on the recent Haitian slaves’ revolt and independence.

   I wonder how would Stephen react to the current debate on immigration -which in so many ways resembles the 19th Century debate on slavery- but it seems to me that his axiom on moral and practicalities pretty much applies here too.

   Keep on the excellent work, Michael. Your ideas are not only important for the USA, but also for Europe.

4. Susan Rose-Ackerman Says:
   January 27th, 2010 at 12:39 pm

   Michael,
   Just to let you know that you are not alone. This op-ed by John Ackerman was posted on the FT website on 1/27 and is titled: “We Must Open Our Borders to Haitian Refugees.” The “we” is not just the US but the international community generally. John, himself is a professor at the UNAM in Mexico City. I saw your post on the CGD website after he sent me his op-ed, and I thought that you and readers of your blog would be interested.

   http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/852da8ee-0b33-11df-9109-00144feabdc0.html

5. Henry Mosley Says:
   January 27th, 2010 at 12:49 pm

   I am totally supportive of the proposal for a Golden Door visa for all the reasons given. But I do have one question: What is more likely – that such a program will provide an opportunity for low-skilled workers, or will it simply encourage the most highly educated and skilled to leave the country in larger numbers? While indeed, the highly skilled can return larger remittances which are important for development, they are also critically needed in the country to rebuild the private and government institutions.

6. Michael Clemens Says:
   January 27th, 2010 at 1:34 pm

   @Henry Mosley: Thank you very much for this important and thoughtful question. First, only 27.5% of Haitian-born adults in the US have a college degree, and many of those were only able to aspire to such education because they were able to come here, so some substantially smaller fraction of Haitians who have come to the US in the past are people who would be highly-educated if they hadn’t left — perhaps one in five of the emigrant adults, or fewer. Second, this fraction should be lower going forward, because people with the most need to leave now are the ones with the least safety net at home, certainly not the elites. Third, a Golden Door Visa could be whatever we want it to be; if we wish, it could be designed to be primarily available to those with less than university education. Fourth, attempting to cause development in a foreign country by preventing skilled people from voluntarily leaving is likely to be as effective as hoping an inner-city neighborhood would ‘develop’ if we trapped the smartest kids inside those neighborhoods against their will — or more likely, it would be less effective, since countries are dramatically more complex systems than neighborhoods and therefore much harder to engineer.

7. Michael Clemens Says:
   January 27th, 2010 at 1:40 pm

   @Susan Rose-Ackerman: Thanks for this terrific link to John Ackerman’s piece. It makes no sense that we don’t have any visa category — not a single visa of any kind — that we can use to give flexibility to legal immigration in dire settings like Haiti’s where refugee law does not apply. There should be at least a few visas that respond simply to acute economic need or natural disasters. I have been publicly blasted by people who have assumed I was proposing fully open borders when my piece said nothing of the kind. Even 500 visas that could be used for emergent situations like this would be better than what we have now: zero.

8. Steve Rosenzweig Says:
   January 28th, 2010 at 4:18 am

   Michael – thanks for fighting the good fight on this. The comment from one of your attackers is right about one thing – you, and I, and s/he, are where we are because of America, because the country allowed our ancestors (just 2 generations removed in my case) to immigrate here. And America is what it is because of immigrants. Immigration right now is far below the levels at the turn of the century, when the country was thriving. And the population of New York, the most vibrant city in the country, is currently more than a third foreign-born.

   The big difference between immigration now and immigration at the turn of the century? Skin color. Which is why the anti-immigration movement is largely led by not-so-closet racists like Krikorian.

9. Javiera Martinez Says:
   January 28th, 2010 at 2:41 pm

   Michael,
   Yours is a generous and fresh perspective and, as other readers, I do think what you describe is a win- win scenario.
   The thing is, it requires to let go of the fear of the unknown and start thinking bigger and more globally.
   The more we have relations with other cultures, the more we learn not to fear them and become aware of everything that we can learn from them.
   After all, you Americans did gain a president out of intercultural exchange!;)
   keep up the good work and I will continue reading your posts!

10. Roggers Says:
    January 29th, 2010 at 1:29 pm

    Dear Mr. Clemens,

    Thank you very much for your powerful article in the Washington Post: “To Help Haiti’s victims, let them leave”, The Washington Post, Sunday; Page B2. January 24, 2010. I am an American citizen from Haitian and Dominican origins. Over the years, I have been reading thousands of books, documentaries and articles about Haiti. Yours is a very powerful one.

