I would like to see policies enacted that prevent hundreds of thousands of people from crossing the southern border every month, or in the event that they are successful in crossing that they are quickly sent back. And I would like to see it done in the most humane way it possibly can be. I believe your second question is either naive or doesn’t come from an honest place. If this is just the “it’s legal to seek asylum” argument then we need to fix the law so the system operates as intended. It would be different if all, most, or even half of those crossing qualify for asylum. They don’t. Where is the line here? What if it gets to 1 million a month? Higher?
More security at the border (man power and technology). Get rid of asylum. Streamline the process to get in and make it a bit easier or fair. Probably 90% of Americans that were born here couldn't get through the current process or would give up. Mexico and other countries have to help with providing background checks, arrest records for certain. We also need a task force that helps these immigrants find jobs and living. Give businesses and renters incentives to rent or give jobs to them so they can get on their feet and be productive. Most these people just want a shot at a better life.
How should they be prevented and under what legal instrument should they be sent back and to where? Mexico does not want to accept Venezuelans, for example, and doesn't really have a reason to. They're illegals there too. And that is what my second question was getting at. It all comes from an honest place. People have quick answers and throw around numbers without context. It is complex, but they want to just be able to say "don't let them in and send them back" like it is that simple. It would be like telling everyone on the interstate to not tailgate and don't make traffic.
The only things that haven't been done or attempted but thwarted by Congress by this Administration that you listed was getting rid of asylum (would require withdrawing from international treaty) and giving businesses and renters incentives, which was done in the Obama administration and he was grilled for.
I hear you. It’s not an unreasonable thought, but here’s why I take exception to it, what significant policy or legislative achievements wouldn’t this apply to? It’s a complicated world, nothing is that simple to execute, but the issue at hand is. But for sake of argument, let’s say the solution is to start by closing the main border crossing points and this eliminates a significant portion of migrants from crossing. What does Mexico do? Well, that’s up to them. Like you said, they’re illegally entering Mexico so maybe Mexico then says ok we’ll do the same thing and prevent them from crossing.
Congress shut down send more bodies to the border? Only thing I remember is Dems getting pissed at Biden for sending like 1500 more troops (which is jack shit) to the border to help. I also don't remember the renters incentives Obama did, I think I remember him doing something with mortgages but the renters part doesn't ring a bell. He also totally [uck fay]ed up on how he went about the incentives for companies. He basically made it so large companies would get money for hiring an employee that they don't have to provide benefits too. The employee (immigrant) got the shit end of that.
So it can become a cartel state and then people will cross into the neighboring states to make BS asylum claims still. No thanks.
Immigration reform was one of the first things the Administration tried to do in their term and it was shut down.
Let’s put aside R vs D, admin vs. congress for a moment. Just so we’re on the same page about how I feel, I believe the forces and actors at play here are far more complicated than the public knows or possibly will know any time in the near future. I’m not the conspiracy theorist person to say oh this one small group is pulling the levers here and driving it to be this way. It’s more complicated than that. But the simple fact is that if the outcome where we have more new illegal immigrants every month than US childbirths was not the desired outcome for a group of very powerful actors, it wouldn’t be happening.
I think you are imagining that the entry points being shut down will mean people don't cross. Both in Mexico and the US, the southern borders are large enough that it will not deter them. They already cross illegally. So what then?
I didn’t see this before my post that came after, so I’ll add this: Who is ultimately responsible for shutting it down?
This is literally conspiracy theory. Immigration is not "red rover." They are not playing by the rules and showing up at a closed checkpoint to not get in.
In Mexico, that’s their problem, they can devise whatever policy is most effective. The notion that this volume of people can cross without detection at more rural places, often with rough terrain, is hilarious. It might be expensive to stop but ultimately worth it I believe.
Put differently than my other post, immense resources would be required to sustain these levels with people crossing in the middle of nowhere, if you believe nothing would change where do you think these resources would come from?
Move towards a merit-based system for all future immigrants. (basically copy the Canadian model) Offer all current, non-violent, illegal immigrants their choice of legal status or a pathway to citizenship Eliminate/restrict means tested welfare benefits for all noncitizens Reform (streamline) the H-2A program Expand border security where needed, without trampling on people's property rights or wasting taxpayer money. Expand visas for low-skilled workers.
Seems pretty easy the Asian and African illegals that have the means to spend thousands of dollars for the trip to sneak in shouldn’t be let in under asylum. the federal welfare system and benefits to illegal immigrants need to be cut too
