Illegal Immigration: Forming a Dynamic Hypothesis

Illegal Immigration

Problem Narrative

The problem that I would like to analyze is illegal immigration into the United States, particularly across the U.S.'s border with Mexico.  Every year hundreds of thousands of people illegally immigrate to the United States, half of them from overstayed Visas. (NPR, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5485917)  There are a myriad of reasons why this problem persist despite efforts to suppress it, not the least of which are various U.S. policies in place that exasperate the problem, some of which will be discussed below.   


Behavior Over Time 

This dynamic problem is constantly changing with respect to the many variables that influence it.  The magnitude of illegal immigration can be measured by tracking the number of individuals caught entering the U.S. illegally every year.  This statistic can be analyzed year by year with respect to the various incentives in place that promote illegal immigration as well as the deterrents that resist it.  For example, if I want to investigate the effect various enforcement policies have had on illegal immigration it would be meaningful to analyze any statistics that track the financial and criminal risk taken by an average illegal immigrant during a given year.  There a large number of statistics that could be monitored to track the financial and criminal risk taken by an average illegal immigrant, but a few are: the percentage of illegal immigrants caught versus those that made it, the average time of an illegal immigrant caught spent in detention, the percentage of illegal immigrants prosecuted for illegally crossing the border, the average amount paid by an illegal immigrant (based on their country of origin) to be smuggled or guided into the U.S., and the percentage of illegal immigrants, with respect to the whole, that perish when trying to enter the U.S.  Additionally, tracking the number of returns and removals on a yearly basis, a statistic kept by the DHS, would provide a composite in lieu of some of the more specific statistics mentioned above.  Returns are people deported without a court order preventing their return while removals are individuals who were ordered to be deported by the U.S. government who face steep penalties if they were caught trying to illegally reenter the U.S.  Returns require no court action, can be accomplished relatively quickly, and the only punishment for having been caught is the time spent in detainment.  Meanwhile, every removal requires a case by case hearing and takes a lengthy period to process. (http://www.justice.gov/oig/special/0403/index.html)


 Relevance of a Systems Perspective 

The complex nature of this problem makes it perfect for a systems analysis.  Within the several variables there are many delays, particularly between when new policy is implemented and when the effects are felt, that make feedback loops very significant.  Finally, there are multiple mental models at work that represent the mindsets of each individual group involved, including the immigrants, U.S. citizens, border patrol, politicians, and drug traffickers.


Study Objective and Questions to be Addressed

The primary purpose of this study would be to answer question: Why does illegal immigration persist across the U.S. - Mexico border and what can be done to address it.  However, when I perform my research I will need to examine the scope of the problem prior to performing this analysis.  I must first describe why the problem of illegal immigration is significant and a one that is even worth spending time to research.  I plant to do this by researching the potential long and short term fallout (social, economic, and impact on national security) from continued illegal immigration.  These projections should speak for themselves, describing both the scope of the problem and providing guidelines that aide in estimating the maximum U.S. contribution (in terms of financial and manpower assets) that would prove beneficial in the long run. 

Statistical Analysis of the Problem

The research performed so far has been based on statistics acquired from the DHS website in the form of yearly publications. (DHS, http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/yearbook.shtm)  These publications record a variety of figures, such as the number of illegal immigrants returned, removed, the number involved in criminal activity, and the number of immigrants based on their country of origin. Below is a graph I have assembled based on these statistics.  Between the years 1944 and 2010, the raw data this graph displays, on a yearly interval, is the: number of illegal immigrants returned and removed, and number of legal immigrants permitted entry.  Additionally, this graph highlights two valuable statistics: the ratio of illegal immigrants returned with respect to the number of legal immigrants and the change in legal immigration from year to year.  In both of these cases, the lines do not represent the values tracked on the left-hand y axis.  The first of these statistics, the ratio of illegal immigrants returned to the number of legal immigrants permitted entry, varies between the smallest and largest ratios during the time frame presented.  The smallest value is approximately 0.27 and the largest is 5.3.  The second statistic, the change in legal immigrants permitted entry each year.  This statistic is calculated by taking the immigrants permitted entry in year N and subtracting the number from permitted from year N-1 from it, then dividing by N-1.  This value represents the fractional increase in legal immigrants in reference to the previous year.  The smallest value is a decrease in the immigrants allowed of 44.6% (negative) and the largest is an increase in immigrants permitted of 182%.  

