Profound, ingrained, perpetual ignorance. Trump wants a huuuuuge statue made to replace the Statue of Liberty. He is working hard to write a sage poem to place at the base of the statue. Wording will be based on Cat in the Hat level of communication. Limited to no more than 6 words. Barron helping him with the spelling.
1
Check your position on this, Times, or you’ll assure us of 8 full years of Trump. Get smart.
14
This is not nearly as big a deal as people seem to think it is.
On one hand, many immigrants seem to be high achievers and they further American dominance in technology and other areas, but on the other hand they do this at a price of our other life balances that most people desire.
Many highly-motivated immigrants use the US to find their dreams through achievement at the price of balance, and the generally don't have much respect for and don't prioritize labor laws and family balance.
America has changed from being one where growth was always paramount, where foreign investment and ingenuity was always desired, to one where we have enough but haven't learned to balance work with family.
I think we should let the dreamers stay, and this includes the higher number that Trump suggested over Obama's numbers. Beyond that I just don't care much. I'm not into viewing the US as a beacon in the hill anymore. It has been becoming a dystopian society since about 2001.
Something's gotta change. I'd like to see the end to NAFTA and a re concentration of each nation on its own economic needs and responsibilities.
Efficiency be damned! We don't care about GDP or efficiency today. There's enough to go around for people that work.
Does does chain migration includeer Melania’s parents who got to come here as relatives of their immigrant daughter? Does that include Trump’s mother who joined her sister in America?
1
It's hard to be sympathetic for the "dreamers" when they are flipping off Americans in photos and flouting the fact that there is no congressional consensus in regard to our immigration laws. Have you seen how disrespectful and entitled they are? Watch the Pelosi video with them.. and she is trying to help them. It's appalling that a politcal party would attempt to shut the government down to boister their voting base. The average American will remember this treasonous behavior from Democrats this November. The media is overstating the support for DACA.
21
This is an immigration policy tied to a specific and narrow period of time: the few decades when immigrants from Ireland, Italy and other (white) European countries were no longer regarded as drunk, violent threats to the nation's moral fabric (or potential agents of the Vatican) but instead could be treated as full citizens with the assistance of subsidized mortgages and college. It is the mindset of a John Kelly, raised in the segregated Boston suburbs.
Because of the accelerating automation we need much less immigrants. In the future lot of the jobs that uneducated immigrants filled will be gone. Why allow more to come here? Trump is right. Legal and illegal immigration was one of the issues he ran on and was elected. Your so called statistics are wrong
14
Reading through these comments is incredible- liberal NYT readers overwhelmingl do not agree with open borders but rather immigration control and reform. If this is the case for NYT readers, it is definitely the case for non-liberals and most probably independent too.
Most Americans recognize that enough is enough - the Democrats have been offered a more than reasonable deal, especially if you consider that they are the minority in both houses of Congress and statehouses nationwide, and also the supreme court. They do not have the numbers or the leverage to decline the very fair deal. If they do not budge, they will be held responsible by the American people for blocking immigration reform, and will lose out in future elections. Do they want to fall on their sword for people who are here illegally and cannot (legally) vote, instead of focusing on actual American citizens, who can vote, as the GOP is doing?
18
Illegal aliens are great for republican businesses. Illegals have no rights, and can be made to work for ridiculously low wages, they can't complain about safety or other abuses or they face the threat of deportation. The GOP doesn't want the number of illegals to go down, so they will lower the legal immigration quotas hoping to induce greater numbers of illegal immigrants. They also hope to get the dreamers out of the way so they can stop this idea that after illegals have been here a while and contributed to society they may deserve to be put on a track to citizenship. The type of person who may think the risk of illegal immigration to the US is a good idea under the GOP approach are those who face either great dangers, or great poverty, making them very desperate to improve their situation and more willing to accept very low paying positions were they can be treated in any cruel fashion by their masters. Increased immigration, or even immigration at the level it is at now is too high for the GOP because as immigrants rather than illegals these people cannot be forced into the low wages the GOP businesses want to pay. Farm workers of California, many construction companies and meat packing plants, these are jobs that US citizens, and immigrants don't want, that is unless they are compensated at a reasonable level for the difficulty of the work.
The GOP doesn't dislike illegals, they just want them to remain illegal. It's good for business.
2
The picture accompanying this editorial has been cropped (or shot?) in a most puzzling way.
These rally-goers are standing behind signs that are presumably meant to spell out the words "DREAM ACT NOW", yet the last one on the right has been cropped out, leaving us with the diametrically opposed "DREAM ACT NO".
Is this farcical incompetence? Intentional sabotage? Or a clever visual send-up of Trump's views on immigration?
4
The terms being used are important and we need to be clear we’re talking about illegal aliens that have broken our laws. We don’t refer to drug dealers as undocumented pharmacists, we shouldn’t refer to illegal aliens as undocumented immigrants.
29
Documentation is the key. I mean look how many crooks get away with grand theft everyday simply because they have one that says MBA on it, and a gold seal. We don’t even need to get into ovine pelts.
Fine, if you've ever had a ticket for speeding or running a red light, you're an illegal driver from now on.
1
"The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States."—United States Code, Title 8, §1101(a)(3)
• "An illegal alien…is any alien (1) whose most recent entry into the United States was without inspection, or (2) whose most recent admission to the United States was as a nonimmigrant and—(A) whose period of authorized stay as a nonimmigrant expired, or (B) whose unlawful status was known to the Government, before the date of the commission of the crime for which the alien is convicted."—United States Code, Title 8, §1365(b)
20
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
I suppose we need to reflect on New Colossus. There's a reason why illegal immigrants constantly arrive to these shores. It's the promise of freedom. As much as we vilify these illegal immigrants, many arriving from europe in the late 19th century were neither legal or illegal.
"Until 1918, the United States did not require passports; the term "illegal immigrant" had no meaning. New arrivals were required only to prove their identity and find a relative or friend who could vouch for them" Very applicable to today. - Washington Post
3
You are aware that the cheesy poem is not law and it was written at a time when the u.s. population was 1/6 what it is now? Do you want to go back to pollution and child labor laws like we had then? Times change. Immigration laws and policies need to as well.
10
It's a poem. It has literally nothing to do with contemporary immigration policy.
7
Just call this editorial why Dems lose elections and be done with it. Despite a relentless stream of propaganda most of us do not agree that people should be free to break our immigration laws with impunity.
30
No offense. But what an overly simplistic view of an incredibly complicated problem -- which probably goes more to explaining your mindset more than anything else.
Queue,
Democrats didn't lose the election in 2016 and infact won by 3 million votes. The GOP is the party that has won the popular vote just once by one state since 1988. Get your facts straight. Winning by slavery era EC directly implies the majority is not with the GOP.
We are talking about DACA kids who came here as children. They didn't commit any illegal act, their parents did commit a misdemeanor. So punish them for what a misdemeanor can be punished. But if they commit anything more than a misdemeanor pushing them into criminal act then deport them.
But the smart thing to do is protect the border with drones and digital eye which is value for the money and is very effective.
I have a great idea. Why don't the United states, Canada, and Mexico come up with a joint immigration and migration policy? Absent that, the United States should copy the nation with the strictest standard. That would be our oh so progressive friend to the north.
For example, under such a joint compact, in exchange for the United States and Canada taking in economic migrants from overseas, Mexico would absorb the economic migrants from Central America. We can determine the density of migration based on current population to land mass, and distribute migrants to under populated areas like Northern Saskatchewan and Central Alaska. Permitted migration could also be based on past absorption of illegal immigrants. That sounds fair.
13
What bothers me is how readily available information is regarding immigration processes - yet few want to read or look into them. Even with this article the top comments talk of the lottery like it's the actual lottery and family migration like it's a given. Lottery is for the opportunity - if you fail in any stage you lose that opportunity and all the money and time used to get there goes away (or, really, goes to the State Dept). Family sponsorship is also just opportunity: if someone's mom or brother or other relative fails at any stage they can't come, and resources are absorbed into the State Department. Applying for visas, getting refugee status, getting green cards, working through the citizenship process: it all cost money, time, and resources. More concern should be for those who overstay on stop-gap measures that allowed for temporary residency - and even that needs to be done way more equitably (no shrugging if it's a 'desired' immigrant). It makes a person wonder what the Venn diagram looks like between those who support this extremist policy against documented immigrants and absolutists regarding the second ammendment when it comes to "We Must Enforce The Laws We Have Already Rather than Ban"
3
We still don't anyone the right to come here, let alone an elderly parent who doesn't speak English and has no assets. Your notion of extremist immigration policy is absurd. Try being old and migrating to Mexico without assets. They won't let you.
4
Currrent immigration policies are fine. There's been a drop in illegal immigration, but there's still millions here. How are they here? They most likely work some way and benefit America by paying taxes, but not participating in government. Trump is hysterical when it comes to immigration. He's a modern day Joe McCarthy.
2
The thing he most misunderstands is why people want to come here. He frequently talks who "they" are "sending" as in ""When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending the best. They're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists and some, I assume, are good people,." Of course, nobody is "sending" anyone. People are fleeing to this country for what we stand for, and the opportunities our nation and the way it operates provides. I am forever grateful to my grandparents and their parents for taking that chance and making a better life---or any life at all given what happened afer they left---than what would have happened had they stayed put. That's what Lady Liberty is all about. This is not.
2
Trump won because people in general are disgusted with illegal immigration. Your arguments fall on deaf ears. Enough already. What we did in the past does not have to cement our future. We were once primarily an agricultural economy, but we moved on. We are no longer open to the teaming masses. Remember there was an election and the choice was clear. No more illegal immigration won the day.
28
Marie, the majority didn't vote for TRUMP and he lost by 3 million votes. Do not use slavery era EC win for where people stand because 3 million MORE didn't stand for what he wanted.
Sure, it "won the day", to the tune of about 3 million votes...
Oh, and it's "TEEMING masses". (eye-roll)
"Undocumented" immigrants.
Merely one of many absurd and notorious NewSpeak expressions ginned up by the pro-open-borders crowd.
Yes, indeed --
"undocumented" -- no "papers"
just like a quack -- the duck that is a doc wannabe --
no pretty paper to hang on the wall --
i.e. no medical license --
precisely because not qualified --
and therefore illegal.
18
Trump should include in his immigration policies preventing birthright citizenship to babies whose mothers come from Russia for the pregnancy and delivery and then return to Russia to live. Reports say they stay in Trump properties in Florida.
6
Birth tourism is a huge problem. Mostly from China and the ME. At 18 those kids can bring all their relatives in. It's being abused and has to be stopped- no matter where they do it.
6
Democrats must take back the House. That goal must come first—before all other issues. It is the Democrats' only chance to save democracy—and incidentally protect the Dreamers.
High turnout in reliably blue districts will not win the House for the Democrats. To win they must attract swing voters, ranging from Clinton Republican women to white workers who voted for Obama before turning to Trump.
President Trump has snared Democrats into a prolonged discussion about immigration, because he knows that plays to his strength, and hurts them with swing voters.
Dems must change the subject, and do so quickly. They must get back to economic issues. They must present themselves as the party of economic progress for ALL working people, not a party with a single, narrow agenda—and a divisive one at that.
They must stress economic issues that cut across regional, party and class lines—as many analysts have pleaded. That is their strong suite, and where Republican are weakest.
To this end, they cannot reject Trump’s four-pillars offer out-of-hand. They must cut a deal with the Republicans on immigration, and move on. They have bigger fish to fry.
Many attractive Democratic candidates are running for local office, including seats in Congress. They are focusing on issues their voters care most about, such as jobs and health care, while trying to steer clear of divisive cultural issues. This is the economic agenda all Democrats must pursue, including the leadership in Washington.
7
Foreigners that invade this nation illegally or enter on a valid visa and stay past its expiration violate many laws and regulations by remaining in this country, therefore, they ARE CRIMINALS. It is not 'smearing' them to call them criminals or have local police or ICE hunt them down, deport them or jail them AS WE DO CITIZEN CRIMINALS. The overwhelming majority of Americans in this alleged democracy want our immigration laws enforced, and if they are not soon, many of us are going to start asking "Why are citizens not treated EQUALLY?". Why is there so much legal discrimination and racism against white and black citizens? Why are citizen criminals for all manner of none violent crimes efficiently hunted down, by cooperating local, state police, the FBI et al when illegal immigrants are continually ignored and catch-released? We are fed up and soon citizens are going to start revolting and refusing to obey the nation's laws too! And no amount of 1% and neo Marxist propaganda branding the democratic majority as alt right, or racist white, or the evil males, or new Nazis or anti Semitic or racist or intolerant or disturbing or unwelcoming .... is going to stop this revolt. After 4 decades of continual slander and name calling bullying the American people have been vaccinated against those social terrorisms and we now demand our sovereignty rights to self determination back. If Israel has the right to stop millions of invading foreigners then we do too!
26
Winthrop,
Yeah all that over the board seize mentality is not healthy for you or for the country. No one is INVADING the country. Geez, get a grip. DACA kids are ot illegal because they came here as kids. Their parents did commit a misdemeanor as per legal code. But life is not as simple as arm chair generals with authoritarian complex imagine. We are a nation of laws and those very same laws will need to be invoked. What is your priority? Do you want to deport the criminals or EVERYONE here illegally? If it is EVERYONE then its gonna be disruptive.
Because unlike your imagination, real life is much more complicated. Many of these illegal DACA parents have served the military, Many of them have American kids, and many have married American citizens(but cant be legalized coz of that original misdemeanor), many work in areas that no one wants to work etc.
Are you saying a misdemeanor is the same as criminal acts? So someone with petty theft is the same as a murderer? If that is the case, then well over half of Americans with some misdemeanor at some point in their life should all be punished with criminal punishment. Right?
Now, the smart thing to do is to legalize the DACA kids with a path to citizenship. And legalize their parents, PAY BACK TAXES and legalize WITHOUT a path to citizenship. But deport the criminals with rape, murder, robbery charges AND build an electronic fence with drones and digital monitoring which is more efficient and lot less expensive.
3
"... while smearing those who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals."
Duh! By definition. If you break the law you are a criminal.
27
If you violate a civil code, we call you a criminal now? Free speech I guess
Give it a rest, NYT. Trump won the election based on his views of immigration.
30
No. Trump won the election based on an outdated Electoral College system, Republican gerrymandering, and all the racists and bigots who came out and claimed him as one of their own.
2
What's wrong with you?
Those who came illegally are illegals,whether they are Dreamers,Beamers,or what have you.
Illegal means indulging in non legal activity.
NYT Editorial team,needs an Urgent relook at what's right & what's isn't right.
Somewhere along the way your muddled thinking is confusing innocent readers who don't know how to react to your mindless support of illegality.
Please don't justify,wrong doers.Ask your Conscience
21
Let's just cut to the chase. For a president as voraciously racist and bigoted as this one is, if you're not immigrating from countries like Norway, you're not welcome in the U.S.
4
Bring us your undereducated, low-net worth people from all over the world.
Yes, come.
You can compete against Americans with education and net worth and climb up the ladder.
Not.
10
Why doesn’t the Times’ editorial board go “all in” and just declare that it supports open borders?
29
I hate to disiullusion the NYT but it is illegal to cross our borders without permission and the appropriate documents. It is illegal to work in this country unless you have visa and the OK from the US government. These people buy stolen SS cards, false documents etc/ How can any sane person or sane newspaper believe that these people are breaking the law and thus are criminals.
Unless we take a strong stang against illegal aliens we will only have more of them. I support what Trump is doing and he needs to narrow DACA down to current holder and not include more to satisfy the Democrats. Also we need E=Verify
22
These are civil code violations by people who just want to live and be Americans. Calling people in this context criminals speaks volumes about you, not them.
87% of Americans were born here and are not immigrants! We are not the Nation of Immigrants! The fact that you Dad or Grandpa came, say, from Poland is irrelevant! You were born here! On this very land! It is your home country, you have nothing, repeat, nothing to do with the country of your parents, grandparents, etc, just a sentimental value, maybe, and topic for conversation over the dinner table. Stop calling this country the Nation of Immigrants! Please!
22
The very fact that they arrived illegally makes them criminals. Why is that so hard to get through liberal heads?
20
Buck, Crossing the border is a misdemeanor not a criminal act. Ergo, they are not criminals. Why is this so hard to get through con heads.
Unlawful entry and being here unlawfully are both punishable by deportation. The rest of your arm waving is irrelevant.
Thought
The punishment for crossing the border illegally is being sent home. There is nothing wrong with doing so.
1
We have to change this MISLEADING narrative. It's NOT about fixing the immigration issues. For Trump, it's about finding a SCAPEGOAT to fan and channel his base's hate against. For Hitler it was the Jews, for Trump it is the immigrants. The most vulnerable ones!
The same "immigration issue", conceived and orchestrated by the Russian KGB all across Europe, has already resulted in Brexit, weakening of Germany, neo-fascist governments in Poland, Hungary and Austria.
We have to stop acting the liberal and start telling it AS IT IS! Democracy dies if it can't protect itself with a FIST!
1
Recruit more Norwegians, Trump likes them!
1
So do I
4
In all honesty, at 325 million, we don't need any more people from anywhere.
4
I agree that Trump has a congenital dislike of immigrants who are not colored in Norse hues. But he also plays the immigrant card in order to schmooze his base. Zero-sum? I think all he knows about sums is what his accountants and Ivanka tell him about the state of his holdings. Consider: he wants to cut immigration; he refuses to contemplate educating all Americans, especially those of dark skin; therefore he would cut the workforce and the consumer base. A stupid sum.
2
Thorough? Honest? Debate? Trump?
1
Why don't more countries have liberal immigration laws like the USA? They know better.
19
Richard,
Canada with 1/10 of US population allows 1/3 of the 1 Million immigrants that SU allows. So Canada is atleast 3 times more liberal than the USA. Canada also allows the parents of immigrants to join them easily. Canada also admits proportionally 3 times more refugees than the USA. By any yardstick Canada has a very liberal immigration. The only thing Canada doesn't allow is siblings to come BUT the US gives a tiny quota for siblings that in practical terms it is meaningless as many have waiting time of well over 2 decades on average.
So yeah you can use immigration as a straw man to demagogue and con the GOP voters. BUT in reality ,US immigration of 1 million is such a small number that it is such a shame that the worlds largest economy with a dynamic economy is sending a message of fear of immigrants, fear of trade and fear of china all over the world.
Canada has 1/10 our population, meaning they still have room. They still strictly control who comes there. When they get as crowded as we are, I doubt the doors will remain open.
7
Did not we have a record level of enforcement under Obama? And yet still all this indignation about Democrats not enforcing immigration laws. Obama, you threw out millions of people thinking it would lead to some grand bargain. You ruined their lives for nothing.
3
What is weird that all the conservatives that are arguing for cut in legal immigration are themselves from immigrant families in USA.
I heard somewhere Mr Trump's family were also immigrant.
I am all for strictest vetting for security reason.. please stop anybody who wishes to make our neighborhood scary but let the persons with proper papers walk and continue to propagate the American Dream dear even though the rich keeps hijacking more and more.
Just ask the Dad co-signing the student loan application today!
1
Trump isn't anti-immigration. He is only a second-generation American. Trump’s father was born in New York, but his paternal grandfather was a Bavarian immigrant. Trump's mother Mary Anne MacLeod was a Scottish immigrant. Trump’s first wife was a Czechoslovakia immigrant and his second wife is a Slovenian immigrant.
The immigration framework the Trump White House sent to Congress last month does not propose a reduction in legal immigration. It proposes giving legal status to 1.8 million unauthorized immigrants eligible for DACA while proposing measures to reduce future illegal immigration.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/white-house-framework-im...
11
Diversity visa lottery is institutionalized racism, couched in "Liberal" sounding ideas. Countries which send more than 50,000 immigrants per year are excluded. Countries like India and China hit that limit easily, while Ireland and5 Gambia are less likely to hit that number. Northern Ireland is a separate country for Diversity Visa purposes. Africa has a lot of small countries, and Diversity visa favors them. Diito for Europe...
In the last 10 years, 500,000 people got the diversity lottery, while someone who applied for a Greencard through employment is still waiting for visas to become available!
About the "Qualifications" : An American citizen who has a high school dip;loma, will struggle in our modern 21st century economy. A high school graduate from Gambia or Latvia is definitely going to struggle. Economic struggles often lead to domestic violence, petty and violent crime.. With some people this will lead to terrorism.
Moreoever, someone who has worked in a restaurant for 2 years, can also qualify for the Diversity visa.
DV favors African and European countries, discriminates against Asian countries, ...
6
I keep finding it interesting that large corporate-backed newspapers like the NYT are so out of touch with what most of the country wants in regards to immigration. There is definitely a disconnect between the monied interests and the people. Putting the hardcore racist Trump base aside for a second, the reality is that most of the country is center-right on immigration, except for big business and their representatives in the media and politics. This doesn't bode well for the future since immigration will increasingly become a deciding factor in elections and may keep getting the populists, faux or not, elected.
20
Boris,
That a country with over 330 million fights for immigration of a mere 1 million, which is 1/3 of what canada allows proportionally, is by itself such a shame. Because it shows the people have been successfully conned into believing that somehow immigration is what is affecting their lack of growth in their income or lack of prosperity in an economy with 4% unemployment.
The republicans have successfully pulled the rug over the eyes of their supporters while giving a huge tax cuts for the rich and corporations WHICH directly contributes to the income inequality. But it is the immigrants who are the reason for their misfortunes not the rich and corporations who provide them with no wage increase or profit sharing, like how Japan does or keep them trained like how Germany does. This country's debt is already at 105% of GDP and with another 1.5 trillion added its gonna be at greece like 130% of GDP soon. All this while there is no money for education of its people or healthcare or money for fundamental research or for infrastructure. But tax cuts for the rich and money for military, unquestioned. Someday the mass will learn that they will not have any SS or Medicare. BUT they will always have immigrants to blame.
Currently, 27% of the people in this country are immigrants or their offspring. If you think that is an inconsequential number you need to attend more math classes. That is to changing every aspect of u.s. life.
2
Thought
Half of Mexicans would like to come here. That's sixty million people. Enough already. Legalize the so-called Dreamers and watch as another flood of unskilled Mexicans invades. We don't want them here. We should have the right to say so.
1
Drop the H-1B numbers to 2,000 per year, double their minimum salary, and require that no country account for more than fifteen percent of the visas. Presently there are over half a million H-1B’s in our country, eighty percent who come from India, and whose minimum salary is $60k. They are not geniuses, they are not diverse, they possess no unique skills, and they are brought in solely to drive down salaries of American citizens working in high tech.
As for the illegal aliens, the most sensible thing to do is to immediately expel all illegal aliens from our country. It just makes good sense.
17
NorthernVA,
Do you know the largest market for P&G is India? Do you know the largest market for GM,Boeing etc is China? Do you know that India bought over $10Billion of defense items from the US? Do you know almost every non-healthcare, non-insurance,non-retail companies make well over 50% of their revenue from outside the USA? Do you know that US is only 5% of world market? Do you know China and india alone are 1/3 of global market? Do you know the worlds largest market for anything is China? Do you know the worlds fastest growing market is India?
What do you think will happen if US companies are not allowed to sell in 1/3 of World market? Millions of jobs will be lost. Globalization is real and US is the biggest beneficiary because with only 5% of world market we cannot remain an economic power WITHOUT access to global market and especially the Asian market. This is reality. And if we get to to access their markets they get to sell their IT services to US companies. Quid PRO QUO. How many Indian companies or chinese companies do you know? Hundreds of American companies are household names in Asia.
The smart thing to do is not to pick a trade war we will lose. We have been enjoying a disproportionate share of the global pie(25% of world wealth) with only 5% of population. But we have to reckon this is unsustainable and our share has to reduce EVEN WHEN THE PIE IS GROWING BIGGER. Let us grow with the Asians rather than fighting them and getting excluded from growth.
Funny. China, Germany, Japan and India some how, miraculously, have large economies without having open borders. In fact they have so many extra people they ship them here. Not the euros of coarse. They know the path to the future is stable, sustainable populations.
5
Grandfather in the Dreamers covered by the DACA act, who are here through no fault of their own. Then, discuss and enact meaningful bipartisan immigration reform. Pass legislation that forbids using immigration as a bartering chip in budget debates, where it does not belong.
3
Sure, ending chain or family-based immigration would end the ability of recent legal immigrant to bring their parents to this country, most of whom are elderly and will have great difficulty assimilating and will become a burden on our society. I read about so many of the Times' Neediest Cases who are elderly, have been in this country for a relatively short period of time and don't speak the language. From a humanitarian view, of course we want to unite families, but we cannot afford it, especially when these individuals, who have never contribute to our society, will be eligible for a myriad of financial and social services after being in this country legally for just a few years
15
Do you know someone who has not contributed to USA? A millionaire who pays no tax or much lower tax as a percent than what his/her secretary pays. Do you know who doesn't contribute to this country. A corporation that gets away with paying the lowest wage possible without providing for the basic welfare of its employee. A corporation that doesn't share profits with its employees as Japanese corporations do. A corporation that doesn't provide re-training or health benefits as german corporations do. A hedge fund millionaire who takes home a lot but pays only 15% or the wealthy who lives off of capital gains of stocks while paying only 15% taxes.
The last line says it all "The way we deal with legal immigration should not be changed without a thorough, honest debate." At what point are we going to have this debate? Shouldn't this debate be handled by a bi-partisan committee that can come up with a full set of recommendations for both legal/illegal immigration? They should be tasked with coming up with an immigration vision for next 20-30 years. We should not let the President or anyone for that matter debate this on Television. We can do better and we should take the time to get it done right once and for all.
3
Polls reveal that the voting public agrees with Trump. Meanwhile Soros has been caught trying to overthrow Brexit. It is not the peasants who are truly revolting, but our elite overlords.
13
The NYTimes' Krugman from 2006: https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/notes-on-immigration/. In regards to low-skilled immigration, he writes, "I wish the economic research on immigration were more favorable than it is." At one point, the NYTimes was way more nuanced about the immigration debate as opposed now where illegal & legal immigration is always conflated to make the argument that immigration is good for America. Even Bernie Sanders was against importing low-skilled labor before he did a 180.
If we open up our doors, there would easily be 500K Central America migrants per year. Doubt me? Read this from LATimes yesterday: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-immigration-central-americans-201802.... Some of the stories highlight people who are not even running from gangs but simply economic migrants. Liberals (I was one?) do nothing to assure people that future flows won't be stopped.
Pointing out Trump's obvious deficiencies does not negate the real problem that we have with illegal immigration, particularly from south of the border. No discussions on effective foreign aid to help these people back home or mandatory use of eVerify. The only solution seems to be we can't kick out the ones already here, no need to limit in the future (cuz ya know, immigration is good and Emma Lazarus and native American Indians and...).
I'm a Democrat as are most of my peers. We may never vote GOP but that doesn't mean Dems have our votes either.
16
Illegal immigration is, well, illegal. It should be resisted. On the other hand legal immigration should be sensible, and admit folks that will assimilate and contribute. Those contributions can be made at many different levels from farm labor to research scientist.
None of this relates to violence except where assimilation does not happen. The key factors in assimilation are jobs and available housing in diverse communities. Not impossible, but not helped by Trump and the GOP.
3
There is a lot of comments here that disagrees with the NYT editors. Trump seems right on this issue: accept the Dreamers with a pathway to citizenship, BUT stringent enforcement of current laws that stop illegal immigration, and invite those who are living in the US illegally to start thinking about going back home. The current system stinks, and Trump is far more clear minded than our NYT editors. Sorry.
13
No. No pathway to citizenship, never.
1
How do we Americans who like to remind ourselves that we are a Christian country, built on Christian values, not see and understand that the vast majority of people who enter this country illegally are not drug dealers, rapists & murderers? Many are fleeing poverty and violence just as our ancestors fled persecution. Did they get permission from the many native tribes before they settled on land that did not belong to them? The idea of Manifest Destiny is one that should be discarded.
One can't help but to consider 90% of this wave of "keep them furriners outa our country: they's bad news in each and every way.... lessen they comes from Sweden or Scotland, of course." hysteria to be motivated by those nasty twin vices Racism and Xenophobia. Who is being targeted - by "the Donald", his friends the "Alt Right", old-fashioned White Nationalist organizations such as Stormfront, and a veritable horde of nasties emboldened by the Trump junta? People from the middle east, especially Muslims; Hispanics, Africans, people of "non-standard" sexual orientation or identification.... anyone not from Nice White European countries is being vilified and dehumanized - with the exception of a focus on the Jewish people, can anyone recall the last time a major world power with a giant military machine took it upon themselves to attain and then maintain "ethic and racial purity" via whatever means they felt they could get away with??? The end results were NOT pretty then, and they cannot be tolerated now.
2
Apparently the bitter essence of the meaning of the word DEPORTATION never entered the brains of Americans. Do they remember Stalin's and Hitler's ample deportations or even the deportations of the native population in their own country.
I can only wonder how this ugly word is being used by Trump and his administration. Or is it used to install fear? This would be even worse.
