senate and the house doing their job to legislate and then he and our form of government the senate and the house do everything. they come up with the bills and they send it to the president. they have to pass it and they send it to the president to be signed or not sign>> "washingto" continues. host: look at the intersection. the snow arrested is with this -- alex no arrested -- what do you think it means for

immigration legal and illegal? guest: what we have learned and seen as the number of job openings in the united states is related to the flow of illegal emigrants trying to enter the united states across the southwest border. the main reason to come see united states and there are many reasons. one of the primary reasons that people, is for the economic opportunities and advantages here. when you take a look at the wage differences and you compare it to the united states. an identical worker can take up four times to 10 times increase in wages. what we have seen is the increase in job

amongst the illegal immigrants so they could try again and again. earlier, prior to title 42, immigrants could go to the court system, there would be actual punishment for them. but instead, they push them back to the border so they can try multiple times. title 42 made it easier for illegal immigrants to come to you the united states -- to the united states. in terms of encounters are the highest level that we have seen since we have data on this . host: legal immigrants are more likely to go in the industry where illegal immigrants are

trying to get these jobs . guest: star a lot of visas coming into the -- there are a lot of visas coming into the u.s. seasonal industries like landscaping, others seasonable occupations. we have a large number of visas for the agriculture portion of that. in terms of the visa for the non-agricultural workers, that cap annually at 66,000. congress routinely double that number every year by allowing attorneys and that program to come back, congress did that again. the biden administration issued half of those additional visas this year. we have this situation where there is a enormous labor command in the united states. we are not issuing all of the visas that we could. in 22 and one, the green card, different program.

it is primary for skilled workers coming into the united states. a lot of tech workers, i.t., science, mathematics, engineering appeared the united states government wasted 60 through 100,000 green cards. this is through a different -- this is through a number of different factors. as a result of these legal challenges to the united states, making it more difficult, more rules, more regulations, we diminished immigration and incentivize even more people to enter illegally. host: those who enter illegally, if the goal is to get a job he looked united states and they achieve the goal, what industries are they getting the job in? a lot of them are in agriculture. guest: also in construction.

a disproportionate share of workers in the construction industry are illegal immigrants. in retail, manufacturing, food arboriculture. things like processing plants across the country. it is a wide range in the industry. most illegal immigrants are low skilled workers in the united states compared to other americans. we seen across different sectors across the american economy. host: a topic that we often get pretty calls for. if you want to join the conversation, republicans it is, . democrats, (202) 748-8000. if you go to cato.org, you can see his work, including this

piece yesterday, border chaos and a catch-22 of immigration reform. what is the catch-22 of immigration reform? guest: americans are concerned about the chaos that is going on at the border. that has been going on for 65 years. this is the amount of chaos caused by immigration systems that restrict immigration significantly and in american players who want to hire these individuals. as long as there is chaos, americans do not want to liberalize legal immigration. the only way to get sustainable control over the border is to liberalize illegal immigration so these would be illegal immigrants can come to the united states lawfully and take the pressure off order control. that is the catch-22. if we do not resolve that issue, if we do have not have a brave politician who is pulling to liberalize illegal immigration, it is very difficult to get out

of that. i do not see a lot of advocates, scholars, others really talk about. host: people hear you say liberalize, what is the conservative case for immigration reform? guest: it is important and integral part of free markets. ideology part of conservative movement for a very long time. in order to make the u.s. economy productive, large, beneficial for everyone as possible. consumers, workers, entrepreneurs, we need to allow in many more illegal immigrants you want to come here for job opportunities. in the process, increase the productivity in the united states, increase the size of our economy and help us grow. the other part is the noneconomic case. we have had throughout our history open immigration system, this is something that defines us in the united states. you take a look at my last name,

your last name, our ancestors comes from different parts of america. we are america. it works out very well. when the reform is looking back at american history, continuing at the traditions and looking at the economic benefits with a free market conservative approach. host: the logical answer for immigration should be based on needs, factors, scientists -- doctors, nurses, scientists, should also be prior to iced. we do not need low skilled workers coming in illegally from the southern border. host: i agree with him. guest: a lot of the should be based on labor demands in the united states. there is demand for every skill worker. there is doctors, engineers, scientists, like the tweeter mentioned. this is also demand on the low end. i do not think the government is

good at citing which occupation -- deciding which occupation should be filled by immigrants. the last major immigration we had was in 1990. before the internet. before massive change in the u.s. economy, technology that has upended both society and the production capacity of the united states. as a result of that, i think our system is out of date and we can't really trust to well congress to determine what is the particular subset of workers by skill or occupation. other countries tried it, it does not work out so well. should we -- i think we should let the economy and the market decide. let american employers and the immigrants themselves choose where and what they work in. sanctuary city our jurisdictions, sometimes counties, often times that readers there cooperation with

