Immigration and the 2020 Campaign
(627 words, three-minute read)
When the 2020 presidential debate begins, President Trump will renew his campaign against illegal immigration. When he does, both sides will obscure the real issues by retreating to their familiar, polarized themes. Republicans will accuse Democrats of wanting open borders and welfare for illegal immigrants, while Democrats will argue that Trump wants to ban all immigrants, use ICE in an inhumane way, and build an unnecessary wall.
How might independent thinkers navigate this unproductive debate?
One suggestion is to separate the discussion into three components: legal immigration, illegal immigration, and whether or not we could do more for those less fortunate.
First, the legal programs appear to work
The immigration programs in use today include family- and employer-based programs, programs for refugees and asylees, the diversity visa program, and other forms of humanitarian relief. Based on my research, it appears that these programs are largely successful, meaning that participants assimilate well into American life. For example, immigrants have as many bachelor’s degrees as do native-born Americans, commit no more crime, and participate equally in the workforce. In addition, 25% of all US doctors have medical degrees from foreign countries, and 32% of computer programmers and nearly 30% of healthcare support professionals in the US are foreign born.
Secondly, the illegal population is not going home
There are approximately 10.7 million illegal immigrants in the US. 62% of them have been here over 10 years. Although many illegal immigrants pay real estate, payroll, and sales taxes, the strain they place on certain states, hospitals, and schools is a legitimate concern. Nonetheless, and despite what has been said during political campaigns, all recent administrations have concluded that it would be impractical to consider repatriating them “en masse.“
President Reagan recognized this reality when he signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, providing a path to legal residency for 2.7 million immigrants while tightening immigration and border security. No president since has proposed anything so comprehensive. While Clinton, Bush, and Obama had different priorities in their enforcement policies, all were fairly aggressive in border apprehensions and the removal of immigrants with criminal records. Despite his rhetoric, Trump’s record has been mixed. His attempt to unwind DACA is tied up in the courts. Although more migrants were turned back at the border in 2019 than in any of the prior 12 years, the annual rate of removals from the interior of the country is significantly lower than during the Obama administration.
My guess is that sooner or later Congress will reach a deal to reinstate a version of DACA in exchange for tighter border security, bringing more of the undocumented population out of the shadows.
And the third question is, could we do more?
As we discussed above, there are several programs that enable the immigration of those with means, family connections, legal assistance, and the time required for completing the process. There are also programs for political refugees. There is no program, however, for people who are simply seeking to escape conditions of abject poverty and do not qualify for refugee status. I think that we should create a class for the acceptance of a reasonable number of people in this condition and create programs to enable their successful integration into the US. Unlike in the decades of such immigration through ports of entry like Ellis Island, the cost of modern society means that greater assistance (language and job training, temporary housing and medical care, etc.) will be necessary to provide for the successful integration of such immigrants.
Despite the fact that many Americans are suffering here at home, America is still a generous country. The Congressional Research Service reports that we provide foreign aid of approximately $47 billion a year. Surely we can find within these budgets the capacity to facilitate the integration of a few more immigrants who seek nothing other than to earn the opportunity that we were born into.
How many is “more”?
Today, the US admits immigrants annually at a number equal to .35% of the population, as opposed to countries like Canada, Australia, and the Netherlands, who admit .8% of their populations annually. If the US were to increase its level of immigration to these levels, it would provide an opportunity for a better life to an additional 1.5 million souls less fortunate than we.