mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Pres. Trump's Wall
Nemesis Comes for the Immigration Reformers
Features Icon
show comments
  • seattleoutcast

    We could start by admitting that illegal immigration has destroyed many American households by denying jobs to Americans in favor of illegal immigrants. One of the largest affected groups are black men. Funny how the democrats have forgotten about them.

    We might also want to consider how educated men (and for a smaller extent, women) are affected by the H1B Visa programs that allow Microsoft, et al. to bring in cheap labor and not only deny jobs to Americans but to reduce the salaries for those in their respective tech fields.

    • Disappeared4x

      Legal immigrants get preference if they are in an official affirmative action class, even when they are millionaires.
      Former Senator Jim Webb had the right idea about affirmative action:

      • MyWord245

        Immigration has become very emotional right now. There are some publications that have been studying this issue, for example: (Table 4).
        Overall picture is much more complex and we should approach it as such. First step is to stop illegal immigration, deport criminals and after a brief period think of migrant work visa of some sort (if you think US workers will do some of the jobs illegal immigrants do, you are mistaken).. The second step is perhaps levy a tax on H-1B visas which in turn could be used to train native workforce. I have seen numerous studied that clearly show that a majority of H1-B visa needs are driven by lack of properly trained workforce not necessarily cheap labor.
        Unfortunately dithering by both political parties brought us to a breakpoint.

        • FriendlyGoat

          You are probably describing how Republicans will convert one group of illegal immigrants to another group of legalized guest workers—–ostensibly conditional or temporary—–with some overlap of certain people already here going instantly from one group to the other and some new ones invited through the big door in the wall. There were some Trump voters out there imagining, I think, that the business community will allow shortages of workers for those very-hard-work jobs on the low end and shortages of those nobody-here-is-trained jobs on the high end to draw in the law of supply and demand and drive wages up significantly. I’m guessing that will not take place and some of the hard-core Trump supporters will wonder what happened (again).

          • MyWord245

            I think we all should agree that the immigration system is broke — we have millions of undocumented and documented immigrants from certain parts of the world living off welfare. That is not sustainable. As a card carrying Dem ( 🙂 ) you should acknowledge that Dems created a big part of this problem in spite of the fact that it is hurting unions and African Americans. They could have made a deal long time ago.
            On the other hand, it is an open secret that the ranchers, construction firms (middle class Rep voters) will tell you how they need workers; so will high tech engineering firms (led mostly by GOP voters). A middle ground is: We should legalize undocumented perhaps as temporary workers so that economy doesn’t tank. But the legal frame work should limit welfare payments to a minimum . Various studies I have seen show that this will increase commodity prices and is very UNLIKELY to bring native workers into very-hard-work jobs. Hard-core Trumpeters should recognize that other crazy plans (round up and deport) will cause more damage than worth the trouble. .

          • FriendlyGoat

            Is there some special reason why the president, who will likely complete his first term with as many foreign guest workers here as are here now, was justified in promising the “crazy plan” of round up and deport to the rally crowds? Is there some special reason why it was okey-dokey to mislead the working class voters about this up to election day and then—-AFTER election day—– give employers whatever quantity of outsiders they want or need to prevent wages from rising from any shortage in any segment of the labor market?

          • question?

            They need workers but want dirt cheap workers.

          • MyWord245

            Perhaps true. Hence my comment above that we should levy a tax on H-1B and other legal migrant temp workers. We will see where this goes — WRM’s article today is spot on.

        • Disappeared4x

          Thank you.
          My life has been shaped by living as a minority in places where 80% of my neighbors and friends were new immigrants, legal in the 1960’s, and illegal 2001-2015.
          Last few jobs I applied for went to immigrants. Sanctuary City Rules exclude my “Identity Group”.
          Should not have entered this thread.

      • I once worked on a case successfully arguing that a Sicilian immigrant, whose family had lived for a while in Brazil before coming to the U.S., was entitled to set-aside preferences reserved for “Hispanics.” This was in a place where nearly all of the political elites were of Hispanic ancestry. smh

  • Boritz

    Good analysis. We have periods of governance via empty and cynical symbolism followed by governance via sledgehammer. We have needed and do need something better, but realists recognize this is as good as it gets, hence Trump.

