Solving Immigration: Border Security vs. Open Doors

How do we resolve the immigration issue? Yes, the US is an immigration country, but does that justify an open-door policy – or immigrants (illegals) making the rules? So what defines the "politically" motivated: refugees and asylum seekers? This is certainly the most critical to define. Are we welcoming the politically oppressed from Venezuela , or the drug traffickers who increase the cartels' powers that come across the southern border? It does not seem that refugees overwhelm the system, nor the asylum applicants, nor the legally entering into the US. So for those, if the law is applied, it appears to work. The only open question then is: what triggered the Biden administration to abandon border security – ignorance, incompetence, and disregard for people? But a New York Times examination of Mr. Biden's record found that he and his closest advisers repeatedly rebuffed recommendations that could have addressed the border crisis faster and eased what became a potent issue for Mr. Trump as he sought to return to the White House and justify the aggressive tactics roiling American cities today. Using the narratives of "inhumane, kids in cages" to justify it, it was probably more the TDS syndrome the Biden administration was suffering from, and current Democratic members of Congress are holding the fort. It appears the more we study history, the more resources are spent justifying the current illegals and criticizing the first comers – stealing the land and destroying the 4 million inhabitants around 1642 (estimates in Europe were about 80–100 million). They killed about the same number of people for religious reasons in Europe before some of them started to immigrate. However, the settlement was undermined by the expansion of Protestantism into Catholic areas post-1555, particularly Calvinism, a Protestant doctrine viewed with hostility by both Lutherans and Catholics. Augsburg also gave individual rulers significantly greater autonomy, allowing larger states to pursue their own objectives, which often clashed with those of central authority or external powers. Conflict sometimes superseded religion, with the Protestant states of Saxony and Brandenburg competing with Denmark–Norway and Sweden over the lucrative Baltic trade.

Here's some more food for thought: blame the migrants for not diversifying and spreading across all of the US – or was it white supremacy? In simple terms, today it is called cluster economics. Or you could write a book about why peanuts or cotton are not grown in the Northeast. Well, the reasons are soil conditions and non-frost days, but politics is excluded from weather.

Here's a document from Congress. It does not address crime, student achievements, healthcare, and society in general – so potentially a propaganda piece?

It all costs money, and if you don't have it , blame someone. Massive increases in Medi-Cal and safety-net programs, especially expansions to undocumented residents, which analysts warn are growing faster than the revenue base. Billions spent annually on homelessness programs with little measurable progress as homelessness soars in major Californian cities. Healthcare for all – it ends when the money runs out.

Immigration lawyers: out of approximately 1.32 million lawyers , there are some 10,000 immigration lawyers and some 130,000 injury lawyers. I wonder how many of those are on the side of the lawbreakers, as defined by law. Perhaps some lawyers riding along with ICE? In short, they would kill a source of income. Lawyers are trained to argue, not to intervene – their role in immigration is adversarial. They defend migrants, challenge ICE actions, litigate detention conditions, and sue the government. If they rode along with ICE, they would be observing potential clients being arrested, witnessing conduct they might later challenge in court, and compromising their ability to represent anyone involved. It would destroy trust with immigrant communities.

For all other purposes, being compromised is okay – just keep the argument; the law does not matter? And you can basically argue anything and blame it on the KKK. Really? So much for history. Most immigrants at the time were coming from southern and eastern Europe, which did not sit well with U.S. nativists and white supremacist groups like the Ku Klux Klan , who believed America should be a nation of white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. In 1924, nativist politicians passed a new Immigration Act establishing country quotas that gave enormous preference to people from northern and western Europe over those from the southern and eastern parts of the continent, while still banning almost all immigration from Asia.

Here's another Congress paper on the cost of immigration. And how are we going to resolve it? Politicians , psychologists , economists , clergy , media , and bloggers – summarize it as lost politicians. Perhaps simple solutions: enforce the border and enforce the visa structure. That leaves those under Obama – DACA and DAPA. Well, have their employers work through the legal process. And under Biden , he only reversed Trump's orders – that is easy to reverse. Then just enforce the law, and if needed, create more visa categories. It is really not complicated. And you could support that some earlier migrants caused the political divide. Some said it was a melting pot – not sure that is the correct word. Culture center might sound better – and diversity, at least the food.