Talking About Immigration

Lately, I've gotten very selective about which of the few podcasts I have in my phone that I ever get around to listening to. Ostensibly, I'm interested in all of them or I wouldn't have them automatically downloading, but as I think I've said before, listening to other people talk just doesn't fit into my life all that well, no matter how much I like the host(s). 

Here's one I gave a chance: "Why Is This Happening," Chris Hayes talking with David Bier, director of immigration at the Cato Institute. As you probably know, Cato is libertarianism central and not usually my cup of tea, but I knew Cato had recently published a study on the positive effect of immigration (whether legal or illegal). 

So what would Bier have to say about immigration under Trump 2.0? 

It's all worth listening to, but here are a couple of key takeaways:

• In the year before 1924, when immigrants arrived at Ellis Island, 98% of them were allowed into the U.S. This is the type of process many people's families went through when they say their ancestors had to come here "the right way." The various parts of my family, for instance.
• In contrast, during what some people call the "open borders Biden" years, just 3% of people who wanted to immigrate to the United states got in. That small percent includes refugees. It also included spouses and children of American citizens. 
• U.S. immigration law changed in 1924, restricting admission based on racist policies, until 1965 when the law was changed again.

During those so-called open-border Biden years, there was essentially no path to legal immigration as it would have been thought of in the early 20th century. CATO created an online game based on the 2024 rules (remember, the rules are much more restrictive now). It was basically impossible to come here legally even under the 2024 rules. 

Yet it's not uncommon for some Americans to think undocumented people are just lazy and not following an obvious, easy process.

This part is mostly quoted from Bier speaking in the podcast. Some of it might be paraphrased or condensed:

If you ask regular people to design an immigration process from the ground up, it never looks anything like what we currently have. 

[The current U.S. process] focuses on whether someone has exceptional ability or extraordinary ability... which costs billions of dollars to analyze, vs. asking, is this person a threat to the country, are they going to be able to support themselves when they get here? 

Those are reasonable questions to answer in an honest system. That is not what our system is about, it's about keeping people out.

If you want people who are hard-working, looking for a better life, not doing harmful things... That's not what we have. 

I think back to my late sister's intractable attitude about immigration and it just doesn't make any sense. It has to come down to xenophobia or racism. Or maybe more simply, some deep-seated fear of contamination. At one point in the podcast, Chris Hayes said something about comparing the fear to people who are neurotic about hand-washing, but he and Bier didn't pursue that. Maybe he was on to something with that.