There is clear correlation between the raw statistics tracked by this graph the ratio of returns and removals to legal immigrants permitted. When the number of returns increases the ratio increases the as well.  In short, the more returns are used as a way of dealing with illegal immigration, the faster illegal immigration itself increases.  Granted, this will require more research to investigate fully but there is a relationship there that is worth a look.  The second relationship I have analyzed, the change in legal immigration, is a little less useful but it does add a dynamic worth looking at.  This will require more work, but I plan to examine various periods on the graph and determine why legal immigration increased in a given period while illegal immigration did not, and vice versa. 

Grounds for Formulating a Dynamic Hypothesis

The information I have presented has given me some causal relationships on which I have begun to build my dynamic hypothesis. First, illegal immigration increases in response to an increase in returns, and decreases in response to an increase in removals.  This is the major causal relationship I have determined from my statistical analysis, but there are additional relationships that are worth mentioning.  Given the economic status of illegal immigrants versus legal immigrants, it is a fact that immigrants illegally entering the U.S. will be a burden on the U.S. economy as well as the country’s economy from which he or she originated in, particularly those immigrants that cross the U.S.-Mexico border.  The economic status of illegal immigrants is below that of legal immigrants, which coincides with an increased number of the population that is both in or nearly in poverty. (http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/mexico/poverty.html) Additionally, an increase in immigration law enforcement will require a financial commitment that is detrimental to the U.S. economy.  Finally, while returns are an ineffective way of handling the long term problem of illegal immigration, they are inexpensive to perform and burden the U.S. far less, financially speaking, than performing removals.

Causal Loop Diagram

The CLD below has six balancing feedback loops and two reinforcing ones.  The diagram explains some of the interactions put forward in this blog but there are many, such as the financial cost of entering the U.S. and the presence of other actors including drug traffickers, that still need to be accounted for.  The different loops listed are:

Updated 10/24/2011 at 12:30PM

B1: Illegal Immigration is Bad for Business:  Shows that illegal immigration hurts the U.S. economy.  This assertion is based on the fact that illegal immigrants, in particular those crossing the southern border, have a substantially higher rate of living in poverty or near poverty than legal immigrants (http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/mexico/poverty.html).  Immigration to the U.S. increases poverty and unemployment in the U.S. while decreasing it in the immigrants country of origin. 

B2: Removal Fee vs Return for Free…ish: Explains how illegal immigration can be minimized by increasing the funding that supports the enforcement of immigration law, leading to more interceptions.

B3:Short Term Budget Control Via Deportation Policy: Explains how, in a similar fashion to B2, the government, and in particular politicians pressured into action, can remove illegal immigrants by decreasing the ratio of removals to returns to stay within the assigned budget.

B4: Budget Control Via Prosecution Policy: Explains how the government can arrive at a balance with respect to the money spent on prosecuting illegal immigrants versus the cost to do so.  The greater the number of prosecutions performed the more money needed. 

B5: Doing Hard Time: Explains what happens when more illegal immigrants are prosecuted: illegal immigration goes down but only after funding is increased.  Additionally, the cost of smuggling increases since smugglers are required to take more risks. 

B6: Economic Impact of Fighting Illegal Immigration: Explains that an increase in the funding to fight illegal immigration is bad for the overall U.S. economy, without any respect to the success that additional funding has in diminishing further illegal immigration.
B7: Cost of Smuggling: Explains how a change in the cost of smuggling illegal immigrants can change the total number of illegal immigrants attempting to enter the U.S. every year.
B8: Easy In: Explains the affect that immigrants who overstay their Visas has on immigration policy.

R1: Give Us Your Intelligent, Well Off, and Successful Masses: Explains the positive effect legal immigrants have on the U.S. economy, as well as the opposite effect should successful Americans leave the U.S. during harsh economic times. 

R2: Keep Your Poor, Weary, and Tired Masses: Explains the negative effect felt on the foreign economy of an immigrant’s home country when successful immigrants leave those countries and immigrate to the U.S., as well as the vice versa should a faltering U.S. economy cause successful Americans to leave the U.S.
R3 Give Us More!: Explains what happens when immigration policies are successful and the number of legal immigrants allowed entry every year is allowed to increase.   

The CLD below is an alternative to the one above.  This CLD is easier to follow and eliminates some of the redundancy present in the first design.  

