With congressional immigration reform triggering nationwide protests in recent weeks, campus immigration experts are closely following the issue.

One proposed bill, the Border Protection, Anti-Terrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act, passed by the U.S. House in December 2005, would charge illegal immigrants with a felony for "unlawful presence." Those helping undocumented immigrants might also be subject to criminal prosecution.

On the other hand, the U.S. Senate's legislation would eventually grant undocumented workers a path to citizenship.

On Monday, supporters of legal reforms benefiting illegal immigrants flocked by the thousands to California rallies, boycotting jobs and businesses to demonstrate economic power. Thousands gathered at the state Capitol in Sacramento, marched on Oakland's International Boulevard and filled blocks of Broadway in downtown Los Angeles.

'Seriously flawed'

Campus experts agree that the House proposal, known as the Sensenbrenner bill, is seriously flawed. Kevin Johnson, an associate dean at the law school, called the proposal "the worst of all worlds," asserting that it would punish undocumented workers but not do anything to reduce the illegal immigrant population.

Law school and Asian American studies professor Bill Hing went even further, calling the bill "unrealistic and immoral."

Giovanni Peri, an assistant economics professor, said the Sensenbrenner bill would also cause problems from a financial standpoint.

"The perspective of making illegal immigration a felony seems very costly, not effective and even hard to enforce," Peri said.

Although the Senate proposal, backed by President Bush, shows more promise, the experts are divided over its potential effectiveness. The law would allow undocumented workers to gain citizenship by learning English, remaining employed for several years and paying back taxes and fines.

Hing thinks the Senate has the right idea.

"Granting undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship is necessary to recognize the contributions they make to the U.S. economically and socially," he said, "while also recognizing the relationship that the U.S. has with the largest immigrant-sending nation — Mexico."

Social, economic factors

But Johnson is not so sure, saying immigration reform must address the social and economic factors that cause undocumented workers to stream across U.S. borders.

"Until we change the laws to comport with the practical realities," he said, "immigration law will resemble the era of Prohibition in the United States.

Many otherwise law-abiding citizens will violate the law by hiring undocumented immigrants, criminal activity will be encouraged, such as human trafficking and smuggling, and the legitimacy of the law will be undermined."

At the center of the immigration debate is simple economics. Proponents of expelling illegal immigrants from the county argue that these immigrants toil for rock-bottom wages, taking jobs away from citizens who ask for higher salaries. Others contend that these immigrants do the work that Americans will not do, making them valuable for the agricultural, construction and domestic service industries.

Johnson agrees with the latter view. He pointed out that President Bush sees the removal of all undocumented immigrants from the country as impractical, bad for the economy and inhumane.

"Prices of most commodities in the state, including new housing, food and services, could be expected to increase with increases in labor costs," Johnson said. "Immigrants are indispensable to the U.S. economy."

But agricultural and resource economics professor Phil Martin is not convinced. Martin pointed out in a recent National Public Radio interview that when the Bracero program, a temporary labor agreement between the U.S. and Mexican governments, ended in 1964, steep produce price increases were expected.

"Even the UC predicted that prices for tomato products and other commodities that were picked by Braceros would increase in price," Martin said in the interview.

"That didn't happen," he said. "The UC developed tomatoes that ripened uniformly, a machine to harvest them, and we now produce five times more tomatoes at roughly half the cost that we did back in the 1960s."

Cheap labor

Martin suggested that the farming industry could adapt to a shortage of cheap labor now, just as it did 40 years ago.

As for the claim that undocumented immigrants take jobs from U.S. citizens, Peri's research has shown otherwise. The economist found that immigration had only a very small negative effect on the wages of less educated Americans, and actually helped the wages of the more educated.

"Overall, immigration is good for the U.S. economy," Peri said. "I would infer that a crackdown on low skilled immigration would not have much of an impact on wages of less-skilled Americans and possibly hurt wages of other workers."

'Tinkering'

It is anyone's guess when the immigration issue will finally be put to rest. Hing expects Congress to act this year, although he is concerned that its actions would not give undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship.

Johnson is equally pessimistic.

"The nation seems unwilling to confront the social, political and economic realities of what is fueling modern immigration and how our economy relies on immigrant labor," he said.

"Until the nation does, we will be tinkering at the margins with major immigration reform every decade or so."