immigration customs enforcement. sometimes what they will say is if you're just arrested by a local police officer, not charged with a serious crime, we're not going to turn you over to the federal government, nor deportation. california has a law passed in 2014. what the law says is, unless you're accused and convicted of a crime, we are not going to turn you over to immigration and customs enforcement. that is basically what sanctuary cities are. it makes a ton of sense. i think we want to let immigration -- to focus. we do not necessarily want every single legal -- illegal immigrant who has come to contact with law enforcement and

turned over to custom enforcements because that clogs up the system, it takes resources away, and it makes illegal immigrants and other communities a little less likely to operate with law enforcement. we see in places with sanctuary cities put into effect, no change in the crime rate come my a lot of evidence on that. in places that they could do more local control, where they forced local government. we do not see a change in crime rates. do sanctuary cities incentivize more illegal? guest: we do not see evidence of that. you have a wage increase to come here from south america. that is enough to get people to come here. that is a lot of changing for these individuals appeared in the sense that if you increase my income, we have nicer cars, bigger houses. it is not the difference between

not having central heating or a house or having central heating. for these people it is the difference between not having central heating and having central heating. it is a huge difference for these individuals. the pole here is primarily economic. americans want to employ immigrants and immigrants want to be employed. the problem is the u.s. and logging the way of that. there are changes here. caller: thanks much for having me on. i wanted to ask a critical question to alex. one question is, i think the narrative and discussion around immigration is often talking about the demand of why immigrants come to america, so they push for them for jobs, maybe higher wages and cultural

and societal forces at play would maybe -- seeking a safer environment. what often is not talk about is the suppliers. can you talk about maybe some of your research, if any at all on how larger corporations you have mentioned, factories, farming and agriculture sectors are supplying illegal immigrants with employment. can you apply additional has to where there is enforcement on the suppliers? there's a lot of conversation and demonizing on immigrants. it is not the same for the suppliers. that is all i have. thank you. host: there are certain bouts of american history were reduced the larger amount of immigrants enforcement inside the united states against employers of illegal immigrants. guest: not so much now. it is expensive and not a

good way to go about it. under u.s. law in 1986, it is illegal for a u.s. firm to employ u.s. immigrants. -- illegal immigrants. if he ever had a job and have to fill out the i-9 form, that form is basically to show that you're lawfully employed in the united states. of course, i think what a lot of people realize, by increasing the benefit of getting a fake id , and other process is e-verify to check whether your legally to work in the matter states. there is in much larger industry of fake ids. to go in these places, it is a lot more difficult and time-consuming for many of these government enforcement agencies to do that. you have got to check all of the data, identity documents, comparing them to realize

real documents and try to make a determination. it is expensive. they try to focus on corralling and getting local law enforcement to the sort of emigration enforcement multipliers. if that is what we see across some states in the united states. they corral, they force local officers to cooperate with customs. it is very expensive. and does not yield anything in return. -- it does not yield anything in return appeared going after employers will have the same economic effect as going after the illegal immigrants because it will diminish their job opportunities and hurt them a lot economically. i hear a lot about going after employers, illegal immigrants,

the end result, the goal is try to reduce wages and opportunities that they do not come to the united states. if economics is the key reason driving illegal immigration, how do you explain the rise and why we have so many asylum speakers these days? guest: a lot of it is because of the situation in this country. part of the other reason is because other legal avenues are so closed up to come to the united states lawfully, some people who might have come on a visa, other people have come unlawfully as workers realize they could get in easier if they make --. i am not going to deny that. i do not think anybody can deny that. host: are we talking 50%? guest: but as a difficult question. the asylum cases, backlogs in court is 1.26.

just going to take a long time to determine what is fraudulent and not fraudulent in the current flow over the last couple of years. it is probably a substantial flow. if we would hear the percentage i would not be surprised if it is half or a little bit more is fraudulent. the legal system encourages that. they are so occult -- it is so difficult to come in other ways. a lot of people come here to try to climb asylum in a effort to get into the united states, otherwise they would have taken a work visa. host: michael, democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. it seems like this whole immigration policy thing is a ploy by the republican party's to discourage immigration and blame the president for the problem. i would suggest to you, build a

wall, not a good ideal. that is what the republicans are pushing. the congress is supposed to be in charge of our immigration laws and rules. they have done nothing. to, it is a propaganda towards the republicans and also sort of simulate the idea of racism in this country to deny immigration to this country. guest: when i talk to my friends who disagree with me, i do not think the vast majority of them are not -- i think the disorder, chaos, large number of illegal immigrants is what turns them off from legal regression. i agree with you that building the wall is a bad idea. i think it comes from looking at

