In a race-baiting piece written for the Breitbart.com website, an economics and business professor from the University of Maryland criticized President Obama’s executive actions on immigration, saying that white Americans now face a government that is “explicitly working against their interests” and “the prospects of their children.”
Written by Peter Morici, who also serves as a Fox News contributor, the professor claims that Obama’s decision to temporarily forestall the deportation of over 5 million undocumented immigrants will “exacerbate racial tensions” with white Americans as they see their income and employment prospects negatively affected.
Admitting that many white Americans “may silently harbor racial bigotry,” Morici claims that the “adverse economic consequences for whites are real and palpable.”
“Millions of illegals will qualify for work permits and be able to take more visible, better-paying jobs. Native born Americans will face more competition for positions paying significantly above the federal minimum,” he writes. “For example, those paying between the averages for the hospitality and construction industries—$17 and $25 per hour, respectively.”
However, according to a survey conducted by the Brookings Institute, the most recent economic evidence suggests that, on average, immigrant workers actually increase the opportunities and incomes of Americans.
According to the institute’s survey of academic literature, “economists do not tend to find that immigrants cause any sizable decrease in wages and employment of U.S.-born citizens (Card 2005), and instead may raise wages and lower prices in the aggregate.”
Morici laments the college prospects of white college applicants, often called “legacies,” who wish to attend the same universities their parents did, saying they would be “squeezed out of top universities their antecedents founded and endowed.”
Morici also claimed that “academically qualified children of successful white professionals are denied access to universities of the same status their parents attended, and consequently face much diminished career and lifetime earnings prospects,” when forced to compete with “the pools of Hispanic and Asian college immigrants and applicants,” covered by the executive actions.
In his piece, Morici failed to note that the “native born Americans,” whose prospects are diminished by immigration reform, include the children of undocumented immigrants who were born in the United States, automatically conferring upon them U.S citizenship. Under the terms of Obama’s plan, the parents of those children would be also be allowed to stay in the country — keeping their families intact — providing they have been in the U.S. since January 1, 2010.
Morici says that the new policies — done to appease “Hispanic and Asian voters” — provide Democrats with an advantage in electoral vote-rich states like California, New York, and Virginia that have higher concentrations of non-white voters. Morici notes that “white voters still account for about 70 of the eligible voters,” concentrated in more-sparsely populated states and the South.
Despite those numbers, Morici writes, “the Constitution does not provide white Americans with a remedy when a president bypasses Congress and abuses executive power to satisfy a constituency that puts its agenda above the rule of law.”
He concludes, “Whites face a government that is explicitly working against their interests, the economic prospects of their children, and democratic processes they have spent more than 200 years defending.”