The most astonishing thing I heard on the “talking heads” programs yesterday was a reaction any Congressional move to secure the border to the effect that Democrats should oppose securing the border other than in the context of “comprehensive immigration reform”. I was reminded of nothing so much as Marechal Foch’s famous quote: “My centre is giving way, my right is retreating, excellent situation, I am attacking.”
I say “astonishing” because the individual has, apparently, not been paying attention. I’ll just use Chicago as an example. For the first time in decades the Republican presidential candidate carried one of Chicago’s wards in the presidential election. The wards that should be Mayor Johnson’s base of support are in an uproar over the hundreds of millions the city has spent on migrants. The mayor’s approval rating has plummeted to the mid-teens.
Illegal immigration is already down to 2019-2020 levels. It’s a long border and we dont really have a practical, economical way to close it. Can we really afford a thousand mile long Iron Curtain? Comprehensive reform, including measures like E-verify to cut down on employment, seems a better bet. People come here to work and if that is harder then they wont come to begin with.
Steve
I agree with E-Verify and have repeatedly mentioned that a wall is only as strong as the weakest border guard. For that reason I’m skeptical of border walls. I also note that President Trump opposed E-Verify requirements on the grounds that it would harm employers, sort of the point.
The Democrats have repeatedly gone on the record on what they mean by “comprehensive immigration reform”. They have insisted on a path to citizenship for the parents of DACA recipients, a non-starter for Republicans.
I, too, have repeatedly gone on the record on the subject. In addition to the measures I mention above I think we need to increase the number of work visas for Mexican workers, eliminate the lottery system, eliminate the sponsorship system and enforce the law among other measures. I also favor some variation on DACA not including the parents of those brought here as children. I suspect that something of the sort would pass both Houses of Congress.
I have a question for you, steve. How do you know how many illegal migrants have entered the country who are neither asylum applicants nor “gotaways”? My own view is that we don’t know how many illegal migrants are in the U. S. I’m pretty confident the number is considerably higher than the 11 million frequently cited. I think the total number of foreign-born in the U. S. probably exceeds 50 million.
I assume the talking heads hold the 90s as their golden age. The importance of bipartisanship to any immigration reform at that time was that both parties had constituencies that wanted looser immigration controls and others that wanted them stricter. Any policy change risked splitting party coalition, but bipartisan legislation posed far less risk.
Around 2012, Democrats shifted to the “left” on immigration, and there was some sort of sorting going on. (Union Democrats like Bernie Sanders and Sherrod Brown had opposed bipartisan immigration reform due to concerns for labor, so they moved “left” to follow the party) The sorting meant that the parties now have fairly identified issues as strong or weak on immigration. Immigration is now more of a wedge issue, which means Democrats should realize that they need to do something to make immigration less important.
I have no idea how immigration can be rendered less important short of starting a war.
I think if illegal immigration levels drop so that they are no longer hurting local government budgets, serious crimes aren’t being committed by illegal immigrants, immigration is no longer contributing to homelessness, etc., then other issues will be more important. I’d put the H1-B visas in a separate space, but workers laid off and replaced with foreign workers make immigration more salient overall.
I would agree to the extent that I think things with higher priorities should be addressed first. IMO abuse of L-1 visas is a greater issue than H1-B.
Bundling disparate things into one big lump is a formula for inaction. That’s as true of illegal immigration as it is of homelessness. Speaking of homelessness I read a very succinct explanation of homelessness the other day: 20 million immigrants; 2 million housing permits.
Dave- The census bureau thinks the number is about 50 million. So you seem to be claiming that there is a cover up or something when that is an accepted number. Anyway, there are a lot of people working on trying to count the numbers. Unfortunately some of those people are working with a POV so you have to guess whose numbers are most realistic. For example let’s use your 20 million and 2 million numbers. 20 million is a high end number used by some people as the number of illegals entering the US while Biden was president. 2 million is a yearly number. I would say that someone who is using the largest possible numbers over 4 years to compare to a one year number has zero credibility. You appear to believe differently.
Steve
I don’t think that there’s a cover-up. I think that people who want to be invisible to the Census Bureau can be invisible to the Census Bureau.
As to accepted numbers, for centuries it was accepted that the sun moved around the earth. Now we think the opposite. For many years the accepted treatment for stomach ulcers was a bland diet and drinking milk. Now they’re treated with antibiotics and PPIs (among other things).