Immigration is not one of those subjects that people gravitate to, partly because it is complicated and complex. Nor can a blog like this do it justice. Yet it is too important in this election season to ignore.
The most I can do in this limited space is to try to summarize some of the issues integral to understanding immigration and provide enough facts to help you realize that politicians making wild accusations about it and offering simplistic solutions to solve the problem are actually part of the problem.
They get in the way of both rational discussions and finding real solutions. If you are drawn to someone who does this, you are part of the problem as well. Just so you know.
According to scholar Susan Martin, there are three areas where U.S. policies on immigration can be improved: (1) visa issuance and entry inspections; (2) curbing unauthorized entries into the country, especially with the aid of human smugglers; and (3) making enforcement of immigration laws for people already here more effective. Improvement in each of these areas is complicated and difficult. Visas are a case in point.
Offering visas to foreigners is a major security concern for every country. Student visas were how most of the 9/11 hijackers gained entrance into the country. Improvements in review and enforcement are definitely needed.
That, however, is anything but easy. Reviewing visa applications involves literally hundreds of thousands of people who want to study or work here temporarily, some of whom are processed through our foreign embassies by a limited number of personnel. The vetting is slow and tedious.
Contrary to what many people believe, Martin says that the complaints against immigration officials is not that they are too careless or easy in letting people in. It is that they are too cautious, often denying visas to legitimate applicants.
But the real security concern begins once a visa has been issued. Keeping up with those who have them is a massive undertaking for any government. As you can imagine, the size of our country, the number of people with visas, and the limited immigration staff the country has makes this very difficult.
The government is working hard to improve both visa reviews, maintaining contact with existing visa holders, and ensuring that people with expired visas return home. Common sense will tell you that this is an area where spending cuts by Congress have been foolish, putting the country more at risk.
But most conservative critics pay no attention to what the government is trying to do, in large part because they are not concerned about visas. They are too busy trying to link terrorism with illegal immigrates coming into the country.
“We’ve got to secure our borders,” is the common complaint, as if that will make us more secure against a terrorist attack. It won’t, and here’s why.
Most of the people trying to enter the U.S. illegally are from Mexico, Latin, Central, and South America. Not one of these countries is a hotbed of terrorism. They’re not trying to get into the U.S. to blow the place up. They want to live here. They want to find a job. They want to make a better life for themselves. They are not terrorism material.
So what is going on when conservatives try to link terrorism and illegal immigration?
Here’s what I believe. It’s about race. Most of the people trying to enter the country are people of color because of their country of origin.
Oh, that’s right. I’m playing the “race card.” It’s something we liberals always do, except for the fact that when something is true, it’s not playing “the race card.” So how do I know what I’m saying is true? Here’s one way.
Why aren’t conservatives complaining about the government doing nothing about students from Europe whose visas have expired (there are many), making them illegal, while getting bent out of shape about illegal immigrants of Latin heritage?
The answer is (“race card” notwithstanding), racism.
If you don’t think the government is doing enough to secure our borders, you may be right. But if you think it is not doing anything, that it is satisfied with the status quo, or worse, that it is ignoring the threat of terrorism, you could not be more wrong.
So instead of complaining, or saying ridiculous things such as, “ISIS members are living right here among us,” answer this simple question. What exactly do you think our government could do that it isn’t already doing that might actually make the situation better?
If you think someone like Donald Trump will do better, tell me exactly what it is he is saying he will do that can actually make a difference. Building a wall that will costs billions of dollars won’t. Freezing all visas from Muslim countries won’t (he’s already walking that one back). Turning away Syrian refugees won’t either, as we will discuss next time.
If there is anything I have learned in studying this issue it is this. Broad accusations and non-specific solutions are a waste of time, primarily because they arise more from political motivations than a genuine concern for finding answers to our immigration struggles.
That will become even more obvious in my next blog when we address the question of what to do about the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants who are living here now.
linnposts.com 
Sometimes facts are contrary to our beliefs and wishes. When faced with the actual circumstances and asked to change the status quo for the better… issues become difficult and challenging. Thinking is hard. Immigration policy is very complex as you indicate in this series of posts. Unless concrete, specific changes are thoroughly reviewed and discussed conservatives are just playing politics with their throwaway one-liners, like “build the wall.” Good post, Jan, I’m looking forward to part 3. And, I’m ready to ask those who are critical of our immigration policy for the specific changes they are proposing and why. Thanks for this series.
Thanks, Rollie. I would love to get some responses with specific proposals rather than broadside slams intended for President Obama.