1
Peter:
Perhaps "facilitated removal" sounds better?
3
Turns out the electorate backs the President, his demands are the ones that won the election for him. Many of the current laws are just dumb, impose crime and a drain on taxpayers without commensurate benefits. We need to impose order and discipline in place of chaos that now exists. Only those who enhance our country should be given entry, for the gift of citizenship is a blessing, and it must be used to make America greater than ever before. We are engaged in a world wide competition and we must have the most highly educated and motivated people. That is what Canada and Australia do and no one thinks twice, but if we do it, it must be racist, this is idiocy.
10
sob, Canada gets 3 times more immigrants considering the difference in population. Australia is about the same as Canada. So if you want to be like Canada we actually need to increase immigration by 3 times. Actually it is easy for parents of immigrants to move into canada than it is to do so in USA. Again, you are not biased by facts or numbers and it matters not as much as your prized opinions.
Canada doesn't allow siblings to come in BUT US actually provides such a small quota for siblings that they have to wait in the queue for 2 decades on average and many just give up. But again your believes are better than facts so believe the con propagated.
Distressing story (NOT reported in the NY Times) earlier this week - illegal immigrant, drunk driver, hit a car, killed two people, one is a NFL football player. Illegal immigrant tried to flee the scene, very drunk, no license, no insurance. He had been deported TWICE and came back to US illegally again. What part of illegal immigration is not illegal? We don't need these people. We need well-educated, members of society who speak our language, follow our laws. Every other country has this system but us. There is a reason...... NY Times you are so out to lunch on this issue. It's becoming comical.
22
Trump is a distinct disgrace as a human being, and certainly as president of these United States, the discriminator in chief, trying to belittle and incriminate any and all undocumented non-white folks in the country as criminals, rapists and worse, one more of his myriad lies to make his point, absent any proof and certainly no facts to prove his poisonous assertions. All this, to keep his misinformed and prejudiced 'base' enraged, and ready to pounce whatever crazy action the boss deems necessary. I have never seen a leader consumed in holding and serving only a minority, his base, with disregard of the majority's needs and wishes. If we could withhold our plundering of Native Americans and enslaving blacks brought from Africa against their wishes, this remains an immigrant country where the vast majority has contributed mightily to make it a success; with rare exceptions, that is; one of them being this ugly American named Donald J. Trump, an unscrupulous demagogue that enriched himself, and his family, at our expense; useless otherwise, where the words freedom, justice, democracy, and solidarity have no real meaning. When was the last time you met somebody who remains willfully ignorant, with no interest in learning the facts, the evidence, the truth?
4
The anti-immigrant mind: shallow, hateful, ignorant. We have a demographic time bomb in the USA. We're headed to upside down pyramidal demographics that will ultimately bankrupt social security and medicare when there are not enough young to subsidize the elderly (no you did not pay in close to what it costs to provide those entitlements). And yet, we have all these productive people that want to come here and save us but we won't take the lifeline because of pure xenophobia and arrogance. Losers!
2
"The president is targeting sensible immigration policies, while smearing those who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals. . ." Current law (8 U.S.C. § 1302 : US Code - Section 1302) specifies, in part, that “(a) It shall be the duty of every alien now or hereafter in the United States, who (1) is fourteen years of age or older, (2) has not been registered and fingerprinted under section 1201(b) of this title or section 30 or 31 of the Alien Registration Act, 1940, and (3) remains in the United States for thirty days or longer, to apply for registration and to be fingerprinted before the expiration of such thirty days . .." It would seem that 11 million or so illegal residents, if not criminals are guilty of violating 8 U.S.C. § 1302 : US Code - Section 1302, in current immigration law-- a point made more vividly by NorthXNW, below.
9
Trump should look to his own family as the model: brothel owners and racist landlords can have descendants who become president; imagine what people of more humble means might achieve if given the opportunity.
2
Um, the photographer left an important letter out of the frame... Picture: “Dream Act No”
5
Yet another example of the NYT talking to itself. You spend a lot of energy developing a nuanced argument about the economic benefits of immigration. I paraphrase to you the words of the notorious Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini: The American revolution is not about the price of watermelon.
You worry a lot about family unification. More than the immigrants themselves, it seems, since they can unify any time they like---in Mexico (or Guatemala, or wherever they come from).
But, you do say you want a "thorough, honest debate" on immigration. Good! Here is my contribution: your arguments mean nothing to me. In fact, the president's arguments mean nothing to me. I don't care about the impact on the economy, I don't care about the impact on crime, I want the borders closed.
Before he ran for the presidency, the only thought I had about Donald Trump, to the extent I thought about him at all, is that I would not buy a used car from the man. But, he promised to close the borders, so I voted for him.
If Hillary Clinton, the most corrupt politician in living memory, had promised to closed the borders, I would have voted for her.
I will vote for whomever will close the borders. Is that thorough and honest enough for you?
15
Haim,
Close the border to people, trade and ideas. Thats what China, the largest economy in 1800s did. The result is shown by history. It took China almost 200 years to reclaim its crown as the largest economy of the world. Now the US is doing what China did centuries ago. The result won't be any different. Those who are scared to compete will perish.
It is clear that your negotiating position is Amnesty First,
and it is clear that your legislative position is Immigration Reform Never.
So, you'll not get your millions of new Democrat voters.
9
Its an exercise in futility debating this with people on the left. The editorial clearly states there is already a 4 million person backlog yes 4 million people (4 x the amount of people in Rhode Island ) just waiting to get in from chain migration and somehow its a calamity to maybe limit that and get a handle on those people before flooding our country with even more.
This is what i dont undestand about this supposed debate. Just because you changed their name doesnt negate the fact illegal aliens are illegal. And some how we have to chain migrate family members into this country so we can keep the family together. Yet when someone even suggests that illegal aliens children should stay with their family its immoral and racists to say it.
13
PL,
You are terrible at math and it shows. The US has a cap of 1 Million per year for immigrants. Canada has 300K cap even though their population is 1/10 of USA effectively allowing 3 times more immigration than the US.
The backlog has grown so much FOR siblings BECAUSE the quota is small. Now we can eliminate diversity VISA and use that numbers to decrease this backlog and the democrats readily agreed to that. It makes sense.
But the issue is US native population is not growing and without immigrants there is not enough people to pay into SS AND Medicare that the 90 million boomers are going to use soon. Unless you want to cut SS benefits OR increase taxes by a lot OR cut down defense spending by a lot THERE IS NO magic that can find cash to pay for that many people. You can't have it all. So pick your choice.
My choice is cut down defense spending some, increase tax on the wealthy some and keep immigration at current levels.
"One is the lottery system that offers the chance for visas to people from countries that are underrepresented as sources of American immigrants"
Who cares which countries are "underrepresented as sources" of immigration? The US was not established to provide a proportional composite of the rest of the world. What kind of idiotic logic is this?
14
Will no one rid the NYT comments section of those who know not of what they speak? For a liberal rag, it is obvious that a majority are against illegal immigration. With no way of knowing the motivations of all the commenters, one can only deduce that the antis feel threatened while the pros see a benefit. If the antis are this prevalent in the NYT, one would assume the country at large is strong majority anti. Nannies, cleaners, gardeners, stoop labor, increasingly trades, occupations filled by illegals do benefit those able to pay for them, those who cannot look on in frustration while competing for these same jobs. The issue is a loser for Democrats unless these jobs are elevated above the status of what amounts to servitude.
7
"The president is targeting sensible immigration policies, while smearing those who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals."
smearing? those who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals??
GOOD GRIEF
It's simply impossible to dignify a ludicrous statement like that with a response.
14
This is great: "The Cato Institute found that lottery visa holders actually killed only eight of 3,037 Americans murdered by foreign-born terrorists since 1975." So you're saying what, Times Editors, we need to let more in to get those numbers up?
Look, you are working way too hard here. Which is what you have to do, I guess, to make something simple into something complicated that requires a "thorough, honest debate." If your parents brought you here illegally, that's on them, not us. Go back and start over, and this time come here the right way: legally.
5
I am amazed and saddened- the NU|YTimes ed. Board and op-ed page writers, to try and "reason" with the GOP or to show them the error of their ways. This is a waste.
I have attempted to explain the way to get through:
The GOP and Conservative elements acting in the anti immigratrion way they usually do, see this as an issue of "dirty foreigners"- who look different, speak different langauges and maybe have slanted eyes and dark skin.
It is racialism. "The foreigner is out to steal from us!" This has been Trump and the GOP idea since the 80's and earlier.
The dremers, however, are different: they are kidnap victims by the actions of their parents who took them from their normal surroundings, snuck them illegally into the USA and then proceeded to send "our" money-OUR MONEY!!!-to places outside US taxing ability and beyond, so it couldn't aid US citizens.
So, the dreamer kids are victims, also; and now they are "ours" and we can recoup! This is because, we invested millions of dollars in US tax moneys in each Dreamer -even though they were foreign. Now, each dreamer is an investment by & of the USA , If we let them leave to go to Canada or Mexico, we will lose multi- millions of dollars, per child. Multiply by the number of dreamers and one gets way more then 2 billion dollars. Lose them to Mexico, there goes many bilions $$ in tax money, plus about 250 times as much in lost future tax revenue.
These are our investment, now-lets not sell it cheap!!
“Honest debate?” See, that’s your problem. You haven’t accepted that we’ve stepped through the looking glass into a weird alternate reality. We’re not authoritarian yet but we have the training wheels on. #Can’tWaitForMueller
"These young 'Dreamers?'” Most likely, their parents are lawbreakers too. If lawbreaking immigrants are "dreamers," are all lawbreakers "dreamers?" Does this include drug cartel members in the United States? If some of them are illegal immigrants, should they get a free pass too? Should they be protected by "sanctuary?"
7
"The way we deal with legal immigration should not be changed without a thorough, honest debate."
Exactly, but we cannot have a thorough honest debate unless we have high quality national data. All the USCB gives us as a database is a "choose your race" system in which the "races" are the 18th century inventions of white racists.
A 21st century system for classifying us cannot come into existence overnight but former USCB Director describes in Ch. 11 of his essential book "What Is Your Race? The Census and Our Flawed Efforts to Classify Americans" how this could be accomplished over time.
What he proposes has much in common with the Swedish system in which each of us is registered by country of birth and with reliable SES and medical data available in databases that are fundamental to all Swedish medical research.
To do this the US will have to employ 21st century research that is as yet only touched upon in the Times thanks to Carl Zimmer. Read him today @ nyti.ms/2BLJNKn to learn what Swedish science journalist Karin Bojs has been writing about for years that "we Europeans were not all lily white blue eyed creatures". Discussing this idea will meet fierce opposition from Americans, even Times readers. Try it.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
Editorial Board of the New York Times does not understand the very simple fact that if someone is here ILLEGALY, they have in fact committed a CRIME and are therefore a CRIMINAL. With this quality of media, who needs the Russians?
9
There is only one reason why Democrats want wide open borders, and sanctuary cities, and zero deportations, and allowing entire extended family members to immigrate to America. They see all of the illegal immigrants and legal immigrants as future Democratic voters.
10
The nyts as much as said so in an article a few days ago.
3
Donald Trump and his wife have employed chain immigration. Don't her parents live in the US?
1
Of course the WH position is Totally Repulsive Unamerican Mean and Polarizing. Can anyone really be surprised that Trump Rarely Unveils Meaningful Policies?
1
It seems like we are talking about two groups - illegal aliens who are here not through any lawful process and immigrants who have followed the legal process now in place. I like the legal process not some tortured process where we all have to bend over backwards to deal with lawlessness.
4
How are we ever to have a serious discussion about a hard topic when even the NYT is resorting to Huffington Post quality journalism about the issue to say nothing of the president's bombastic claims about it...
For example the NYT says, "Lottery visa holders actually killed only eight of 3,037 Americans murdered by foreign-born terrorists since 1975..." This is a purely misleading statistic as it deliberately cherry picks its parameters to ignore the last two terror attacks in NYC. The West Side highway truck attach killed six Chilean tourists and they are excluded here because they aren't "Americans." Likewise it excludes the most recent terror attack in which the Bangladeshi man had his pipe bomb malfunction and partially detonate early which thankfully resulted in only minor injuries to anyone other than the bomber himself.
Similarly, in arguing that "immigrants help the economy grow," there is no discussion of money taken out of the U.S. economy and sent to family members in other countries. This is obviously bad for the economy. Salvadorans alone send $4 billion home to El Salvador. Nor is there a discussion of the cost to our school system to educate children who don't speak English and provide them with help to navigate the language barrier. And what about affordable housing? Virtually every large city is facing a housing crunch. In that light, why not prioritize skilled immigrants who will be able to afford housing rather than contributing to the housing crisis?
12
No surprise the NY Times is attacking Trump's immigration reform plan, but the "backward view" angle is most perplexing considering they refuse to accept any changes to the current system apparently because "that's the way it is". In the interest of honest debate the NY Times should lay out what they think an ideal immigration system for the US would be instead of just attacking any proposed changes like a rabid dog.
5
Those we especially need are low skilled farmworkers and others. Give them green cards and let them bring their families. If you desire to continue consuming fruits, vegetables and wine, it's a good thing. But these workers have a right to better housing and wages. If Americans wanted these jobs, they would be there. Otherwise, let's build a wall, deport everyone and move large swaths of working age people to the interior and force them to work. In the long run, reality has a way of of working things out. A temporary work visa is slavery with no benefits.
1
Three percent of illegals work in agriculture.
2
We are going to need those immigrants when all of us baby boomers fully retire. And how can anyone talk of deporting the dreamers? They are as American as apple pie! They didn't have the quirk of nature to be born on American soil but they are more American than Trump and his neoNazi supporters.
1
Really? And who's going to take care of all those low wage workers you're happy to exploit when you retire when they get old? Another 50 million immigrants? Where does your Ponzi scheme end?
2
It is not 'smearing' to call someone who breaks the law a criminal, at least to me. Was calling Al Capone or John Gotti a criminal smearing them? The definition of a criminal is someone who breaks the law, so that is not a smear but accurate use of the English language.
7
Mike,So to call your child or grandchild who didn't do anything illegal because they are just children as criminals is fine with you. Got it. Do you even realize that to commit an illegal act knowingly, you need to be older than your children's age? But i guess these things are beyond your reasoning power. Thats not only sad but also inhumane.
DACA children didn't commit anything illegal, their parents did commit a misdemeanor as per legal code. Are you saying a misdemeanor is the same as being hardcore criminals like al capone? if that is the creiteria well over half of America is criminal coz many have committed a misdemeanor at some point in their life and got a second or third chance to correct themselves.
2
And most of them are now of legal age, and they remain in the country illegally. Therefore, they are persons who commit a crime, making them criminals.
Of course there are different degrees of criminal behavior. That is why there are violations, misdemeanors, and felonies, and degrees of each. My only point is that anyone who commits any of these acts is not being smeared, as the tagline here stated, by being called a criminal.
2
As baby boomers age who is going to take care of the elderly? The need for aides is going to double soon, and 40 percent of them are immigrants. Mushroom farmers. Poultry workers. Field hands. Oyster shuckers. Most of them are immigrants, too; many are undocumented. Rightwing anti-immigrant comments here are ignorant, not just of basic principles of fairness and humanity, but also of the critical need for these workers in jobs that domestic workers reject. One Aberdeen oyster farmer is losing his workforce to ICE thugs empowered by the Hater-in Chief, and he can't find anyone to replace them.
Ignorance and inhumanity wrapped up in simple-minded righteous indignation about "illegals" in our country has infected American minds.
1
John Kelly is simply racist by saying that Dreamers were too lazy to get off the couch and sign up. Many are doctors, nurses, teachers, engineers, and more. Immigrant facts: "They are more likely to own businesses or to start businesses than the native-born; of the 87 privately held companies currently valued at more than $1 billion, 51 percent had immigrant founders."
2
The overriding issue is not legal immigration. Yes, the system could be better and more attuned to the needs of our country. But what is driving the debate and fueling frustration across party lines is blatant illegal immigration. If the rules we have now had been enforced Trump would not be president. He skillfully capitalized on the frustration or ordinary Americans. I recommend editorialists spend some time in local courthouses. In my community a man without a license, with four convictions to his record and one deportation, smashed into the back of a car with a vacationing family. What do you think they thought when they learned of his record. Week after week individuals in our country walk into and out of the courthouse in our community, mostly for traffic violations, and no record is made of their status. To me, good record keeping would seem a minimal start. Ask the tradesman who carries insurance and licenses what he or she thinks about competing against people who do neither. My point is that to really understand the frustration that is driving this issue you need to start at ground level. These are good people who only want the rules enforced.
31
"Mr. Trump’s approach seems intended less to rationalize the immigration system than to inflame his core supporters by demonizing nonwhite people, as he did when he disparaged immigrants from nations like Haiti and Mexico while praising Norwegians."
And therein lies the key. Who knows what Donald Trump really thinks about immigration, what we do know is that he has found it a useful tool to keep his base, especially the white supremacists, on the boil. So the nativist stance is useful, at least for the moment. And facts be damned, whatever the President finds it useful to say is what we hear from this Administration.
7
My great grandparents arrived here legally around the beginning of the 2oth century as unskilled laborers without high school educations, and after being in America for 60+ years, they never learned English.
2
They never learned English, the horror! Did the sky fall on your neighborhood?
Sixty years ago no one had a high school diploma. Today almost everyone does. Times change. We don't need people who don't speak English and don't have a high school diploma anymore.
1
The Times wishes to continue the Democratic party voter recruitment campaign on the basis of the logic that it is good for America. Apparently the voters who elected Trump disagree.
Trump should insist on a deal that offers amnesty to the DACA crowd in exchange for iron-clad policies that eliminate illegal immigration. E-verify, eliminate the lottery, build a fence, do what needs to be done. One would think that the side giving ground here is conservatives, since there is abhorrent to prioritize illegal aliens over people struggling to immigrate legally. But the screams are all from liberals.
Which leads to one unassailable conclusion. Liberals like illegal immigration. Which means they should not be taken seriously. As policy makers. Or as patriots.
3
How is it possible that this man married two immigrants which means they have extended family members over seas and yet he wants to close down on bringing those members to this country.
Oh wait a minute, that applies to everyone else. Now I get it.
1
I've already said it. The Republicans cannot keep this country white. It is numerically impossible. Accept it, and accept that this country needs more immigrants, for the country to flourish. Immigrants don't commit crimes, Americans do.
3
If you really believe that, you should move somewhere safe like Mexico or Central America where all these safe people come from.
1
Wasn't that SpaceX launch the other day a thrill and an awesome accomplishment! Its raison d'être, Mr. Musk, is here because of our great immigration policies, of the past.
3
Please Editorial Board, in the future when Trump and Immigration is the subject matter the names, Stephen Miller and John Kelly, should also be given some prominence in any discussion thereof. Our uninformed Fake President, as usual, has no grasp of any intricacies of the immigration issue but that duo, the "keep America white" whisperers, remain the power behind the throne.
1
I know this is difficult for New Yorkers to accept but Trumps views on immigration is directly in line with the majority of Americans.
It is you that have a “backward view” of it.
8
Chrissy, what exactly is in line with Americans? Please elaborate.
A majority of Americans didn't even vote for trump. A majority of Americans want to legalize DACA. A majority of Americans,including democrats, dont want to build a wall BUT instead want to use drones and technology to monitor the border much more effectively than a stupid wall will ever do. A majority of Americans don't even have immigration as a top 5 issue. No American, including democrats, want OPEN BORDERS. that is just a conservative straw man invented to beat the democrats. A majority of Americans want to legalize all the illegals(non DACA), pay back taxes and join the mainstream WITHOUT an option to becoming citizens.
The majority of Americans never voted for keeping illegals in the country or a diversity lottery or birth tourism or birthright citizenship, or not enforcing immigration laws or not securing the border either. Maybe we should.
1
Bias much? "A Gallup poll last June found 62 percent of Americans support maintaining current levels of immigration or even increasing them" the same poll found that 73 percent of Americans support maintaining current levels of immigration or even DECREASING them. A Harvard-Harris poll in Jan. 2018 found that 54% want legal immigration cut to 500k or below. Great fact checking!!!
4
Dreamers are not immigrants. They are illegal aliens. They must stipulate as much when the register for the DACA program. Reforming the system for LEGAL immigrants should not accommodate those who chose to ignore our laws in the first place.
5
Pity government can't be run by ignoring the President.
“The way we deal with legal immigration should not be changed without a thorough, honest debate.”
Unfortunately a thorough, honest debate is not remotely forthcoming from this GOP government. For that matter where is the credible blueprint for a comprehehsive fix from either party?
I am want to recall that over 40% of the illegal immigrants estimated to be in the US were visa overstays. Could we at least get a handle on this!
DACA is but a fraction of the 11 to 14 million illegals now in America — they must all be part of any credible reform. Twenty five years of partisan wrangling and nothing resembling a solution is in sight.
2
I read with interest the comments of those who want the "illegals" deported immediately. Your concern for enforcing the law should include prison sentences for the CEO's who have been hiring the undocumented for decades for work and wages that "legals" would never accept. Throw a few big shots in jail who use illegals to clean their fancy hotels and watch how fast the problem gets magically solved1
5
How about holding Mexican government officials for their own failures? Why are their actions in failing to provide for their people never on the table?
1
Thousands of people, mostly German Jews, who escaped the Holocaust and were admitted to the US were just perfect, with their language skills, to help win in World War II. And let us not forget native Americans who, with their difficult languages, helped too to win the war in Europe and the Pacific. By doing well with foreigners, America does well for itself.
1
Open your eyes, or better, your brains and get real "native" Americans: there is one reason for us immigrants to come to USA and one reason only: jobs.
We come after them and you allow us [thank you] to have those jobs because, and accept it, you need us. If you believe that we are after an American citizenship, you are plainly wrong; that is the idea sold to you by your politicians left and right to keep you distracted and away from reality: you need us and we need your jobs. Nothing else!
What a world we live in! People who came here illegally are now not criminals. If I illegally didn't pay my taxes would I be a criminal?
5
Bill, You are not that dumb to suggest DACA kids are illegal. Their parents may have committed a misdemeanor by coming here illegally or overstaying the visa. But do not confound the two. A misdemeanor is not criminal by law. Again do not confound the two. Now an illegal who committed a criminal offense such as rape, murder or robbery is a criminal. Did you get that?
When the article states that right-wing extremists have committed far more attacks than Islamists, it is a little misleading. The GAO study referenced shows that Islamists killed more people during the period in question. Right-wing extremists committed more attacks, but the vast majority of those attacks were things like "Neo-nazi kills his cellmate" or "White supremacist kills his transgender neighbor," which are not really what we tend to think of as terrorism. If you look only at things that describe a terrorist attack, the Islamists come out slightly ahead in number of attacks as well.
Kudos to the Times for citing their source, but I'm not sure it supports the argument.
2
The Presidents problem is that DACA and Visa lottery recipients are not his preferred immigrant from Norway. As a representative of the Federal government that is supposedly meant to serve people of all backgrounds and nationalities his personal opinion on immigration is of no importance. His clear and unfettered support of White supremacists and other fringe nativists further proves that he should have no input on the national immigration debate. His views are are skewed and warped.
1
Most (8 out of 10) Immigrants just support Democrats simply to promote its own religious and racial agenda by playing the victim card. No wonder Dems are so desperate to protect its vote bank. On the other hand, economic opportunists (believer of corporate corruption and crony capitalism) combined with racial/religious hatred against any specific religion & race (e.g. Arabs and Muslims) tend to support GOP. Both of these categories are not so great for future of America.
2
Its interesting to watch the linguistics of comments. All these new terms fresh from the propaganda mill. "Chain migration", ooooooh. Here's a word, but its not used much because people flock away from anything socially awkward: sheeple.
Illegal immigrants cost us OVER 100 BILLION DOLLARS each and every year.
This is hardly, if ever discussed.
7
Sources, please.
I read in the Washington Post That Trumps grandfather came from Germany,
And opened a hotel which was a house of prostitution.
Then his Father ,also from Germany came here to the USA and bought real estate ,he would not rent to people of color and was taken to court
Because of his discrimination.He also was seen at Kkk marches.
The beliefs of Donald Trumps ancestors were not due to the fact that they were
Immigrants but more due to a right wing belief growing in Germany during
The 1920 ,1930,and of course 1940s.
We inherit things from our ancestors,perhaps Trumps complete lack of respect for women And immigrants of color can be traced to his ancestors and he continues to carry the flag of misogyny and discrimination into our Democracy,
He brings Verbal support for fascist beliefs and includes some in his advisors.
There is no place for him in our government.No one with his beliefs can hold
An office in a democracy and not corrupt our system.We already had enough
Discrimination he fit right in.
1
Switzerland recently enacted a law that requires immigrants to pay back all of the welfare and other funds paid to them before they can become citizens. What a great idea!
It is abundantly clear that American taxpayers already cannot afford to pay to meet the needs of American citizens--elderly, disabled, veterans, et al.--so it is totally foolish to think that taxpayers can be squeezed to pay for millions of illegal aliens. Illegals should be deported but allowed to follow existing laws and procedures for becoming visitors, residents and citizens.
7
Except that non citizens in this country cannot receive welfare. It doesn't exist more so most of these non citizens pay more taxes to the IRS which has tallied many billions of unclaimed money do to the shadowy world they live in. Congress has enabled this culture of indecision because of the fear of the browning of America.
Problem is that anchor babies are instant citizens.
2
DD
They get lots of funding via their anchors. Any funds they pay into the IRS are minimal at best. FYI most illegals are Mexicans and many consider themselves white.
2
It's ironic that this president wants to vet immigrants more closely than the people who work for him.
2
Where are the DACAs parents? How many are there? Never discussed here.
4
Illegal is illegal. You can call it "undocumented", but it is still illegal. Until the Democrat party reverses its acceptance of illegal alien entry into the United States, and agrees to drastic measures to prevent it, they will be supporting law breaking. That's the bottom line.
38
Paul,
You are right, but this is a complicated issue. Like it or not, we’ve allowed a certain amount of illegal immigration for decades — under both Democratic and Republican leadership. We turned a blind eye intentionally, largely to the benefit of our economy. Now, we face the question: shall we send the children of these immigrants “back” even at great cost to them and us?
It’s hard for me to understand the current Republican obsession with past immigration, but I do understand the desire for security and fairness. To me that means a path to citizenship for the many illegal immigrants we were all complicit in admitting and sensible policy adjustments going forward.
It would be nice if this were a simple issue of legality, but it just isn’t.
2
Paul, Who is stopping the GOP from implementing the e-verify across any registered llc or partnership or corporation? Why not punish the employer who provides jobs to the so called illegals? Why are they not doing it? The democrats had mandatory e-verify in the bill passed by the senate in 2013. Why is that not part of discussion here?
Why is the highly abused H2B used by trump not part of the discussion here? Are we a country with shortage of waitresses?
Democratic party is not supporting the illegal alien entry, because it is the GOP that controls all levers of government and they HAVE TAKEN ZERO STEPS TO MANDATE E-VERIFY. So it is Trump and GOP who are supporting illegal alien entry BUT creating a straw man about open borders to demagogue the issue and con their less educated supporters.
3
I believe the correct term is 'criminal alien'
The editors at the NYT should remember that. They can't sugar coat it by calling them 'border heros' or whatever new PC term they've come up with. If dems don't smarten up. Trump will win re-election.
2
Anecdotes seem to have more power than data. Trump talks about illegal immigrants as criminals even though the data do not support him. On the other side, gun control advocates rail against "assault" weapons, even though these guns account for a very small fraction of all homicides.
1
There are almost 11 million or more illegal immigrants in the country. The word "illegal" is used because, those men and women who have come into this country, have no proper documentation, and they did not seek passage to enter the country, through the normal legal process.
Today, there is so much rhetoric and debate about people living here illegally, which includes the "Dreamers". The crux of the problem is not the illegal immigrants. It is the inaction on the part of our elected representatives. Yet, there does not seem to be any solution in sight. Instead, we are seeing a different approach to immigration. Cutting down or removing the lottery system, changing the so called chain immigration does not solve the immigration issues.
This country was built on the foundation of immigration. Today's opinion from the editorial board rightfully points out the benefits the country has derived from immigration. What we need is careful thinking to improve on existing rules on immigration, instead of rushing to judgment, to remove or curtail immigration. This is something our elected representatives should look at.
Mr. Trump should take a moment to look at himself. His parents were immigrants to this country, who should be proud to know their son is the POTUS. Mr. Trump will do well to share the feeling with all immigrants in this country, and those aspiring for the American Dream.
1
America has never welcomed immigrants, other than the slaves that were brought here to further the economic interests of colonial capitalists. We were appalled at the subsequent waves of immigration from Ireland, and Italy and eastern Europe, and Asia and South America. Significant immigration has always produced a significant backlash and a wave of xenophobia and racial/ethnic prejudice. Trump and the Republican majorities everywhere in Federal and State governments owe their positions of power to broad constituencies that want to see immigration limited and better controlled. That outcome would seem an inevitable consequence of the 2016 election cycle. Perhaps the anti-immigration pendulum will swing back in the other direction at some point in the future, but for now, living together in a democracy would seem to require people with more progressive views of immigration to compromise in the directions of better controlled borders and fewer immigrants.