  • lukelea

    I think a lot of Americans would accept a blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants long resident in this country in exchange for an across-the-board moratorium (pause, time-out) on all further immigration until we can assimilate and integrate the 70 million or so first- and second-generation immigrants who are already here (including the 11 million undocumented), the vast majority from societies with no, or very weak, democratic traditions.

    • Ofer Imanuel

      Not so fast. Let Trump clean the 2 million or so criminal among the 11 million illegals.
      Also, preventing educated people coming here is not very smart.

      • Jim__L

        Making sure that educated immigrants get paychecks they deserve would be a good thing… although I’m still inclined to say that a citizen should be a “protected class” — to be given preferential treatment, all other things being equal.

    • Jim__L

      I think that with Trump’s election, we’re very unlikely to see an amnesty. I suspect that deportations — starting with the uncharismatic immigrants, criminals particularly, then unattached men — are going to happen, yes, in the amount of millions.

      And then, we assimilate the rest.

    • Angel Martin

      this is what was promised with the 1986 amnesty… people will not buy the same false promise a second time.

    • Ozefan

      I would never accept amnesty. We already did it and all it got us was more illegal immigration. It’s also a tremendous slap in the face to everyone who followed existing immigration rules. Suppose you’re waiting in line to get into a concert. How do you feel about people who just walk up to the front of the line and get in?

  • James_Eric

    The foundation of a rational and democratic immigration
    policy is for the government to demonstrate both the ability and will to
    control who comes into the country. Once this is established, and all citizens
    recognize this, only then is it possible to discuss how we should deal with
    immigrants. Without that foundation, all discussions of immigration policy are
    absurd, just noise—worse than Trump’s tweets.

  • FriendlyGoat

    Funding is not a problem unless they combine it in the same budget bills with cuts to things people want. This is why we can almost certainly bet on a “supplemental” or a series of them. Based on the “law of something or other”, it will take about twice as long and cost about twice as much as anyone estimates now.

    • ggm281

      And likely the same thing that happened before will happen again. A democrat will come in, halt the fence building and use the appropriated billions for something else entirely that pleases HIS (or her) masters.

      • FriendlyGoat

        Care to explain how that will happen?

        • question?

          There are presidential elections every 4 years and congressional elections every 2 years. Sooner or later the pendulum will swing.

  • ggm281

    The audacity of spending decades assuring us that we must constantly increase spending on public education “because there will be no jobs at family supporting wages for people without some post-secondary education”, and then insisting that millions of people with an average of only 9 years of education (only 6 years for Central Americans) are a huge boon to our economy had simply gone on too long. Sure they were a “boon” to those who hired them. They profited immensely by shirking FICA, health insurance, OT, workers comp. And the taxpayers picked up the tab (particularly the local taxpayers). So count me on the Trump side in this particular battle. No, I don’t think when we are talking about kicking people off of SS/Medicare who paid into it for 40-45 years that 12 million people who didn’t should be added in.
    At the end of the day, in a democracy people have a say in who comes into their country. Welfare “reform” would NEVER have passed had the IIRIRC not passed right before – assuring people that low education, unskilled foreign nationals couldn’t just invite themselves (and future children) into the public’s paychecks. Most of us realize that if illegal entrants aren’t turned around at the border or when they come to the attention of authorities, more and more will come. Who wouldn’t rather live in a country where other people work to feed house provide medical care and education for your children. It is pure nonsense that they cannot build a life in Mexico. Mexico has had a rapidly expanding economy for 25 years with a middle class growing in both size and affluence. But you have to complete COMPULSORY high school. For those too lazy to do so, there is always American taxpayers you can turn to.
    As we start discussing a universal basic income for unskilled workers about to be replaced by automation and AI, perhaps it is reasonable to have an immigration policy that benefits the country rather than treat the taxpayers as the world’s charity?? And let’s be even more honest. These are not magical people. The statistical relationship between educational attainment of parents and educational attainment of children holds for them just as it does for native born populations (in EVERY country with public education). We are going to have a massive class of “workers” with no work. Because these parents are convinced that what holds them back from being affluent, their children were born with – a US birth certificate. But surely we understand that there is nothing magical about being born in the US. When your kid starts school already 2 years behind age level at age 5, he doesn’t have a bright future. He has a life of poverty ahead! This wave of immigrants is the first in US history where the first American born generation does no better than their parents. And even those that entered earlier, their grandchildren are economically WORSE off than their Mexican born grandparent. (Pew)

