G4E1-Immigration Data Office

You're viewing a single section of this policy brief.

CONGRESSIONAL IMMIGRATION DATA OFFICE

This proposal would establish a single federal office to provide integrated, comprehensive immigration data and analysis from across relevant agencies. The information collected would include:

Labor Market Needs—Worker shortage data and the level of additional labor needed, if any, at various skill levels across industries and occupations. This would include whether those needs suggest raising, lowering, or holding current caps on relevant visas.
Immigration Impacts on the US—The effects of immigration nationally and by state, both positive and negative, on economic growth, fiscal health, and US workers’ jobs and wages. This would cover the substitution and scaling impacts of foreign workers and wage data by visa category. It would also include impacts on local, state, and federal government services, crime, and housing.
Impacts on Immigrants—The experience of immigrants admitted through different visa pathways, including the prevalence of exploitation by employers, integration into the workforce and communities, English language acquisition, and use of government benefits and services.

The office would be a nonpartisan arm of Congress, housed within an existing agency such as the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Government Accountability Office (GAO), or the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Alternatively, it could be a new office, such as a Congressional Immigration Data Office.

The proposal would require the office to publicly issue reports on labor markets and other immigration impacts at least every two years. The reports would recommend whether employment-based and other visa caps should be raised, lowered, or left unchanged. They could also recommend adjusting visa selection criteria to admit immigrants most likely to contribute to the economy.

The office would be authorized to obtain relevant public and non-public data from the many congressional and executive branch agencies that already collect it. Congressional sources would include the CBO, the GAO, the CRS, and the Joint Committee on Taxation.

Executive branch sources would include the Department of Labor, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the US Census Bureau, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Commerce Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the State Department, the Department of Education, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The office would also draw on state government and non-governmental data, including from academic researchers and think tanks.

The Case For

Supporters argue that a government office conducting and publishing objective analyses on a regular basis would better inform the public and policymakers. It would give them a rational basis for adjusting visa caps up or down, or making other changes to the immigration system. They argue it would stimulate a more data-based immigration debate and help reduce and reconcile conflicting research that various advocacy groups advance. The government reports and data would also inform employers and investors, improving the efficiency of labor markets. Supporters also assert regular data publication would strengthen research outside the government. Advocates note that most other major immigrant-receiving countries have similar data bodies to guide policy debates of government decision-making on this issue.

The Case Against

Some opponents agree that an immigration data office would be beneficial in theory but argue it would be hard to implement, with little real payoff in practice. They maintain that the reports would still be subject to advocacy group and partisan criticism. They note that similar legislative-branch bodies, such as the CBO, increasingly face skepticism about their findings as partisan tensions grow. Given the uncertainty that the office’s research would meaningfully change immigration policy debates, critics contend it is not worth the cost.

Opponents also argue that immigration does not warrant its own data office when arguably more important areas, like healthcare, don’t have one.

Some opponents reject the premise that Congress would pass sounder immigration laws if it only had better data. The obstacles to reform, they argue, stem from differences in policy preferences, not a lack of good data.

You're viewing a single section of this policy brief.

Read the Full Brief ↗

CONGRESSIONAL IMMIGRATION DATA OFFICE

The Case For

The Case Against

Links

Address

Contact Us