Illegal Immigration

Problem Narrative

The problem that I would like to analyze is illegal immigration into the United States, particularly across the U.S.'s border with Mexico.  Every year hundreds of thousands of people illegally immigrate to the United States, half of them from overstayed Visas.  There are a myriad of reasons why this problem persist despite efforts to suppress it, not the least of which are various U.S. policies in place that exasperate the problem.   


Behavior Over Time 

This dynamic problem is constantly changing with respect to the many variables that influence it.  The magnitude of illegal immigration can be measured by tracking the number of individuals caught entering the U.S. illegally every year.  This statistic can be analyzed year by year with respect to the various incentives in place that promote illegal immigration as well as the deterrents that resist it.  In the case of law enforcement, it would be meaningful to analyze any statistics that track the financial and criminal risk taken by an average illegal immigrant during a given year.  This statistic could be represented in many ways, but a few are: the percentage of illegal immigrants caught versus those that made it, the average time of an illegal immigrant caught spent in detention, the average amount paid by an illegal immigrant (based on their country of origin) to be smuggled or guided into the U.S., and the percentage of illegal immigrants, with respect to the whole, that perish when trying to enter the U.S. 


 Relevance of a Systems Perspective 

The complex nature of this problem makes it perfect for a systems analysis.  Within the several variables there are many delays, particularly between when new policy is implemented and when the effects are felt, that make feedback loops very significant.  Finally, there are multiple mental models at work that represent the mindsets of each individual group involved, including the immigrants, U.S. citizens, border patrol, politicians, and drug traffickers.


Study Objective and Questions to be Addressed

The primary purpose of this study would be to answer question: Why does illegal immigration persist across the U.S. - Mexico border and what can be done to address it.  However, when I perform my research I will need to examine the scope of the problem prior to performing this analysis.  I must first describe why the problem of illegal immigration is significant and a one that is even worth spending time to research.  I plant to do this by researching the potential long and short term fallout (social, economic, and impact on national security) from continued illegal immigration.  These projections should speak for themselves, describing both the scope of the problem and providing guidelines that aide in estimating the maximum U.S. contribution (in terms of financial and manpower assets)  that would prove beneficial in the long run. 

1960's Air to Air Combat - A Flawed Mental Model

1960's Air to Air Combat - A Flawed Mental Model


The Missile Model

The 1960's was a very interesting time for U.S. pilots and fighter aircraft.  Prior to the Vietnam War there was very little for the U.S. to base it's projection for how a then modern air war would be fought.  The assumption at the time was that missile technology would make close range dog-fighting (combat between jet fighters at a very close range that involved lots of maneuvering, strategy, and skill) obsolete.  This assumption formed the basis of the U.S. Air Force's and Navy's mental models going into the Vietnam War.  All U.S. advanced fighter aircraft designed during the early-mid 1960's adhered to this mental model.

Acceptance of this mental model meant that there would be no reason to arm aircraft with guns, weapons which had no guidance and were only useful in dog-fighting.  The type of guns mounted on aircraft are very heavy and bulky, which meant that removing them would make aircraft faster and capable of carrying more missiles.  A prime example is the F-4 Phantom below. (Image is public domain, free for public and personal use via www.wikipedia.com)

Air to Air Combat in Vietnam
The Vietnam War proved to be a reality check for anyone that thought guns were obsolete, let alone the idea that all combat would take place beyond visual range.  A complex mixture of missile malfunctions and new rules of engagement that required U.S. pilots to confirm the ID of enemy planes visually before firing led to numerous dog-fights during the Vietnam War.  These dog-fights did not go well for U.S. pilots, which culminated in a 3 to 1 kill to death ratio in air to air combat by the war's end, down from an impressive 15 to 1 ratio during World War II.  However, as the war progressed the U.S. adapted, albeit slowly.  When the war was over, most pilots sent to Vietnam were taught, at the very least, rudimentary dog-fighting skills and were flying aircraft that, even if they lacked internal guns, were armed with external gun pods.  

Causal Loop Diagram

U.S. planners placed little emphasis on the dog-fighting ability of either U.S. pilots or their aircraft prior to the Vietnam War.  This is represented by the inner most feed back loop titled "Future Air to Air Combat Will Only Take Place Beyond Visual Range".  This scenario represents a situation where military planners were seeking to improve the overall combat effectiveness of U.S. fighter aircraft.  The mental model of these planners only considered the ability to strike aircraft at long range and number of missiles such aircraft could carry.   When aircraft were considered ineffective, the solution was to increase the number and quality of the aircraft's missile armament, as well as a host of other characteristics related to interceptor class fighters that I am ignoring for reasons of simplicity!

