Software versus a wall: Evidence is mixed
The Trumpcrack down on illegal immigration has focused on increasing deportations, building a wall on the and forcing local law enforcement agencies to turnover undocumented immigrants to federalmy colleague Lo mi Kri el examined last week.
Another method, the citizenship authentication system known as E-Verify, is much cheaper and more effective—but it hasn’t worked in all states that require it, new research shows. A 1996 law required the creation of a systemthat allowed employers to quickly and easily check worker provided documents against federal databases. Over the past decade, eight states have made the E-Verify system mandatory for all employers. Over half of new hi res nationwide are vet ted by that system.
Pia Orrenius, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, and research partner Madeline Zavodny have found that states requiring E-Verify saw drops in their undocumented immigrant populations. Along with the Great Recession, thoselaws probably played a role in the recent decline in the number of people living in the U.S. illegally.
But Orrenius and Zavodny’ s latest research has found that most states haven’ t enforced their E-Verify man dates very strictly .( Texas, and a handful of other states, currently only require E-Verify for government employers.)
So, does compliance with E-Verify mandates have an impact on illegal although the evidence is mixed. Arizona and Alabama saw substantial decreases in their undocumented populations, compared to what they would have been without the laws, according to Orrenius’ and Zavodny’ s model. But other states with high compliance, such as Georgia and South Carolina, saw no change.
Employers often protest E-Verify requirements because they make it harder to meet workforce demands.
Still, if your goal is to reduce the number of people coming to the United States for jobs, it appears to have more bang for the buck than elaborate border security measures. lydia.depillis@chron.com twitter.com/lydiadepillis