4
America accepts about one million permanent legal immigrants per year, more than all other industrialized nations combined. To characterize it as unfriendly to immigrants if absurd. Nearly 16 percent of the population are immigrants.
5
What happens to the undocumented parents of the Dreamers/DACA recipients if their children are granted a path to citizenship? Even if they could be sponsored by their Dreamer children, what message does that send to family members of citizens who have had to remain in their home countries for many years while they wait for approval? On the other hand, we can't just deport these undocumented parents; most of them have been living and working in the country for years, if not decades.
We have two issues: Who do we throw out, and who do we let in. We need a little more common sense regarding who is subject to deportation. Several recent examples raise serious questions about the administration's desire to "protect the public and national security".
Syed Jamal, chemistry professor from Lawrence, KS, in this country for 30 years, being deported to Bangladesh - Lukasz Niec, physician in Kalamazoo, MI came to the US at 5, here for 40 years from Poland - Jose Garcia, landscaper in Lincoln Park, MI, married to US citizen, two kids, sent back to Mexico, came to the US when he was 10 - Amer Othman Adi, business owner in Youngstown, OH came to US at 19, green card, Jordan citizen, here for 30 years.
While their legal status and attempts at obtaining legal status vary, all are apparently responsible and productive members of their communities, have no ties to their countries of origin, yet have been deported or are pending deportation.
Limits to who can immigrate legally - fine, lets have a serious debate. Deporting real criminals, gang members and similar illegals - absolutely. But can we use a little common sense?
3
Serious question. Can parents brought over here by adult children apply for social security? I've heard it both ways.
3
"The preponderance of evidence shows that immigrants help the economy grow."
Really? So if one million legal immigrants (and countless illegal immigrants) coming to the United States every year is truly good for the country, then perhaps we should let in, say, 50 million a year to supercharge the economy and create a true utopia on earth.
10
Before we add even one more person to this countrys population we need to answer a couple of questions. How does this help in the fight against GW? If we are the highest per capita co2 producers we do the world no favors in growing our population. Second. Since when did infinite growth in a finite country become possible? I know of no study (in fact most say the opposite) that we can continue to add people at the rate we are (no matter how it affects things short term) and this is sustainable. Until the science says "sure America (and the planet) are totally sustainable long term at 500 million citizens and here's why" we are messing with something that has effects far beyond the next social security check, the economy and neighborhood school crowding. Short sighted stupidity is not just the realm of the right. The only conceivable, long term sustainable future for us and the planet is a falling, not growing population. Prove me wrong.
8
Here is merely one of many unexamined mantras chanted by the pro-massive-immigration crowd.
Supposedly we need more young healthy immigrants to "pay taxes into Social Security and Medicare" so that there will be enough to pay benefits to an "aging population".
No we don't.
Massive immigration supposedly to solve funding problems for Social Security and Medicare is a giant Ponzi scheme -- the mother of all Ponzi schemes.
All those supposedly young, healthy immigrants will themselves retire, and become entitled to benefits, and when they do, the chant will continue -- supposedly we need still more immigrants to pay for their benefits -- and more, and more, and more, ad infinitum.
Furthermore, under family-based immigration, where parents can be "brought in", the parents come in after their prime earning years -- the years before age 44 or 50 -- so, during their 50s and 60s, the parents work the minimum 10 years in order to collect full Social Security and Medicare benefits -- thus "paying into the system" far, far less than they will draw out.
A sensible immigration system would put a ceiling -- say age 40 or maybe age 45 max -- on a all immigrants -- and a merit-based system would award extra points for immigrants in their 20s -- those already out of school but still with their prime earning years ahead of them.
As for the supposed funding problems of Social Security and Medicare, by far the better solution is to raise the retirement age for everyone to age 70 or more.
8
If Mr. Trump is talking polemically, and acting sensibly, for me this is a sign our political system works. It can take the most unruly candidate and minimize the damage he can create.
Plato, in "the republic", addressed this problem. One knows there will be good and bad leaders. He asked the question: how does one construct a political system where the damage done by bad leaders is minimized by the system itself.
1
Does the Times even realize that by emphasizing "close" relatives, you REDUCE "diversity" and give a literal handful of families from particular countries a lock on legal immigration? For example, Bangladesh is no longer able to participate in the "diversity" lottery because it has sent so many immigrants through it. Thanks to "family reunification", diversity "winners" have been able to sponsor unskilled, uneducated family members, such as the 20-year-old whose father was sponsored by his sister--and who came for no other reason than nepotism. Mexico, thanks to the 1986 amnesty and family reunification, has accounted for 15-20% of our LEGAL immigration for almost 3 decades--doesn't seem very "diverse" for so much of our immigrant flow to come from just that one country.
6
The "progressive" democrat point of view is the only thing wrong with the US are it's existing citizens thus their never ending attempt to replace US citizens.
8
Exactly what immigration laws does the editorial board think need to be enforced?
Does it believe that everyone here illegally, now and in the future, should be allowed to stay, and put on a path to legal status?
Does it believe only those who commit "serious violent felonies" should be deported?
Does it believe the American public has any say, on any level, besides "more immigrants, and illegal ones are fine"?
12
The perspective one takes on immigration is informed by where one stands in Americas economic hierarchy. The economically secure live in a world where they can afford to be pro immigration whereas the precarious often resit. From the perspective of a group that has job security, savings and equity adding more low skilled workers into the economic sphere doesn't pose an issue. From the precarious point of view, where jobs that lead to a middle class life in cities like New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles are in short supply, more low skilled workers makes the American dream harder not easier. The truth of course is that immigration is good for some and not so good for others. The people who have economic security are the ones who benefit from making the precarious compete: more supply of labor lowers the value of labor. Labor wants protection, a pathway -- not a shot -- to a dignified life. The issue that immigration stands on top of is scarcity and if we plan to overcome the rift on immigration we must get to the underlying issue. The mixed market has not been able to deliver the dignified lives to each individual. We need to quit playing an economic game of musical chairs where some people are destined to be without or deeply underemployed and give people a path to establish themselves -- citizens and immigrants alike.
8
this got me to thinking, what is our current immigration policy? how many people to we accept, what are the rules etc. how about an article that educates us so we can judge the current debate.
13
"diversity-visa holders and illegal immigrants, the groups most maligned by Mr. Trump, are far less prone to crime than native-born Americans." Indeed, there's very good reason to suspect they're less prone to crime than the Trump family.
7
Actually, ILLEGAL aliens are MORE prone to crime. They are in federal prisons on NON immigration-related offenses by a much greater rate than their share of our population. Moreover, it rather depends on the crime. Some 7 million illegal aliens, according to the Social Security Administration, are committing FELONIES by using stolen SS numbers to work. Yet, the Obama administration let the workers it found doing this in its audits move on to other jobs.
7
Why are we afraid to name the obvious? Trump ran on racism. His primary appeal to his core supporters is racism. Whipping up fear of brown people is at the center of his immigration policy proposals.
There are many serious issues to deal with on the immigration front, including illegal immigration, the Dreamers and the most effective and humane ways to handle legal immigration. Those issues, while thorny, might properly be addressed by serious, well-meaning people. Donald Trump is neither.
On the whole, immigration has been a tremendously positive force throughout U.S. history. Diversity and all its benefits are among our great advantages in a competitive world. Should it happen without thought, planning and compromise? Of course not. But the current xenophobia is deeply damaging to our country.
8
It isn't up to Trump to decide on a bill, and when some people in Congress are focused only on the welfare of illegal aliens and cheap labor employers/donors, well, Americans in general are out of luck.
6
Just because we expect people to obey the law doesn’t make us racist.
6
What better way to create allies with the people in other countries than to treat their citizen immigrants well. Look at Iranian immigrant activists seeking change in Iran, or Chinese immigrants fighting for human rights in their native country. Indeed, the lack of US ambassadors requires citizens to help out to improve diplomacy.
Ironic that there is much more extreme vetting of immigrants than of POTUS candidates who conceal their tax returns and criminal history from voters. Shouldn’t we have an FBI extreme vetting of our candidates that will have ultimate control on our nukes so that the voter knows we are not electing a criminal, thug or tax cheat?
Foreign countries would be just as justified - wrongfully - in vilifying Americans visitors and immigrants alike entering their country as bullies, war mongers or worse - trump subjects and supporters.
Insulting immigrants insults the nations they come from.That creates hatred, violence and terror and popr allies.
Respect immigrants and they will respect you back, including their country men and women back home
5
The idea of our foreign student program is that foreign students take their academic knowledge and knowledge of the US BACK to their homelands to make their homelands better. That's what ILLEGAL ALIENS should be doing. In fact, a couple of years ago, the Washington Post ran a story on how returning illegal aliens are helping Mexico, already a wealthy country, to build a middle class.
5
Two areas of suboptimal journalism is confounding illegal and legal immigration, one of which is very productive and merit based (legal immigration) and one of which is costly based on social services/lack of tax revenue (illegal immigration). It's very reasonable to support based merit based legal immigration similar to the rest of the world and not open border illegal immigration without being branded a racist.
Moreover, the nominal dreamers makes it seem like the illegal immigrants are all saints, while in reality, many such as in California, simply enter into the social service programs and do little or no work while creating slum like areas. California is a specific target of illegal immigration from the south and has one of the highest poverty rates in the country. The lesson from Ca is that if you open the borders, you import poverty, taxes go unbelievably high for tax paying citizens, and many working people leave the state.
As an aside, my family just visited SF and SD in the last year and couldnt believe the decline in cleanness and civility. I think many americans can universally agree we dont want america to become a third world country
30
Where are you getting your information about California from? I live in a community with a high number of immigrants from Mexico and Central America, and while many are low income, they also work hard, often at multiple jobs, and pay sales taxes along with the rest of us. And the next time your relatives visit San Diego or San Francisco, have them take a closer look at those homeless people. Few of them are immigrants.
1
We already ARE a third world country, the richest one too.
3
Satish,
Have you been to the Appalachia or to the south? Thats where real poverty exists. Out of the bottom 10 states by median income, 9 are from the south/applachia. California is actually a top 25 state by median income. Out of the top 15 states by median income 13 are from blue states and other 2 red states are Alaska and ND driven by oil money. And obviously the most welfare recipients per capita are in the poor red states not in blue states. Do not confound the issue of poverty with illegal immigration.
Do you know what a low tax mecca like KS and OK has done? They have no money for education or healthcare of the poor. And they have no money to provide basic living for American citizens in Alabama or louisiana or WV or KY or OK or ...
There is NO OPEN BORDERS despite what you would like to believe. And no one supports open borders as you would like to believe. There is a net emigration since 2007 but then you don't care about stats because who needs those when you have your believes as facts. What makes you think you can actually quantify the measures of cleanliness and civility based on your anecdotal single visit?
Thank you for the sensible editorial on immigration.
For the record, unemployment is down to 4.1%, (3.5% for white workers). Wages are beginning to rise and regardless of the latest stock market swings, inflation is low. Crime is at historic lows and the number of undocumented immigrants has actually decreased over the last 12 years (from 12 million in 2006 to 11 million today). So why is Trump attacking immigrants, demanding to spend billions on a ridiculous wall, and risking government shutdowns in order to reduce immigration, "illegal" or otherwise?
It is clear to most thoughtful people that raising the anti-immigrant flag sometimes may make for a good political strategy in the short term if your goal is to win elections. But to continue to wave that flag when dealing with real-world issues, makes for the possibility of making fundamentally wrong decisions that will be difficult to undo. If data and facts that contradicts Trump are disregarded by the electorate because they are referred to as "fake news", then we are being dragged down a dark hole.
What we all need is a comprehensive reform proposal that gives current undocumented immigrants a path to legalization that isn't too onerous and brings most people into the system, a thoughtful approach to the future flow of immigrants that takes into account the needs of the economy AND reunites families. Instead, we have Trump.
2
We don't have the amnesty you want because we know that without enforcement, we'd just get more illegal aliens--just as we did after the 1986 amnesty and the mini-amnesties that followed that. So, let Democrats agree to increased border security and interior enforcement, and mandatory eVerify. But you can bet that isn't going to happen.
5
So we millions wanting to get into the country and work. If we had guts we would open the doors to everyone, grown the population and the economy. But no, we are following the same path that Japan did. An aging population with fewer and fewer workers.
1
As the Nobel-prize winning economist noted, you can't have open borders and a welfare state.
Japan, by the way, is STILL #3 in GDP. Mexico, meanwhile, is #15, a wealthy country, though not as wealthy as Japan. If having more people is so wonderful, then why isn't Mexico desperately trying to get its six million citizens here illegally, especially Dreamers, to return? Instead, it's spending $50 million to provide lawyers to fight deportation.
7
We are NOT Japan, an isolated island nation with a 99% native born population.
4
Exactly. More is not better, especially when it comes to population.
4
The findings of the Gallop poll claiming 62 percent of Americans support maintaining current levels of immigration are clearly the products of a push poll. A recent Harvard-Harris Poll shows 76 percent of Americans want radical cuts to the number of immigrants. Some 56 percent of those polled want the number slashed in half and moved back to what the President called "historical norms" in his campaign speech on immigration in Phoenix. The US accepts more immigrants annually than all the rest of the worlds' countries COMBINED. We take 1.2 million legally and some 600,000 come in illegally, over half overstaying visas and disappearing into America. This massive immigration is destroying the social safety net. The dean of the nation's immigration economists, George Borjas of Harvard's Kennedy School, calls low-skill immigration a very bad bargain for Americans. It also makes immigration a zero sum game: the winners are the employers of cheap immigrant labor (including the wealthy who now have servants to nanny their kids, do their lawns, clean their houses, etc.) while American wages have stagnated since 1970 -- interestingly only five years after the passage of the ruinous and myopic Immigration and Nationality Act in 1965. Immigrants are mostly who they've always been -- but they are coming to a radically altered America, one without a major manufacturing sector and a large welfare state. It makes SENSE to adjust immigration in light of these factors.
27
American society is changing and not to a better future since last few decades. One quantifiable example would be- role of religion in public policy and even in science and technology has increased to its worst level in its recent history. Most Immigrants to USA are now from crime infested, corrupt and religious conservative societies. And there are reasons why those countries face that situation.
We tend to highlight the good aspects of large scale immigration but tend to ignore how best we can attract quality people from abroad, who would not only contribute to economy but also assimilate into main stream American society, believe in its open society and secular democracy.
Corporations and many businesses (including universities) generally like more immigrants as a source cheaper and easily exploitable manpower. Universities would love to maintain or increase its steady flow of lucrative customers from abroad who have money to pay insanely high tuition fee- sometimes ignoring talented local students. It would not be wrong to say that massive increase of students from countries like India, China, Russia are is directly proportional to growing corruption in those countries and worsening wealth accumulation in fewer hands there.
9
Immigration is not what drives up criminal activity - it is poverty; or at least the belief, often angry thoughts driven by the struggles of those who can barely support their own life, that they have an equal if not better "value" than the given person in more sustainable position. Crime typically offers a better, more immediate payoff than the minimum-level job that would require so many more hours in a very boring task. To tackle crime, the overall community will simply have to pay more fair wage to all their workers; and provide a support system that enables the poor to better balance their immediate lifestyle decisions against the overall risks, and determine a feasible long-term plan for advancement. You do not wipe an entire community based solely on their ethnic heritage, their religious beliefs, etc. Instead you do a better job at establishing an individual's overall value and then encourage them to seek the many potentials for growth. What immigration should be is the equivalent of a job hiring, for that "qualified American citizen". Then there needs to be something along the lines of a mentorship to help that new hire become a more valuable asset to the nation. It is a daunting task for sure, many employers fail to push their employees towards better roles. Similarly, education in the poorer communities is disturbingly weak. The desperate will immediately take the best pay-off they can get to eat their next meal.
1
Wages don't rise simply because you order them to. In fact, wages are determined by the interaction of supply of labor and demand for labor. Immigration, legal or illegal, increases the supply of labor, and unfortunately, we've seen that technology is already cutting demand for labor.
We should indeed be screening, more than we already do, for a "qualified American citizen". But family reunification leaves most of that decision not to Americans, but to immigrants themselves. We set a very low bar, only 125% of the poverty level, for sponsoring an immigrant family member, then don't enforce the affidavit of support OR our public charge laws. Meanwhile, immigrants who get employment-based green cards ARE screened, first by the employer, then, by the US gov't, for skills, education, and the availability of AMERICANS to already do the work.
4
The President and members of Congress should take a walk through the Borough (Queens) where the President grew up to witness the importance of immigration to the fabric and to the economy. If the economy grows as the President predicts, we will need a labor force that will fill in the shortages of labor at all skill levels. Unfortunately, the President espouses himself as a pragmatic President. Now is the time that he demonstrates this rather than playing to his base which in fact is destroying the fabric this nation
2
J. Munson, unskilled, uneducated workers do jobs that literally ANYONE can do, and unfortunately, that's who many of the immigrants and illegal aliens we get are--unskilled, uneducated low wage workers who displace unskilled, uneducated low wage Americans from jobs and drive down wages even further. Plus, Americans who do pay net taxes subsidize both the low wage immigrant workers AND the Americans they displace.
3
I would if unemployment was higher but if know the job market, there is not enough workers. Additionally, they are a number of unemployed that do not go where the jobs are
When a crime is committed by an illegal immigrant, the first argument we hear is people here illegally have a lower incarceration rate than native born Americans. Perhaps this is true, but the murdered person would still be alive regardless of that statistic. I fail to see why this statistic should offer any comfort to anyone. Yes, anyone could have committed this crime but only one person did.
In Montgomery County, Maryland a 15 year old girl was raped by two students here without documentation. When it was pointed out that it is a felony to aid someone in this country illegally, the school board representative said this was "making political points". No..it's pointing out that while a one armed Martian could have committed the crime-he didn't, it was committed by someone whose presence in a high school constitutes a felony. Being on a school board doesn't put you above the law.
The second argument we hear is this is an exception and we can not draw a conclusion from it. Perhaps...but is it possible the police shooting of an unarmed black motorist is also an exception? Why does the Democratic Party, as espoused by Kennedy's response to the State of the Union, draw the conclusion we live in "racist" country. If you can't draw a conclusion from the crime of an undocumented person in America than you can't draw a conclusion from a police death either.
Either we have a border or we're not a country. Either we enforce the law or we have chaos.
17
The illegal immigrants who are here now were not planned for. If we allow any proportion of them to stay, that number should be offset by decreasing the number of legal immigrants that are allowed from each of those countries so we can achieve balance, instead of having most immigrants from only a few countries. We can see how patently unfair this is to those who have been going through the process legally, so we need to have most illegal immigrants deported.
13
"The Cato Institute found that lottery visa holders actually killed only eight of 3,037 Americans murdered by foreign-born terrorists since 1975". . .stated in a rather blase manner, but we don't hear much about the stories from these forgotten American families whose dreams have been broken. Birthright citizenship is no longer necessary or desirable and contributes to the quagmire we keep repeating again and again. . .merit-based immigration makes sense . . .. end the diversity lottery.
11
There is no economic reason, in an economy where automation has & will reduce job growth, to keep immigration at current levels. It is also unfair to the underemployed and unemployed men of color to put up further barriers to job opportunities in the form of cheap immigrant labor. And by the way, immigrants send billions of dollars out of the country that is not spent here, reducing their economic benefit to America.
19
Hypothetically, if America was the country everyone was leaving, and potential home countries asked us to prove ourselves to them, what would we as individuals offer? Some of us are professors and lawyers, some of us aren't. Those of use who toil in the middle or low castes aren't capable of making the same impact we want the "top choice" immigrants to make. Lastly, consider, with a population that cannot offer impact, but demands it, who would want to come here? Trump's America is incestuously unsustainable. They want to only mix within themselves. For as much as they love scientific figures, they miss the lesson royalty lines show- this dies out.
2
Patrick S., you seem to believe that professors and lawyers are somehow what developing countries need. Well, those that do need them often send their own citizens here to be educated, and the students are then expected to return to their homelands to make them better. Pres. Obama's father did a graduate degree in economics at Harvard as a foreign student, then returned to Kenya to work in its government.
2
Why does he hold up Norway as his model for 'good' immigrants?
My grandfather emigrated from Norway and became a citizen about 10 years after Friedrich Trumpf came from Bavaria. Both Trumpf and my Norwegian grandmother died in the Spanish flu.
My grandfather was a socialist who believed in votes and careers for women and who supported my mother in law school. He believed in equality, in fair treatment of the workers who reported to him, and wanted FDR to push harder for social justice. He would never vote for Trump.
Maybe Donald picked Norway for the same reasons he and his family hid their German ancestry and his father's arrest at a Klan rally, figuring that being 'Swedish' was more acceptable in America than being from Germany during WWI and WWII.
6
No, he probably picked Norway as an example of a country with a high standard of living (lots of oil money) and a well-educated, skilled population who, if it immigrated, would NOT be net users of our tax monies.
3
The Democratic party could get on the right side of the American public, greatly benefit dreamers and other immigrants, and stem the Republican tide in one fell swoop, by simply saying "no more."
A broad swath of Americans, to a large extent former Democrats, have concluded with obvious justification that Democrats have no intention of ever enforcing immigration laws. By renouncing support of lawlessness and sincerely joining the effort to stem the tide of more illegal immigrants, public trust in Democrats would be restored and the natural sympathy of Americans for Dreamers and other hard-working immigrants they interact with dailey would come to the fore, enabling an eventual equitable solution to the problem of the illegal immigrants already here.
So long as the party resists efforts to prevent continuing illegal immigration it stokes the public's fear and natural resentment of gatecrashers and will continue to suffer the election of Republican extremists on immigration, losing more and more electoral ground among its traditional middle-class base.
36
What Trump fails to realize is that immigration is and will continue to be the engine of our economy. His tax cuts *might* spur some short-term increases in demand, but his immigration policy (such as it is) ignores our aging population and declining birth rates.
Trump thinks that growth comes from “making deals,” but it actually comes from the dynamism of business and family formation, along with improvements in productivity. These things are largely the purview of the young.
Immigration is the only way out if this trap because our aging population is “the future that has already happened.” (Peter Drucker’s words, not mine.) The republicans my succeed in Making America Whiter Again, but the halcyon days of broad growth and prosperity that they miss so dearly will not return without a robust, immigrant workforce.
14
On the contrary, Trump does realize we need skilled, educated immigrants, not unskilled, uneducated illegal aliens and even legal immigrants, who are NET USERS of taxes, and who will likely remain that for generations. You also seem to be assuming that skills and education are uniquely the province of whites--what a racist belief.
5
Fintan, you're equating "growth" with "good". Well, if having more people creates growth, and that's so good, then why isn't Mexico eager to have the six million of its citizens who are here illegally, including most Dreamers, return to it? Instead, it's paying $50 million to help them fight deportation. Fact is, GDP growth isn't the real measure of how well of a country is--GDP per capita is. And the CBO, which evaluated the Senate amnesty bill a couple of years ago, said that while the bill would have doubled legal immigration and would have cut illegal immigration only 25%, it would have kept unemployment high, wages stagnant, would have increased GDP, but would have DECREASED GDP PER CAPITA. (Mexico, by the way, is #15 in GDP, a wealthy country, but middling on GDP per capita, at #60--perhaps why Mexicans "poor mouth" so much. That and income inequality.)
5
What you fail to realize is that you are not in charge. The American people have spoken and they have rejected you and your feelings.
4
Immigration is an emotional & thorny issue for most people. It resonates with their core beliefs about fairness & the rule of law. However, the reason it has never been sorted out after so many years & efforts by administrations of both stripes, is because businesses love the cheap labor & the public loves under-the-table cash deals. Illegals don't take checks, protest poor working conditions or dare to join unions.
If the federal government really wants to reduce illegal immigration then simply make E-Verify for employment mandatory, together with substantial penalties for non-compliance. But businesses love that cheap labor.
42
Wrong. Businesses don't deduct their labor payments if they don't pay by check. So taxes are witheld from immigrant checks and this only benefits those who reside in the U.S. The federal government is unable to enact an immigrant worker scheme because most Americans regard those who come here to contribute as guests and are not driven by the invidiousness which in the past prevented immigrants from living here or joining unions. Moreover, when quotas were enacted in the 1920's Western Hemisphere immigrants were exempted. Maybe because both Texas and California provided automatic citizenship for Mexican Americans before these two states joined the Union. You could look it up.
1
And Democrats love "cheap" votes--and clients. They allied with the US Chamber to sue the Social Security Administration to prevent it from requiring employers to use SS no match letters as a basis for firing employees who couldn't "fix" their numbers with the SSA. SSA estimates that about 70% of its SS no matches are due to illegal aliens--that's 7 MILLION illegal aliens using stolen SS numbers, a felony, and lying on the I-9, also a felony, to work.
2
" Businesses don't deduct their labor payments if they don't pay by check."
What makes you think that a business that is illegally hiring illegal immigrants is filling taxes with 100% accurate numbers? Plus it would have cost them at most 28% of the wages and generally much less, which considering they are paying lower wages to begin with and have a much more compliant labor force is probably a small price to pay.
2
It's hard to agree with anything Donald Trump proposes given his angry rhetoric but changing to a Canadian style immigration system might be better than what we have now. Canada considers language - the ability to speak French and English - and job skills, education and other so-called "merit" issues.
Would a change to the Canadian approach from the current one that favors sponsorship of immediate and extended family members benefit the country economically? Help shore up Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other programs? Help our beleaguered k-12 public schools?
28
Basically immigrants to Canada must not be a burden on society. That is why democrat oppose these common sense reforms. They need an underclass to give welfare to in return for votes.
4
Legal immigration is great for the country, but we need to able to pick and choose who may enter, this isn't nativist, this is common sense. We want contributors not takers, so let's open doors to those who can contribute immediately. Lottery systems are ridiculous, that must go. Chain migration for immediate family the nuclear is great, not some uncle or aunt that is not nuclear. Mother, father, brother and sister, maybe grandparents if they can contribute.
28
Ron,
The problem in America is ignorance and inability to research and think rationally. Many commentators, even on NYT, are totally ignorant about the complex immigration system. And they don't make any attempt to actually learn the system before making comments.
There is no way to sponsor uncles and aunts. The system has overall numerical limits and then country wise numerical limits to sponsor parents and siblings. The wait time for parents is a decade and the wait time for siblings is multiple decades. So it is not like anyone can come whenever they want.
I am fine with even removing siblings because if they can qualify on their own they can come via employment VISA. But American population is declining without immigration and we don't have enough people to pay for the 90 million retiring boomers.
Also, America is not the top destination for VC funds anymore. China and India with their huge internal markets are ALREADY developing the next level companies that are becoming direct competitors to American corporations. 20 years ago 75% of companies in forbes global 2000 were American, European or Japanese. Today the same forbes 2000 has many Asian corporations at the top. Who do you think lost out? We are stupid if we are not poaching the best Asian talent here and building a wall so that they won't leave. Because they are building the next gen corporations in AI to Solar to Healthcare while we are sitting here creating a fear of immigrants.
1
The editorial board asserts that “the programs targeted by Mr. Trump are designed to make legal immigration more diverse,” but current immigration policy has produced a non-diverse stream of immigrants. During the mass immigration years of the late 1800s and early 1900s, immigrants came to America from a multitude of countries speaking a multiplicity of languages. The tremendous diversity of yesterday’s immigrants encouraged them to assimilate and acculturate rather than coalescing into ethnic conclaves. Since the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, about 50 percent of immigrants have come from Latin American, a region that represents just 8.5 percent of the global population. Twenty-seven percent of America’s immigrant population is from just one country—Mexico—which has only 1.7 percent of the global population. Mexican Americans already rank third among America’s 20 largest ethnic group, just behind German Americans and African Americans, who they will soon surpass. Mexican Americans are already the largest ethnic group in our two most populous states—California, Texas and Florida—which daily grow less diverse due to immigration. Nationwide, Mexican Americans outnumber Irish Americans, Italian Americans and the other ethnic groups we lump into the catchall “non-Hispanic white” category.
35
With the entire goal being to adjust the demographics of the US so it is more favorable to democrats.
6
Mexican Americans are the largest ethnic group in California and Texas not because of the lack of diversity in our immigration policies but because those states used to be in Mexico. They were here for hundreds of years before Anglos came along. Mexican Americans have a far greater claim of belonging in the Rio Grand valley etc than any northern European.
4
Oh oh. Looks like you've discovered the truth about the left and their cries of "racism" if you want even the slightest brakes on the flood of people coming here. They don't care about anything, except that they be non white. A less diverse, basically brown country is absolutely ok with them as long as it's not majority white.
2
I think that immigrants and immigration is great! So if we can also improve the quality of our immigrants by upping the education and work skill requirements why not? Pick the top 25% of the 4 million person backlog and just let them in, but we need to go get all of the most qualified persons in the world!