The first unintended feedback loop entitled "Look Ma, No Guns!" is the unintended consequences of designing aircraft solely for long range air to air combat.  When the ratio of missile to guns increased the number and quality of guns equipped on aircraft decreased.  When the guns were removed the short range effectiveness of fighter aircraft was diminished, represented in the CLD by a decrease in the overall combat effectiveness of the aircraft.  Since the planners were only concerned about long range combat and believed that short range air to air missiles were just as effective as guns there was no expectation that removing the guns would be a problem.  The delay in the CLD below represents the period before significant combat in Vietnam had taken place.  Prior to actual combat, simulated combat between U.S. aircraft reinforced the idea that guns were obsolete.

The second unintended feedback "Top Gun What?  Who Needs School, Just Push the Button!" represents the effect on pilots that the mental model of military planners had prior to the Vietnam War.  Dependence on missile technology made pilots and instructors lazy with respect to their dog fighting ability.  Air to air combat was not practiced like it had been a decade earlier, leaving most pilots with little or no dog-fight training or experience.  Unfortunately for U.S. pilots, even the close range air to air missiles were not as effective in combat as planners had hoped, in multiple cases failing to even fire.  Even if the missile did fire, these missiles required a very large heat signature to lock on to the target.  This meant that U.S. pilots needed to maneuver very skillfully in behind enemy aircraft, aircraft that were often more maneuverable than their U.S. counterparts.  This was a difficult task for most pilots who had never experienced more than a casual dog-fight between friends, let alone alone any real air to air training.  This is represented in the CLD beginning with an increase in long range effectiveness at the expense of gun related armament.  As long range effectiveness goes up, so to does a pilots reliance on guided missiles.  The more pilots were taught to rely on guided missiles the less air to air combat was taught, ultimately leading to a decrease in the overall combat effectiveness of the pilot and plane.  The delay in this loop represents the slow out-phasing of dog-fighting tactics and the loss of active duty pilots with combat experience, experience that dated back to the Korean War which ended in 1953.

Illegal Immigration

Illegal Immigration in the United States- A Chronic Problem

Illegal immigration is a serious and ongoing problem in the United States.  The three primary sources of illegal immigration are from Asia , Mexico, and Central America.  This problem interests me because of the detrimental effect illegal immigration has on the U.S. economy, the way in which the U.S. combats illegal immigration versus the methods employed by other countries, and the disinterest the federal government shows in remedying the problem.  The specific parts of this chronic problem that are of the most interest to me me are the economic fallout associated with illegal immigration, policy in the U.S. that reinforces someones desire to attempt to illegally immigrate to the U.S., and the security measures taken by the U.S. to halt and ultimately reverse the current trend.

Defining My Specific Interests

Economic Fallout: I am interested in quantifying how the economy, specifically the number of available jobs and federal tax revenue is affected by the presence of more illegal immigrants.  Additionally, I would like to quantify the average cost to the federal, state, and municipal governments for every additional illegal immigrant that enters the U.S.  These costs have many sources including, but are not limited to: Health care (namely emergency rooms), public education, use of public facilities, criminal activity and law enforcement, and any federal programs such as welfare or state/federal health care that contribute towards taking care of either the illegal immigrant or their children.  The economic fallout is with respect to the entire cost of allowing an illegal immigrant into the United States, cost that must include the eventual cost if that immigrant has children, however legal they become, in the United States.  In the case of children, particular attention should be paid to the percentage of children that will become productive members of society (earning potential, likelihood of becoming a criminal, etc.) compared to a legal immigrant or U.S. citizen. 

Security Measures: This part of the review will examine the percentage of illegal immigrants that enter the U.S. who are caught in the act, the percentage of those that try again, where these illegal immigrants enter the country, the percentage of these illegal immigrants that are engaged in a criminal activities (other than illegally crossing the border), and the number of border control agents (and their counterparts) needed versus the number available. 

