My Take on the Immigration Debate
I do not doubt that there are honest, hard-working immigrants who have arrived in the United States illegally. President Trump, in his usual style, is exaggerating: not all undocumented South American immigrants are criminals.
If we were to stop these honest people from immigrating, we would be shooting ourselves in the foot. Our agriculture would suffer, our gastronomy would suffer.
I would suggest screening undocumented immigrants who are already in the United States to determine whether or not they should be allowed to stay. If they had engaged in any illegal behavior, I would ship them home. If not, if they are honest and hard-working people, I would give them a work visa to protect them from exploitation. If they had the opportunity to work and earn minimum wage (or more), those immigrants would be able to buy health insurance and pay taxes. Every five or ten years, those individuals should be required to return home for a year before applying to come back. This will prevent them from developing permanency expectations.
Now, as to the undocumented immigrants pouring into the United States…
I suggest that in order to immigrate, individuals should be required to get the support of ten sponsors living in the United States who can testify that the individual is an honest, hard-working person. If that individual were later found to be a criminal, any immigrant who sponsored them should be deported home with them. (Here, I am applying micro banking principles.)
Do not build a wall— it is Ineffective. People can climb over walls or build tunnels underneath them. The United States should double or triple the border patrol. If more people have the opportunity to be sponsored, maybe there will be no need for coyotes, for crossing and dying in the desert.
Granted some immigrants may come illegally anyway to benefit from our social services without being documented. That might call for a review of our policies.
Ichak Kalderon Adizes