  • Frank Natoli

    a binary choice between wholly open and wholly closed borders
    A wall on the southern border is NOT a “wholly closed border”. It is a border that is [almost] as effective as the border that all of us experience when we arrive from overseas at an international arrivals airport. We are all herded, under the watchful eyes of armed law enforcement, into immigration pens to prove our legal right to enter the United States.
    Nobody is arguing that immigration and customs “walls” should be removed from international airports.
    Why would anyone argue that the southern border should be any less effective?

  • ljgude

    I love the sound of bone saws in the morning, which is to say while I agree with Mr. Gallagher’s moderate ideas we are at the very beginning of the attempt to reassert control over the souther border. Until Trump raised the issue any serious mention of restoring our sovereign rights to control our borders was politically incorrect and politically impossible. We shall see if Trump overdoes immigration reform in due course, but in the meantime I’d propose a 20% tax on remittances going south of the border as a way to keep the concrete flowing and the bone saws turning.

  • Jim__L

    We need to have a serious discussion about assimilation in this country. Trump needs to make serious moves against Political Correctness in the universities and in what laws the Executive enforces, to allow for pro-assimilation forces to take the people we have in this country, and make us all into Americans as Middle Americans would understand the term.

    And we should probably have some level of expulsion of people who refused to “put themselves under the laws of the United States” by refusing to immigrate legally. If “immigrants who, though here illegally, have responded rationally to thirty years of policy signals from American leaders of both parties and spent decades building lives here on those assumption” are allowed to stay, then nothing changes about the rational response to people considering moving here illegally in the future.

    We have to make the rational response to the idea of coming here illegally, “No, that isn’t something that will work.”

    • Andrew Allison

      “And we should probably have some level of expulsion of people who refused to ‘put themselves under the laws of the United States'” Let’s start with the SF Board of Supervisors!

      • Jim__L

        Depends on how that precedent was contextualized…. I’m not generally for the Federal Government coming down on city supervisors like that. However, immigration (like foreign and defense policies) really is a Federal matter.

        The trick is, to allow the Fed to come down regarding immigration law, but properly limit the Fed’s power when it comes to issues that are properly local issues.

        • Andrew Allison

          I was being facetious, but the fact is that sanctuary cities are violating federal law, and the consequences should be the same for municipal governments as for individuals. The alternative is anarchy. I couldn’t agree more about local issues which are not subject to federal law.

  • Proud Skeptic

    When in doubt, just enforce the law. Doing the right thing is often difficult but it is never confusing.

  • Andrew Allison

    On behalf of my fellow legal immigrants (who followed the law), I say no illegal immigration period! For those already here, get a Green Card and start paying taxes, etc., or begone.

    • Jim__L

      This is what the Democrats don’t understand… legal immigrants aren’t that keen on illegal ones, and assimilated immigrants aren’t that keen on unassimilated ones.

  • ——————————
  • This is a good, balanced look at the situation. We need more like it. The reference to the historical perspective is, I think, especially important and overlooked.

  • Pete

    As screwy as it sounds, some people in the country actually believe foreigners have a right to immigrate to America.

  • Stephen

    Failure of governance?! Inability to compromise?! What utter nonsense.

    The federal government with local buy-in has acted for decades in blatant bad faith in the enforcement of immigration law: Faithless execution of the law; there has been no better example than this.

    Sure, build a wall, tax remittances…whatever. But, above everything else, strictly enforce existing provisions against employment and the tide of illegal entry begins to abate. Send a few prominent employers to federal prison for a few years and there will be a marked change in attitude because nearly all employers are not activists when it comes to their business and their freedom. This was the strategy of Eisenhower and it worked remarkably well and quickly.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service