Beyond taxes and abortion, few issues tackled in the political arena yield heated debate nationally or in Tennessee like that of the impact of unauthorized aliens. Much of that clamor is understandable. There is, many feel, legitimate reason for frustration over federal inaction and/or lack of enforcement of existing laws. That frustration has in turn led to a spate of new state and local government attempts to enact laws to increase control—laws having an effect on business.

As the Tennessee General Assembly kicks into gear this session, it will have another wave of immigration-related bills to consider. Therefore, now is the time for responsible examination of the issue. A summer 2007 report from the office of the state comptroller of the treasury of Tennessee intended to help guide policy discussions serves as a timely study on the topic. Intended to contribute factual information to the debate, the report is as interesting for what is implied as for what is overtly stated. The findings?

• 100,000 to 150,000 unauthorized aliens resided in Tennessee in 2005, or about 2% of the state's population.
• Unauthorized immigrants are not eligible for most public benefits yet contribute to state sales and property taxes.
• Many economists nationwide agree the increase in immigrants boosts states economically and that unauthorized immigrants have a negligible effect on American jobs and wages.
• Several key industries in the state are dependent on these workers.
• Document and identity fraud make it difficult for employers to comply with federal requirements to hire only authorized workers.
• The state is not supposed to be in the business of regulating immigration, and if there are problems, it's the federal government's responsibility to deal with them.

As a pro-business magazine located in a decidedly pro-business state, it is not customary to argue in favor of federal control trumping state control on any issue, particularly one that so directly affects commerce. But the view of immigration as a federal and not a state issue is one shared by a preponderance of national and state business advocates, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. While Tennessee lawmakers should continue to encourage the federal government to address immigration, this should not be a major focus of the state's attention. Certainly, mass deportations or imposing measures that drive out the state's immigrants could have a detrimental impact on the state's economy. Meanwhile, the economic benefits of coming up with a workable system to deal with the unauthorized work force, as well as to maintain a well-regulated federal immigration system with strong enforcement and a workable guest worker program, would probably make this whole issue go away.

The comptroller's report, taken in tandem with recent media reports from across the nation and even here in Tennessee, provides a fuller picture of the unintended negative impacts of new state and local regulation of immigrants. For example, The New York Times reported in September 2007 on the factory town of Riverside, N.J., becoming the first municipality in the Garden State to enact legislation penalizing anyone who employed or rented to an illegal immigrant. Within months, thousands of immigrants had fled. "The law had worked," the article states, "Perhaps, some said, too well," as closed-up storefronts and a town budget strained by lawsuits challenging the law pummeled Riverside in the aftermath. According to a November 2007 article in The Houston Chronicle, "retailers and employers whose success depends on Latino businesses and workers have felt the pinch since Oklahoma's anti-illegal immigrant law went into effect... changes in the law are needed to counteract its negative economic consequences." And, according to a recent AP article, a new Tennessee law intended to keep illegal immigrants from getting driver's licenses has made it impossible for many legal immigrants—including highly skilled workers at large international companies—to renew their driver's licenses in the Volunteer State.

It's unlikely that lawmakers in Tennessee and other states will hold their powder on this issue in 2008. But consideration of the issue as a whole leads us to a simple cautionary word for Tennessee lawmakers, particularly those facing an election in 2008: Do not allow campaign politics to dictate responses to the weighty questions of immigration reform. And for the sake of business in Tennessee, be wary of the consequences of acting without weighing all sides of the issue.