New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (R) has been wrong on many economic issues confronting the Big Apple - from tax increases to subsidies for big league ball clubs.  But at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in Philadelphia on July 5, Bloomberg got it right on immigration.

According to an Associated Press report, Bloomberg noted the following about those who are in the country illegally: "Although they broke the law by illegally crossing our borders ... our city's economy would be a shell of itself had they not, and it would collapse if they were deported.  The same holds true for the nation."  Bloomberg also said: "Members of the House of Representatives want to control the borders. So do all of us here.  But believing that increasing border patrols alone will achieve that goal is either naive and shortsighted or cynical and duplicitous. No wall or army can stop hundreds of thousands of people each year."

Bloomberg's declarations are realistic, and generally supported by most economists. 

In fact, immigration is one of those very few issues on which widespread agreement exists in the economics profession.  One is the economic ills of raising the minimum wage, as a higher government-mandated wage hurts young, inexperienced, low-skilled workers who lose work to higher skilled workers or increased automation, or see many of their jobs simply wiped out altogether.  Second is free trade, as comparative advantage and freer exchange among businesses and individuals across borders foster greater economic growth.  The third issue is immigration. 

Agreement among economists on immigration has been verified in past polls.  For example, in a December 1995 report, "Immigration: The Demographic and Economic Facts," the late Julian Simon reported: "In a poll of eminent economists conducted by Stephen Moore and me in the mid-1980s ..., with update by Moore in 1990, we found agreement that immigration had (and has now) a positive effect upon the economic condition of the United States; Moore found comparable results in a 1989 poll, too. Included in the surveys were 38 persons who had been president of the American Economic Association, as well as those who had been members of the President's Council of Economic Advisers. In answer to the question, ‘On balance, what effect has twentieth-century immigration had on the nation's economic growth?', 81 percent answered ‘Very favorable' and 19 percent answered ‘Slightly favorable.' ... None of these top economists said that immigration was ‘slightly' or ‘very unfavorable' or felt that he or she did not know enough to answer. This extraordinary consensus belies the public picture of the economic profession as being on both sides of all important matters."

Simon then added: "The top economists also are willing to extend their backward assessment into a forward-looking policy judgment. When asked, ‘What level of immigration would have the most favorable impact on the U. S. standard of living?', 56 percent said ‘more,' 33 percent said ‘same number,' and none said ‘fewer.' Only 11 percent said ‘don't know.'"

This remarkable unity regarding the economics of immigration apparently continues today judging by an open letter addressed to President George W. Bush and members of Congress signed by more than 500 economists and other scholars (including myself).  The letter is sponsored by the Independent Institute, and among the signers are five Nobel Laureates - Thomas C. Schelling (University of Maryland), Robert Lucas (University of Chicago), Daniel McFadden (University of California, Berkeley), Vernon Smith (George Mason University), and James Heckman (University of Chicago). 

The key points are:

• "Overall, immigration has been a net gain for American citizens, though a modest one in proportion to the size of our 13 trillion-dollar economy."
• "Immigrants do not take American jobs. The American economy can create as many jobs as there are workers willing to work so long as labor markets remain free, flexible and open to all workers on an equal basis."
• "While a small percentage of native-born Americans may be harmed by immigration, vastly more Americans benefit from the contributions that immigrants make to our economy, including lower consumer prices. As with trade in goods and services, the gains from immigration outweigh the losses. The effect of all immigration on low-skilled workers is very likely positive as many immigrants bring skills, capital and entrepreneurship to the American economy."
• "Immigration is the greatest anti-poverty program ever devised. The American dream is a reality for many immigrants who not only increase their own living standards but who also send billions of dollars of their money back to their families in their home countries-a form of truly effective foreign aid."

None of this should be a surprise.  Most immigrants - both legal and illegal - come to this nation in search of economic opportunity and a better life.  In order to accomplish that, they must contribute to our economy.  They become producers, consumers, and entrepreneurs.

Understanding the economics, it then becomes apparent that immigration reform must focus on border security in the name of national security, vastly expanding legal channels of immigration to help secure robust economic growth going forward, and offering a reasonable avenue to legalization for undocumented workers.

The open letter on immigration wisely concludes: "America is a generous and open country and these qualities make America a beacon to the world. We should not let exaggerated fears dim that beacon."

_______
Raymond J. Keating is chief economist for the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council.