I have no interest in addressing the segment of society that approaches the immigration issue in bad faith and barely-disguised racism. I don't see where common ground is possible. For that part of electorate, I agree with Jon Lovett's dictum to get two votes for every one of theirs.
1. You’ve critiqued the family separation policy. What should border patrol agents do instead to people claiming asylum at the border?
A few things: First, families should be kept together. Otherwise, this traumatizes children and empowers human traffickers and other who would take advantage of minors without their parents present to protect them.
 |
| See these kids? Don't separate them from their parents. |
1. You’ve critiqued the family separation policy. What should border patrol agents do instead to people claiming asylum at the border?
A few things: First, families should be kept together. Otherwise, this traumatizes children and empowers human traffickers and other who would take advantage of minors without their parents present to protect them.
Second, go back to the previous policy of assigning parents a court date for an immigration judge to decide the case. To rectify the system’s huge backlog, the government should hire many, many more immigration judges and caseworkers. While the attendance rate was about 90 percent for previous families assigned a court date, increased efficiency would likely drive increase attendance.
Finally, running a system well takes people. This is where I part ways with "Abolish ICE" folks. There's a need for competent, well-funded law enforcement agencies* focused on border patrol and another focused on trans-national trafficking issues. Good policing matters. Everyone is safer. However, I wouldn't be surprised if a future administration decides to rebrand and reconstitute** the agencies because trust between the brand has been so badly damaged.
* An oft-overlooked fact is that two separate federal agencies are in play here. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) manages the border. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) handles deportation and trafficking crimes.
** Both agencies are housed in the Department of Homeland Security, which was created post-9/11. Therefore, the sort of mass reorganization this would take isn't unheard of. It wouldn't be like reconstituting a more established agency like, say, the FBI or DEA.
2. Won’t this empower human traffickers and bad actors to fake their way through the process?
Not necessarily. A major reason law enforcement struggles in separating the bad actors from those with legitimate needs is because immigrants can best tell officers the difference between the two. Unfortunately, immigrants, documented and undocumented, don’t trust law enforcement because they believe they’ll be harassed or deported if they have any interactions with officers. (This is a major reason why serious crimes like rape go unreported at higher rates in immigrant communities and many local police forces stress that they won’t turn anyone over to ICE.)
Effective law enforcement requires trust and cooperation from the communities officers are trying to police. That trust must be earned. Taking kids away from their parents does precisely the opposite.
3. If the federal government is too permissive, could it create a structure that encourages immigration from central American countries, thereby further destabilizing them (because of mass migration) and empower human traffickers (who prey on people’s dreams of making it to the U.S.)?
This is a real concern that I don’t hear discussed enough. Everyone will be better off if countries like El Salvador and Guatemala become much more stable. I’m not an expert on Central American geopolitics, so I won't go much beyond generalities. But here goes:
The last point is especially important because some folks will be unresponsive to appeals on ethical or humanitarian grounds. Successful political activism usually means marshaling an unwieldy coalition on narrow grounds. What I hope is that by putting better immigration policy in the economic interests of the "lower taxes!" crowd, plus giving employers some legal certainty, we can create political will that will ultimately result in a lot less needless suffering of some of the world's most vulnerable people.
2. Won’t this empower human traffickers and bad actors to fake their way through the process?
Not necessarily. A major reason law enforcement struggles in separating the bad actors from those with legitimate needs is because immigrants can best tell officers the difference between the two. Unfortunately, immigrants, documented and undocumented, don’t trust law enforcement because they believe they’ll be harassed or deported if they have any interactions with officers. (This is a major reason why serious crimes like rape go unreported at higher rates in immigrant communities and many local police forces stress that they won’t turn anyone over to ICE.)
Effective law enforcement requires trust and cooperation from the communities officers are trying to police. That trust must be earned. Taking kids away from their parents does precisely the opposite.
Victims of human trafficking are taken into custody in Guatemala
This is a real concern that I don’t hear discussed enough. Everyone will be better off if countries like El Salvador and Guatemala become much more stable. I’m not an expert on Central American geopolitics, so I won't go much beyond generalities. But here goes:
Creating a functioning states means more than sending a bunch of DEA agents there. It means investing in basic infrastructure, health care, and education. This will be expensive, though less expensive than our military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan (with an arguably better benefit for Americans).
To deter human traffickers, it would make a lot more sense if lawmakers and law enforcement first acknowledged in policy what American businesses have been doing for a long time: employing a ton of undocumented immigrants, especially seasonal workers. Once everyone becomes more upfront about what is happening and way, the next step it to implement an effective work visa program so people have a way to travel legally and safely to and from the United States for work without relying on traffickers.
This could be financed by a reasonable tax on workers. Employers get the benefit of not exposing themselves to legal trouble and also predictability as far as when workers will be available and for how long.
4. Isn’t that just turbocharging immigrants taking jobs away from Americans?
On a practical level, not really. For a lot of these seasonal agriculture jobs, not enough American workers lack the skill set or just don't want to do the work. Many more Central Americans grew up on farms than U.S. citizens. If we want to have a functional food supply in this country, we need to import workers.
Apropos of nothing, plenty of Americans could do the food service jobs at Mar-a-Lago.
