Jim Deitsch

Senior Seminar: Politics of Happiness

Professor Radcliff
November 12, 2018

Immigration Policy and Human Happiness

Introduction:

During the 2016 United States Presidential election cycle, immigration policy was featured

prominently during media coverage, campaign speeches, and national debates. Immigration

policy was framed as an important issue that would dramatically affect the lives of American

voters. On the one hand, the Republican ticket contended that less restrictive immigration

policies would lead to an influx of “illegal” immigration, which was framed as undesirable; such

immigration would lead to less jobs for American citizens, worse public schooling for American

children, dangerous drug and gang-related activity within American borders, and a general

sense that the American identity was being lost to foreign invaders. On the other hand, the

Democratic ticket contended that less restrictive immigration policy would create a more well-

rounded, welcoming America. Through this lens, immigrants are viewed as benefit to society;

they might bring unique talents to the capitalistic economy, they would certainly bring diversity

of thought and other intellectual contributions to our classrooms, and the end result would be

a better American identity rather than a vanishing American identity.

There are two considerations that must be taken into account when examining the

respective desired immigration policies of the two major American political parties. First, the

effect of immigration policy on the immigrants themselves must be discussed. For the

Republican party, the short answer is that it does not matter. American policy should protect

American citizens. For the Democratic party, the effect of policy on immigrants themselves is
claimed to be a primary consideration; harsh immigration policy is viewed as inhumane, so it

should not be allowed. The second consideration that must be taken into account is the effect

of immigration policy on current American citizens. This is the consideration that the

Republican party considers to be of paramount importance – since immigration (particularly

immigration of the “illegal” variety) is viewed as being an overall negative influence on the well-

being of American citizens, stricter immigration policy should be implemented.

Since the Republican party is unwilling to consider the effects of immigration policy on

the immigrants themselves (a direct corollary to the “America first!” rallying cry that has

become popular), any attempt to advocate for less restrictive immigration policy that could

possibly reach the ears of half of the country would have to address the effect of immigration

policy on American citizens. If an argument could be made, preferably one backed up by

statistics, that lenient immigration policy contributes to the happiness of American citizens,

headway might be made in bridging the gap between political parties. At the very least, if it was

established that lenient immigration policy did not have a statistically negative effect on

American citizens, it would be more likely that Republicans would listen to immigration

arguments based on the well-beings of the immigrants themselves.

With this background in mind, this paper will seek to established a statistical basis for

the argument that easing immigration policy will actually lead to a happier country – if this is

not the case, the paper will examine whether the effects of immigration policy on happiness are

neutral or negative.
Methods:

The best way to ascertain the relationship between immigration policy and happiness is to

assign degree of strictness of immigration policy as the independent variable, and then find the

effect on subjective well-being of a country’s residents. Other things would have to be

controlled for as well – if a country with a remarkably high GDP and a country with a low GDP

are compared, the relationship between immigration policy and subjective well-being are

unlikely to tell the whole story.

For this study, I have chosen to focus on well-developed countries, so that the results

have relevancy for the United States question of how to structure its own immigration policies.

The first step to determining the answer to our question is ranking a certain amount of well-

developed countries by their immigration policies, from least restrictive to most restrictive. The

Center for Global Development has developed such a ranking system for 27 well-developed

countries. “To arrive at the index for each country, we look at three broad aspects of rich

countries’ migration policies. First, their willingness to accept migrants from the developing

world; second, how well those migrants are integrated; and third, whether the country

participates in a raft of international conventions on migration.”

The United States ranks in the bottom half of the countries, which means that their

immigration policies are stricter than average among the countries with the world’s 27

biggest economies. If a positive relationship exists between well-being and lenient

immigration policy, we would expect the United States to be below average in well-being as

well, when other relevant factors are controlled for.

 Several sources provide rankings of the subjective well-beings of various countries, but

perhaps the most accessible is Gallup-Healthwats State of Global Well-being, which ranks all

countries in the world according to well-being. “The Gallup-Healthways State of Global Well-

Being: 2014 Country Well-Being Rankings report provides an overview of global citizens’ well-

being as measured by the Gallup-Healthways Global Well-Being Index. In 2014, our research

includes more than 146,000 surveys in 145 countries and areas, and captures how people feel

about and experience their daily lives. Our research shows that people with higher well-being

have higher productivity, lower healthcare costs, are more resilient in the face of challenges

and are more likely to contribute to the success of their organizations and communities. The

Global Well-Being Index measures well-being across five elements (purpose, social, financial,

community and physical) and individual responses are categorized as thriving, struggling or

suffering (see back page for definitions). Our analysis ranks countries based on the percentage

of the population that is thriving in three or more elements of well-being.” The United States

ranks #23 in these rankings.