11
What about countries that don't have advanced educational systems? Or countries where they don't allow women to obtain higher education? Or how about war torn countries where we can't obtain formal education records?
By your standard, only those from first world countries with great educational systems, stable, free and democratic governments. Those folks don't typically immigrate to the United States. The whole point of immigration is to go somewhere to better your life. If you're life is already good, then you're not likely to move, are you?
1
"The way we deal with legal immigration should not be changed without a thorough, honest debate."
If the Times wants honest debate, why does it try to confuse by using words like "undocumented" "unauthorized" and even "immigrant" when describing illegal immigrants (Aliens)?
"of the 87 privately held companies currently valued at more than $1 billion, 51 percent had immigrant founders." Since we are being honest, what does that have to do with illegal immigration?
"since the country is at nearly full employment" I will be honest with you. The more accurate U-6 unemployment rate is defined as all unemployed, plus "persons marginally attached to the workforce, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the labor force." In other words: the unemployed, the underemployed and the discouraged. That rate is 8.2% Perhaps the Times editorial board would be more concerned if we encouraged the Times management to hire illegal immigrants to take their places and save a bundle of money.
As the saying goes "You are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts." Lets try to be honest !
41
Trump. Is. Not. Well. If only the sickness was confined to him, but his toxic contagion is effecting so many innocents caught in the crosshairs of decades' worth of inane U.S. policies, especially their 'war against drugs,' which has given poor Latinos few viable options but to escape their dangerous homelands for the promise of a better tomorrow in the U.S. Let it be said, though, that the Obama Administration, led by Hillary as SecState, also contributed to this deplorable situation, exponentially making a bad sad situation worse for all of this poor dear innocents.
3
When exactly did the erudite editors of the NY Times come to the strange conclusion that those who break the laws of the United States should be rewarded? The editors are so anxious to reward them with citizenship and welfare, especially at cost to those who play by the rules.
If we are to be a nation of laws, not of corrupt hack politicians, the first thing is to say, "We will obey our laws." That goes for liberals as well as conservatives, Democrats as well as Republicans, foreigners as well as citizens.
Obey the law. Come here legally. America will welcome you. But break our laws. and we can and should send you back. That is the way of a civilized society. It is the American Way. Only erudite fools fail to understand.
36
Ah, the true value of immigrants: a gang of illegals from Poland are brought here (pulling a few strings) to erect the steel framing for an enormous Tower. Once their work is done, they're shipped back to Poland, without being paid. While they were here, by the way, they weren't allowed to buy food from the Disabled War Veterans manning food carts on Fifth Ave.: the Boss was on a campaign to rid the glitzy street of the "eyesores."
7
If this is far to legal immigrants who waited for years is never discussed
12
Can we talk about Melania's questionable immigration and her parent's "chain migration," parents with no skills as desired by the Trump/GOP faction?
10
I do not want the Dreamers sent back to their Parent's homelands.
I am willing to offer amnesty to all the Immigrants who are not
guilty of felonies.
But I just want to know one simple answer:
How does Immigration help Native Americans, African Americans
and any Poor American who must compete with Immigrants for jobs/
school space/medical care.
Why are the poor of America not thought to be more important
than Immigrants ?
How can anyone expect a raise when there
are immigrants willing and ready to take their jobs ?
Does it mean anything to be an American Citizen anymore ?
Or will the Elites destroy what is left of lower middle class
and make the poor even poorer because they will only
hire Immigrants, preferably those without "Papers"
to be their Maids, their Nannies, their Gardeners...
29
I'm still troubled by Trump's careless throwing around of the term "criminal." The only time he should speak that word is when he's alone with his bathroom mirror.
5
Democrats need to make clear that they are definitely NOT in favor of throwing open the borders and letting any and all to come on in.
Strengthen legal immigration system including a very ROBUST E-Verify!!!
14
A smear is not a compelling argument. How else can you characterize your statement "The changes the president is demanding stem from a nativist, zero-sum view that what’s good for immigrants is bad for America”? Is the Times ignorant or is it intentionally seeking to mislead on the large cost of each immigrant to American taxpayers? Government expenditures are over $20,000 a year per resident of the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_government_budget
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/
and are proportionate to the number of residents. Check Canada and Australia. The proportionality implies the expenditures required for a new resident are on average over $20,000 per year, and far more per worker since less than half of the population works. When immigrants do not offset the additional cost of their presence through taxes, their presence is being subsidized. Imagine what would happen if employers were required to offset the costs through a tax to hire a non-citizen. If the Times has a compelling argument for low-skill and illegal immigration give it. Is it the lack of an argument that causes the Times to smear concerned Americans. Many are concerned by the effect of both low-skill and illegal immigration on reducing the wages and destroying the working conditions of the poorest American citizens as well as on American tax payers.
32
There is a very simple solution to the immigration issue, punish business for encouraging illegal immigration by hiring undocumented workers.
No one says this because much like the magic tax law the Republicans just passed, it's another bait and switch for regular people.
Business wants a steady flow of undocumented immigrants. It's good for them. It drives down wages and floods more money into their pockets allowing them to use the labor force in both instances as disposable.
The Buffoon in Chief is happy to "shoot" a few immigrants on the White House lawn to make a show for his tribe. A little bit of theatre for the carnival crowd. The key is to make sure there are still plenty of people who can manicure his golf courses and change the sheets in his hotels for next to starvation wages.
9
And yours too. The liberals love to bad mouth corporations but demand to buy cheap fruits vegetables chicken fast food etc apps galore for cheapest hotels and even nannies for their children. Well cheap comes from somewhere. So I agree punish businesses via legal penalties or fines for hiring illegal immigrants but just dont demand 15 dollar an hour minimum wage for putting french fries in a bag.
1
As usual the NYT rhetoric belies facts on the ground. For example family reunification programs suggest that theoretically a angelbaby can sponsor at a minimum 2 - 4 parents and upto 4- 8 grandparents.
These immigrants will reach the USA shores at an age where they will be eligible for social security and Medicare benefits.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to calculate the math on the cost this type of immigration when approx one million or more angel babies have been born in the USA.
The USA doesn’t have a financial responsibility to take care of the worlds geriatric population but work the abuse embedded in our system we are doing it in spades. This is just one example of the abuse embedddd in the current immigration system and can be addressed with common sense policies.
Sadly when this was pointed out to congress and senate members by email and mail- not one Of them had an interest in learning more about this pattern of abuse.
29
Perhaps ending chain migration could be a good thing. That system brought us our current president as his mother followed her sisters here from Scotland.
3
Is the Times really arguing that chain migration is fine because there is a backlog, because the number of distant relatives it brings in is not in fact totally, absolutely unlimited?
(Reads again). Yep, that's what they're saying! I guess when you have no good arguments you go with what you've got.
35
Being illegally in a country is itself a crime. It is for instance a felony in Mexico.
There was no need for Trump to talk about other crimes committed by illegal immigrant. Being illegal is itself illegal. But we know that Trump has the habit of talking carelessly. And that habit undermines his own political goals as Democrats find material, in his own utterances, to ridicule him.
But the truth is that America, unlike practically every other country in the world, is very ambivalent about enforcing its own immigration laws.
Does Mexico have sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants from Central America? Do pigs fly?
27
"...while smearing those who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals."
Excuse me, but if they came into the country illegally, they ARE criminals.
31
For over 2 years I having been reading the news about Trump, candidate then President. I my view, all the news misses the reality of Trump. There is no logic, fact or grounded reality to Trump. He is Nero setting his world on fire. There is method to some madness. It has got to be more difficult to find the perfect person for a job focused on productivity, than finding the perfect person that would destroy the agency or institution. "Crippled effectiveness" is another form of "Starve The Beast". Ben Carson, Tillerson, does anyone UN ambassador Dalton. Perry, De Vos. One could put farm animals in charge and see less destruction.
Then of course the is the schoolyard bully ~ junior high school drama queen.
...and the part that will get us killed. The God's Gift To The God's "Trump", in his twisted little mind, he must compete with the most infamous person of the 20th century.
Please stop reporting on what he says or infers, our Nero is unbridled insanity without lineal connection from moment to moment. Report on what and who he is.
Regarding our economy: It is consumer based. Any increase of that base, especially with those coming here and starting over (building a new household) will strengthen our economy. ~~SE
3
Just what is Mr. Trump afraid of- other than the Mueller investigation? His attitude toward "others" just showcases his racism.
6
As a legal immigrant and citizen I continue to be insulted by the NYT and others' relentless conflation of legal immigrants and illegal aliens. There is a massive difference between these two groups- not that you would know it reading here.
Why the heck should folks like me spend many thousands of dollars and work for many years to jump through the legal immigration hoops to EARN citizenship, when others who came here illegally and contribute little to our country, simply EXPECT to be handed legal status, just because... ?
I feel for the DACA folks and like most I believe we should help them, but NOT at the cost of future security, and NOT without FIRST realigning our immigration policies and securing our borders.
46
Why is there no discussion regarding the environmental effects of immigration? Consider that when the typical immigrant comes to the US, their consumption of resources and impact on the environment increase substantially. That's because the per capita rate of resource consumption here in the US is much higher than sending countries like Mexico, China or India. In other words, immigration is bad for environmental sustainability. And since almost all of the US's population growth is due to immigration and their offspring, this population growth leads to more sprawl, traffic, pollution and pressure on our existing natural resources. At 330 million people currently how many more immigrants can we realistically import and at the same time maintain our quality of life and have some nature left over for future generations? Is our future to be Shanghai and/or Mumbai?
Again, why is the environment and sustainability left out of our immigration debate?
19
Dan,
If the US faces any environmental effects it is because of removing all regulations, not due to immigrants. If there are any environmental effects it is due to not controlling the carbon emission and instead promoting coal and oil while erecting tariff barriers on solar and wind. Immigration is not bad for environmental sustainability if the US ACTUALLY HAS ANY ENVIRONMENT LAWS to stop climate change. Remember, we are the only country in the world to withdraw from a self imposed paris accord.
Any urban sprawl is due to lax zoning regulations that allows developers to increase the sprawl and actually provide incentives to do so NOT due to immigrants. Any traffic congestion is due to not having the money for providing mass transit in a meaningful way because after tax cuts for the rich and feeding the military we have nothing left for healthcare, education, research or infrastructure. You are learning all the wrong lessons and making wrong conclusions. Without immigrants we actually don't even have money to pay for the 90 million baby boomers' SS and medicare.
It is not immigration that is the biggest issue we face, it is the income inequality increased by unlimited military spending and tax cuts for the rich and corporations. In a world of nuclear parity increased military spending to achieve slightly better conventional arms superiority over China or Russia is neutralized by their nukes. So why keep spending on the white elephant that can't deliver decisive victory?
1
Liberals (I am one) will continue to LOSE if they do not accept reality: importing unlimited desperately poor people crushes wages. Period.
Productivity is no longer tied to number of people working but rather to amount of energy expended. We don’t need any more people. We need to stop destroying economies in the countries that are exporting people by the millions by ceasing to subsidize our farming mega corporations. We need to put IN JAIL corporate owners and managers that won’t stop hiring illegal immigrants. And we need to get serious about real equal education for all children by not making schools locally funded thereby allowing rich folks to give their children a better education than poor and working class folks.
I feel horrible for poor non-citizens. But it is IDIOTIC to think that importing them into this country solves a single problem other than making liberals feel smug and making food unrealistically cheap. Stop being stupid. Take care of our poor and working class.
108
Dear Jc: Yes, u have a couple of valid points in that we need to put the on us on employers and corporations hiring and using the undocumented... they're the ones lurimg these poor people in in many cases. The other point is our education system being locally funded, thereby letting the rich move to better and more affluent areas leaving those unable to do so operate on crumbs. Does white flight of the past come to mind? However, the GOP wants to keep the status quo. A tough conundrum.
1
J c writes: "Productivity is no longer tied to number of people working but rather to amount of energy expended. We don’t need any more people." Really?
Apparently 'J c' does not live in one of the many American communities where low-skills jobs are being done by hard-working, often undocumented immigrants. Many of these jobs are not well-suited for automation, partly because they pay so little that the ROI on automation is poor. From processing chickens to picking crops to landscaping/mowing to housecleaning and childcare, millions of immigrants make up the short-falls of labor availability.
What depresses wages is not, as he suggests, immigration. If that were true we would have had much lower wages in the 1950's-70's. What depressed wages since then is the crushing of unions and corporate/Republican greed, moving our economic engine from the Rising Middle Class model back to the Income Inequality model of the Gilded Age. Nixon, Reagan/Bushes, and the Billionaire Boys threw the Rising Middle Class under their big gold-plated Cadillacs.
2
those "...corporate owners and managers" you mention are sitting at this very moment behind your congressmen; so the solution will not come from Congrss or Senate. Sorry.
The American population is aging. Without immigration we will become like Japan. And there won't be enough younger workers to pay into the system to keep Social Security solvent. As for chain migration what Trump says is not true. Ask any Filipino who tried to bring a distant relative here like a niece or aunt how long it takes. It could take upwards of 10 years to get an interview. And those types of petitions are reserved for U.S. citizens. Someone holding a green card can't petition for distant relatives. Sadly he has armed himself by saying anyone who contradicts him in the media is fake news. And his gullible supporters believe him.
5
Legal immigration through controlled borders is the way to go.
1
Yeah, wouldn't want to be like Japan with an educated, skilled, safe, clean, peaceful, employed country where your biggest problem is how to keep people productive longer and get resources for a hopefully falling towards sustainable population. Much better to have a huge and growing underclass of uneducated, unskilled people doing menial jobs for low pay who will need a lot of care that there will be no way to pay for in the future when they retire.
1
Al Japan has prisons. That means they got criminals. It also has people who pick up garbage for a living. And some who work in fast food like we have in America. Not everyone is educated and skilled. Why don't you Google McDonald's in Japan and see who works in there? They are not foreigners but Japanese. No we don't want to be like Japan where most of our population will reach the age where they might need to be in nursing homes. The one good thing Japan has going for them is their diet where many older people can get around without the need of wheelchairs as we see here. The fact is the very people who you look down upon are those who keep this country running. Like the people who work on farms picking produce to get to your table. Of the lowly paid home attendants who might have to take care of your parents. Maybe you should ask yourself why young women are not having babies in Japan and their population has been decreasing. You paint a pretty, safe picture yet yet women seem uninterested in bringing children into that culture.
Wake up Republicans. Save us from this scourge.
Bring us back to the party of Lincoln. Save your party. Save America. It is time to stand up for the values you claim to hold dear.
2
Another variable here is that white Americans are having fewer children. A recent NYT column cited increasing worry about climate change as one reason women are deciding to have fewer or no children. A negative birth rate would be disastrous for the U.S., and immigrants can change that, and since they tend to be highly successful here, are more law-abiding that native Americans, and have created 51% of privately held companies, they will be needed in the near future.
5
What?! You can't be serious. Your realize that if GW is human caused and Americans are the largest per capita co2 producers on earth, we NEED to have fewer children not more. The answer to our problems is not to double down on what got us here in the first place. A falling towards a sustainable population (thru fewer births and much reduced immigration) is the only way forward that doesn't simply get us to a worse position in the long run. I thought the left was all about the facts the numbers and the science??!!
Rewarding illegal behavior encourages more of it and that can never be good for any society.
24
We should have two paths for legal immigration. One should be a merit based system like Canada or Australia. The second should be for political (not economic) refugees. Then a system like e-Verify should be rigorously enforced with significant penalties for employers who hire illegal aliens.
Then we can debate what the right number of legal immigrants should be.
10
our immigration policy should be reasoned, not subject to randomness
6
I understand the NYT and other media outlets obligation to report and analyze this debate over immigration. But, all media outlets, except for Fox, are overthinking Trump's position in the debate---he and his closest advisors are racists--yes, I said the word, and mean it. You could fill a library with books, articles, data on the positive impact of immigration on any country--these are not fake facts, but the real deal. What is not fake, is the blatant racism of this administration.
4
As the American K-12 education system continues to produce underachieving, unmotivated, incurious students who are too lazy to get off the couch because they're busy playing video games - with opioid addiction in their future, it is only hardworking, overachieving immigrants who can keep America fed, create new businesses and push the frontiers of technology.
3
Charles, you are wrong, wrong, wrong. It only stands to reason that if you get rid of 11 million foreign illegals at the bottom of the ladder it makes life better for Americans at the bottom. More opportunity, higher wages, etc. You seem to have a difficult time equating sneaking into a country with criminality.
17
Trump is incapable of debate or reasoned discourse supported by facts. We have yet to see any evidence of it. It's another lever for a racist to play with his base, and like any belief-based religion or cult, there is little you can rationally do to convince him or his base about it.
Trump changes his views only when he feels threatened or is in a position to lose. Fear of losing helps to bound his behavior. In the current political climate, this does not occur often enough. Trump is a master of bullying, intimidation, and public - personal ridicule, enabled by a complicit GOP. As immigrants are weak and defenseless, he will continue, even if he got everything he has demanded.
Fortunately, that can change.
Yes, you need to focus on facts for the majority of the sentient population.
Play to the majority, and rally the majority to vote in the mid-terms. Then face this loser with a new Congress that is not cowed and has the votes to deal with him.
22
According to the recent Harvard Harris poll, MORE Americans want an end to chain migration than want DACAs amnestied. And according to Gallup, more Americans, 35%, want a DECREASE in immigration, than want an increase, 27%. The rest want immigration to stay at current levels, though Gallup doesn't ascertain if they know what those levels are. If we were to amnesty Dreamers, well, we'd need to CUT future legal immigration in order to keep it at the same level we have now, about a million a year.
Look, Democrats want some illegals to be legalized, which is anathema to many Republicans. Republicans want other changes to the immigration system described here. A deal is to be had if just for a moment Democrats would stop claiming that any reduction in immigration or rational emphasis on skills is somehow racist. When you make such claims, you shut down compromise and debate. If you want a deal, Democrats, be willing to make painful concessions on your side too.
7
The "immigration plan" of the democrats has been for decades, ever more immigration, legal and illegal, followed by amnesty followed by more immigration legal and illegal. There is no compromise in the lefts plan that doesn't involve just opening the flood gates further. The largest wave of immigration to this country was not the Ellis island era but now, after we have become the third most populous country on earth. We need a reset.
2
"...while smearing those who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals"
If it's illegal then it's a crime. A person who commits a crime is a criminal.
16
Key words at the end....thorough.....honest.....debate. The toddler is not capable of any of these singularly and certainly not in combination.
1
Illegal aliens, by definition, are in this country illegally--that is, in violation of law.
Those in this country illegally should be deported and, if they can meet appropriate standards, be allowed to immigrate to this country legally.
There are hundreds of millions of people on the planet who would like to come to America; we cannot remotely afford to admit them all--not even American taxpayers have the funds necessary to do this.
13
I have yet to see a compelling rationale for the diversity visa program. The US does not need to collect immigrants from every nation on earth - the program is a waste of money.
15
Doesn't sneaking across a border make someone a criminal the moment they set foot on US soil? Omitting the 'illegal' before 'immigrant' does not change the fact that they are breaking our laws.
And please do the arithmetic: continuing to welcome illegal immigrants and make them citizens then allows them to sponsor their extended families to come, too - do they teach about exponential growth and the magic of compound interest in journalism school? Just how overcrowded are you willing to make this country and how many more low-skill jobs do you expect Americans to sacrifice to foreigners, in order to fulfill your need to be seen as virtuous progressives?
22
"...while smearing those who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals"
The President is not smearing anyone, but simply stating a fact,
The definition of criminal is committing a crime, the definition of crime is to commit an illegal act
13
But four out of five Americans want less immigration, not more.* And even in the Dreamer's case, most American want additional restriction on illegal immigration to prevent this situation from reoccurring ten years down the road.
* Source: http://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Final_HHP_Jan201...
14
US population in ‘95 stood at 267 million, today it is 324 million. Doing nothing will increase pop to about 400 million within another 20 years. The issue is population planning and sustainability, not racism as the Liberals would like to taint the debate.
17
Back in the days of the 70’s and Erlich’s“The Population Bomb”, zero population growth was bipartisan. Over the years whites dropped their fertility rate below replacement but the rest did not follow suit. By 2000 zpg became equated with racism as it implied being against races with high birth rates. Even the Sierra Club was forced to eliminate population control and reduced immigration from its platform. Go figure.
2
"And since the country is at nearly full employment, the timing of these anti-immigrant demands might seem odd."
Well then, since the country is at nearly full employment, can we do away with the minimum wage? After all, according to the NY Times, supply and demand don't impact wages. Could we let in 10,000 foreign journalists and see if that has any impact on NY Times employee wages.
It is always comical to hear from a company that lost $700 million in the Boston Globe fiasco how business and the economy work.
19
So Trump is, according to the Times, “smearing immigrants who come to the US illegally as criminals.” Hmmm. If a person enters your home or your country without authorization, they have engaged in a criminal act. So it’s not a smear, it’s a fact. What has happened to the Times ability to distinguish them?
15
Look, Trump's "immigration policy" is not a "policy" and it is not about "immigration." It is racism -- pure and simple -- an appeal to the racists among the malevolent minority which is his base (and an expression of the man's own profound racism, which he incubated at his father's knee, a KKK member). Trump's entire political career is based on racism and this "immigration" business is simply an extension of it. It's time to stop treating what he says about "immigration" as anything other than a racist rant. It is of a piece with what the GOP, a minority party, has long done to win elections in a majoritarian political system: scare the bejesus out of people. Used to be communists, then after the Soviet Union collapsed, Muslims. And always -- always -- people of color. Always there must an enemy -- an "other". That's how the GOP gets people to vote against their economic interests since what the GOP is actually about is making their paymasters, the 1%, richer. Trump and this attack on immigrants -- in a country of immigrants -- is just the latest, insidious installment.
2
It is not racism to have immigration laws!
1
In addition to Trump's nonsense on immigration is his hypocrisy. Our First Lady, his current wife, is a naturalized American citizen. She has brought over her parents from Slovenia and they also live in America. I believe Trump is calling this chain migration instead of family reunification and demanding that it be curtailed or ended. Under his rules, his own wife would not have been allowed to help bring her parents here to live as they are doing now. Trump speaks with forked tongue on this issue--as he does on many others.
4
You didn't mention that her sister lives here too. And Trump's mom followed her sister to the US from scotland.
1
Immigrants built this country. Of course they did. But you know what they didn't do? Sponsor a bunch of great uncles and grand nephews to come in. Nuclear family is the tradition that built America. Extended families only serve to stifling individual freedom, entrepreneurship and movement of people. All antithesis to the American idea. People who are sprouting off about their "ignorant and stupid" (in their words) grandparents who immigrated are forgetting that they came here cutting off all ties to the old world. That's not the case anymore in the age of non-stop intercontinental flights and internet. Immigrants (both legal and illegal) today still maintain distinct connection to the world they emerged from and that is really not good for America. If you want to immigrate to the US of A, you should be prepared to lose yourself in this country. Not planning from day one to be an anchor to other non-citizens.
11
If only your own delusions are true? Do you know how trump's mom came to the USA from Scotland? She followed her sister who was already in the US. Do you know how Melania's parents and her sister came to live in the US?
Italians and irish and scots and Eastern Europeans brought their family too. This is just as traditional as American pie. Pre-immigration days when any European can simply show up on American shores and accepted as American there were entire extended families that came to America. You can't build your own version of history ignoring actual history.
1
The only backward view of immigration I would like to see is turning the clock back so that Trump’s ancestors wouldn’t have immigrated to the United States.
2
"The way we deal with legal immigration should not be changed without a thorough, honest debate." Agreed, now can the left please agree illegal immigration and its institutional support of it should stop tomorrow?
10
No one is denying that immigration, that is legal immigration is good for the US. What the President is pushing for and a majority of US citizens want based on the most recent Harvard-Harris survey is an end to illegal immigration and a move from chain-based immigration to a merit based system that every other country uses. US citizens are also demanding an end to the immigration lottery which makes no sense what so ever. If the democrats and their allies in the media would stop demigoding the issue (i.e.: calling everyone who wants laws enforced and changes made a racist) perhaps we could have a real conversation.
12
The immigration mantra from so many for so long has been, "Get in line and do it legally like so many honorable immigrants have done!" Well, now they want to close the line as well. This is very revealing of the true heart behind all these calls for law and order in a country of laws. At best it is xenophobia, at worst nativist bigotry.
3
Actually, it is the Editorial Board that is behind the times in its views.
The majority of Americans are not in support of the diversity Visa or chain migration and would largely prefer migrations at 500,000 per year or less.
Trump galvanized a realization that allowing in well over a million in per year, against a backdrop of 4 million High School graduates per year, was decreasing employment of natives and leading to stagnating wages.
After the downturn, unemployment of the young, both High School and College educated, a "lost generation" of people without jobs and thus a work ethic was being fostered. Immigration through chain migration and by illegals only exacerbated the situation with unemployment of Blacks and Hispanics unusually high (50% of young blacks in Milwaukee).
The recent roiling of the stock market has been largely attributed to rising wages fostered by a tightening of the labor market. This is good for the country, what people need and want, and why we voted for Trump.
The US is 4.38% of the worlds population and it is obvious we cannot take all who might want to come to this country. The Democrats want the Diversity Visa and Chain migration and open borders and citizenship for all illegals simply because new immigrants vote Democrat by a 2 to 1 margin - pure naked partisanship is on full display here.
10
If our high school grads can’t compete with immigrants they are the problem.
2
The Board calls for a 'thorough, honest debate.' Yet throughout the article; they are anything but (calling opponents of illegal immigration 'nativists' for example).
They also claim our 'country is at nearly full employment.' I would think that a highly-educated group of professionals would know that the unemployment figures only reflect folks actively looking for work and that almost 94 million of their fellow American citizens have dropped out of the workforce.
Working in a profession that has very few illegals in it and pulling down six-figure salaries; I suspect the Editorial Board is a little out of touch with the realities of illegal immigration on a personal level. Nice to be in an ivory tower!!
12
Polonium was killed hiding behind a curtain.
1
A backward view is the unwillingness of the NYT editorial board to listen to American citizens. Articles such as this and turning off comments on Pelosi will not work. Her speech looked like a pathetic pandering relic from the past.
As a person who voted democratic , with few exceptions, for many decades I am ashamed and disgusted with the democratic party and former liberal icons who use to champion American workers. Even Caesar Chavez put American workers first.
This editorial couldn't be more out of touch with the public and is a glowing example of why Trump won and just may get elected to a second term. Outside the bubble there are Americans who have experienced how the globalist love of unchecked immigration, both legal and illegal, along with visa workers has decimated their earnings and communities.
Try thinking of them for a change.
12
Immigration debates should start with the never-discussed question: how populous do you want the United States to be? Just roughly. We are pressing towards 400 million. Do you want half a billion? What do those numbers mean for water, sewage, garbage, open lands, recreation, air, education, medical care, roads, energy? I wish the Times editors would start investigating such questions, whatever their conclusions, rather than issuing manifestos.
8
When did respecting our laws become bigoted and discriminatory? People that are here illegally, need to leave. It doesn't matter where they are from. What matters is that they are violating our laws.
12
That’s the way people we’re treated BC.
Diversity for the sake of diversity? Lottery to give green card is like slapping the students who come from poor countries who stand for years in an extremely long line but go through a process of meritocracy.
8
The NYT editorial staff and more important the leaders of the Democratic party needs to read the comments on this piece. The reliably liberal readers seem to have real doubts about our current immigration policy and a lot seem to think Trump's idea on changing our system are a good idea. A lot also think this issue is a election loser for the Democrats in November. Trump is pretty sure that as long as the Democrats are focused on illegal aliens he is winning and your readers seem to agree. Identity politics cost them the 2016 election and inability to learn from their mistakes looks like it will do it again this fall.
14
It’s easy to blame those who came here illegally for crime, jobs being taken, and a host of other things. The reality is that illegal’s count for an extremely low percentage of crime. The jobs they do are for the most part entry level jobs. They are blamed for our government and elected officials neglecting to train our future workforce for the millions of jobs that go wanting. It’s easy for lazy politicians to place blame elsewhere.
2
Can you imagine how was the suffering of the children that lost their parents during WWII in Germany? Thousands walking during cold days and nights, looking for food in the waste baskets. No clothes, no shelters. Nothing.
The leaders of America at that time created The Marshall Plan. And look how is Germany now.
Dreamers, most of Americans love you. We know that at the end of the day, you will be saved by the wonderful generosity of America The Beautiful.
And We The Immigrants salute Elon Musk who was born in South Africa and launched a powerful rocket yesterday. Hooray!
3
Prior to 1960, people immigrating to the United States had higher levels of education/marketable job skills than US citizens. Since then, "immigrants," including those who enter the country illegally, have lower levels of education than US citizens. Many of the people from Central America who enter the country across the Southwest border have as little three-to-five years of education.
Can the United States do better than this?
7
One day the earnest multiculturalists at the Times and elsewhere will wake up and discover that the country they thought they lived in doesn't exist any more. The USA was built, with all its sins, as a freer version of western Europe. The "under-represented" countries are mostly not European, do not have anything like a comparable culture, and in many cases are basically "boss culture", where you owe your life to a local Mr. Big.