5. The upshot of what you’re arguing is that a lot more immigrants will be entering the U.S. from country that are basically failed states. Will those immigrants bring those issues with them?
The long history of American immigration says no. For example, Irish immigrants, many fleeing from a world-historical famine, have done just fine. In the short-term, first generation immigrants are likely to struggle. This has a lot to do with them lacking much beyond a grade-school education and not speaking English (a notoriously difficult language to learn as an adult).
To deter human traffickers, it would make a lot more sense if lawmakers and law enforcement first acknowledged in policy what American businesses have been doing for a long time: employing a ton of undocumented immigrants, especially seasonal workers. Once everyone becomes more upfront about what is happening and way, the next step it to implement an effective work visa program so people have a way to travel legally and safely to and from the United States for work without relying on traffickers.
This could be financed by a reasonable tax on workers. Employers get the benefit of not exposing themselves to legal trouble and also predictability as far as when workers will be available and for how long.
4. Isn’t that just turbocharging immigrants taking jobs away from Americans?
On a practical level, not really. For a lot of these seasonal agriculture jobs, not enough American workers lack the skill set or just don't want to do the work. Many more Central Americans grew up on farms than U.S. citizens. If we want to have a functional food supply in this country, we need to import workers.
Apropos of nothing, plenty of Americans could do the food service jobs at Mar-a-Lago.
When future generations ask what the Trump administration was like, this is the story I'm going to show them: https://t.co/qb0EORtTql— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) July 9, 2018
The long history of American immigration says no. For example, Irish immigrants, many fleeing from a world-historical famine, have done just fine. In the short-term, first generation immigrants are likely to struggle. This has a lot to do with them lacking much beyond a grade-school education and not speaking English (a notoriously difficult language to learn as an adult).
Also, violence from drug cartels are a major cause of Central American countries' struggles. As the U.S. figures out how to tackle the opioid crisis, it’s possible that we could adopt a more public health-focused approach (similar to countries like Portugal) and decriminalize many possession-related offenses.
While this wouldn’t get rid of the cartels -- Prohibition birthed American organized crime and it obviously didn’t go away after Repeal -- it would weaken their financial might and also free law enforcement to focus on the cartels’ other illegal activities like extortion and human trafficking.
While this wouldn’t get rid of the cartels -- Prohibition birthed American organized crime and it obviously didn’t go away after Repeal -- it would weaken their financial might and also free law enforcement to focus on the cartels’ other illegal activities like extortion and human trafficking.
 |
| Homicide rates in Central America, per The Economist |
A lot my arguments boil down to these themes:
- Loosen laws to reflect realities on the ground. By narrowing the focus, it should be easier to enforce those laws.
- Loosen laws to reflect realities on the ground. By narrowing the focus, it should be easier to enforce those laws.
- To make enforcement more efficient, increase the capacity of the system by hiring more judges, caseworkers, and law enforcement officers.
- Prioritize easier, legal entry for most immigrants who want to work here so as to 1) build trust between law enforcement agencies and undocumented immigrants and 2) law enforcement can devote resources to targeting the bad actors.
- Prioritize easier, legal entry for most immigrants who want to work here so as to 1) build trust between law enforcement agencies and undocumented immigrants and 2) law enforcement can devote resources to targeting the bad actors.
The idea is not to weaken law enforcement. Instead, refocus resources on the cartels and associated criminals. Weakening the cartels' grip on money and power will go a long way towards stabilizing the countries by giving their citizens less of an incentive to want to leave in the first place.
***
It’s worth remembering that moving away from everything and everyone a person has ever known is mind-bogglingly difficult. Most people wouldn’t want to do it unless they believed they had no real choice. Therefore, the people who do take this on are likely to exceptionally entrepreneurial and hardworking. These are folks we should want in our community!
Finally, even now, undocumented immigrants pay taxes. As the native-born U.S. birthrate hovers below replacement level, we will need more young taxpayers to pay for Social Security and Medicare costs of the two biggest generations of Americans -- the Baby Boomers and their children. Immigrants can help mitigate the need to pay higher taxes.
It’s worth remembering that moving away from everything and everyone a person has ever known is mind-bogglingly difficult. Most people wouldn’t want to do it unless they believed they had no real choice. Therefore, the people who do take this on are likely to exceptionally entrepreneurial and hardworking. These are folks we should want in our community!
Finally, even now, undocumented immigrants pay taxes. As the native-born U.S. birthrate hovers below replacement level, we will need more young taxpayers to pay for Social Security and Medicare costs of the two biggest generations of Americans -- the Baby Boomers and their children. Immigrants can help mitigate the need to pay higher taxes.
The last point is especially important because some folks will be unresponsive to appeals on ethical or humanitarian grounds. Successful political activism usually means marshaling an unwieldy coalition on narrow grounds. What I hope is that by putting better immigration policy in the economic interests of the "lower taxes!" crowd, plus giving employers some legal certainty, we can create political will that will ultimately result in a lot less needless suffering of some of the world's most vulnerable people.
Right now, the people who are satisfied with the status quo on the border are the drug traffickers (who appreciate the re-allocation of law enforcement resources) and white nationalists. Those are groups I'd rather see made miserable.
 |
| If this guy is smiling, we're doing it wrong. |
No comments:
Post a Comment