Immigration advocates worry that the incoming Trump administration’s threats of federal deportation may trigger a cascade of unintended consequences in Pennsylvania.
And there’s support for legislation that could tackle issues with economic strain and criminal activity associated with an influx of migrants that concerns taxpayers in Pennsylvania and beyond.
The House Democratic Policy Committee discussed this last week as it considered ways to avert potential fallout from major policy shifts. On Election Day, the party secured a one-seat majority in the lower chamber, giving it carte blanche to pursue state-level immigration reform that could struggle to find support in the Republican-controlled Senate.
“Unfortunately, there’s going to be immigrant detentions and deportations on the horizon, so now it’s crucial that this legislature not only pass welcoming policies to support immigrants but to fight back against these proposals,” said Julio Rodriguez, political director at Pennsylvania Immigration and Citizenship Coalition.
Rodriquez’s comment came just days before President-elect Donald Trump confirmed he would be willing to declare a national emergency to begin mass deportations of immigrants who crossed the border illegally.
Supporters of the action argue that relaxed rules for migrants claiming asylum, as well as an unsecured southern border, allow violent offenders, drug smugglers and terrorists to enter the United States undetected.
It also worsens the exploitation and suffering of undocumented migrants seeking relief from gang violence and economic instability in their native countries – a main talking point of Pennsylvania’s U.S. Senator-elect Dave McCormick.
Other strains on the state’s economy and public safety exist, however, including uncompensated medical care and diverted law enforcement resources, which leaves medical providers and police departments struggling to keep up.
A 2021 report from the Migration Policy Institute found that of the nearly one million immigrants residing in the state, half were naturalized citizens. Another 32% were lawful permanent residents, while 16% were undocumented and 0.5% were DACA recipients.
Almost all immigrants working in the state, legally or not, pay into the system. Undocumented immigrants specifically account for $134 million in taxes and are, in most cases, not eligible to receive federally funded public assistance benefits.
Rodriguez said the economic power of immigrants goes far beyond expanding the tax base. With over $30 billion in spending power, he says the state would lose $6.4 billion in gross domestic product if the state’s undocumented immigrants were to leave the workforce.
Rodriguez cited Florida’s Senate Bill 1718, which bans driver’s licenses for applicants incapable of proving lawful residency in the United States. Drivers with existing licenses from Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode Island, Vermont or Hawaii come with heightened restrictions because laws there don’t require the same.
Florida officials say the law targets drug traffickers and other cartel activity while preventing undocumented migrants from accessing public assistance programs unlawfully.
Critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, call it a “sweeping anti-immigrant bill” that makes it harder for those with children born in the United States to work. Some studies estimate the Florida economy will take a $12.6 billion hit.
Back in Pennsylvania, a Republican-authored House proposal would also ban out-of-state driver’s licenses for undocumented migrants. It’s part of a broader package of immigration reform that also includes requiring the use of E-Verify for state grant recipients, and employment in the meatpacking, food processing, and lodging industries; protecting unaccompanied immigrant children; and cracking down on human traffickers.
Rodriguez argues such policies could, for example, trigger higher grocery store prices because it would likely reduce the agricultural migrant workforce upon which farmers rely.
Several other bills under consideration offer a different approach.
House Bill 1548 would prohibit law enforcement from spending resources on immigration enforcement. Proponents of this kind of legislation say that helping Immigration and Customs Enforcement hinders public safety by pulling officers away from their actual duties and fostering mistrust in the community.
Another proposal aimed at reducing crime, House Bill 1371, would help clear the path to citizenship through U-visas for victims of violent crimes. Supporters say that when immigrants cooperate as witnesses for law enforcement, it has a real impact on drug trafficking and gang violence.
Additional proposals would provide for an Office of New Pennsylvanians and more funding for J-1 visas for doctors to work in the state.
Advocates said fostering immigration is an essential piece of the puzzle required to slow the state’s downward population trend. According to Kyle Kopko, executive director of the Center for Rural Pennsylvanians, the demographic shift is the “single most important issue” facing the state.
Fewer people doesn’t necessarily mean less work. A shrinking population means a shrinking tax base, economy and congressional representation. It strains essential services like health care, extends waiting periods, and leaves Pennsylvanians across all industries with few to no provider options.
By the end of the decade, Kopko says 53 out of the state’s 67 counties will have more seniors than young people. At present, only 60 of every 100 open jobs in the state are filled. One way to curb that, he says, is by welcoming more immigrants to the state.
Rodriquez said there’s also a moral imperative because immigrants come here for three primary reasons: low wages, climate disasters, and civil unrest, all of which the United States has contributed to through its economic, environmental and foreign policies.
According to the Institute for Economics and Peace, climate change and civil unrest will displace over one billion people worldwide by 2050.