Now you can make all the placatory noises you want, but importing people who don't share anything remotely like your basic values isn't going to protect and preserve them, unless you have an assimilation program that would leave certain people horrified.
Look abroad for examples. The German experiment importing Turks has been running for decades. How has that worked out for them? There are plenty of others that you can find if you want to look.
10
In 2010, the U.S. Civil Rights Commission issued a report on “The Impact of Illegal Immigration on the Wages and Employment Opportunities of Black Workers.” It concluded that “illegal immigration to the United States in recent decades has tended to depress both wages and employment rates for low-skilled American citizens, a disproportionate number of whom are black men.” As Steinberg notes, one of the great ironies of our recent history is that immigration policy, which was partly inspired by the civil rights movement, has probably had a negative effect on African Americans at a time when African Americans might have been able to take advantage of the passage of civil rights acts outlawing employment discrimination.
6
Such backward views: rule of law ought to be respected by those who plan on becoming part of the order of the country they are in (or do they? On whose terms? Ours or theirs?)
6
To me, the canary in the coal mine is population growth. There are parts of the world where the population continues to grow at a rapid pace. This puts enormous pressure on the environment. It causes people to want to immigrate. One of the reasons the Middle East is such a mess is out of control population growth. Why should the Western countries, who have behaved more responsibly, be the release valve for the self imposed disaster unfolding in this area of the world and other areas as well? We have not owned up to our own environmental issues. Look at the Houston floods, the California drought to name a couple which are population related. Personally, I would like to keep the U.S, population growing at a very slow rate. Other countries need to reign in their population growth. This should be a starting point to figure out how many can come.
64
US population is growing at replacement level BECAUSE OF IMMIGRATION. If not for immigration, US population will be declining like Germany but not as drastically as Japan or Italy. We also have 90 million boomers who are retiring and need to be provided with SS and medicare. Who is going to do that if you cut immigration? Who is going to care for the boomers if we cut immigration?
Also, without population growth, on which capitalism depends for economic growth, American companies will be at the beck and call of Asian markets thus ceding our economic power to China on a platter. We can be like Japan and shut down the border for immigration and let the economy stagnate for 2 decades. But loss of economic power also is loss of political power. Japan has no huge military all over the world to pay for nor does it have any super power status to protect. But we want to feed the huge military and preserve the super power at any cost. Are you ready to let China and India take over the reins of global power while we stagnate like Japan? We can't always have the cake and eat it too.
And yet our population time bomb is too FEW working age folks in the near future to easily manage our future social security and medicare obligations. We're not replacing ourselves fast enough, it's not balanced demographically. I wish we could trade the people that know nothing and glibly speak against the people in the world that really need help for real, brave people that actually put something on the line to be here. We can't all be sheep.
1
So the Ponzi scheme of ever more people using ever more resource for infinity into the future is your answer? That's great except the laws of physics won't go along no matter what capitalism dictates. Our population now, is totally unsustainable longterm and what about the lefts co plants about global warming? How is that improved by tens of millions more added Americans? The path forward is not improved by catching China or India in the popution race. Why do you think they all want to come here, because it's crowded?
3
Democrats should not be advocating paying near-slave wages to illegal migrant workers in abusive, sweatshop conditions. This current 'system' might be good for 'the economy,' but it hurts the American-born working class.
25 years of Democrats screaming Amnesty! Not Deportations!! (and Republicans luving the cheap labor) has left America with a horribly abusive environment for low wage workers that goes on, and on, and on....
If Democrats can't rediscover their Barbara Jordan roots and understand that immigration levels must be modest, and immigration/labor laws strictly enforced, to protect American workers, they deserve to lose in November. Not that Trump and the GOP deserve to win, but Democrats deserve to lose.
I'm feeling politically homeless these days.
13
Our news media continues to be filled with opinions and obstacles regarding immigration. Refugees are increasingly scapegoated and feared as a threat by many. Opportunistic politicians demonize them feeding prejudice and hyper-nationalist tendencies.
The irony is that our own national neocon-driven foreign policy, from the Iraq invasion and toppling of Libya's government to the military coup “regime changes,” instigated wars, and the tyrants our country has imposed, have been the primary force in the creation of refugees. From Honduras and El Salvador to Sudan, Libya, Afghanistan Syria and Iraq, refugees are the victims of our policies -- we created them and we owe them.
4
Trump's lies on immigration -- and the facts refuting them-- need repeating -- and repeating.
The following excerpt from the editorial about the so-called "lottery" program needs to be posted on every conservative and rightwing web site and in the comments section of every story about immigration on such sites.
"The immigrants chosen in the lottery, moreover, are not chosen “without any regard for skill, merit or the safety of our people,” as Mr. Trump said in his State of the Union address.
They must have at least a high school education or two years of experience in skilled work, and they must also undergo criminal, national security and medical checks.
The 50,000 recipients of the visas are not guaranteed permanent residence, only a chance at getting through the rest of the immigration process."
The lying has to stop -- and be stopped.
Fox Fake News and its supporters need to have the FACTS drummed into their heads. Eventually, enough of them will realize how they have been fooled, duped, and Trumped!
Maybe then democracy will re-emerge.
2
The editoraial board now echo the mantra of the anti Trump/ pro Hillary crowd, in the nonsensical quote “how about more Norwegians?” As much as I hate to say it he has a point there. You love to reference the number of businesses created by immigrants, but you fail to mention this has been one of the most abused loopholes in our system, by which immigrants are fast tracked to citizenship by starting a business or buying property obviously distorting the financial landscape for the native born as housing in urban areas from L.A. to Vancouver become unaffordable for the rest. The other issue is the number of foreign born languishing in taxpayer funded for profit prisons, in the tens of thousands Im sure, and yes the M.S 13 Gang are native born Salvadorans but They arrived a scant few years ago both legally and illegally from a ( U.S. backed) war in their homeland. If you or the commenters have some inside information with respect to the nefarious activities of the Norwegians perhaps you would share it. For that matter I would like to see some figures supporting the targeting of people from the Middle East, aside from the accusations of “terrorists” the Iranians and others of Middle Eastern decent I have known are among the very best citizens. Facts should be examined, not just political footballs being lobbed back and forth from either side. The biggest threat this nation has faced in the last decade are the bankers and merchant princes who destroyed jobs and the middle class.
5
This editorial is so disingenuous (as is most NY Times immigration coverage). What's best for the country and it's citizens' quality of life long term is zero or near zero population growth. This is of course not what the cancerous corporations or mega rich that are feed off the country want, but we really shouldn't let them control our policies.
Also, why is extended family reunification so important if most of the people coming in through it only live in Mexico anyway. They can easily go visit them multiple times a year.
7
The two wellsprings of immigration hysteria are fear and ignorance, with puddles of disinformation, economic insecurity and racial bias strewn about, and a powerful undertow of political cynicism and hot-button irrationality coursing beneath it all.
The anti-abortion, anti-woman wedge Reagan used to cleave working class Catholics from the Democrats has morphed into the anti-immigrant hot button, which along with racial panic and Islamophobia, constitute the main chance Republicans have of winning elections.
White working class exploitation is baked into GOP DNA. They've systematically betrayed their core white constituency with degraded education, dead-end economic policies, alienated communities, repressive penal systems, and rural neglect. This was followed by inciting rebellion, hostility to government, scapegoating, fearmongering, even fetishizing guns as icons of heroic if blunted freedom. If a sucker wasn't born every minute, Republicans minted them by the thousands with successive political Armageddons that pitted the white us against the dark hordes of them.
There's no rational case against immigration. Nearly all "facts" cited are shibboleths swaddled in faux urgency and high pitched emo talking points.
The essence of American genius is the melting pot. No one does assimilation as well as we do. Our immigration system is heart and smart.
The GOP version of the Hippocratic Oath is do harm and pit the harmed against the harmless.
We're better than that.
51
Yuri Asian,
If I am poor how does Immigration help me ?
My wages will never go up if there are Immigrants willing and ready
to take my job and work under the table for more than 8 hours a day.
If I attend a school in a poverty ridden school district how do even
more students, students who do not speak English help my child's education,
benefit my education ?
I have to go to the County Hospital, it is full of un-documented immigrants
seeking medical care which they may or may not pay for.
Does it make any difference to you whether someone is an American
Citizen or not ?
3
Yuri, you just made the case against certain types of immigration. It's about WORKING CLASS EXPLOITATION, i.e. cheap labor. George W. Bush's chairman of the Fed admitted he wanted more immigration to reduce wages and salaries, which it has in fact contributed to. The founder of the AFL-CIO, Samuel Gompers, an immigrant himself, also recognized that continuing immigration would hinder his efforts to organize workers and negotiate for better wages and working conditions, so opposed immigration. Cesar Chavez likewise opposed illegal immigration for the same reason when he was organizing the UFW and even sent union members out to patrol the border. As long as employers can get workers willing to cut a picket line and work for less than current workers, they have no reason to raise wages. Our immigration laws are supposed to act in the same way that unions do--to restrict employers access to labor and reduce the supply of it so that wages rise.
3
@Ali
Thanks for reading my post and taking the time to respond. It always surprises me when any of my comments are noticed at all, let alone receive "recommendations" or replies.
I guess my poorly made point is that immigration is a diversionary political tactic used by Republicans to short-circuit attention and rationality.
The reason workers aren't paid decent wages or receive benefits isn't a function of surplus labor as most studies I'm familiar with indicate because 1) immigrants form a pool of informal and physical laborers who work in undesirable and low-skilled jobs such as seasonal farm labor, dishwashing, home health aides, etc., and don't compete directly against Americans; 2) work opportunities are regional and Americans generally won't travel beyond 250 miles so geographic workforce disparities compel employers to situate jobs where labor is available or rely on transient labor, such as farmworkers.
I think also the political primacy of commercial entities over wage-earners allows the former to skew employment to their advantage, treating labor as a variable cost instead of a social responsibility. The systematic dismantling of the labor movement has exacerbated this and the driving engine of corporate hegemony has been the GOP.
As long as there is an imbalance between workers and management, wages and benefits will be treated as a business cost and not as the social obligation it should be.
Sorry my reply is about to exceed 1500 and thus incomplete.
1
The title should be "NY Times Backward View of Immigration" because most of the country disagrees with your view. That's why a loose canon like Trump got elected - on this one single issue. Bernie and Hillary were unable to provide a sane solution when a microphone was stuffed in their face. All they could mutter was "Have a heart. Let them ALL stay."
18
Wrong, Jerome. You didn't read the part about, or you dismissed, the data from the Cato Institute. You forget that in spite of Russian interference and an ill-timed, poorly-conceived news conference by James Comey during the Presidential election, Hillary Clinton still won more votes than Trump. You can peddle your theory to Fox News where they will gladly accept and endorse it. But the readers of the NY Times are too informed for that.
1
Maureen, if you base your voting on the vapid "news" on Facebook and other moronic social media you shouldn't be allowed to vote anyway. Trump appealed to people because even without FB most people look around and realize adding more humans to the country no matter where they are from is a loser in the long run. The democrats better wake up to this.
2
What message has Trump sent, by agreeing to amnesty for 1.8 mil illegal aliens, far more than those registered under DACA?
It appears that he has come to accept that it is not possible to deport the illegal aliens. This is a weakness that will only increase more illegal immigration.
We are already at a point where illegal immigrants have gone from seeking sympathy to feeling entitled. Trump must start deporting the DACA people. Start with those who have committed crimes or falsified social security information. Keep those in the military. This will force the democrats to concede to his four-pillar immigration reform.
Does Trump have the spine to deport these illegal immigrants?
We do not want to hear bone spur excuses on this, Mr. President.
4
Please please stop excusing members of Congress. They are, in general, part of the problem. I think many of us have been surprised at how totally unprincipled they are. Congress is the rare institution where the whole is much less than the sum of the parts.
1
Legal immigration is acceptable, but it has to be recognized that immigrants depress salaries, and take jobs away from US Citizens.
Illegal immigrants are another matter. The United States needs to control the influx of "undocumented immigrants". A good first step would be to go back to calling them what they are "illegal aliens".
8
The Mayflower must have been the largest ocean-going vessel ever - larger even than Noah's Ark - judging by the number of Americans who are now claiming the right to oppose immigration.
2
Immigration like every other aspect of this country has changed in 300 years. The left need to wake up to this. It's not the 17th century's anymore anywhere ( ok, in the Middle East it's still 1200, but that's another issue). A country of 325 million needs a well thought out plan for the future not misty eyed looks at the distant irrelevant past.
4
In the United States immigrants are either legal aliens or illegal aliens. Immigrants who enter the United States without reporting to Immigration and Customs Enforcement or overstay a visa after legally entering are illegal aliens.
The United States has no obligation to provide benefits or services to any foreign national in the United States illegally. These illegal aliens should be arrested and deported as soon as possible. Our nation is weakened by illegal immigration and illegal aliens.
14
The Times seems to prefer the policies of President McCain. Please remember that in a democracy, elections have consequences. McCain's policies were rejected by the electorate; Trump's policies were validated. Stopgap bills are not the answer; let's make a deal. And if you think preferring Norway over Haiti is racist, I suggest that you start recruiting your workers from community colleges instead of privileged private schools. Race has nothing to do with it; merit does.
7
If we remember, trump's poliicies were rejected by 3 million More votes than those he received. That he won by slavery era EC is immaterial when you are talking about where the majority stands. And the majority was not with him on election day or even today with approval at 40%.
What makes you think someone from Norway automatically has merit? If you go by merit alone then most immigrants will come from Asia because they are the most educated and most successful in the US by any yardstick. Are you fine with it?
Through sheer luck or base instinct Mr Trump has stumbled upon yet another issue where his position is closer to the American public than the “elites”. Interesting to see NYT cites a poll done last June but omits to mention the spate of recent polls where majority of Americans are for limiting current levels of immigration. See the recent Harvard-Harris poll.
Immigration is a classic example where you can see the “elites” trying to dictate to the masses. Even NYT ‘s obviously liberal reader base opposes their view on immigration. It’s not that difficult to see.
We will get 4 more years of Trump if Democrats/MSM keep this up.
8
Why do so many Americans have a problem with immigration control in America? Why do those same Americans have no problem with the extremely rigid parametres that almost all other countries have in place to block immigrants? Why are US citizens wanting to allow people who are not citizens privileges, and opportunities given to them paid for by tax dollars that citizens do not even have? The US currently has so many social problems, and financial problems with a huge portion of your citizens not able to afford higher education, as well as having water shortage problems in some of their largest cities - why would they be wanting to take in more people? Questions I ask every time I visit the U.S. Every time I fly into Los Angeles and travel your freeways I see miles and miles of rubbish next to the freeways, I see thousands of homeless.
10
Since when is "the best of American tradition" giving legal remedy to people who have broken the law? I'm sorry, that is not an American tradition. Those who benefit from the illegal acts of others deserve nothing more than they've already received.
The social softening technique of calling the illegals "undocumented" or "Dreamers" is a mind game. The idea that no country should have a border, and that any border is meaningless, is truly insane, and completely Un-American. We are a nation of laws, and those laws should be respected, especially by illegals.
8
There is nothing backwards about wanting an immigration system that brings in people who have an education or skill set that is desirable.
There is nothing backwards about wanting to control immigration at the border and in the interior of our country.
Backwards is wanting to bring in every family member of poor, uneducated people, then, wait a decade or so and see if some of them become productive and scream to high heaven when you get a few.
Backwards is wanting to legalize people who only cared about what they could get from our country without coming legally, and people fighting for them instead of Americas poor.
6
I taught US History and Government in a fairly big, high school, with a student population of over 50% Hispanic. The white student population was around 45%. The percentage of free-and-reduced lunch students (coming from families below the poverty line) was close to 70%. Most of our kids were struggling, coming from struggling families.
This is the American crime: poverty. This comes in all colors. We talk of immigration before we talk of poverty. But, we must solve the problems of citizens living in poverty conditions, and only then, deal with new citizens.
That's certainly not racist; it's humane and compassionate towards those already here, including all dreamers. Trump is a racist, but he's evil enough to know that using the idea of helping people come here does not actually help those in dire straits that already reside here; maybe for generations. What do you have for them? Where's the 'end poverty now' talk? Where's the raise taxes on the richest talk? Nowhere.
Those that are here should be able to become citizens, especially if they were brought here as children, or if they've been good in the years or decades that they've lived here.
But don't fool yourself: no country can have open borders. And a country that can't even solve the abusive crime of poverty (don't we lead the industrialized world in % of citizens in poverty?!) is in no position to act as if immigration is an issue that's only about compassion for others.
88
To a large extent, the illegal "immigration" debate is about whether we should be tolerating the importation of poverty. We have been struggling for decades to improve the lot of American poor and now, thanks to a feckless government, we have imported a large group of very poorly educated illegal "immigrants" who, in most cases, aren't capable of helping their own kids become better educated. Unless educators really enjoy being social workers, you would think they might shine a spotlight on this issue.
4
Few are advocating for illegal immigration, many should be advocating for dreamers who broke no laws and, through US government's failure to act, grew up here. The only home they know is the United States. Dreamers are victims and Republicans want to victimize them yet again.
The argument over immigration is a good one to have. Congress should bury the buzz words and pass a sane fair immigration bill.
52
Of course the broke laws. Just coming here was a violation of the law. At some point as they got older they understood that they had violated the law to get here. And many violated the law to get job etc. or drive a car without a license etc. I have no problem with deporting these people who have ho legal right to be here and that includes VISA overstays.
8
They were not old enough to give consent and are victims. Their parents violated the law not them. 'These people" are victims; yet, you attempt to lump them in with people who deliberately broke minor laws. Most undocumented immigrants broke a law considered under the legal code as less serious than jay walking.
1
The so called 'dreamer' are the victims of their parents, who did in fact break the law.
1
So why, WHY have the Democrats given up on DACA? Lots of explanations on Trump and his minions, but nobody asking why the Democrats gave up, GAVE UP, the only leverage they have. Make no mistake: this would have been, much more surely than the last shutdown, not a Schumer-Shutdown, but a TRUMP-SHUTDOWN. Speaker Pelosi is right in not wanting to let the Republicans off the hook. And the NYT is doing a disservice to readers like me who are looking for explanations and analysis.
1
The very notion that we would award entry into the United States based on gambling on the results of a lottery is abhorrent.
The more that Democrats and liberals insist on defending it, the more they will lose.
Set a limit on immigrants. Then set a rational criteria for priority within that limit. That is the only sane immigration policy.
6
Nothing in this editorial can be construed as supporting "illegal" immigration. But you cannot know this from the arguments made by many commenters who like Trump's approach. Sad.
Proportionately. "Dreamers" are also less likely to break the rules than Trump and his associates. If Americans want to stop scofllaws from entering the country, the "big, beautiful" wall should be built around Trump Tower.
1
As a Democrat, I'm all for the humane treatment of immigrants and giving them the respect they deserve. I wish our politicians would stop demonizing them.
That being said, I'm also for meaningful immigration reform. There's no sense in doing thing legally if you can get the same or better results doing it illegally. There's is a certain "brain drain" effect by constantly taking in the most motivated, talented individuals from a country. Our population increases from immigration do have environmental impacts, and cheap, illegal labor does have economic repercussions, namely artificially driving down prices and wages to perform those jobs that deserve to receive fair pay. Democrats should call Republicans on their bluff by mandating the e-verify system, but I'm guessing that would be against everyone's donors, so I won't hold my breath.
And for God's sake, don't blow $20 billion on a wall in the desert.
57
Bryan Maxwell Raleigh, NC: Blowing $20 billion on a wall in the desert is an apt metaphor for the mindset of Donald Trump and the utter ludicrousness of the Republican position on immigration. I hope we build it as a fitting testimony to him and that the funds used to build it deplete any benefits that his BASE hopes to see coming their way.
1
Why not make it easier to immigrate legally?
Any illegal act is a crime. Thus, person that committed it is a criminal. Any foreign individual who dreams about peaceful, successful existence, while being unhappy with the life in her/his own country, ought either try to change the local system or apply for the legal immigration. This, by the way, how I came to the USA many years ago.
6
Let the 2018 election begin. It is a call to all those who didn’t vote, all those who have never voted. Help us save America. Rid us of this corrupt Republican Party. Not until they are routed and gutted will they return to the party of Lincoln. Even Eisenhower.
There are many that would welcome that.
2
Why should we attempt to make our immigration system more "diverse and humane"? Why should our citizenship via immigration be treated as a lottery ticket awarded to a randomly selected winner? We should have Canadian/Australian style merit based immigration that selects immigrants we want, not merely immigrants who want us.
To all those who decry the anti-immigrant sentiment common in the country, recognize the origins of this: rampant illegal "immigration", unchecked by either party, compounded by the continued idiocy of Birthright Citizenship, has led to a huge population of illegal "immigrants" and their offspring/enablers/supporters, which has tainted the very idea of immigration.
If we want this country to get back to welcoming immigrants again, we must regain control of our immigration system through sufficiently vigorous enforcement. That means starting now. There is nothing noble about millions of illegal "immigrants". They are just testimony to the long term incompetence of a very expensive Federal government.
115
"We should have Canadian/Australian style merit based immigration that selects immigrants we want, not merely immigrants who want us."
Who, exactly, do "we want"?
1
Kurfco California: the article specifically states, " They must have at least a high school education or two years of experience in skilled work..." And they are in no way evidence of 'long term incompetence of a very expensive Federal government' - that is a long stretch of words without merit or proof. The government has been incompetent for a long time independent of immigrants and its very expensive nature is a function of the real world we live in, again independent of immigrants.
1
And yet we need more young people if you want to count on your social security and medicare benefits. Very Orwellian by the way saying that limiting immigration is a path to welcoming immigrants.
3
Like it or not, globalization is here. The idea that the most skilled, educated, upwardly mobile immigrants are looking to come to the U.S.A. is as antiquated as Trump's bigoted view.
Today, there is much opportunity all around the world for those same people Trump finds attractive, the skilled and educated. They might come here for business, but it's unlikely they are looking to immigrate.
If we want to be truly pragmatic, then we should allow no one to immigrate or be granted a work visa of any sort for any position unless there is absolutely no American qualified for (or trainable for) the position. Let's see how long before employers start screaming because they want to import labor instead of paying American wages.
63
Except it's true. Most people DO want to come here or at least the west. The reason we are all fighting about immigration is because this country and the western democracies are hands down the last, most desirable places to live that are left. You are right in that u.s. employers don't want to pay our wages, but that's just more of the race to the bottom and nothing to be proud of.
3
And more importantly America companies can easily move jobs overseas. I work in tech and see this happen all the time. Companies do layoffs in the expensive parts of the US and six months later those jobs appear in India, China or other places.
Let's not fool ourselves. Companies will go where there is talent and if the talent Google, Facebook, and others need is NOT here, they will go elsewhere.
Trump supporters seem to think if you stop immigration that the native man or woman with a high school diploma will get the job a high skilled immigrant with a MS or PhD.
1
One variable you're missing is domestic mobility. An employer may have an opening that an unemployed American is qualified for, but that American may live in Atlanta, and the job is in Denver. The Atlantan may not be willing or able to move, but immigrants are rarely so tied to one region of the country. This has been a significant issue recently, as places like Utah and Massachusetts are starving for workers yet unemployed in the Rust Belt and Appalachia are unwilling or unable to move and take those jobs.
2
The lottery system is itself a means of limiting immigration to a number greater than zero. You can argue about what is the right number, but if it is more than zero there has to be a selection and it is practically impossible to predict the future of any specific candidate. Hence we do not waste time and enable corruption by pretending to judge.
The comprehensive argument presented here effectively argues against the anti-immigration mania being fueled by this president. His message, purely and cynically intended as 'red meat' for his base, willfully ignores these facts.
The seeds of ethnic cleansing have been sowed. Right here, in the United States of America. Logic and facts matter, just not to "the base." If the integrity of the election process can be maintained versus gerrymandering and Russian interference, the only answer is rallying the vote directly against "the base." We don't need to "understand their anger." We need to defeat them.
4
Mr.Trump's views on immigration are not the only backward sentiments in this administration.Mr.Trump cannot warm up to Great Britain , but is intrigued by Russia,he casts suspicion on the FBI and Justice Department but watches TV to get his talking and tweeting points. Mr Trump brags about his buildings and golf courses and I'm just guessing they were built by immigrants most of whom did not come from Norway or have PHDs.
2
The article is a bit confusing as it names people entering the country according to the law "legal immigrants." Thus, persons doing the opposite are illegal immigrants. They have broken the law. Most states have similar laws for example a guest in your home is there legally but the guy who broke in is at the least a trespasser which is a criminal designation. Why not call the guy who you wake up to in the middle of the night standing over your bed merely a dreamer instead of a home invader? If we could start calling somethings what they are perhaps there might be more willingness to address the issue. The next time you go to a doctor and you are told you have a cold when you actually have cancer do not worry about it because according to some, proper identification is not important when addressing an issue.
6
Like the majority of Americans I am in favor of finding a pathway to citizenship for these folks, but can we please stop calling them "undocumented" In order to qualify for DACA, they had to register and provide evidence of their immigration status. They are here illegally and VERY well documented.
5
I understand why the left conflates illegal migrants with legal applicants for citizenship. It skips over the fact that line jumpers are breaking the law by sneaking in, thus making them criminals. The usual punishment at law is deportation. After 9/11 one would think that responsible people in positions of authority would take action to make sure that there was closer scrutiny on who exactly is allowed to enter our country. Anarchy is not the answer.
7
Wrong on all points. As the leading per capita producers of co2 on earth adding an American is the worst thing for the planet you can do. We are told constantly that the right doesn't believe in numbers and science etc but in reality the left hates numbers that don't fit it's preconceived views either. We should be working towards a sustainable population and helping the rest of the world do it as well. Instead we are the fastest growing western democracy in the mistaken belief that flooding the country with "diversity" somehow solves all problems ( btw, there is no evidence that other "diverse" countries are anything but chaotic due to their diversity). As we race to to become a third world country with absolutely no research to show this is good for us or the planet we may want to pause and look at the country we will be when the 4-500 millionth American gets here later this century, because when it happens, it will be far too late to do anything but try to survive as many do now in China and India our fellow travelers in the "big three" of population.
3
We do need to shift to merit based immigration.
Native born unskilled Americans are disadvantaged right now more than at any time in our history. The days when you could come out of high school and get a job on the General Motors factory line and make a solid 70k and retire with a lifetime pension are long long gone.
Manufacturing has gone to China and Vietnam and Mexico and much of what's remained is being done by robots.
Our high school graduate unskilled workers are getting KILLED and the last thing they need are unskilled immigrants coming here to compete for the last remming jobs that are vanishing by the week.
I vote for sealing the southern border, INCREASING legal immigration, pivoting to a merit based system and bringing in as many Nigerian doctors and Russian engineers and Chinese computer scientists and Iranian programmers as we need.
7
How about instead of robbing the rest of the world of its brightest and best educated, leaving those countries in worse shape, we revamp our education system to produce these skills? The people left in these countries will be more likely to want to immigrate as their countries fall apart after we hijack the cream of the crop. Not to mention the Ponzi scheme of continuing to add people here while our native population is not being prepared to take us forward is not a long term plan that is sustainable for us or them.
4
"The changes the president is demanding stem from a nativist, zero-sum view that what’s good for immigrants is bad for America."
I think that's baloney. Elsewhere the op-ed rehashes the blatantly partisan talking point that Trump's immigration views are all about increasing white people. But that assertion is so freakingly beyond intelligent. It's meant as a smear all by itself, where the only basis is "I said so, therefore ha ha ha .."
Moving beyond the spin, we need a national conversation about what US immigration policy should be. So let's take a pause, spend a year or so really talking about it (rather than spewing op-eds like this one that accuse others of smearing while continuing a long NYTopinion history of doing the same), and decide what that policy is going forward. It's just a fact that there is no solid consensus at this point, but there are strong views. Get some quick resolution on the so-called Dreamers, then issue a time out. It's important enough to do so. Both sides have some legitimate concerns.
Trump's proposals are treated as permanent. They aren't. But they do speak to a "reset and see" approach. If the numbers are too low, or if certain sectors of the economy need another look, adjustments can be made, which is better than long-term guess work mixed with political animus.
3
Family-based migration takes far longer than Trump thinks.
As an Indian citizen, it will take me 10-15 years to get my employment-based green card.
Once I get my green card, my parents can be sponsored for a family-based green card - which takes 20-30 years. This, assuming my parents even want to migrate to the US, which they don't.
Those in power either don't know these facts, or are willfully ignoring them.