Policy: This section will examine current policy enacted by the United States that either balances out or reinforces the problem of illegal immigration.  The types of policy that will be taken into account include: the penalty for illegal immigration, how U.S. policy affects the calculated risk undertaken by illegal immigrants who choose illegal immigration versus the risk they face staying in their own country and policy driven incentives such as emergency room health care, the ability to find work, the potential to have a child born in the U.S. that is a U.S. citizen, the desire to rejoin family that has already illegally immigrated to the U.S. (whom the U.S. are reluctant to deport), and, in some areas, free education. 

Quantifying the Problem - Hard Variables

The following is a list of potential hard variables which can be tracked to quantify the problem and what is causing it to increase.  

Severity of the Problem: Tracking severity of illegal immigration can be done by using data recorded by various government agencies that detail the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. by their country of origin and the rate at which these illegal immigrants have children who are born in the U.S.  If this were graphed it would show a marked increase in illegal immigration since 1980 with the dominating source of illegal immigration being from Mexico.  It would also show that for every illegal immigrant in the U.S., their are approximately two  additional people born who are unauthorized but will most likely be given citizenship.

 Percentage of Illegal Immigrants Caught in the Act: Self explanatory.  This graph would show an increase over the past 5-10 years in the percentage of illegals caught in the act but the total percentage caught would be marginal compared to the number that successfully immigrated.

Repeat Offenders: The number of people caught attempting to enter the United States more than once.  This graph would show an increase over the past 5-10 years since policy has not been enacted to fix the problem of illegal immigration itself.  This graph will also examine the percentage of total immigrants that are repeat offenders with respect to the past 10-20 years. 

Percentage of Offenders Prosecuted: The percentage of offenders prosecuted for illegally attempting to enter the U.S compared to the whole.  I am not sure of trend, but this graph will show an abominably low prosecution rate of less than 3-4%.

Percentage of Illegal Immigrants in the U.S. Prosecuted and Deported: The percentage already in the U.S. that eventually face prosecution and deportation with respect to the whole.  This may be a difficult statistic to find, but I would hypothesize that the number is on the decline given the decline in state and federal revenue to enforce immigration laws.

Number or Percentage of Illegal Immigrants Already in the U.S. Released or Skipped Bail: The number or percentage of illegal immigrants caught and identified as illegal immigrants who either skipped their court date because they were not held in custody or who were released since the crime they committed was either negligible or because their only crime was being in the U.S. illegally.

Economic Incentives for Illegal Immigration - This graph would detail the number of illegals currently employed in the U.S., the total cost of services such as health care and welfare enjoyed by the illegal population and the cost of education for children born of illegal immigrants.

Cost of Directly Fighting Illegal Immigration:  Self explanatory.   This graph would show a marked increase in the cost of fighting illegal immigration given the new funding provided to support it over the past 5+ years.  However, this cost would still be marginal with respect to the drain on the U.S. economy.

Assessment of Cost of Enforcing Immigration Laws Versus the Cost of Allowing the Problem to Persist: This graph would document various potential trends involving the immigration problem.  The trends would all track the cost of future illegal immigrants and those currently here that are arrested and released versus the potential cost of halting and reversing the problem associated with illegal immigration.  This graph would not be exact but is intended to give a ball park estimate of the resulting economic fallout based on whether or not the problem is amended.

This list could go on but that's enough for now, the problem is already sufficiently complex! 

Soft Variables 

This is a listing of the soft variables, variables which have, for the most part, have already been detailed above and need no further elaboration. These variables are all reflected in the hard variables above.

Policy- What policy issues promote illegal immigration, which act to deter it. (temporary visas, difficulty of legal immigration, path to citizenship or lack there of, citizenship laws for the children of U.S. born illegals, etc.)

Enforcement- What enforcement has proven effective in catching illegal immigrants both in the act and after the fact.

Prosecution/Punishment- What level of prosecution and form of punishment is effective and ineffective in providing a successful deterrent against illegal immigration.   What can we learn from history and other countries to succeed in selecting the right level of prosecution and punishment?

Motivating Factors Behind Illegal Immigration- Why are people coming to the U.S?  What does their country of origin lack that the U.S. provides?  What makes breaking the law worth the risk and how can new policy on behalf of the U.S. counter this motivation, particularly in terms of providing alternative solutions? 

Connecting the Dots

All of the variables above are interrelated.  While further research is required, most of the the interactions between key variables can be explained.  However, unless someone really wants me to draw a crazy causal loop diagram, I'm going to avoid explaining the complex interactions, as I understand them now, until next week!