    Yes, indeed, you are right!. As you know Haiti isn’t at war with any country. It is surrounded by peaceful and wealthy neighboring countries. It is not experiencing any tribal conflicts. There is no linguistic barriers among us (them). All Haitians speak Kreol. Again, Haiti is trapped in a vicious circle of man and nature made disasters. We/They have been hammered on again and again and again. The “annum per capita” salary of a Haitian is 580 dollars. The Haitian of the twenty-fist century has comparatively the same economic power as a 17th Century’s Languedoc (France) peasant, a roman slave or a big industry employee of the 19th century.

    As you rightly mentioned, many causes lead to this destitute situation: years of bad and repressive governance (if any), destruction of the ecosystem, Haiti’s geographic position, American aid. Not necessary in that order. Don’t take me wrong. American aid is- as you stated- vital for Haiti. Without the United Sates, Haiti would have been at the same stage as Somalia (as if one isn’t enough). However, the way the money has been administered creates more problems than it solves. Foreign aid has been used to corrupt people, hire them to import non-sense politics. Some Haitians with barely 8 years of education have been paid in Haiti the same salry as a College educated Administartive Assistant at the entry level. I have run into some who are asking themselves why they’ve been apid so much… Now, they go so far at harrassing and threatening American citizens living in the U.S. (proof available upon request).

    Some officials in the United States are acting on the U.S. soil- against any notion of logic- upon their Haitian colleagues’ desires… As a consequence, Haiti becomes a moral challenge for its oldest neighbor, allied and friendly country…. I do agree that the U.S.-for lack of a better solution- should open its doors to more Haitians. However, if international contractors and other U.S. Officials in position of power in or around Haiti don’t stop creating that Kleptocracy, and breeding conflicts among Haitians, this solution-as generous as it could sound- would be be a transfer of misery. Haitian people are very resilient. If I am not mistaken, it is about time that American University professors and students, the United Sates Congress, American journalists, pay more attention to what is going on in Haiti.

    We need a new type of approach. How many more lives and “loss generations”- to repeat Secretary Mrs. Clinton’s own words do we have to suffer to call the attention of the United Sates that Haiti is at the verge of an irreversible crisis?

    Thank you for your time and attention.

    Respectfully yours,

    Roggers

11. Erik Kingston Says:
    February 15th, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    Michael:
    Just heard the piece on NPR. Sorry to hear you’ve been getting such negative/unconstructive blowback.

    I have to say that while I appreciate where you’re coming from as an academic, I would take issue with the economics of immigration as a solution. It may work in some cases in a ‘normal’ economy, but as a housing expert fielding requests from homeless or soon-to-be homeless refugees from several countries, I can attest to the challenges on the ground.

    Boise is one of several resettlement locations for refugees from around the globe; most recently from Burundi, Somalia and the DRC (Congo). These folks are incurring thousands in debt for their travel costs to Boise from the refugee camps. Once they get here, they receive approximately six months’ worth of direct assistance, including rental assistance. They receive approximately one year of case management from the refugee resettlement agencies. After that, they are on their own.

    These folks typically have little or no English skills, and find themselves competing for minimum-wage emploment with unemployed or underemployed local native English speakers. Although they are highly motivate workers and prefer earning their income; they face many hurdles. The burden on local charities is immense, and not likely to improve in the next few years. Many refugees we encounter express a desire to return to the camps, despite conditions there, as opposed to relying on costly housing and other necessities which force them further and further into debt.

    Local communities receiving refugees need far more resources to accommodate the need. A handful of housing providers have welcomed refugees into their complexes, and even donated a few units to help the resettlement agencies house their clients. In response, local fair housing enforcement advocates are threatening complaints against the agencies and providers for ’steering,’ a violation of the Fair Housing Act, for what they perceive as creating concentrations of tenants based on national origin. It’s a mess.

    Please take the time to speak with housing and social service practitioners in current resettlement communities to get a sense of the ground truth of this inmigration. We apprecite the diversity our new neighbors bring, but the current system is setting everyone up for failure.

    See my article regarding this topic in Rural Voices magazine at http://fairhousingforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/ifhf_collaboration-as-second-language.pdf.

    Best Regards, and thanks for contributing ideas to this process.

    Erik Kingston
    Boise, ID

We value frank and constructive exchanges and encourage you to use your real name in your comments.