Foreign policy: Immigration and family separation

The United States foreign policy, particularly immigration, has been a subject of everlasting controversy spanning throughout history but further intensifying during the Donald Trump era. America, as a global power and center of geopolitical and economic activity is inherently a “nation of immigrants”. This brings along numerous benefits to the economy of the country in a variety of ways, such as unemployment reduction and an overall increase in GDP. However, it is not without drawbacks, as clashes in culture and illegal immigration incite racial tensions and put the security of the country in jeopardy. Although there are two sides of the coin, and all solutions have both advantages and repercussions, it is best that the American government implement a policy that is open to more legal immigration; yet subsequently mitigate illegal immigration to the furthest extent possible. This would not only yield favorable outcomes to the state of the economy and help reduce social tension, but it is reasonable to infer that it is a largely bipartisan policy making the legislative process much more straightforward, with the support of the majority concerning public opinion.

Dominating the aspect of immigration is the deeply contentious issue of illegal immigration. It has been tarnished by cases in which undocumented migrants contribute to drug trafficking and cases of homicide. The Trump administration has been a monumental factor in the recent antipathy, as their campaign has espoused crude remarks on Hispanic illegal immigrants, and although illegal aliens are not Americans, his rhetoric impacted Hispanic-Americans too. It created an aura of fear that grouped all Hispanics together, putting pejorative labels on them. The President’s remarks have provoked copious accusations that he is prejudiced towards Hispanics in America. Evidence, however, points to the contrary, during his condemning of unauthorized migration. “America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation. But all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled, illegal migration. It strains public resources and drives down jobs and wages. Among those hardest hit are Hispanic Americans.” President Obama also upheld this. In 2005, he said “We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants in this country. (The Associated Press)” Despite the difference in opinion among Republicans and Democrats regarding illegal immigration, with the former believeing that a hard-line approach which includes deportation of all migrants and reinforced border security is the way to go, and the latter accepting the inevitablity of illegal immigration and maintaining a more lenient approach by providing documentation following a meeting of various requirements, there is room for compromise. Both parties, to a certain extent, believe that strong border security is a necessity and also encourage immigration through law abiding ways.

The dissociation between illegal and legal is pivotal. 60% of Americans polled in a Pew Research Center inquiry regard illegal immigration as the largest migrant related issue (America’s Immigration Quandary 1) and needs to be thwarted. Detriments include costing the economy catastrophic amounts of money and leaving the country susceptible to violent crime and illicit drugs (FAIR: The High Cost of Illegal Immigration). Also, many are manipulating the flawed system by obtaining free healthcare funded by taxpayer dollars funded by the legal citizens of America (Bacon). Although there are statistics that promote the idea that even illegal immigrants have the same, albeit lesser, benefit on the economy as legal immigrants, these benefits are not rationale for allowing unchecked migration, because employers are innately compelled to hire workers for a cheaper salary, and illegal immigrants are typically willing to work for a lower pay, which in turn hurts low-skilled workers composed of both immigrants and long-term citizens. On the contrary, 49% of Americans enquired in a 2017 Gallup survey believe that lawful immigration benefits the economy (Swift). Impecunious immigrants reinforce the economy because they are less accustomed to American society, therefore, resort to menial jobs that established Americans stray away from. They are the backbone of the American production industry and invaluable for Americans seeking affordable labor. America needs to increase opportunities for immigrants and make the process more straightforward, as it will only benefit society and further discourage illegal immigration (Wu).

Popular opinion aligns with the proposed policy plan. In a 2013 survey conducted by IGM Chicago, increased legal immigration is supported by a weighted 63 percent of surveyed Americans. Even considering the prevailing thought that other low-skilled workers are hurt by a larger volume of incoming low-skilled foreign workers, it applies to the idea that illegal immigration must be significantly reduced while increase the opportunity of legal immigration to counterbalance the antipated decrease. Despite the fact that not every American agrees with the proposal, it is only democratic that there is majority-rule in a situation where no consensus can be made.

Tied to public opinion is the media coverage that strongly influences voters. It is known that Congress is deeply unpopular among the general public, despite it being the branch in which the electorate has the most control over. The approval rating of Congress in recent years has been consistently in the range of 10 to 20 percent of the American public, suggesting that they are not accomplishing what most citizens expect from them. Central to this discontent is how the media portrays the legislative branch. Because it is composed of members with ideologies all over the political spectrum, media of all sides have their critiques on congressional members with opposing views. This further incites the negativity that enshrouds public opinion of Congress and creates factions among the people. Because legislative processes involve many compromises and negotiation before a bill is seriously considered, media plays a huge role in spinning the policy in a positive light to avoid dissenters influencing Congress, and congressional members themselves being deterred from calling for a vote, as they strongly value their support among the general public due to looming threats of re-election, particularly the House with it’s two-year terms. If a bill is excessively partisan, it is unlikely that it gets through this filtration process and many news outlets will respond negatively to the proposal. Therefore, the policy needs to be impartial enough that mainstream media of both viewpoints - particularly CNN, NBC and Fox News - portray the policy in a way that creates support among the population. Overall, the general population cannot be neglected when pursuing a bill that involves much controversy, with media playing a colossal role.

The proposition of immigration reform has lingered in the ranks of Congress throughout the 21st century, especially since early 2013. A proposed immigration bill titled “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013” introduced by Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer was held by the Senate and passed by a 68-32 margin. However, this bill would have made it possible for many undocumented migrants to gain legal status and eventually citizenship. This was a deterrent among a select group of conservative House Republicans, who refused to introduce the bill on the House floor. Republicans preferred an approach with individual bills rather than a comprehensive bill, which was deemed unfeasible for Democrats without a promise of a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Political polarization is inevitable when dealing with such a contentious issue, therefore, it is imperative that a sufficient body of Congress approves so that the bill can be taken to the executive branch. It is agreed upon by both parties that illegal immigration should be avoided; the difference in opinion is the dealing of illegal immigrants already residing in the United States. This policy proposal mainly deals with the prevention of illegal immigration, primarily by strengthing the border, increasing surveillace regarding visa overstays and a more active approach by ICE to crackdown on illegal aliens involved in more illicit activities. To appeal to the more liberal branch of government, the quota on immigration should be expanded, contrary to the current agenda of the Trump administration - more focused on the reduction of immigration in general - they reduced the refugee quota from 45,000 in 2018 to 30,000 in 2019. This will certainly be contrary to the ideology of the Democratic Party, currently a majority in the House of Representatives. Republicans, barring a minority that are on the extremely conservative branch, largely agree that legal immigration is beneficial and should be encouraged. In response to this deep divide, an increase in border security and a simultaneous increase in the amount of legal immigration, which in turn decreases the motive for illegal immigration as there are more opportunities to foreigners in desire of improved quality of life, is a bill that will have a reasonable opportunity to foster strong consideration in the legislative branch of the federal government.

In conclusion, immigration - the main component of United States foreign policy - needs to be dealt with in a manner that yields comprehensive reform yet is able to pass through the branches of government. This requires a strong consideration of bipartisanship and public opinion, which is accomplished with the aforementioned proposal.