the chaos and from one trying to get control of that chaos. very few people think when they see chaos, that the answer is liberalization. on the point about congress, you are right. congress's job is to pass law. immigration laws are an important part of that. we have seen over the last several decades, we see this every year, congress gives the president authority over many different issues. we saw this in the trump administration, biden administration, congress really does not want to pass laws that much anymore, they want to give the president power to do things. that is what we see in immigration. -- about the myth of immigration law, where there are so many executive orders, so much power for the president to determine who can enter the united states,

usually by saying in national word like national security or other phrase that allows him to basically uphold control of who can enter the united states. this is a problem across multiple areas of law, or we basically have this congress advocating this responsibility by given -- giving a number's power to the -- giving eight a number's power to the president. i would like them to address these issues. i would like them to be a part of this debate. that is not what we are seeing. we are seeing congress waiting for the president to act and giving him more power. host: ohio. republican. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i agree with many of the things you are saying in terms of, we have to work on specific legislation regarding immigration. we need more visas. i think we have to address a

number of issues, obviously the cartels and the human trafficking, tragedy and the border and the chaos you are describing. one other thing i do not hear people speaking about, that is cost. according to the cdc, 20% of our nations children are born to a noncitizen. i suspect that that first american in this nation may grow up someday to be president and i would be the first person to stand in line to say horay. the mandatory safety mandates we have, the chip program for health insurance, all of these programs, if 20% of our nations children are born noncitizens, that is a $60 billion cost. as soon as individuals in our country have a child, now we are at a terrible place. we have a child who is a u.s. fincen, who is a parent -- u.s.

citizen with a parent who is a noncitizen. we have to talk about the spending and cost. we need to have some way of addressing that. we can't take on all of this additional mandatory spending with a rod sweeping change in the policy to allow everyone in, unless we change the 14th amendment, unless we potentially change the laws regarding representation. thomas jefferson took the first senses with 16 states in southwest territory. we should appropriate money based on population and representation of congress should be based on citizenship. guest: first on the ship birthright citizenship, which is what the color meant by the 14th amendment. birthright citizenship has been unintentional subsidy for assimilation. in terms of cultural, economic,

even as illegal immigrants who were born here to be citizens, that made them feel more connected to the united states, it produces legal barriers for them to get education and a job. when you compare to other countries, all of which do not have birthright citizenship is a much better assimilation here in the united states. birthright citizenship has helped along the assimilation of illegal immigrants. about costs, i agree with you. i think the spending is out of control, immigrants, it is out of control for their kids. when we take a look at welfare benefits come on average it is 28% below native born americans, that is without any kind of control for age or poverty, 28% below on average per capita. now there u.s. born citizens who

do have access to a lot of those benefits. i agree with you. congress has done this before. we should build a higher law around the welfare state, instead of a law around the country. host: what are the benefits that somebody who crosses illegally? what can they get? guest: illegal immigrants are barred. they do have access for emergency medicaid, if they show up at a emergency hospital they can get that. illegal children have access to wic, they have access to school lunch programs. some states could allocate their own money, not federal money, their own money for welfare programs for illegal immigrants. california is trying to get

100,000 illegal immigrants onto the states medicaid. i oppose these efforts. i think they are too expensive. i do not think they're going to have a positive outcome. i do not think california taxpayer should have to subsidize that. illegal immigrants have very little. they have access to the benefits i just mentioned. some states allow people on the green card to have access to benefits. if you're here for five years, you can get a lot of these benefits. illegal immigrants and illegal immigrants have less access to welfare benefits. host: are you ok with illegal immigrants having those benefits you laid out? access to school lunch programs wic, are those things we should be providing to the country who come in illegally? guest: i do not think they

should be. i think i should be reserved for american citizens, where they are native or foreign-born. host: independent. good morning. caller: farr asked my question, i want to thank you all for the show -- before i asked my question come i want to thank joe for the show. this is my favorite show on tv. i heard this topic. what a great conversation. this is "washington journal" at its best. has it been a study that against who would come into the united states that all immigration restrictions were listed, all odds repealed, what with that flow be? is there any idea of the magnitude? i think this is a really crime

all over the world. with tv's, satellite, internet, people realize how poor they are and they want to get to where people live better. i do not know if there is enough to go around. thanks very much. guest: on the estimate of how many immigrants are coming to the united states at ritter virtually all of its restrictions, it is hard to model something like that. estimates range over a very long time. i seen estimates by eight economist in 2018 -- by eight economist in 2018. who basically have a 500 year production -- projection. he estimates it at 800 billion. take that for what it is worth. if you get to look at surveys that have done more recently, wonder 50 million people in the

world say -- 150 million people in the world say they want to move to the united states. a lot of those people want to end up moving if they have the opportunity. the truth of the matter, we do not really know. we should be skeptical of any estimates about the number, given that we are going from a system that the days of ellis island are long over. they ended over a century no. legal immigration is the second most complicated portion of u.s. law, second to income tax. they are extraordinarily restricted, even compared to other oil-rich countries. the u.s. is extremely restrictive when it comes to immigration. in terms of people knowing around the world how they already two media and television, i think that