3
I'm confused. The editorial board writes "The president is targeting sensible immigration policies, while smearing those who come to the U.S. illegally as criminals." The phrase that sticks out to me is "those who come to the U.S. illegally" and the word that sticks out is "illegally". What part of illegal is non criminal? I don't want to debate the issue, or the merits, or the legality, but this is the New York Times so let's debate the words so please tell me part of an "illegal" is not criminal? If it is, for example, illegal to take the possessions of someone else without permission how is that not criminal? If someone illegally enters the home of an individual without permission how is that not criminal? Let's not play word games and construct pretend narratives like it was a dark and stormy night and refuge was sought in the home, no, let us assume there was no compelling reason to enter other than it was there. Under that scenario how is illegal not criminal?
141
Illegal vs. Criminal: Illegal activity is activity that contravenes the law.
Criminal activity is illegal activity that is also a crime. What constitutes a crime is usually detailed in a criminal code in each jurisdiction but can derive from common law crimes like murder, arson, rape etc. A crime is an offense against society and is generally prosecuted by the state.
For example (may vary by jurisdiction):
Breaking a contract - illegal
Stopping in a No Stopping zone - illegal
Negligently polluting the environment - illegal
Breaking someone's arm - crime
Deliberately ramming someone with your car - crime
Recklessly polluting the environment - crime
6
The logic is that it is illegal but only a civil (as opposed to criminal) violation: kind of like running a red light is a traffic infraction but not a crime. Run a stop sign, run a border sign -- no big deal, fine them and it's fine. Forget the ridiculous notion that someone beginning their life in America by breaking the law is unlikely to consider "rule of law" a value (at least to the degree it infringes on their wants). So, we are then told we should accept illegal immigrants on their terms. And so the spiral goes.
1
Extremely disingenuous argument. "Illegal" is a given in the sense that the undocumented are coming into this country without the protection of immigration law. However, the point that Trump is constantly making is about what they do after they get here, you know, rapists, criminals, murderers, etc. And the data shows this to be false. The Cato Institute, hardly a pillar of liberalism, had done the data mining to determine that the crime rate is LESS than it is among native-born Americans. Maybe we need MORE undocumented persons to offset our own native-born penchant toward crime.
1
While nearly everyone seems to support the Dreamers being allowed to stay, polls suggest that Immigration is not as important an issue to Democrats as it is to Republicans. If the Democrats keep pushing immigration issues front and center they will continue to loose voters. Democrats are more concerned with health care, good jobs/ the economy, gun control, and women's reproductive rights. Democratic voters realize that for many, salary stagnation is coupled with the availability of cheap labor whether it be tech with the H1B1 visa program or undocumented roofers. As others have noted, those willing to work for less, always drive down wages for everyone. If the Democrats want to survive (and maybe win) their focus needs to reflect the needs of their voters - and they need to come to the table on some of Trump's immigration proposals.
13
I agree. That's why Trump won -- there are a lot of life-long Democrats who want to take a breather on unfettered immigration.
The Democrats should take the deal Trump put on the table 2 weeks ago -- 1.8M path to citizenship; money for add'l border security; limits to current and future immigration. Enough already with people sneaking into the US.
Dems should say that they want to take the high ground, show bipartisanship and call Repubs' bluff.
Let's see if Ryan can pass it.
3
I don’t want them to stay, but would be willing to trade something I don’t want for other reforms that I do want. To me, their parents are criminals who smuggled them in, and that behavior should not be rewarded.
2
If nearly everyone support the Dreamers being allowed to stay then there shouldn't be a problem for Democrats in upcoming election. Democrats are not pushing immigration. Even you say everyone wants to protect Dreamers. So what's the issue? The fact is Trump is the one who wants to change the immigration laws. There was an article written in this newspaper a while back that addressed the diversity visa. Some of the people who came here on that visa are from countries like New Zealand and Australia. Those two countries don't have a history if immigration here so one way for them to get here is via the diversity visa. And like this article mentions it is not like because someone wins the visa they automatically are admitted without any biographical data, criminal background check or skills and education assessment. But when you listen to Trump you won't know this. He's trying to change something that really has no major problem. There's a limit on how many people can get a visa on the so-called chain migration. Some people wait as much as 10 years. Trump gives the impression that one can just bring their distant relative here in 90 days as one can do with a fiance visa. Nothing is further from the truth.
1
I have officially named President Donald Trump the "Peril-in-Chief" for all of the reasons described by the NYT editorial. Both he and Chief of Staff Kelly believe it's OK to terrorize with impunity.
I don't know what else to say or what other tag to place on Donald Trump. I watch Sarah Huckabee Sanders speak with mockery every day toward the political opposition which has worthwhile positions held by more than half our citizenry and guests. And the President just loves it.
No it's not OK. The role of the President is to lead human nature and society in the right direction and not to take advantage of it.
Using this measure as a test, our President gets a fail and should be asked to resign before he creates more damage here and around the world.
11
Well gee if you enter illegally you have committed a crime. If you came here legally and over stayed your criteria it is not. Perhaps the latter needs to be adjusted to be a crime. So the president in his speeches is correct, he is not talking about over staying your tourist visa, the wall (barrier) is built it won't effect these sorts.
8
OK, but it doesn't necessarily follow that the only appropriate sentence for someone who has illegally remained in the country is deportation.
'Unlawful presence', which is what you refer to, is a civil violation akin to a parking ticket. Imagine, for a second, that instead of paying a fine, the punishment for parallel parking is to strip you from your family and home and put you on the next plane to Honduras. People would rightly take issue with that.
From a legal standpoint, being in the country illegally and speeding are the same thing; in fact, I would argue that people who speed are a much, much more dangerous threat to society than someone who immigrates illegally, and yet the difference in punishment and treatment are night and day.
I'm all for a more stringent border security apparatus - that illegal immigration deprives immigrants themselves of rights is reason enough for me to be. But to deport people who are already here is unnecessarily inhumane, and the disgraceful way that the right wing seeks to link immigration and violent crime is odious. If you want to save American lives, ban guns and sugar and leave immigrants alone.
1
I think one point gets overlooked: there has been a epochal change in transportation technology . Immigrating over thousands of miles used to be an extremely difficult expensive trying process that was therefore self-limiting and attempted only by self-motivated people .Now however even ordinary impoverished Afghans or Mexicans or El Salvadorans can get on a bus and in a few hours or days travel hundreds or thousands of miles
11
When the US introduced the diversity visa program back in 1987, it seemed like a silly idea to me. However, I turned it into a business that year, collecting the names of several hundred applicants from people with qualifying nationalities who phoned in from across Canada. I then flew to Washington DC for my first visit there -- for an intense day at the Brentwood post office, where I dumped the applications in the mail through the day and early evening. (I wasn't the only one with this idea -- the USPS reported the highest single day volume of mail flowing through the system at that postal station.)
The idea worked, in that a couple of years later, I received my visa invitation. After a somewhat surreal experience at the central Los Angeles immigration office when a black immigration officer gave me priority over hundreds of hispanics waiting in line, I decided that while I enjoyed visiting and even operating a business in the US (my Delaware US corporation files its IRS taxes from Canada), I would never want to make it my permanent home, and let the visa lapse.
Then, and now, I thought this is a crazy way to run an immigration system. Sure, allow people with immediate family relationships, spouses, and individuals with valuable skills and talents to immigrate, but a lottery, wow. If you are going to do that route, why not make it an auction -- highest bidders win. At least that idea would generate some revenue for the treasury.
Diversity is fine, the lottery, not.
12
Umn...we do have an auction of sorts....for the highest bidder...those willing to invest 500k can get a green card. See stories about Jared Kushner's sister pitching this to some Chinese investors. Here is the official US government link.
https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/investors
and Yes, This is a super crazy way to go about immigration.
1
The word irony can hardly describe Trump's negative attitude towards immigration.
His grandfather, Frederick Trump was a German-American businessman who was born in Bavaria (Germany) and immigrated to the United States at the age of 16 (can we call him an original Dreamer?)
His mother, Mary Anne MacLeod, was both a Scottish immigrant and later a naturalized citizen.
So his pure hatred of immigrants is baffling. But then again, most of his actions are baffling too.
8
His wife is also an immigrant. And her parents.
1
What is your point? That because we have immigrants here, that we can have no say in any immigration policy, that the u.s. has to have open borders and no control on who comes here? No other country on earth operates this way. We had cars with no pollution control in the past. By your reasoning does that mean no car should have pollution control now?
2
This column is a "potpourri" of well meaning pronouncements and quotes and offers no actual recommendations for solutions. First let's distinguish between legal and illegal immigration. The left and the media have used a broad brush term of immigration to blur what's an important distinction. While the "wall" is unlikely to solve anything illegal immigration is a major problem. The problem of integrating the 10 million illegals already here is a major issue. Can they be granted legal status with eventual rights to a green card and citizenship say over 20 years? Since they broke laws they should not be allowed to sponsor relatives howsoever "close". That way they will not be vote banks for politicians interested in votes more than humanitarian considerations. Next, far reaching legislation for legal immigration that is skills based is required. The lottery visa as well as the so called investor visa (exploited among others by Trump cronies) should be abolished. The sponsorship of relatives must be made more restrictive by imposing skills requirements. While accepting the Dreamers we must be restrictive on the visas issued to their law breaking parents. Reforms are going to be some what draconian but just skirting the issue as now solves nothing.
12
"The left and the media have used a broad brush term of immigration to blur what's an important distinction. "
Just as you use the broad brush of "illegal immigrants", ignoring the fact that many are actually refugees from lives that you can't imagine.
Does this mean we have to take every one in who has a bad life? If so, get ready for perhaps a billion people to arrive next week. We can't, shouldn't and must not, have as an immigration policy, "you get to come here because your life is not good". Reason, the numbers, and what is best for the citizens in this country has to be the overriding determinants of our policies, not our feelings.
2
Al,
If only the native Americans have done what you propose then this entire issue is moot. You would have been in disease and poverty ridden Europe.
I'm a Democrat, and I see dreamers becoming to 2018 elections what transgender bathrooms were in 2016. A way for the GOP to splinter Democratic focus and messaging away from jobs, the environment, civil rights, and equality so that the GOP wins again in 2018, because they can rightly say these other lifeblood issues weren't Democratic priorities.
IF we don't focus on getting enough of the GOP stays in office - they will continue to support a dictatorial commander in chief who is replacing hundreds of judges with unqualified appointees hellbent on destroying our democracy.
I don't know what the answer is - but Pelosi making the dreamers an 8 hour filibuster topic alone today is out of proportion with the need to protect ALL of our democracy from the spectre of a red button Trump and his tax-law-blissed-out minions.
18
My autocheck changed a sentence - it should have said: If we don't focus on getting enough of the GOP out of office…
Because if we don't get rid of the GOP majority in 2018, this dictatorship - that exists solely to benefit billionaires in our country while keeping the little people in line with propaganda - will continue to reap incalculable destruction on our people, our land and our democracy.
Focus, democrats - we need to get back together under the BIG tent to bring humanity back to our country.
1
My 89-year-old mother, who has Alzheimer's, currently lives in an assisted living center here in Maryland. The facility, widely regarded as one of the best in the area, is quite expensive (nothing is cheap in MD), and we are only able to afford it through the combined pensions of both of my parents--the type of pension none of my generation, save the 0.1%, will ever see.
Though the place is expensive the staff are largely not well-paid. All the nurses, orderlies and floor staff--to a one--are legal immigrants, many of them from West Africa. There are not enough of them, but they do their job well and with dedication. Turnover there is astonishing, mostly due to an abundance of better-paying nursing jobs elsewhere, for which they rapidly become qualified working at the ALC.
So when this so-called "floodgate" is shut off, who will staff my mom's ALC? Will there be a massive rural-to-urban migration of Trump's "base," eager to help my mom bathe and get dressed for $11.50/hr? Where will my mom go when the ALC jacks up its fees by 50% to make ends meet? Will I need to quit my job to care for her? Will she need to go on (publicly-funded) medical assistance after my family depletes what little savings we have?
I sure hope people in the halls of Congress are asking themselves questions like these. I have my doubts.
14
I understand your situation, but saving money by depending on powerless people toiling for poverty level wages is not a proper way to save.
4
I am a lifelong democrat.
We are always comparing the United States to our Western Allies, especially when it comes to health care.
I would like to look at their immigration and citizenship requirements.
My son was born in France. At one time there was the opportunity for him to become a French citizen. Not in many years has this been possible. Neither of us parents were born in France.
My grandfather was born in Denmark (one of the countries that is consistently voted the best place to live. At one point, I could become a Danish citizen. Not any longer. Not a close enough relationship.
And yet we promote chain migration or family migration or whatever you choose to call it.
I think it is time to look at our citizenship laws. Being born in this country should NO longer grant automatic citizenship. And coming to this country illegally should not mean you can bring over your distant cousins.
I do empathize with the Dreamers and think something should be done for them, but it doesn't include making their illegal parents legal. They knew they were breaking the law when they crossed the border with their children.
50
Totally agree. Chuck and Nancy should fall on their swords and take Trump's deal.
Tell the base there was nothing they could do to change it.
There are millions of Dems who secretly agree with Trump's plan. That is why Trump won.
Enough already with unfettered immigration of people from Africa, Asia, South America and the Middle East.
4
@Fuller
"There are millions of Dems who secretly agree with Trump's plan. That is why Trump won."
Really?? -- Care to substantiate that with some REAL facts, instead of with just those in your head?
Securing the future for DACA recipients and Dreamers will never happen unless those concerned about illegal immigration are satisfied. Previous legislation (e.g., Simpson-Mazzoli in 1986) granted lots of amnesty, but promised border protections fell far short. Partisans on the restriction side of the debate are in no mood to be fooled again.
Further upsetting them is the growing disrespect for immigration laws on the books now. It is easy for them to imagine getting to a deal, only to have a future Democratic administration ignore the enforcement provisions, as the previous administration did and sanctuary cities do now. That is why President Trump’s wall, controversial as it is, resonates with so many. Unlike electronic surveillance and E-Verify, it is hard to relax or undo.
New legislation should re-establish the rule of law, and all parties should be willing to insert provisions to make non-compliance really difficult. As for provisions, I would like to see a system based more on merit, like other nations have. Another issue not being adequately discussed is birthright citizenship, which should be restricted to those on a path to citizenship. Casual aliens should not qualify.
12
"But such a debate can’t unfold in the shadow of Mr. Trump’s threat to imminently expel the Dreamers."
This is a misstatement by The New York Times editorial board. Donald Trump, as president (and not as political candidate), has, to my knowledge, never threatened to expel the Dreamers. He rightfully ended the DACA program in the fall of 2017 (because it was deemed an abuse of executive power by former President Obama), and gave Congress six months to sort out the problem. We are now approaching the six-month deadline and still Congress has not acted.
22
The candidate and the President are not two different people, no matter how you coach it. Both the candidate and the President stirred the base with outrageous and divisive rhetoric.
Honest debate is impossible with Trump people, who like Trump himself arrived at their positions through pure emotion. As a friend often says, you can't change their positions thru rational debate.
4
Our immigration system should be designed to benefit our citizens and our country, not the other way around.
While we are an incredibly generous nation, we shouldn't run our immigration system like it is a humanitarian project. We should strive to recruit the best workers and (potential) citizens, regardless of their country of origin.
Rewarding lawlessness (in the form of amnesty) begets more lawlessness. This is about one party's desire to have more voters added to their rolls once citizenship is granted.
Perhaps the NYT Editorial Board should plan a visit to a Texas border town and speak with actual individuals who deal with the effects of this flagrant lawbreaking before their next piece on immigration.
31
Americans want DACA recipients to stay, but they know advocacy groups will work to thwart efforts to curtail future illegal immigration. In 1986, we granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants based on promises that the federal government would stop future illegal immigration. But a tsunami of 11.5 million new illegal immigrants washed over America. Therefore, Americans want to package citizenship or legal resident status for DACA recipients with strong measures designed to reduce future illegal immigration and bolster border security. Americans also want a switch to a merit-based immigration policy similar to Canada’s. There is nothing wrong or racist in wanting a deal that is good for Americans as well as Dreamers and future immigrants.
18
Immigration is a vastly overrated issue. More immigration does little good for anyone and even less harm. We admit 1 million people per year. That's 1/3% of our population. On the whole such a small number neither helps nor harms our economy. Most of those we admit are family members of residents or those with work skills we value. So most who come here are not needy. Nor is our immigration policy much good for our reputation in the world. Many more are waiting than the number admitted and first come, first served is hardly a merit system. As for the refugee population, we admit so few that it makes no dent in those who are endangered. And as to the undocumented, they are treated poorly and stigmatized so that we get no awards for housing them. Moreover, we know so little about them, there is no way to assess their effect on the economy.
And what of our tradition as a nation of immigrants? That ended a century ago when we stopped admitting everyone and imposed country quotas. Now that we're down to one million immigrants per year, immigration is pretty much a non-factor for us and for the world's needy. It probably is the most divisive non-issue in America.
6
While I agree with some of your sentiments, check the CATO Institute for detailed information on the effects of immigrants both legal and illegal.
Trump knows Trump and only Trump.
So he can't trust anyone else because he can't understand that there are good and upright people in this world.
No, the Carnival Barker-in-Chief sees us as The Greatest Show on Earth, so step right up, step right up.
But NOBODY gets in without buying their ticket.
1
Can a liberal be for the dreamers but also for limiting the inflow of new immigrants? Consider the cause of zero population growth.
I stand behind the dreamers AND their parents, who were allowed to establish roots here- the system winked and ushered them all into the country by providing jobs that helped their employers and the entire country make money.
Once people have established lives here (and have little hope of resuming what they left behind) they should always be granted citizenship after a certain number of years, the cruelty of forced deportation in these cases is incomprehensible to me. Why should these people have their lives wiped out as a political gesture?
But for environmental reasons, I am for zero population growth. Much of the beauty and wealth of America is the result of a relatively low human population per square mile. Excessive human population is destroying our planet. We can't force the people of developing nations to use birth control and have small families, but open borders reduces incentives for doing so.
Subtract immigration and the population of the developed world is stable, if population growth was stable elsewhere, maybe so much immigration would be unnecessary.
10
Better work hard to keep the far right from blocking defunding all birth control, here & abroad
1
"A Gallup poll last June found 62 percent of Americans support maintaining current levels of immigration or even increasing them.”
Harvard’s School for American Political Studies and The Harris Poll released a poll taken online between 1/17 and 1/19/2018. It asked how many legal immigrants should be admitted to the U.S. each year. 9% of respondents said none. 35% said less than 250,000 immigrants. Another 19% said less than 500,000 immigrants. 18% others answered less than a million immigrants.
We now admit a million a year. According to this recent poll, 81% of Americans want fewer immigrants to be admitted annually. (page 68, table 61)
The poll asked if the respondent favored or opposed the lottery that randomly picks 50,000 people each year for greater diversity. 32% of the respondents favored the lottery. 68% opposed it. (page 72, table 65)
The poll asked, "Do you think immigration priority for those coming to the U.S. should be based on a person's ability to contribute to America as measured by their education and skills or based on a person having relatives in the U.S.?” 79% favored a person’s ability to contribute. Only 21% thought priority should be given to relatives. (page 67, table 60)
Based on the Harvard Harris Poll, this editorial is out-of-step with the vast majority of Americans.
29
When confronted with conflicting poll results it is recommended to look at the questions and how they were phrased. Might also help to look at who commissioned the polls.
Rick, I completely agree with you. Another consideration is the lapse in time between the 2 polls. The Gallup poll was taken last June; the Harvard Harris poll last month. In the interim, there has been much discussion of immigration so the general public has probably become more aware of the number of immigrants who love among us and how they have been chosen.
At current rates, immigration numbers are far too low to meaningfully affect our economy and refugee numbers are fR too low for us to help the neediest. The nativists want to reduce immigration for no good reason. Advocates of immigration generally want to hold numbers steady. So the truth be told virtually all Americans are against immigration numbers that make a real difference.
3
Bravo. If we aren’t Native Americans then we are descendants of immigrants. Isn’t that the vast majority? So it is telling the majority of Americans support continued or increasing levels of immigration. Why are these Cato stats hardly known? We all need to be able to recite the evidence.
It’s the sound economic argument with declining birth rates, aging populace and more to improve immigration. (hey, who is going to pay for the looming debt of the GOP tax plan and this reckless budget deal?)
Isn’t the clear answer; support the dreamers, fix the H1B backlog while we increase spending on STEM education, allow family migration with minimal education levels, and tout immigrant contributions to tax and society? How can trumps base be sizable enough to hold the GOP hostage? They aren’t. We are the majority of Americans. White backlash is shameful and wrong.
Californians know crops wither, neighborhoods stagnate and our world is more dull without immigrants.
1
@RM:
For an act to be illegal, you need two things: 1) the act itself; 2) the intent to do the act. The Dreamers were brought here as kids. They had no unlawful intent with respect to breaking immigration laws. And they have a form of legal status, at least until March 5.
Alb, Kinda sorta. There are about twice as many non registered dreamers than registered dreamers. It seems that more are intentionally breaking the law so your intent is actually there.
4
Why is getting people in from countries traditionally underrepresented a legitimate goal, since that is the stated purpose of the diversity lottery? Is it important that there be people from every country on the globe here? How does that serve the interests of the US and it's citizens. We should also switch away from chain migration to a merit based system though I don't think we need to decrease the total number of immigrants. Why should having relative here gets someone without a high school diploma in ahead of a phd without a relative? Immigration policy needs to be about the needs of the US going forward.
12
Most of our immigrants are delightful people--hardworking and hospitable. Even so, their families use social services at approx. twice the rate of native born citizens, through no fault of their own because of low paying jobs with no benefits. In addition, illegal aliens and children of aliens have a higher crime rate, costing taxpayers a great deal in prison costs. Rents go up for our poorest citizens when more immigrants move in, and schools become overcrowded with lower quality instruction, as students are not proficient in English. Unions used to ensure that even people in humble jobs had a adequate pay and benefits, but between the influx of immigrants and free trade policies, all workers have lost ground with benefits and many with pay as well. Having 20 - 30% unionized work force is a good way to set the bar for pay and benefits, but unionization is impossible with a huge cheap labor supply. Trump is right to want to remove illegal immigrants and decrease future immigration. However, he is wrong about bringing more highly qualified immigrants. This move will pauperize the middle class. Immigration should be limited to people who can teach skills to or bring technology and research to the U.S. , and to replace Americans who work abroad. Already IT workers are suffering from the impact of foreign workers, and health occupation college programs remain underfunded because the economy depends on foreign doctors and nurses. 40 million is enough immigrants.
11
This is so interesting. I see the tide turning, and it's a good thing. I am a democrat, but the leadership was virtually ensuring a loss this November because of the constant whining over non-citizens. It is a death sentence for our party to continue doing so. Sure, I want the dreamers to stay, and I think something will be worked out, but stop holding up government business to get it done. Nobody is going to start dragging them out of homes, schools, businesses etc. I think Schumer realizes that, so now the rest of them need to take a breath and regroup. Start governing for US citizens.
13
I hate to side with Trump but he is right. Diversity lottery doesn't make much sense and most countries have stopped the Family/Chain migration beyond immediate family.
There was a time when manual labor was required in USA en masse and people without even an high school diploma or English skills were allowed to immigrate. However, the economy and the country has change significantly. Most low skilled manufacturing work has been outsourced and some of the blue collar and even white collar work has been automated. What is the point in an immigration system that caters to a society that existed 30 years ago ? I think it is time to better understand the requirements of the current economy and country and allow individuals (blue and white collar workers) based on the requirements instead of blindly following existing rules.
11
The diversity lottery was designed to back door a bunch of Irish immigrants in and like many such targeted laws outlived it’s usefulness. There’s no reason for the population of the United States to reflect every nation on earth, or to expand the number of nationalities/ethnicities represented. The family reunification rules have a better argument and aren’t that different from what has been historical practice.
5
Automation is swiftly changing the employment situation worldwide, especially in North America. As more and more people are replaced by machines, work hours must be reduced to maintain full employment. This reduction in work hours will eventually have to result in guaranteed incomes for Americans to remove them from the workforce; something which is currently being introduced in a few other countries.
The children and grandchildren of those who we admit today will be competing with current American's children and grandchildren for a piece of that guaranteed income. The living standards of our progeny will be diminished by the progeny of any future immigrants.
While it's true that many immigrants come here with skills and talents, we have many skilled and talented Americans who could fill those same roles but are less likely to be hired because they expect to be paid more; businesses prefer to hire immigrants because their lower salaries improve the bottom line.
Consider the brain-drain: When we bring in the best and brightest from foreign lands, we are depriving their home countries of the rewards of future improvements to agriculture, infrastructure and social programs, almost guaranteeing them permanent second and third class status.
With our interconnected world, great inventions and discoveries made anywhere will be available to all but much of the profits will accumulate in the countries where they were developed – A boon to many Third World countries.
6
There is a reasonable point to be made that the country is vastly diverse as it is and does not need to do more via a lottery-based system. It further makes a lot of sense to promote and drastically increase merits based immigration, especially highly qualified foreign students graduating from US universities and wishing to stay. This is a brain and talent pool that would most certainly and decisively benefit the country in a way that low skilled immigration is not.
One of the biggest arguments against giving amnesty to illegal immigrants is that it favors the illegal over the legal immigrants, the ones who have been patiently waiting in line instead of jumping the queue. A constant and reasonable argument for allowing those illegal immigrants to stay are their deep roots in the country after many years of living and working here. Thus a reasonable compromise would involve limiting permission to stay to those who have been here over 4-5 years, and thus eliminating those who have not 'deep roots'.
I find limiting immigration to spouse and children utterly reasonable, especially if those spots which otherwise go to more extended family members are made available for qualified immigrants,meaning those with a university education or positions in science and engineering. Every study shows that a high school education or less is increasingly insufficient for a career, and this we should not have immigrants in the first place who are statistically likely to fail.
5
I'm sure for the Trump-Miller "merit based" immigration the ability to swing a golf club on a private golf course would be a highly rated skill. Linked with the ability to avoid walking on the golf course a subsidiary skill is the ability to drive a golf cart. Not all skills are STEM.
Says the NYT,
"The preponderance of evidence shows that immigrants help the economy grow."
Even if true, that is the wrong question.
The right question is whether each person's share of the economy grows.
The difference is the difference between total GDP and GDP per capita.
That difference is fundamental, but overlooked by the pro-immigration crowd.
Just because the economic pie grows bigger,
that does not mean that each slice of the pie grows bigger,
The slices will not automatically get bigger
when the reason for the growth in the pie
is that there are more people.
And immigration necessarily means more people.
Most discussions and debates about "growth" in the "economy"
by supposedly erudite economists
revolve around "tools" for increasing economic growth
which do not require more people,
-- arcane (to the average Joe) tools such as
"fiscal policy", "monetary policy". "tax policy", "regulatory policy", etc., etc.
But those kinds of "tools" do not involve more people.
So, when the discussion of "economic growth"
shifts to situations involving more people, as in the case of immigration,
the discussion needs to shift from growth in total GDP to GDP per capita.
But those -- including many supposedly erudite economists --
who tout immigration as a some kind of elixir for increasing "economic growth"
almost never manage to talk about GDP per capita.
12
This NYT editorial is ignoring the change that has happened in the USA since the 1965 Immigration Act. We have gone from 200 million US residents in 1967, to 300 million in 2006 and now as of this past July census it is 326 million. The GAO estimates that about 70 pct of these increases in population are due to foreigners moving to the USA and their offspring.
Is it any wonder why the cost of housing is so high, with almost 1 million new units needed each year to keep up with the growing population ? Every year hundreds of thousands of acres of natural land in the US is plowed under for parking lots, office parks, shopping, and housing all to accommodate millions of more people.
The Barbara Jordan commission, led by the late Democrat, in the early 1990's proposed cutting legal immigration in half. She said the country simply did not need to grow so big to ensure the US of security and its place on the world stage.
Yes, foreign people do raise their standard of living by moving here. But as a traveler to El Salvador and Nicaragua in 2003, I could see what the people really need is an upgrade in their legal and educational systems. The US could help these people far better by giving them advice on that. It is unfair for US citizens to deal with expensive housing, and traffic that will only get worse in the future Why go to 400 million and then 500 million people here ? Where is the balance in that ?
13
We should have a thorough, honest debate over immigration.
That means that both the benefits and the drawbacks of the current immigration policies must be delineated and defended.
We can start by distinguishing between migrants and immigrants. Too often the NYT conflates the categories with those called refugees. The three categories are not the same and conflating them only confuses the issue and undermines rational discussion not to mention the credibility of the argument.
Americans do not want a situation comparable to the current state of European countries which struggle to absorb the migrants who are disrupting their cultures and economies. No amount of hand wringing by the editors will change that reality.
Ironically, the economic dynamism immigrants bring to the US when the immigrants choose to assimilate with American culture, as imperfect as it is, is undeniable.
That is not enough.
The key is cultural assimilation, including language, including secularism, including education, including capitalism, including work ethics. Immigrants who demonstrate those characteristics tend to do well in our country. Those who don't, don't. We're talking large numbers here, not individual stories.
It doesn't really matter that some native born Americans of European descent don't measure up to the ideals we as a people purport to hold. The cosmic dice tumbled and they were born here. While that may not be "fair," it is reality.
