Three experts called for reforms to U.S. immigration law during a panel discussion Wednesday at the Robert and Bernice Wagner Alumni House.

The three speakers acknowledged the current lack of legal channels through which Latino immigrants can enter the United States, and also said support for each side of the immigration debate was illuminated in the wake of protests in Washington, D.C., earlier this month.

“The protests achieved something important,” said Daniel Griswold, director of trade policy at the Cato Institute, a public policy think-tank. “They showed Washington that there are powerful, strongly held opinions on both sides of this issue.”

Griswold pointed to the nature of the U.S. economy and the decreasing number of Americans who are willing to take on certain jobs as a reason for high Latino immigration.

“Our economy continues to produce jobs that do not require a lot of skill,” he said. “Additionally, the pool of Americans who are willing to take these jobs is shrinking. Because of this, immigration from nearby countries . is great.”

The next speaker, Eric Gutierrez, legislative staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, a Latino civil rights organization, discussed how the functional nature of Congress will ultimately impact any new immigration legislation. Due to the continual bargaining process that is characteristic of congressional committees, any new bill will only be approved through compromise, he said.

“Right now, we’re in a situation where there will be a compromise,” Gutierrez said. “By its very definition, a compromise means that neither side will get everything it wants.”

Gutierrez also condemned what he called U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner’s (R-Wis.) “narrow view of immigration,” saying that the congressman ignored the positive aspects of the Latino presence in the U.S. in sponsoring a bill last year aimed at tightening immigration restrictions. If approved by the Senate, the bill would make “unlawful presence” in the U.S. a felony, he said.

Despite acknowledging the validity of some points put forth by those in favor of stricter immigration laws, Andrew Selee, Director of the Mexico Institute for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a nonpartisan institute for policy study, said that approving such legislation would be contrary to American economic interests and societal values.

“It’s a problem that a large percentage of the population cannot vote or participate in the political process because they are undocumented,” Selee said, acknowledging the view of those supporting stricter laws. “It’s also a problem that immigrants are hurting the ability of Americans to fill certain jobs.”

“The United States isn’t built on an idea about a unified culture,” Selee continued. “It’s about a confluence of cultures that accept the democratic process as the right way of doing things.”

The panel discussion was sponsored by MEChA de Georgetown.