Consider the immigration issue SOLVED

Step back and remain calm – I have solved our immigration crisis.

Without the benefit of a law degree, and with only my better-than-average, but less-than-a-scholar’s understanding of US history, I can make the case for an elegant solution to our immigration crisis. “Elegant” in that it uses our own history as a precedent, and appeases both ends of our political spectrum:

•  Conservatives – we are proud of our country, our past, and what we have to offer humanity as “the greatest country on Earth.” Now we can tout our family values – even extending those values to people we don’t know, understand, and who don’t look like us. And because we stand for both the rule of law and fiscal responsibility, we can offer a policy that reflects both.
• Liberals – you can avoid criticism for “tax and spend,” or delivering social benefits to the undeserving. This plan increases tax revenue from people under-paying now - it pays for itself!

Let me lay it out . . .

From the time Europeans first landed on these shores, they had to deal with the Natives – disparate tribes living independently, often at war with each other, and ranging from simple hunter-gatherers to agriculturally-based villages and cities. Being relatively unsophisticated in either technology or political structures, even if they had been able to sail to Europe it is unlikely they would have had much interest in relocating eastward; all the migration from the 16^th century well into the 20^th was from east to west.

Fortunately for our forbears – the original colonists and later settlers – the Native Americans’ lack of sophistication worked to their advantage.

• There were no immigration laws with which to contend.
• No ports of entry; if the natives weren’t friendly where you landed, get back on the ship and land elsewhere.
• No organized ICE, Customs and Border Protection patrols, “walls” or surveillance of the borders

Of course, this is not to say that these immigrants weren’t met with violence – many times, they were. It was just relatively unorganized, and disjointed. Eventually, native tribes came to the conclusion that their best chances lie with choosing sides – align with either Britain or France. Talk about defeated!

The National Archives offer a concise narrative of what happened next (https://www.archives.gov/research/native-americans/treaties).

From 1774 until about 1832, treaties between individual sovereign American Indian nations and the U.S. were negotiated to establish borders and prescribe conditions of behavior between the parties. The form of these agreements was nearly identical to the Treaty of Paris ending the Revolutionary War between the U.S. and Great Britain. The negotiations ended in a mutually signed pact which had to be approved by the U.S. Congress. Non-tribal citizens were required to have a passport to cross sovereign Indian lands.

From 1832 until 1871, American Indian nations were considered to be domestic, dependent tribes. Negotiated treaties between tribes and the U.S. had to be approved by the U.S. Congress.

In 1871, the House of Representatives ceased recognition of individual tribes within the U.S. as independent nations with whom the United States could contract by treaty, ending the nearly 100 year old practice of treaty-making between the U.S. and American Indian tribes.

Not only were treaties routinely broken by the colonists, and later by the US government: when we no longer had patience to deal with these “individual sovereign nations” we simply defined them as something other than sovereign nations! But why wouldn’t we?  We had already established the “greatest country on Earth,” and stopped thinking of ourselves as immigrants seeking freedom, and instead as the “native” Americans!  But THESE natives were more powerful, more sophisticated, and unconcerned for anyone who wasn’t “one of us.”  In short,

Our history is to tear-up treaties, laws and definitions when they no longer serve our interests – it’s the American way!

And so now, with our own history as precedent, we can fix the 21^st century problem of immigration. But first, let’s all agree –

•  We’ve created our own problem by redefining “immigrant.” When we were the “huddled masses, yearning to be free,” it was one thing. Once we didn’t need the labor or the soldiers, they became “illegal aliens.”
• Not all immigrants are illegal; we remain bound by US and international law that protects the right of people to seek asylum in other countries. And why wouldn’t we? We are a compassionate, freedom-loving people (many would add, “Christian”).
• “While the number of families arriving between official border crossings has skyrocketed, the number of migrants seeking asylum at official border crossings has remained relatively constant, at around 4,200 per month.”  This is due to a 2018 US border policy denying asylum seekers entry – forcing them to await a hearing date in Mexico – and not because they prefer to scale a fence, climb a wall, or risk death crossing a desert (Thousands of asylum-seekers left waiting at the US-Mexico border, PRI).
• It defies logic, and everything we see and know, to insist that the majority of border-crossers are violent gang members, or drug- or human traffickers. These are families fleeing violence, oppression, and lack of opportunity to feed their families in their home countries. And THAT makes them Americans in the original, founding sense of the word (see At the US border, asylum seekers fleeing violence are told to come back later, The Washington Post).

Our treatment of freedom-seekers makes a mockery of the principles our country was founded on.

It’s about time we get to my plan:

In keeping with US tradition, values, and legal precedent, we should just tear up our immigration laws that prevent freedom-loving people and families from seeking life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

1. Grant DREAMERS - persons who have lived in the US without official authorization since coming to the US as a minor - citizenship. Outright. This is a no-brainer.

o They had nothing to do with any decision to break any laws – they simply accompanied their parents, however they arrived here.

o We are legally (let alone morally) obligated to educate them with the full benefit of any services that any other child receives. Nationally, the most recent data (2016) indicates $11,762 is spent on public education per student. That means over the course of 12 years, we invest on average $141,000 for each of the 800,000+ registered DREAMERS. Why would we threaten to deport our investment in them?

o These children and young adults are motivated and capable of making our society stronger and better (I’ve done the research and immigrant students do make America More American, professor says, NJ.com).

2. Grant full citizenship to anyone residing in the US who wants it, as long as they do not have a record as a violent criminal, or are not subject to a current criminal investigation. Precedent allows this:

o After enslaving Africans for about 300 years, the 14th Amendment was passed, changing them from slaves to US citizens virtually overnight (making it reality? – that’s the subject of a future blog!)

o Laws are like treaties – they are all broken when they are inconvenient. Who do you know who always obeys speed limits?

o We can change the definition of “citizen” just as readily as we changed the definition of “individual sovereign nation” for Native American tribes 150 years ago. 

3. Engage with these countries that cause decent people to risk their lives for safety and freedom, starting in Central America. 

What the hell’s going on in Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua anyway? If you wanna make nice with nasty people, what’s so appealing about Kim Jong-un and Putin? Do some of the hard work, too, and start bullying the countries that can’t keep their own people safe! 

4. Reform our practices at the border to treat people humanely, remembering how we honor and revere the people who risked everything to come to this continent and create the greatest country on Earth in the first place. 

Are we so insecure that we need to build a wall to keep out bad guys?  We seem to have largely mastered the concept of homeland security; we are capable of both being decent and protecting ourselves.

Now . . .  sit back and imagine how much less anxiety there will be in this brave new world. No more accusing our neighbors of stealing the benefits and bounty of US citizenship – now they are citizens, paying taxes, voting, participating in government just like the rest of us!  Our neighbors no longer live in fear of ICE raids and deportation. And what will we do now with that $4 billion+ we were going to spend on a wall, knowing that there will be fewer people fleeing here for their lives, and when they do they will be well-treated?

How many other problems are we creating by pretending that we always stand by the rule of law, stubbornly clinging to principles that aren’t even consistent with the ones we were founded on?  Why do we choose to deny others the same rights and privileges that we hold so dear for ourselves? Could the only reason be that we think we are better than they are?  These aren’t rhetorical questions – I, for one, would really like to know.  I’m just afraid that I might actually know the answer.