8
A 1965 amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act prioritized family reunification. Today, nearly 75% of all new legal immigrants enter the United States on family reunification visas. Family reunification produced such a non-diverse stream of immigrants that diversity lottery was created to offset the effects of family reunification, but it has little impact, since it admits only about 50,000 lottery winners per year. According to the Pew Research Center, 27 percent of America’s immigrant population came from just a single country—Mexico. And nearly 50 percent of immigrants are Hispanic, a sharp contrast to the immigrants who arrived during the mass immigration decades of the late 1800s and early 1900s. The “huddled masses” came from a multitude of countries speaking a multitude of languages. Their tremendous diversity encouraged them to assimilate and acculturate rather than coalesce into cultural identity groups. Since a switch to a merit-based immigration policy would produce a much more diverse stream of immigrants, we would no longer need the diversity lottery.
8
The elephant in the room in this discussion is the great success that corporate America and its stooges in Washington have had in sluicing off all productivity gains over the past 30 years into the hands of a few thousand obscenely wealthy individuals. All this ire directed at immigrants who are "jumping the line", "depressing wages", "importing poverty etc., misses the root source of the issue. People like Trump, from this monied class, have been skillful for years in drumming up nativist and anti minority, anti-immigrant sentiment while they pick our pockets.
The only zero sum game here is between a oligarch/plutocrat class that wants every last dollar and the rest of us who are encouraged to turn on each other to fight over the scraps from their table.
The demographics and fiscal trends in this country dictate that we are going to have to develop an enlightened population and immigration policy to avoid being hollowed out like Japan, where they are facing an untenable situation with too few workers and too many retirees abetted by draconian immigration policies and a sub-replacement birth rate. THat can be our future too if we are not careful and don't look at the numbers...
2
While this country is a "nation of immigrants", we are a very different nation than we were only 60 years ago. Before about 1955, an immigrant lived or died, prospered or starved with no negative impact on the country whatsoever. There was no taxpayer safety net at all. A wildly successful immigrant was a national plus and a wildly unsuccessful one left no mark.
No so today. We have Food Stamps, Medicaid, WIC, housing assistance, Medicare, etc. Unsuccessful immigrants impose real cost.
Unless our national policy is to be the social worker to the world until we can no longer afford it, we should deeply care about which immigrants we admit to this country.
12
Common sense should rule for all immigration. Assimilation should be the guide.
We already have areas in Minnesota,California and New York where the police hesitate to go. So mass immigration should be stopped and a moderate rates should be adopted. Unfortunately this can not be accomplished without secure borders.
8
The person trying the hardest to conflate legal and illegal immigration is Donald Trump. He equates every person who is not from a European country as a criminal. He equates every family member with a terrorist. Take a look at the people who poured through Ellis Island. The Rothschilds were not on the boat. But a penniless Andrew Carnegie arrived with his starving family.
Every person in this country who is not a Native American is an immigrant whose family came from some other country. The United States would not exist if not for the dreams and hard work of the immigrants who have streamed here from around the world.
People would not come here illegally if they could not get work. The flaw in the system is the vast underground network that supplies undocumented workers to industries (like construction) that thrive on paying them low wages. These are American companies making profits. Let's go after them. That is the only way we will ever dry up the supply of undocumented workers.
3
America faces the threat of being overrun by a billion people who want to come here to stay for whatever reason. Trump is merely listening to the millions of Americans who just don't want to have to deal with a huge influx of aliens who don't share their cultural norms and values cutting their wages and usurping them in other ways. Already we have visa programs like H2B that are abused to the max by their holders, that serve only to depress wages for Americans and make it impossible for our people born here to compete for jobs. Something must be done.
13
I think we all agree we need some type of responsible immigration reform. But why do you continue to use the term undocumented immigrants....when the correct term is illegal immigrant. To make this clear, the right word to use is illegal simply because they are illegally in the USA. Undocumented is not a clear description of the act which has left those in violation of the law. They committed a crime by entering the country without permission. I know progressives want to stop others from using the term illegal immigrant, often invoking the idea that no human being is illegal, but that's nonsense. Human beings sometimes commit illegal acts. If it wasn't a problem, we wouldn't round people up and deport them.The term is accurate. It's not a semantic discussion. I think, when the left hears illegal, they decided, well, let's just change the word & we'll be done with it. Is there something about illegal immigrant per se that is so dehumanizing that it can't be used in polite discourse for people who are trying to have an honest conversation & aren't trying to spin it?
We should not be afraid to speak about this problem in an unbiased way. We need to speak clearly so we define what is at stake. Undocumented seems to imply that some people forgot to fill out the correct paper work when crossing the border. It wasn't. They entered the U.S. knowing they were breaking the law. They are here illegally without permission of the the U.S. That's why it's an issue.
11
The United States is not going to solve the problem of undocumented immigrants until it deals with the underlying reasons why so many will do whatever it takes to get into the country or stay beyond their allotted time.
The main proponent for such action are the continued wars being inflicted on countries where the citizens flee for their lives. Those wars could be inflicted in direct ways or indirect by applying pressure to and for corrupt and incompetent governments.
Of course, if I could not find anything to survive in the place I am, I would go anywhere I could. There is no law against that.
1
Unfortunate myopia by NYT and readers since the backwards view is by the Democrats open border policy, not by reasonable immigration policies.
Social engineering experiments of invitations of refugees/open borders has become an abject failure in Britain, France, and Canada. Just last year, Trudeau invited refugees with open arms. After 10's of thousands of poor Haitian refugees started pouring in, he quickly changed course. Moreover, he had to preemptively send diplomats to California and Florida to curtail Hispanic economic refugees from entering Canada.
In Britain, France, and Germany, the influx of refugees from a similar open border policy to the current dem policy has led to social lack of cohesiveness and the expected decrease in civility. Moreover, there have been serious electoral losses for the liberal immigration policy.
It is unclear why the democrats would tie themselves to a fight which is against the will of the american people and simply defies common sense. Importing poverty such as in California (where latino population is 27% below poverty rate, well above other ethnicities) leading to strain on social services and tax payers and is simply beyond reason.
As with much of the midwest, I wish there could be a reasonable unifying candidate from the democratic party, rather than far left candidates which don't hear the concerns of american citizens. Democrats are simply guaranteeing continued electoral losses.
12
I enjoy looking at the photos that accompany articles.
Monarch butterflies? Love the Monarchs. Problem is they are about to become extinct. Not enough available land to support their food. No one wants to grow milkweed.
Are the dreamers promoting their own extinction by using the Monarchs as a symbol?
4
The reality is that if you are in the US illegally you are in the process of committing a crime.
It almost never includes violent crime but it almost certainly includes illegal entry, visa overstay, fraudulent use of social security numbers, etc.
Legal immigration is laudable and necessary to enhance the nation. Illegal immigration is corruption on many levels.
9
The extremely high number of illegal immigrants has fostered an anti immigrant sentiment amongst those who are affected via jobs and income. It's terrible that legal immigrants such as the diversity lottery program are negatively affected. We on the left are as much to blame as anyone. What are we doing to end illegal immigrants as a source of cheap labor for the Chamber of Commerce and the titans of industry? Nothing. It's time for E-verify and an end to illegal hiring.
6
One word: overpopulation.
Immigration increases population, a population that is already growing too fast. Unless immigration is balanced by an equal exodus, uncontrolled or excess immigration just adds to the overpopulation problem.
Let each nation work on the overpopulation problem and then be responsible for its efforts or lack thereof. Just as we encourage responsibility in individuals, we should encourage it in nations. Nations which do nothing to control their population, have no basis to complain when they run out of food and water. Human population neeeds to be in balance with the available natural resources.
This means having fewer children, and allowing less immigration from nations where life has become more difficult in part due to the pressures that overpopulation puts on the natural environment.
8
"Mr. Trump’s approach seems intended less to rationalize the immigration system than to inflame his core supporters by demonizing nonwhite people, as he did when he disparaged immigrants from nations like Haiti and Mexico while praising Norwegians."
The problem with containing Mr. Trump['s "inaccuracies," is that they fly so fast and furiously that a fact checker can't keep up.
The man who lies the most has the biggest megaphone. Scapegoating immigration as the source of all the nation's ills launched his campaign and drives it still.
Trump's famous "wall" is more than symbol, it's a road block and constant evidence of the bad faith motives of this president.
He knows in an era of mounting debt and more pressing needs than a "wall" that his childish insistence on a physical barrier so important to his base is what keeps loyalists in line and riled up.
It's also a convenient, moving target sort of symbol as to why whatever immigration deal Congress cooks up, the president can denounce as not good, strong, or effective enough.
Who needs facts when lies are so compelling that immigration is bad for this country?
Donald Trump, son of immigrants, has so distorted the facts regarding the history and value of immigration that nothing less than expulsion will satisfy his angry base.
Our immigration system has become a such a tool of xenophobic blood lust that our society may never recover.
15
Mr. Trump's views of immigrants is bigoted. He plays on the worst of how bias works. If a "Christian" white man (Timothy McVey, David Koresh, Ted Kaczynski) commits a crime, no one says, "White Christian men born in America are terrible and dangerous. We must get rid of all of them." They say that that one man was bad or did evil things. However, if a Muslim man commits a crime, they use it to smear all Muslims; if an immigrant commits a crime, then they tar all immigrants with that one man's crime (an undocumented immigrant, driving drunk, killed another drive recently - true to form, Trump used the accident as an example of why we must get rid of ALL undocumented). That is what bigotry looks like.
27
It costs $12,000 per year per person for health care.
To allow illegal immigrants to bring in elderly parents will be a huge cost to taxpayers. Their health care costs will be much higher than $12,000 per year.
Will you donate an extra $30,000 EVERY year to cover the parents helath care costs ??
5
As an observer from another country, my impression is that the NYT editorial board is out of step with the wishes of the vast majority of Americans on immigration reform. The arguments offered in this editorial ignore important aspects of the problem which must be included if there is to be a solution. As Donald Trump says, with some exaggeration but not much, America is not a country until it gets control of its borders and adopts the kind of sensible immigration policies found in many other developed countries, including my own. As for the Wall, it is a powerful symbol for effective border security, which is absolutely necessary in some form, perhaps not in bricks and mortar but somehow. Trump is right on this issue. He is increasing his popular support with his tenacity in pursuit of a solution.
71
The wall as a symbol of border security is a waste of taxpayer money. We don't need another empty symbol; we need effective security. How will any of this stop those who overstay their legal entry into the country, or the majority of illegals who fly in?
Unfortunately, Trump has taken the conversation of illegal immigration and changed it into fear mongering and not wanting any immigration. But there is much that needs to be publicly discussed without the fear mongering. How can we stick to our core principles of being a nation that takes in those who seek better opportunities, religious persecution, or refugee status and not overwhelm the taxpayers with services that may be needed? How can we fill the need for skilled labor without corporations abusing that as an excuse to pay a lower wage to a foreigner. To achieve this the corporations have American workers making a higher salary train a foreigner to do their job at a lower salary and then don't let the door hit you American. Public schools are not allowed to question the legal status of students and so our schools resources are spread thin. Yet an American wanting to use an out-of-district public school, if permitted, would have to pay a tuition fee that rivals that of a private school. But an illegal immigrant can get a free public education.
Neither party is looking at a comprehensive, sensible, humane program that benefits America.
1
Nope. He's still wrong.
We need a lot of immigrants not just for growth but to survive.
And he is doubly wrong to promote xenophobia.
As for the wall, I don't hear you advocating for one on the US-Canadian border.
Why is that if it's so important a symbol?
1
Trump wants to limit LEGAL immigration. If you support this, just say it, and explain your thinking, unless you believe ALL immigrants are illegal, which is a lie.
There is an illusory trap that people tend to fall into. That trap is the illusion of perfect knowledge. If only we did "extreme vetting", or only let people in from certain countries that somehow this selection procedure will result in higher quality immigrants and more prosperity for the country. If I line up 100 people who desire to immigrate to this country it will be impossible to tell which one is the next Steve Jobs, or Elon Musk, Albert Einstein, Sergey Brin, Levi Strauss, or god-forbid Rupert Murdock. Or which immigrants will have children or grandchildren who will rise to the presidency or cure cancer. The MIller's of the world, the Bannon's, trump's, Spencer's. etc. certainly don't have that perfect knowledge, so what they fall back on is bias, in some cases bigotry - we should only let in more people like me. But it is more likely that those who are not like them will have the drive and ambition to make meaningful contributions. How many immigrants cut lawns, painted houses, harvested crops etc, did whatever it took so that their children could have the freedom and opportunity to achieve their full potential? Plenty. Those with a negative view towards immigrants are living in a self-defined delusion.
39
Are you also asserting that universities should abolish admission standards as a system of "self-defined delusion"?
3
Nothing is perfect, but we do have indications that can and should be used. How about not allowing anybody to come and become a citizen?
4
Thomas Jefferson founded the University of Virginia as a meritocracy, whereas Benjamin Franklin founded the University of Pennsylvania with open admission - anyone who wants an education should come and get one. Both models have merit, but the student's ongoing performance is what determines who will graduate. That model won't work with immigration. And I would be foolish to imply a one-size fits all to every circumstance as you seem to imply I am doing.
For instance if I wanted to reduce the number of school shootings, using your logic, I would take all the guns away from white Christian males. Using that selection criteria would reduce the number of school shootings to about zero. Using appropriate variables and metrics is pretty important.
2
The US is very different to other English speaking countries with regard to the proportion of skilled migration. The last numbers I saw indicated only 13% of the migrant intake was skilled migration with much of the rest being family reunion. The very successful migration programs of Australia, Canada and New Zealand have a much higher skilled migration intake and a consequently lower family reunion proportion. Australia for example is 68% skilled and 32% family visa streams. Can I suggest with respect that the USA seriously consider rebalancing its skilled/family reunion proportions. There would be many advantages.
52
And then we'd be Australia and not America. Give me your healthy, your smart, and your good investments?
1
It'd have been easy to say Trump's rhetoric is merely base-rousing to placate his right wing supporters had it not been his track records as a landlord. So it is possible he has this anti-non-white-immigrant view is his own.
25
Barring a few saner elements if most of the Congressional Republicans are more than eager to follow Trump with all his nativist baggage, however detrimental that might be to the American interests and values, where's the room for a rational debate on immigration? As things stand today the immigration issue is going to be a bargaining chip in the hands of Trump whenever he wants to get his legislative agenda approved by the Congress be it the spending bills or the budget as such.
17
It is not "nativist baggage". Almost every country in the world enforces its own immigration laws and can be pretty tough about them.
It is quite common for people attending conferences in India to be denied visas or have a lot of trouble getting a visa.
Does that mean that India is suffering from " nativist baggage"?
Of course not. India had its hand burned with the massacre in Mumbai in 2008 carried out by "immigrants" from Pakistan. There is nothing "racist" about this. Pakistanis are racially quite close to Indians. But alas, some of them do not LIKE Indians.
It is ridiculous that America allows, even celebrates 11 million illegal immigrants in its midst while putting Kim Davis in prison for failure to sign some documents.
But you progressives have decided that laws are ONLY valid if you people like them so there we are.
3
My grandfather, an Italian shepherd who had never been in a schoolroom, could neither read nor write, was sent to this country by his mother to look for his missing father at age 12. His father dead, he was stuck here and he went to work in the coal mines. His entire teenage years were spent there, but he saved enough money to buy an apprenticeship with a butcher. He worked for the butcher for free for two years, while also working a night shift in the mines. At the end of 2 years he bought out the butcher's business. He went on to own not only the grocery for 50 years but a hotel, a beer distributorship, 2 restaurants and a farm where he raised his own chickens and eggs for the grocery. He raised a family of successful middle class children(4 of them combat veterans) and grandchildren. He wouldn't have passed a "merit test" only because he had never had an education or the opportunities available in the US. America opened his mind, which happened to be a very good one. He supplied the ambition and hard work.
129
Calannie: Once upon a time it was possible to achieve what your grandfather achieved. In the 21st century it is rare. My grandfather also worked in the coal mines. There are very few "coal mining" jobs left. There are very few industrial jobs left. Good education is absolutely necessary and that is often very substandard in communities where the immigrants live.
3
I love all Italians and I do not want to contemplate New York or San Francisco without Little Italy! But you do realize that those kind of possibilities are no longer available to low-skilled immigrants: most butcher shops have been swallowed by big companies whose recruiting methods are not geared towards allowing employees to advance in life, the mines are closing and most manufacture has moved abroad. As other readers pointed out, this is not the 1900's anymore.
6
Great story, but the US is much different today than back then. We are already over populated and we have automation instead of manual labor. We already have plenty of unskilled individuals.
5
Why do we continue to import poverty? The average legal immigrant today is poorer than in 1970. The average child immigrant today lives in poverty until adulthood, and the continual influx has made it very difficult to reduce child poverty numbers. Immigrants and their children generally do move up the socio-economic ladder, but it takes longer today than in the late 1800's. We need to reform our immigration laws to better reflect what is best for the America we have today, just like was done in the 1920s and 1965.
113
The average American citizen today is poorer than in 1970. Citizens and their families now only rarely move up the socioeconomic ladder, and when they do it takes a lifetime.
What needs to be done is not reform to the immigration laws but reform to the tax and business laws.
58
To Adrienne, I would say that the Dreamers, who in just a few years have demonstrably "moved up the socio-economic ladder," not to mention are serving in our military, would seem to refute your claims.
Do you remember your parents and teachers telling you over and over that talent alone will get you nowhere, but perserverance and hard work are the keys to your success? These are the qualities that the majority of immigrants have in abundance, and these are the qualities our country still needs.
What a joke, we need much fewer humans, especially those that have low skills and are not currently citizens. We just reformed the tax laws and business laws are mostly state laws.
2
Trump’s view is that we should focus on attracting immigrants who compete at higher earnings levels, the last jobs likely to be obsolesced by automation, and the ones currently most in demand by domestic corporations who complain that their growth is encumbered by the inability to find enough workers with necessary skills – instead of those who compete with Americans at the low-end of the earnings scale, arguably complicating the employment of millions of Americans and occupying jobs that CURRENTLY are being obsolesced at an increasing pace, burdening social safety nets. As such, his view is aligned with that of MANY Americans, and is certainly both mainstream and quite defensible.
The editors’ view is defensible as well, but that doesn’t make Trump’s “backward” – if anything, it’s forward-looking, seeking an immigration policy that better addresses today’s needs.
Putting off a political reckoning on comprehensive immigration reform and border security is not wise. While we should define a solution for Dreamers rapidly, we must also begin resolving the highly divisive issue of general immigration, take it off the table and move on to other pressing issues.
45
The factor missing from your equations is education--and that has been missing for generations, especially for the poor. It's cheaper to import the qualified than to qualify the native-born.
3
But once again, Richard, you are projecting onto Trump what your ideas are, rather than recognizing his flip-flopping postures. He is doing the opposite of what you say; he is making it harder to get H1-B visas, which are the skilled engineering and computer science work entries into the U.S. (from which workers often apply for green cards and then citizenship). In fact U.S. companies often like skilled foreign labor, not because they can't get or train U.S. labor but because they can pay less. Trump's view is 'hire American', not 'allow immigration to compete with Americans'.
check out:
https://qz.com/1176576/h1b-visa-under-trump-is-already-harder-to-get/
5
"Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
Nothing about education- or skill-based criteria in those words, once a proud American mantra. Time to tear down the Statue of Liberty since it's now a lie.
34
Diversity and family reunification are at odds with each other. 70% of inmigrants admitted each year come through family reunification. And a few countries make up the majority of those.
If nothing else, increasing skill-based immigration would open the doors for people who stand little chance under the current system.
47
We don't need or want "diversity" for its own sake. We want productive citizens no matter their past, and only current citizens as much as possible.
4
One problem with this debate is that we're not addressing the presenting dynamics.
For instance, to what degree has America's seemingly endless appetite for narcotics destabilized Central America and Mexico? To what degree would ending the War on Drugs give the governments of Mexico and Central America a greater ability to confront their organized crime problem (in much the same fashion that we were able to confront ours, albeit over the next 50 years after the end of prohibition)?
To what degree did NAFTA disenfranchise Mexican subsistence farmers, who by virtue of our importation of cheap, industrially-harvested corn, lose the ability to support themselves in their native land, and thus were compelled to seek other employment in America?
To what degree has our historic support of right-wing governments in Central America contributed to the culture of violence that had led so many emigres to flee to this country for their lives?
When I contemplate these type individuals, I do not think of criminals, I think of victims.
On the other hand, I can easily imagine a potential immigrant, legal or otherwise, who would be a bad fit for admission into a freewheeling, often profane and aggressively irreligious culture.
The problem with Trump is that he is a simpleton, racist, pig, and panderer - and proud of it. He is the last person capable of rising to the challenge of addressing these highly complex presenting issues.
If only he had not wasted his life watching TV...
95
Well Gee those are other country's issues, not ours. This is very simple, you have a rule of law or not, you control your borders or not. I don't want not.
3
I agree we should go back to being xenophobes. Not involve our self in the politics and problems of other countries. Let them and their people solve them. Ie dont take their human capital what the left always says are the most hardworking smartest and bravest those immigrating to america.
You other comment is a little naive the drug war and the us dollars it brings in keeps alot of these countries afloat.
1
You made great points that I can fully support until I read these sentences -
"The problem with Trump is that he is a simpleton, racist, pig, and panderer - and proud of it. He is the last person capable of rising to the challenge of addressing these highly complex presenting issues."
This is precisely the problem with this debate that we're not addressing. the refusal to see that Trump is no simpleton, or a racist (pig, maybe) and that he's not a panderer. By believing he is all these things, his detractors are underestimating him, just like the other republican candidates did in the primaries and just like the New York Times and the democrats did in the general election. How is it possible for a simpleton to amass billions of dollars of personal wealth, become president without any previous political experience and pass a massive tax bill through Congress? And, in order for his adversaries to convince people that he is a racist they resort to arguments like "all white people are racist", or that building a wall is racist. Did he ever belong to a racist group? Has anyone that ever worked for him ever accuse him of being a racist? As for not reading books or watching to much TV, everyone watches TV and by contrast college educated people read .7% of a book a year. This is the man that democrats must negotiate with if they are to get what they want with DACA. They need to stop calling him, the republicans and his supporters names and negotiate a good compromise.
2
There are questions worth examining and debating about whether the United States ought to admit more skilled immigrants"
What is wrong with taking "low skilled immigrants"? Don't we need them? “Ten years from now, there are going to be lots of older people with relatively few low-skilled workers to change their bedpans,” said David Card, a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley.
A merit-based immigration system may be a good idea but it would limit the supply of low-skilled workers. A system that deliberately excluded low-skilled workers might raise labor costs in industries that rely on those workers, increasing prices for consumers but boosting wages for workers. Supporters of merit-based system point to Canada and Australia as models but according to Tamar Jacoby, the president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a national organization that advocates for the legalization of undocumented immigrants: “The fact is that even the countries that started with a system like that, invented the system like that, Canada and Australia, have over the past 20-25 years moved away from a strictly diploma-based and skill-based system.”
42
Yes, it was found years ago, not every new immigrant is going to be a high tech entrepreneur or similar skills that countries only require and nothing else. A country still needs people for the trades, construction workers who build the buildings, do general labor, work in the service industries, hospitals and other important day to day jobs that are important to a society that don't require a college education. Not everything can be automated either.
16
I fear that I am naïve, but it has long seemed to me that "low skill" immigrants who find success in America, either themselves or through their children, and thanks to its opportunities end up being the kind of patriots whom we want as a country to nurture. Skilled immigrants are, on balance, perhaps less likely to value the break that becoming Americans has offered to them.
And in the next 5 years canada will be moving back to skilled based immugration because they like us will have strained their budgets and school districts and welfare and job training sites with the overload of unskilled workers coming in.
How can you have your cake and eat it too??? The left continually flood the economy with low skilled workers that have undeniably caused lower wages in fields that traditionally provided two person working households a middle class income. construction maintenance factory work food processing house painting ditch digging taxi driving care giving etc So now that they have driven the salaries down for Americans and immigrants alike they want to fix the problem they created with unfettered migration by demanding 15 dollar minimum wage.
The left loves driving down wages of the working man and keeping out those who may take their jobs. Lets have 5 years of unfettered immigration of phd qualified college econ professors and mathematics and sciences teachers. Flood the market place with cheaper over qualified academics and computer programmers from across the globe. Lets see the cost of and pay to college teaching jobs drop precipitously and watch as these entrepreneurs start better cheaper schools or alternative degree programs to the university based system. Then we will see who is championing unfettered immigration.
3
I think the biggest point missed in this article is that the US's immigration policies are about 50 years out of date. They worked for a time when the US was mostly homgenous and the influx of immigrants (both legal and illegal) were low. A family based visa system could be implemented because there weren't many families to began with.
Today there is enormous demand to immigrate to the US, in part feuled by established immigrant family members. The 4 million on the waitlist is only part of the picture. Established families are also motivators for illegal immigration.
Maybe it is time for family based immigration to end. However, there is no doubt that we need immigrants. It is simply time to totally overhaul the immigration system. Neither party is currently up to the task. Proposal such as legalizing DACA and removing the lottery system are both temporary and lazy solutions. Maybe when the next adminstration steps in more progressive immigration reform will be proposed.
31
wait - you seriously think that the US 50 years ago was "mostly homogeneous? I agree that immigration *reform* needs to occur, but not because we don't need more diversity.
21
There is "no doubt" that we need immigrants? Why because you say so? Try thinking of what could happen with no new immigrants. What actual needs could not be met by other actions? Answer is very few.
4
It is very hard to understand how LOTTERY would be a good "system" for anything, except, well lottery for entertainment. It is interesting that countries that are very progressive/liberal like Canada and Australia, which are often touted as models on many policies by the left wing of the Democratic party, have merit based systems. They determine that let's say the country needs more hydro-civil engineers, then they have a quota for this profession (regardless of the country of origin). This gets updated regularly. Kind of makes sense. The randomness of lottery doesn't make sense on its face (i.e. the intrinsic lack of sense). Who would agree that lottery decides things like which candidate gets a job, who is elected to a political office, who becomes your doctor, which school your kids go to, etc.
92
"It is very hard to understand how LOTTERY would be a good "system" for anything, except, well lottery for entertainment."
Is normal day in Russia, no? Or, I guess, New Jersey.
But pretty hard not to argue a "merit based" lottery system would have produced a better US president than the one Russia chose for us.
1
So you are for state planning of the workforce. Why not have the state also decide what subjects American high school graduates should study in college?
Since the Editorial Board seems committed to maintaining our current levels of immigration, it would be helpful to see a follow-up editorial about another pressing issue: how do we control America's population growth?
Our growth rate, while not yet as scary as many nations in the developing world, is still unnerving. We gain several million people each year. We'll eventually run out of food and water to feed them, places to house them, and landfills to store their waste. We need to avoid this. What steps can the US take to keep its population stable?
82
I'm not exactly certain where you're getting your information, since the United States population grew by 0.7 percent in the last year, its smallest annual expansion in 80 years, per the Census Bureau in December 2016. that's the closest to "stable" that we're likely to get. your alarmist predictions - besides not taking into account the death rate - seem wildly unsupported.
1
I agree; get rid of the lottery and chain migration. Let's extend tuition help to our own "dreamers" to go for trades or degrees that are needed in the U.S. before importing them in from another country. Other countries would not be as permissive as the US has been in allowing immigrants with work or education visas to overstay their visit without sending them home. Pres. Trump speaks for the American citizen whose voice has been ignored for a long time, while the Dems are interested in increasing their voter base. It would be nice to see our reps (especially, House Minority Leader Pelosi) show more support for American citizens before demanding DACA support.
1
Malthus said the same thing in 1798. His concerns about population growth were inaccurate then just as your are today.
There are many valid reasons to squelch illegal immigration and adjust our legal immigration rules but population growth is not one of them.
1
Let's face it, Trump's attitude towards immigration is based on his racism towards anyone who is non white. America has a history of racism towards immigrants of color going back to our founding fathers. The changes to our immigration policies after the civil rights movement has meant that people like Trump no longer recognize their country. We're becoming a minority majority country and older white Americans find this very threatening.
Hopefully Congress will continue to ignore Trump and work towards bipartisan solutions to address our immigration policies. But we need to stop lumping legal immigrants in with those who chose to break the law and come here illegally or overstay their Visa. The dreamers deserve to be protected but not the adults who brought them here. We have the right to secure our borders.
18
Sorry but congress cannot ignore Trump in their immigration policies. Trump is the one who won the presidential election because of his stance on immigration, and Trump is the one who must sign the final bill into law.
The open border RINO Republicans like McCain, Lindsay Graham and Jeff Flake do not speak for the Republican party or its voters. Lindsay Graham was polling at 0% during the Republican election, and Jeff Flake is resigning because he knows he would lose his next election.
2
It’s sanctimonious and yes, racist to insist on drawing strict distinctions between the wanted ‘legal’ immigrants (usually Asians) and unwanted ‘illegals’ (Hispanics) since this country has hypocritically ignored its true needs for labor by relying on illegal labor for so long. No one has ever asked me how many immigrants I want to let in, and I’ve lost jobs to Indians and Chinese but never Mexicans.