probably plays an effect. i think the big reason why they know is that there are people from all over the world who tell their family members back home how great it is in the u.s., how much posterity there is, how much opportunity there is. we you do surveys about patriotism and how much like the u.s., immigrants in the u.s. are more like you to say the u.s. is the best country in the world and more likely to say the rest of the world should be like the west. it is enthusiasm in the u.s. which i feel like we need especially in these hyper-partisan times. i think india and the realization of the rest of the world, and how poor they are by comparison definitely plays -- i think media and the realization of the rest of the world, and how poor they are by comparison, definitely plays a factor. guest: -- host: any guesses what number three would be? guest: maybe telecom law.

that's just a guess though. host: tony, democrat. good morning. c-span.org fit -- caller: good morning. a couple items. in addition to the labor shortage, anybody just has to go down to lowe's or home depot. right behind the building, you will get all the labor you need. of course the poor people are getting paid slave lasers -- slave wages because the guy running it takes most of the money. the only thing i called about was i was so proud of aoc going down a couple years to the border and talking about all the dead people and babies in the river. i do not see that anymore. as far as economic opportunities, fentanyl that is being sold in this country. the hundred thousand deaths for the first time last year.

these people are making money hand over fist. it is crazy. whatever happened to those border patrol people that were whipping those illegal immigrants at the river? i thought they were going to jail? i never heard anything more about that. host: am going to interrupt. there is a bit there so what do you want to pick up on? guest: the government did an investigation of that and look at the picture from multiple different angles. that was not the case. i think those individuals who were accused of whipping were definitely not lt of whipping. but, those dramatic pictures really galvanized the immigration debate to bring home to people how chaotic the border is. in terms of fentanyl smuggling, what we know is the vast majority of sentinel, as far as we can know because this is a black market so data is limited,

best bars talent from the fentanyl seizures, almost all of them are from legal ports of an -- of entry. through smuggling, not so much through illegal immigrants carrying them on their backs or across their desert -- the desert. fentanyl issues are a different issue from immigration. i gets tied in because of the border. the problem with fentanyl and drugs is the same problem we see with immigration. too many level restrictions. a legal black market causes chaos and has that hundreds of thousands over the last for years of tragic death. host: in less than 10 minutes when this program ends, we are going to take to the bipartisan center with a preview of what the next congress could look like if republicans take control. the former director of the congressional office is giving a presentation there.

we are going to bring you to that if you stay on c-span. until then, continuing this conversation with alex no asset -- nowraseth. patricia, ohio, republican. good morning. caller: for boarding. i have no problem with legal immigration. what i have a problem with is what it costs. the children come in and no one can speak english and i know we have a relative now who is -- a.g. garland: that afternoon. since i became attorney general, i am made clear that the department would speak through its court filings and work. the justice department failed to receive a property receipt related to a court-approved

search the fbi conducted earlier this week. the search was a premises located in florida belonging to the former president. the department did not make any public statements on the day of the search. the former president publicly confirmed the search that evening as is his right. copies of both the warrant and the fbi property receipt were provided on the day of the search to the former president's counsel who was on site during the search. the search warrant was authorized by a federal court, upon the required finding of probable cause. the proffering -- the property receipt is a document that federal law hires law enforcement agents to lease with the property owner. the department filed the motion to make public the warrant and receipt in light of the over president's -- the former president's confirmation of the search and the substantial

public interest in this matter. faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the justice department and our democracy. upholding the rule of law means applying the law evenly, without peer or failure -- or favor. under my watch, that is precisely what the is doing. all americans are entitled to be evenhanded application of the law, to due process of the law and to the presumption of an -- of innocence. much of our work is by necessity done out of the public eye. we do that to protect the constitutional rights of all americans and to protect the integrity of our investigation. federal law, long-standing department rule, and our ethical obligations prevent me from providing further details as to the basis of the search at this time.

there are however certain points that i want you to know. first, a personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in the matter. second, the department does not take such decisions lightly. where possible it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken. third, let me address recent, unfounded attacks on the professionalism of the fbi and justice department and prosecutors. i will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked. the men and women of the fbi and the justice department are dedicated patriotic public servants. every day, protect the american people from violent crime, terrorism, and other threats to their safety while safeguarding our civil-rights.

they do so at great personal sacrifice and risk to themselves. i am honored to work alongside them. this is all i can say right now. more information will be made available in the appropriate way and at the appropriate time. thank you. thank you all for your questions but as i said, this is all i can say at this time. >> who will take you live now to a hearing on the election integrity being held by the oversight committee. >> i was interested to learn that your office created something called facts matter, a website, to counter misinformation and disinformation during elections. what has the responsibility