Immigration policies & the presidential election 2016
This Presidential election cycle in the U.S. has been arguably unlike any other in history. The flow of information and the availability of opinions relative to who is best to lead the country forward is staggering for most interested mortals plugging along through their respective daily lives. Like many, I have come to the end of this cycle largely undecided about who to entrust with arguable one of the more important roles in our global society.
Much of the discomfort in this important exercise of personal choice seems to revolve around the characters of the individuals who have chosen to expose themselves to scrutiny beyond the level to which most feel comfortable. It’s made for some very personal, potentially damaging, revelations about each of the major party proponents.
In my mind; however, flawed character does not define effectiveness as a leader of a major industrialized nation. You may be saying, “What!?”, while scratching your head in disbelief. Well, yes. I said it. I believe we have had some arguably flawed individuals who have led administrations that resulted in monumental development for our country and for the world in general.
That said, I have tried to put the choice-between-evils discussion aside in favor of recognizable, realistic policy framework and the differences between the two major candidates who have a legitimate shot at the office. For the purpose of this short article, I will focus on one component of the policies espoused by the candidates, and one about which I have some familiarity: immigration.
I have been a practicing attorney for about 29 years. A large part of that period, I have focused on U.S. immigration law. During my time as an attorney, I have seen the proposed immigration policies of 4 Presidents and implementation of those policies, many times failed.
Effective immigration in the modern age is about efficient management. We, as a nation, should continue to recognize that we, unlike most other nations in the world, were created by the diverse immigration of people and cultures from around the world. As technology has made it easier for us to bridge land masses and vast expanses of open water, the policies and cost of effective management have become more far reaching and difficult to apply equally.
Both major candidates have stated their prospective policies in this area on their respective websites. There have been many discussions out and about the airwaves about how each sees this issue. But here is how the relative policy positions map out from the respective websites of each candidate.
Donald Trump
Donald Trump has laid out his plan as follows:
Begin working on an impenetrable physical wall on the southern border, on day one. Mexico will pay for the wall.
End catch-and-release. Under a Trump administration, anyone who illegally crosses the border will be detained until they are removed out of our country.
Move criminal aliens out day one, in joint operations with local, state, and federal law enforcement. We will terminate the Obama administration’s deadly, non-enforcement policies that allow thousands of criminal aliens to freely roam our streets.
End sanctuary cities.
Immediately terminate President Obama’s two illegal executive amnesties. All immigration laws will be enforced – we will triple the number of ICE agents. Anyone who enters the U.S. illegally is subject to deportation. That is what it means to have laws and to have a country.
Suspend the issuance of visas to any place where adequate screening cannot occur, until proven and effective vetting mechanisms can be put into place.
Ensure that other countries take their people back when we order them deported.
Ensure that a biometric entry-exit visa tracking system is fully implemented at all land, air, and sea ports.
Turn off the jobs and benefits magnet. Many immigrants come to the U.S. illegally in search of jobs, even though federal law prohibits the employment of illegal immigrants.
Reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers, keeping immigration levels within historic norms.
Hillary Clinton’s major policy proposals look like this:
Introduce comprehensive immigration reform.Hillary will introduce comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to full and equal citizenship within her first 100 days in office. It will treat every person with dignity, fix the family visa backlog, uphold the rule of law, protect our borders and national security, and bring millions of hardworking people into the formal economy.
End the three- and 10-year bars.The three- and 10-year bars force families—especially those whose members have different citizenship or immigration statuses—into a heartbreaking dilemma: remain in the shadows, or pursue a green card by leaving the country and loved ones behind.
Defend President Obama’s executive actions—known as DACA and DAPA—against partisan attacks.The Supreme Court’s deadlocked decision on DAPA was a heartbreaking reminder of how high the stakes are in this election. Hillary believes DAPA is squarely within the president’s authority and won’t stop fighting until we see it through. The estimated 5 million people eligible for DAPA—including DREAMers and parents of Americans and lawful residents—should be protected under the executive actions.
Do everything possible under the law to protect families.If Congress keeps failing to act on comprehensive immigration reform, Hillary will enact a simple system for those with sympathetic cases—such as parents of DREAMers, those with a history of service and contribution to their communities, or those who experience extreme labor violations—to make their case and be eligible for deferred action.
Enforce immigration laws humanely.Immigration enforcement must be humane, targeted, and effective. Hillary will focus resources on detaining and deporting those individuals who pose a violent threat to public safety, and ensure refugees who seek asylum in the U.S. have a fair chance to tell their stories.
End family detention and close private immigration detention centers.Hillary will end family detention for parents and children who arrive at our border in desperate situations and close private immigrant detention centers.
Expand access to affordable health care to all families.We should let families—regardless of immigration status—buy into the Affordable Care Act exchanges. Families who want to purchase health insurance should be able to do so.
Promote naturalization.Hillary will work to expand fee waivers to alleviate naturalization costs, increase access to language programs to encourage English proficiency, and increase outreach and education to help more people navigate the process.
Support immigrant integration.Hillary will create a national Office of Immigrant Affairs, support affordable integration services through $15 million in new grant funding for community navigators and similar organizations, and significantly increase federal resources for adult English language education and citizenship education.
From my perspective, there is positive and negative to what both candidates propose. For example, it seems that they BOTH see an ongoing problem with the immigration system as it exists and wish to see it reformed. That position, of course, is not new. Our Congress has been considering proposals, and voting against those proposals, throughout at least the last three administrations. Mr. Trump’s proposals seems to vilify current proposals and lean, very heavily on enforcement. Much of what we are seeing here, arguably because these are complex problems, are platitudes. But, that is far truer, in my opinion of Mr. Trump’s position. He has made the idea of a wall on the Southern border an icon of his leadership strength. He has offered that in order to pay for the wall, he will essentially threaten Mexico. He proposes that his administration will push to redefine wire transfers using a convoluted scheme based upon a section of the Patriot Act. They will choose to pay or lose income coming from Mexicans in the U.S. Oh, or raise visa fees. To me, the former is proposal sketchy and unrealistic at best in the time frame of one term, the latter idea is not new, and is a method often employed to pay for increased necessity of an overworked system. The real danger as I see it with the way Mr. Trump words his policy plan, is that it seems he wants Americans to believe that there is not in place any system of enforcement in place to address the issue of illegal immigration. I can tell you that I have represented many people during the last 8 years, at least, who would have preferred that to be true. It is simply not.
Not to give Mrs. Clinton a pass here, I believe there are issues with her perspective as well, specifically regarding the expansion of benefits regardless of immigration status. I expect, notwithstanding the difficulty she will have just managing the flawed ACA mechanism, paying for the expansion against mounting state objection, will be unrealistic. I’m also not a huge fan of her proposal to create an Office of Immigrant Affairs and the cost associated with it.
Mrs. Clinton; however, in my view, does have an understanding of the basic ideals of what immigration to this great country means to our families and businesses and is proposing a much more realistic set of policy goals. I also prefer her language in presenting those ideas.
Bottom line, politics is important, but politics effects people. It is important, once this mess of an election is over, to find how to best serve individuals and work despite our differences toward that goal. THAT is what makes America different and great. Oh…and…OVERTURN CITIZENS UNITED!!