1
In 1950 whites made up 25 percent of the world population......now it is closer to 8. Anything other than open borders could be considered discriminatory against non whites. One thing we could do is base numbers of immigrants based on world population......92 dark skinned and eight whites.....and adjust country ratios to get that demographically balanced result. Over time it could adjusted until the white number is 0.
The GOP is conflating all immigrants with crime while many are beginning to conflate the GOP with Russian collusion.
I'll take the immigrants.
40
David: What percentage of Undocumented Immigrants of the total population live in Concord?
Where I live in the 60's it was less than 5%. Now it is close to 90%. We have the highest taxes in the country and most go to support the immigrants, schools, health care, babysitting, supplemental food programs at school and food stamps, shelter, and crime prevention. And these programs don't seem to help. Less than 20% of these children are qualified to attend college and fall very far behind on standard testing.
39
Illegal means illegal. No matter how it is dressed up it still means illegal ! Illegal means among other things; lawless/prohibited/unauthorized etc., it is a form of crime and goes against the values of a civilized society ! Period !
131
and yet, as a crime, it legally ranks right up there with jaywalking. a misdemeanor. which I hope you're calling also "against the values of a civilized society."
1
So is it not illegal to slaughter millions of Native Americans and take over their nation and its resources? Is it not illegal to use slave labor to build the country and industry that crushed Chinese and Asian textile industries? Just because Europeans could kill the native Americans, steal their resources and build a country on the back of slaves doesn’t make it legal. Why was it legal when any white person who found his/her way to American shores without any VISA?
1
All unjust laws must be disobeyed..
"Mr. Trump’s threat to imminently expel the Dreamers."
Baloney. He made no such threat. All he did was say he favors ending the DACA program. ICE says deportation would "not be a priority".
Memo to Editorial Board:
Dreamers = illegal aliens, average age 24 years according to the government.
The Democrats aren't fighting to keep them here because of altruism.
They need their votes.
Because they can't get them from Americans.
142
The democrats actually won the 2016 election by 3 million votes. In any country other than the US Hillary would be the president.
A party that has won the popular vote only once since 1988 and that too by one state is in delusion if it thinks Americans are behind it.
3
so Hillary's popular vote was from the 3 million Dreamers? as for Trump's and ICE's statements, I don't see that they're focussing on "bad hombres," but on heads of families, professionals, minor traffic violators, and, you know - stellar contributors to society. I don't trust their claims at all.
3
I believe that being a citizen is a requirement for voting. I know that Mrs. Clinton received almost 3,000,000 more voles than Mr. Trump. It is therefore erroneous to state that Democrats can't get votes from "Americans" when they obviously do.
3
So, the NYT accuses Trump of "demonization",
and calls for an "thorough, honest debate".
OK.
Let's see if the NYT and friends can start
by not using disparaging words like "racist" and "xenophobe"
every time someone advocates for a shift in criteria
for qualification for legal immigration,
such as from various kinds of family connection, as currently,
to skill or merit,
and every time someone advocates for stronger control
so that people who do not have qualifications set out by law do not get in.
172
When the person leading the charge for "shift in criteria" uses language that demonizes all people of color than some will have to live with charges of racism and xenophobia.
He started his campaign with the words "They're rapists". Hard to pivot now to some sensible dialogue on immigration policy.
1
Finn - did not see the words "racist" or "xenophobe" in this piece. I guess you'll not be living up to your family name or related nom de plume - the 3rd century Irish "Robin Hood", renowned for mystical powers and generosity. You'd rather shout "I've got mine, Jack" and close the golden door on equally or better qualified immigrants than the poor and starving masses who came here from your benighted homeland in the 19th century.
1
But allowing racists to get away with misrepresenting their true objectives will allow the racists to succeed. No, thanks.
Maybe I'm stupid ..but, this is not my reading of his view or policy. Maybe we went off the rails when Teddy Kennedy twisted the rules for Irish immigrants in the last 70's ( my grandfather was one in the 1890's) LBJ's changes fit the times ..... today -- we have lost our way. Giving status to so called "dreamers" should not allow the same rights to family immigration. The point is to find a solution to a particular problem (the dreamers).
33
But the dreamers are an issue that will come again unless you do something to prevent that. And becoming a citizen is not really essential to their issue.
2
@vulcanalex
Sorry. You're wrong. Becoming an American citizen, with all the rights thereof, is exactly essential to their issue.
The so called dreamers should not be reward for their parents' crimes. They dreamers need to go to their countries of origin and apply for citizenship like any other foreigner.
85
They should not be punished for their parents’ crimes either, and what you propose for Dreamers looks a lot like punishment. And you don’t apply for citizenship from your country of origin. You apply for citizenship after you have lived in the US as a permanent resident for at least five years. What the Dreamers would get, is legal status and a path to citizenship.
2
well said
3
The guy has a backward look on everything, at excepting making money in non kosher ways.
5
Maybe once Trump has screwed thing up here so badly, he’ll have done the Dreamers a favor by cutting any ties with us so they won’t feel obligated to have to stay and endure what those of us stuck here by birth will.
14
I support the views of this editorial. I write only to note that the diversity visa created under a 1965 immigration law signed by LBJ did not include a lottery. The lottery component was added many years later. The lottery can be removed without materially altering the diversity visa program.
10
The call for a "thorough, honest debate" on immigrarion is praiseworthy. But since when has anything in the U.S. been debated honestly? Almost every debate is partisan, and even when it's bi-partisan, such as the decision to invade Iraq, it's often horrendously wrong.
For 7 decades U.S. politicians have been dishonest brokers for the Palestinians, for years the military-industrial complex has protected U.S. commercial interests while claiming other allies haven't been pulling thejr weight. And for the past two decades there has not been a single serious congressional debate on the Saudi role in breeding and financing Radical Islam across the globe their viral 'madresehs'.
'Honesty'? It has never been in fashion. Why expect it for immigrants?
21
I too am also getting sick of hearing about our American traditions. I wish my great grandparents had stayed in Norway where they belonged. Lefse is way better than anything Frito Lay has tried to force down my throat here.
15
I could not agree more. Anyone who wants to to come to the US should be allowed. In two or three years there will be no white majority. This country will be a better place. Unlike Norway which is completely white and one of the most zenophopic countries in the world. And yes, I have been there.
1
You're always free to go back.....that's the beauty of our American tradition.
2
Trump’s main issue with all types of immigrants, including legal immigrants, is the same issue that Sessions, Bannon, Steve King, and Tom Cotton have. It has nothing to do with economics, since an aging population certainly does not call for a 50% cut to legal immigration. Most legal immigrants are nonwhite, non-European. As Steve King once said we can’t repopulate the country with someone else’s babies.
10
"illegal" means "criminal". Like money fraud, murderer, pouring acid on someone, child abuse, etc. This is not difficult. DACA was one of the worse decisions in American history.
83
Children are not criminals. There needs to be a humane solution.
22
Just understand that morality and legality are to quite different things. Don't get them confused.
17
no, actually, it does not. being in the country illegally is a misdemeanor. THAT'S what's not difficult. you cannot define a word in the way YOU want to; you must use its actual definition. illegal immigration is NOT like murder, child abuse, or violent attack. it's like jaywalking. a MISDEMEANOR.
2
"Mr. Trump’s approach seems intended less to rationalize the immigration system than to inflame his core supporters by demonizing nonwhite people,..."
Strike the word "seems" and replace it with "is"; please.
18
I don't think the author understands. We have too many illegal aliens in the US. These aliens are compromising the quality of life for legal citizens in the US!
Too many people in the world and especially the US cause significant problems. Overpopulation is a significant contributor to health care costs, traffic, homelessness, crime, violence and pollution. Plus we are a nation of laws. Start with enforcing our laws so people who were here first get what they earned.
Think about it.
108
The problem, as you know, is that the Dreamers— and we aren’t talking about millions— came here as children. They know no other home. Also there is no clear path to become legal. That is what’s needed: a path to becoming a legal citizen. Our humanity must come into play.
15
Let’s enforce the laws then.
-Our anti discrimination laws.
-The constitution that allows for checks and balances on an ill suited president. The laws allowing for the removal of an incompetent president
-laws against foreign interference
-laws against police brutality
Our country was built on no taxation without representation. Yet the senate poorly reflects our nation’s true population. The Electoral College, which needs reform if the GOP will allow a charlatan the presidency, was rigged by a foreign power..out Cold War enemy.
When will Americans unite against a common foreign threat, not against ourselves? We aren’t a nation divided: we are a nation whom a foreign power is making appear divided on social media.
2
the US does not have an overpopulation problem. the DREAMERS are not compromising any quality of life. what is your stance on the white men with guns who murder people daily in acts of domestic terrorism? they're the ones compromising ALL quality of life.
1
No mas amnistia.
If this amnesty goes through for the DACAs (and their parents), there will be many millions more that will come and do the same exact thing. This same thing will continue to happen over and over again.
This is being closely followed by all in Mexico and Central America. They are ready to come and try too. Does anyone remember the last time, last time?
115
Illegal immigration is bad for the United States, and it is bad for the countries where the immigrants come from. It is detrimental to our fellow citizens, because it drives-down low-end wages, drives-up low-end housing prices, and strains already extremely limited public resources. It is bad for the illegal immigrants' home countries because they are deprived of their talents, and possibly even more importantly, there will be no pressure to improve social conditions because people have always been able to come here. Sadly, I fear my fellow liberals have forgotten how to think, and this issue is but one example...
199
Are you ready to pick tomatoes and go into the construction trade? Get ready for produce shortages and higher prices. In the meantime, here in Prescott we have 2 large construction projects that have stopped because they can't find construction workers. They are gone. I'm not saying we should hire illegal aliens, we definitely should not, as a former HR Manager I used every tool I could to assure that who we hired was actually legal. HR Managers need even better tools. Its time for Congress to stop playing politics and get on the stick and do their job.
If you don’t want people to come here to work illegally, then give them a way to come here and work legally. With our current immigration system there is no way for most without family here to immigrate here and do jobs in sectors with shortages, whether that be agriculture, construction, or services.
Switzerland recently enacted a law that requires immigrants to pay back all of the welfare and other funds paid to them before they can become citizens. What a great idea!
It is abundantly clear that American taxpayers already cannot afford to pay to meet the needs of American citizens--elderly, disabled, veterans, et al.--so it is totally foolish to think that taxpayers can be squeezed to pay for millions of illegal aliens. Illegals should be deported but allowed to follow existing laws and procedures for becoming visitors, residents and citizens.
1
Down the line Democratic voter here. Sorry, there is no logic to continue the diversity visa, visa by lottery. Of course Trump is as usual lying when he claims that the recipients of diversity visa are killing us. But Trump's lying cannot be the justification for letting people in by lottery. We should not be afraid of diversity, but there is no reason to create an immigration policy based on some vague desire to promote diversity either.
There is nothing wrong in asking a hard nosed question: do we want legal immigration to benefit us? If yes, we should focus on highly skilled immigrants. Of course we should be considerate about refugees and have a realistic compassionate attitude about family reunification. But what is exactly the point of letting in people simply because people from their home countries are under represented in the US?
Most people are unaware of the fact that the concept of visa by lottery was first introduced in the 1990s to let in Irish immigrants, who no longer has close relatives in the US to qualify for family reunification visas.
53
Trump is in an eternal attack mode and immigrants new to the country and suspect by his supporters are easy targets. Rationality or coming up with a sound plan beyond attack has nothing to do with Trump's mode of operation. Thus Trump and his GOP sycophants can only destroy. Trump is only interested in power, money and puffing up his ego and immigrants are perfect whipping boys. Things like infrastructure can not keep his attention because they require him to be quiet for a moment, listen to others and come up with a plan that lasts for more than ten second sound bites or tweets.
8
The cutbacks in immigration from the 1920's to the 1960 were one of the pillars upon which the civil rights movement for the descendants of slaves were built.
31
Instead of making pronouncements like this how about explaining what it is based on? My history prof would say cite your sources, but I'd settle for some explanation.
There is no reason why any nation can't adjust its annual immigration numbers up or down to suit its needs. Just because the developing world can't get its fertility rates in check doesn't mean developed nation states have an obligation to take in hundreds of millions of destitute indigents. So let's go on am immigration diet for a decade or so. We can always go on a cheap labor binge later.
129
@Valery Gomez: Framing immigrants as "destitute indigents" is exactly what this editorial is talking about. The actual fact is that immigrants commit less crime and create more new businesses than native-born Americans. Why wouldn't we want those people to come here? They literally lower our crime rate AND improve our economy.
Why wouldn't you want our economy to grow? Would you rather other nations that compete with us, like China or Germany or France, soak up all those future innovators? Immigrants are a great investment in our future strength as a nation.
1. So canada, UK and Australia's Immigration systems are anti diversity and less humane? You are always comparing USA to "other first world countries" when comes to gun control, healthcare ect why doesn't that comparison apply to this particular topic?
2. "Only killed eight" . Seriously?
3. Poll say we should increase immigration? Yes they are talking about legal immigration. Not illegal immigration that president is trying to stop.
4. Immigrants kill less people than right wing extremists. That has got to be faintest praise of immigrants that i've ever hear.
5. The billion dollar companies were started by *legal* immigrants. We all want them. Stop trying to conflate legal and illegal immigration. Its infuriating and I cannot explain why you are doing it.
168
1- Canada, UK, Australia are semi welfare state with totally different structure of immigration support. For example, Canada and UK have immigrant support resources that help new immigrants in getting assimilated and getting settled. In our country for decades families have been taking care of new family members arriving from far off lands giving loved ones food, residence etc till new arrivals are able to take care of themselves.
2- If Canada and Australia have the best immigration policies and they select the best and the brightest, then why they have not become a superpower in every field of life the way we have become? Why majority highly skilled foreign workers in UK and Australia look at US with envy? Why these talented immigrants have difficult times in assimilating in UK and other European countries? I will contend that every generation of immigrants have contributed heavily to make America Great. If one truly wants to make America Great again, one would welcome new immigrants not smear them as our president often does.
3- I am tired of hearing the argument between skilled and unskilled immigrants. Can we really define what an unskilled immigrant is?
2
1- Australia, UK and Canada have far less successful immigration policies than the US, and they have already far less demanding policies to follow than the USA. I know, I've experienced both USA's and Australia's first hand. Europe is basically the easiest.
2- See analysis from the Cato Institute, a think tank very few would call liberal by any stretch of the imagination. However they are not Fox News.
3- Trump is trying to curb *legal* immigration too, like stop the lottery and family reunion policies.
4- Agreed with that one.
5- The article does not. It says that we do have illegals in the US now and they are a separate problem that needs to be dealt with. It is the President who conflates them by demanding that Dreamers can only stay if we curb *legal* immigration. As a result it is impossible to write an article regarding one without the other. That is literally the first paragraph of the article.
1
1. what is the comparison?
2. yes. #45 is lying.
3. incorrect.
4. not praise, just addressing #45 lies.
5. incorrect. read. the entire article is about #45 trying to dramatically reduce LEGAL immigration. lottery is legal immigration.
2
The President's and his supporters echo the views about immigrants since the Irish, Italian and Chineese waves of the late 1800's and early 1900's. Like it or not this country was built by immigrants. They all made the hard decission to leave their native homelands to build a new life and in the process built America. Diversity is strength, our founding Fathers knew it and 62% of Americans know it. Trump's zenophobia and fear mongering about immigrants is contrary to America's best interest and it's ideals. The Dreamers children of illegal imigrants are for purposes, Americans they were brought here as children, educated, speak English. They contribute to the economy, have served in the military, pay taxes and the vast majority are law abiding citezens. Their parents worked hard, in all types of businesses, and many started businesses. Now they all live in fear of losing their jobs, being, deported and or their families being broken by deportation. GW Bush's prosposed immigration policies would have resolved most these issues we are faced with now. If they had been enacted, most of our Hispanic immigrants, would probably be Republican, since most of them are fiscal conservatives. The Republicans shot themselves in the foot then and looks like will do it again. America can not afford to be so short sighted, instead we should be embraceing them.
15
"Diversity is strength, our founding Fathers knew it "
Then why didn't the abolish slavery, give women the right to vote and disallow gay marriage?
9
The Constitution was ratified in 1789, by 1804 all the Northern States had abolished Slavery. We fought a bloody Civil War, that lead to the abolishment of Slavery in 1865, and gave former African male slaves the right to vote. Women had to fight longer, and in some ways harder for them to finally get right to Vote, in 1923. Personally, I find those two reprehensible, as did Thomas Paine and others wiith regards to Slavery and Susan B. Anthony with Women not getting the right to vote when Slavery was abolished. I also find the prohibition against Gay Marriage, reprehinsible, which not untill recently has been abolished, but is still under assault, by the close minded. Sometimes Progress takes longer than it should, just like these immigration issues, but eventually it will come, whether you like it or not. In large part, because Women and African Americans have the RIGHT TO VOTE!!!
2
because they made the Constitution a living, breathing document, open to amendment for the good of the nation. that's why people named "Wong" can now become citizens, marry, and vote.
1
"Mr. Trump would allow no new applicants other than immediate family members, and even these would no longer include parents. Imposing these restrictions and ending the diversity visa lottery would cut in half the number of legal immigrants."
Perhaps more, fewer legal immigrants will consider immigration if they know that they will be cut off from the rest of their family. How can a single child continue living and working here when aging parents may need to be taken care of.
Trump will let DACA immigrants stay, DACA is too popular to dismiss. He and Millet are now using that as a leverage to further make America white again. What is next? he will go after more legal immigrants and try to force them out.
2
Response to EA:
``How can a single child continue living and working here when aging parents may need to be taken care of.'' This question results from ignorance about Chinese and Indian, and I suspect Mexican families. It is common in India to find an ambitious young man from say the state of West Bengal working in Mumbai with aging parents back home. He travels to Kolkata by train from Mumbai once a year. The immigrant in NYC can reach his/her parents in about the same time it takes the Indian. This is also true for the Chinese young person who is working in Shanghai or Beijing and who has aging parents in innter China. Yes, there are reasons to change the family reunification rules. Chain migration has been real, for people from countries other than the ones for whom the waiting period is long [India, China, Phillipines, Mexico etc.]
Under Trump’s backward view of immigration, his own grandfather, Frederick, who was unskilled and didn’t speak English, might not have been allowed into the United States. Our country—-and his own family—-was built by immigrants who dared to dream of a better life and created their own opportunities in our democracy. His draconian plans for limiting new immigrants and deporting undocumented ones who have already been assimilated are a national disgrace.
6
Conditions in the U.S. have changed quite a bit since 1885, when Trump's grandfather Frederick immigrated to the US at age 16. The Second Industrial Revolution was in full swing and US population stood at about 56 million total. We are long past the industrial age and US population is around 324 million or more. Times change.
6
This country has its roots in immigrants coming here for many different reasons. If Trump's ideas about immigration were applied backward to all those folks who came here to live their dreams, how many would have made the cut? And, how many of us today would even be here?
Immigrants aren't bad. Politicians using them for votes is far worse.
Technically the first white settlers were illegal immigrants infringing on the sovereign rights of aboriginal peoples who occupied this continent. But native Americans is beyond the intellectual capacities of this president.
6
Those immigrants of the past were needed to dig ditches, build railroads, and otherwise create an American infrastructure that previously did not exist. They worked coal mines, steel mills, and all kinds of backbreaking manual and unskilled labor. America's needs are now different. We need high tech people, not low tech people. We do need a more reasonable immigration program for agricultural workers, whose skills and willingness to work the farms and orchards does not exist among our own citizens.
18
wait - I thought our infrastructure needed massive upgrading? I thought Trump was bringing back "beautiful clean coal"? and he didn't seem to ask for *skilled Norwegian* immigrants, did he?
2
I believe Trump's attacks on immigrants are part of his wider plan to consolidate power in his camp. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", in a sense. He knows that the creation of an enemy is a proven tactic in rallying support for a power takeover. If he "creates" enough enemies, he can control the masses who worship him. Thinking people can see it happening. It has worked time and again for demagogues such as himself. He knows that the "immigration" issue motivates his base. It is frightening to see this happening. Trump has figured out that he can slander immigrants and Democrats and get away with it and grow ever more powerful. The "immigrant" dog whistle will eventually tear the nation apart if people of good will do not stand up against his demagoguery.
6
Enough with the immigration thing already! I think we all need a timeout!...Let’s focus upon building civility among our citizenry, and rebuilding our infrastructure!
37
From what I gather from reading here and in many previous articles over the course of several years, if you replace the entire population of America with illegal immigrants, the crime rate will go down, number of business creations will go up, and a whole other bunch of stuff that might be considered good for society. But, I am fairly certain that Trump can't handle that level of abstraction.
6
George W. Bush gave undocumented immigrants the right to privacy. No one has hard numbers on how many undocumented immigrants have been convicted of crimes and are in state prisons.
Therefore, all of the research that has been conducted on the percentage of undocumented immigrants who have been convicted of criminal behavior has been based on questionable assumptions made by the researchers, themselves. What the purported research actually does is show the researchers' biases.
Legal immigrants commit fewer crimes. We do not have the figures for illegal immigrants.
3
How many of those "illegal" immigrants read the NY Times. How many readers of immigrants came through Ellis Island. How many immigrants came though Ellis Island and were considered not "suitable" and returned back to their home countries. Let's let immigrants in this country the correct way, through justuification. Illegal entry was and still is a legitimate crime.
25
it's a misdemeanor. also, Ellis Island turned away far, far fewer than it admitted, and for reasons like mental incapacity, criminal records, and overt disease. we actually screen for those issues now. back then, they had no choice but to turn away - or incarcerate. back then, they didn't have air travel, either. not a good equivalence for an argument.
2
The headline for this article includes the phrase "Trump...smears people who entered the country illegally as criminals." It would have been better to say that he smears them as "violent criminals." The headline, as written, implies that immigrants have done absolutely nothing wrong by entering the US in violation of our laws. This plays into the hands of Trump and the Republican party that he has so shamefully dominated.
The Democratic party (and well-meaning liberals) should be aware that a sizable percentage of voters are easily scared into voting Republican because of racism-fueled fears that our country will be overrun by illegal immigrants. Every mention of sanctuary cities, counties, and states increases Trump's approval rating and bolsters the GOP's chances of keeping the house in 2018. If Democrats insist on making immigration a major policy issue for the midterm elections, we are all going to be suffering through another two years of the GOP controlling both houses of congress.
16
The main thrust of the president's animus towards immigrants is to give him and his base targets and a reason to demonize foreigners, especially those from Latin America or Africa. This ugly and xenophobic stance is hardwired into his "make America great again" rallying cry that resonates so strongly with older Americans who no longer can identify with a country in which they were raised decades earlier. That America is a thing of the distant past that the president promised to bring back to the heartland. The Dreamers are not coming from Norway so the president and his supporters don't want them here.
The federal judge the president smeared as being "Mexican" was not a drug dealer or a rapist but that didn't matter. The president assumed that the judge's Hispanic heritage was sufficient reason to demean him, which is pure racism.
The Chief Executive never misses a chance to have families who were victimized by illegal immigrants tell their stories at his rallies and speeches, not to sympathize with them but to warn Americans of the danger that outsiders and foreigners represent to the safety and security of the homeland. It's obvious to what class and bloc of Americans the president is issuing his dire warnings.
6
"one notion that runs through all he says or tweets about immigration is that it is a door for criminals and terrorists to enter the United States"
How can he possibly think like that. Criminals, my god there's a bunch of them running around the White House right now. Quite a few over at EPA, HHS, Treasury, State, too. Then there's the lobbyists, wall streeters, hedge fund whizzes, etc. Now that's a basketfull of deplorables if ever there was one.
Heck, we need more not less immigrants to lower the criminal percentage.
11
The really stupid part is Trump’s desire for more immigrants from Norway - a country which, compared to the US, has higher per capita GDP, better and cheaper healthcare, less crime, etc. Does he even understand why people move to other countries? Why his grandfather, for example, came to the US? Hint: people don’t emigrate so that they can have poorer lifestyles with higher chances of being murdered.
7
Encourage everyone to read political analyst John Judis' piece in The American Prospect, entitled, "The Two Sides to Immigration Policy." Mr. Judis wrote insightful book last year about rise of populism in US and Europe and is former author in NY Times Magazine. Balanced view.
NY Times never accounts for employment and wage impact of mass immigration on lower-skilled US citizens and legal immigrants.
NY Times never accounts for environmental impact of turbo-charged population growth via de facto open borders.
NY Times does not report that demographers have used the term "chain migration" as a neutral term since 1960's; and that Democrats such as Barbara Jordan and even Dick Durbin a few years ago have equally used the term "chain migration" and supported reform of same. Never considered a "bad word" until Trump was elected.
NY Times does not report that there are DACA recipients who came in their later teens of their own free will, without their parents, and who have been here over a decade and still do not speak English. I.e., not brought here by their parents as little children & who certainly know their home country as well or better than US.
Finally, NY Times never accounts for per pupil spending decline for US citizen children in public schools under mandates to educate illegal aliens. While many bipartisan elite send their own children to private schools.
These factors should also be part of a "thorough, honest debate."
149
I would add to your comments, the impact on culture and society, as well as impact on the environment by the sheer mass of people. California, one of nature’s gems, is a diverse mess and too many people.
Although the impact on the European based culture of the historic US is considerable, it is more so in relation to the African-American people and culture who lack the numbers and economic clout to ameliorate the impact.
2
I must have missed that part in the article where it klaxons for "mass immigration." can you point it out to me, please?
1
Thank you. Would love to copy and paste that as an editorial across the nation.
2
Ok NY Times. You are for more immigration to increase economic growth. Fine, that is your opinion. Just please don’t be hypocrites and editorialize against global warming or opine about all the environmental issues we face. These are problems caused by the perpetual population growth of consumers.
All countries need to take a stand on stabilizing their populations as soon as possible. Our planet needs this. While Trump has all the wrong reasons for reducing immigration, there are some valid non-racist ones.
87
On immigration, the US divides into two camps: cultural vs. economic.
Trump and his supporters are making a cultural argument, which is at best nationalistic and at worst racist. Economically, his policies are a complete disaster and would result in slower growth and labor shortages in key sectors from agriculture to senior care.
If you are OK with the idea of the average skin color in the US being brown,
then all you care about is the economics. In this case it is all supply and demand. We simply need to make more 'illegals' legal. Because, it shouldn't be 'illegal' to want to feed your family and give them a better life.
3
It's time for a forward-looking, truly progressive immigration policy.
It's 2017, not 1897. The factories of yesteryear are gone, taking with them the need for unskilled labor. We must now compete in a knowledge-based global economy. Our immigration policy must evolve with the times.
A modern, merit-based immigration policy modeled after the Canadian and New Zealand policies is the only progressive path forward. Anything else is just trying to live in the past.
73
Canada and NZ are reworking their skill-based model to include unskilled.
3
Trump had previously said of the Dreamers that they shouldn't be too worried and that he had a big heart.
Talk about wanting it both ways!
If Trump were concerned for these young people, he would not hold them hostage to his half-baked, fantastical border wall. For that matter, he wouldn't stir up fearmongering of immigrants.
4
Cameraman might have wanted to capture the “w” I am guessing was at the end. ;-)
2
His view is clearly backward but at least he is clear about what kind of immigrants he wants. " We want people from places like Norway.” White people." We don’t want people from African countries or from Haiti". You cannot be clearer than that.
His view might take us back to 1924 when the National Origins Act passed when only people from certain countries were allowed and not from others. It gave a percentage of allowances for people to come, giving preference to Northern Europe, discriminating against Southern and Eastern Europe, and completely barring immigration from Asia and other nonwhites. In 1965, we moved away from this racist National Origins Act. Donald Trump would have no problem if the dreamers were all white and the lottery system was applicable only to people from Norway and Sweden.
16
Is a high school degree really an adequate qualification for immigration ? Also conceptually, why is it better to have a brother or a sister of a citizen come in versus say a engineer who is unrelated to anyone. The plan itself just need a bit of tweaking. It need to reallocate at least some part of the visas available under the diversity lottery/family visa category to qualified immigrants who can contribute more.
63
Illegal entry is indeed a crime. Unlawful presence (entering legally, such us under a tourist visa, but failure to leave on schedule), is a civil violation subject to deportation. So, those who entered illegally are in fact criminals.
http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2014/07/is-illegal-immigration-a-crime-...
156
A civil violation is by definition not a crime. And I don't see the point when the editorial is about two avenues of legal immigration.
8
What about children brought into the country with their parents? They can have zero intent as they are children. Are they not an exception? Would you hold children responsible for their parents crimes?
7
To RM in Vermont--People who run stop signs are criminals. People who cheat on their income taxes are criminals. Lots of people break lots of laws but we don't go around labeling them as "criminals". That is a pretty harsh and dehumanizing word. The conversation needs to be driven by justice and humanity, not by harsh labeling.
24