Some thoughts on… Yearning to Breathe Free

After the second Presidential debate, a handful of topics have emerged as issues distinguishing the candidates. In the spirit of bi-partisan dialogue, Steve Uhl will be joining for the next few postings. Steve and I worked together at Strategic Decisions Group, a consultancy, where he was the head of the Boston office.  We will post our perspectives on the driving arguments of the Republican and Democratic parties on four key issues – immigration, individual rights, foreign policy and the economy.  This week’s topic is immigration.

Steve Uhl

Most polls show that immigration is one of the top issues for voters, which is not surprising since illegal immigration has skyrocketed since the Biden/Harris administration came in.  Reversing Trump policies was a focus of numerous executive orders enacted by the Biden/Harris administration on Day 1.  The massive influx of illegal immigrants that resulted has had numerous negative effects, most notably on many communities unable to handle the surge.  While the media are quick to ridicule Trump’s statement about ‘eating the dogs and cats’, they ignore the very real problems created in a city like Springfield, Ohio, where between 12 and 20 thousand Haitians have arrived in a city of 60 thousand.  No reader of this blog would envision a 25% spurt in the population of their hometown and dismiss the problem.  Nor would they dismiss Venezuelan gangs basically taking over entire apartment blocks.  Beyond the stress on resources, high levels of illegal immigration are a depressing force on U.S born worker’s wages and are an indirect insult to those who go through the process legally.

There is no evidence that a Harris administration would solve, or even attempt to solve, any of the problems above.  Her sympathies appear to run entirely towards illegal immigrants rather than U.S. citizens and most ‘immigration advocacy groups’  - which push for more liberalized immigration policies – strongly support Harris.  Though Harris and others like to use the generic term ‘migrants’ to describe both legal and illegal immigration, they are profoundly different things.  And the seeming disregard for the law plays into the general unease that the electorate has around rising crime.

Harris’ relative lack of concern about illegal immigration plays into the perception that she is a ‘coastal elite’ and not attuned to the problems of middle America, which Trump makes a priority to try to speak to.  I’ve occasionally asked my friends and colleagues – typically doctors, lawyers and the like – how they would feel if millions of doctors and lawyers were surging across the border, competing for doctor and lawyer jobs.  To me it’s self-evident that if that were the case, a border wall would have been built a long time ago.  

Harris’ lines of attack on Trump will undoubtedly be ‘he killed our bipartisan border bill’, which is true as far as it goes, and might blunt things a little.  But talking about some potential piece of legislation is not likely to be compelling to citizens who have viewed the results of current policies enacted by Biden/Harris, nor compelling coming from someone who in her actual 2019 primary campaign advocated for decriminalizing border crossings and cutting funding for ICE.  Another line of Harris' attack could be to attack Trump’s plans for ‘mass deportation.’  I don’t think that will be effective either – most people realize that this is part of the “his supporters take him seriously, not literally” paradigm.  The press may swoon at such a draconian statement, but others realize that it is more a signal that he will get serious about the issue and not be afraid to take action.

At the end of the day – immigration is a no-win issue for Harris, and their strategy will undoubtedly be to change the subject to more favorable terrain such as abortion.  Whether that will be effective is another question entirely.

Waseem Noor

The George W. Bush Presidential Center states the United States is “a nation built by immigrants”. The focus on immigration policy raises three critical questions: 1) Who are the immigrants that are being discussed? 2) Are immigrants straining the economies of cities? 3) Would VP Harris or Fmr Pres Trump do a better job addressing the issue?

Who are the immigrants that are being discussed?

The term "immigrants" (also known as the foreign born) refers to people residing in America who were not U.S. citizens at birth. The population includes naturalized citizens, lawful permanent residents (LPRs), certain legal nonimmigrants (e.g., persons on student or work visas), those admitted under refugee or asylee status, and persons without documents (unauthorized) residing in the United States.

According to the US Census, 5 million immigrants were in the country in 1870 growing to 45 million 150 years later in 2020. Despite the increase, immigrants as a proportion of the US population has stayed between 5-15% since 1870.  Of these 45 million, the majority are legal with about 23% (~11 million) classified as unauthorized.  

The recent unease over immigration stems from unauthorized immigrants coming over the Southwest border.  According to the US Customs and Border Protection, since 2021 encounters on this border increased to their highest level of 300,000 in December 2023. Encounters refer to people who are both detained and who are sent back.  Since then, it dropped back to pre-2021 levels of 100,000 encounters in July 2024. Historically, individuals were from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. But in December 2023, 54% of encounters involved citizens of countries other than these four nations including Venezuela, Colombia, China, Ecuador, and India.

Are immigrants straining the economy?

Six states are resident to about 55% of unauthorized immigrants – California, Texas, Florida, New York, New Jersey and Illinois.  The integration of unauthorized immigrants into communities does cause strain in education, resources and employment in cities, including San Diego, Houston, and New York City, and it takes time to adjust to the change.  Although unauthorized immigration has increased since 2020, crime rates across the US and in major cities like New York are down to pre-Covid levels.

Over time, large urban centers have historically benefited from immigration. Smaller cities have also benefited. Studies, including one by the Hoover Institute a conservative think-tank, find that “inner cities immigrants may be potential contributors to rebuilding and revitalizing America's inner cities”l.  Even in smaller cities, like Springfield, the Republican Governor of Ohio has refuted Trump’s claims and supported the legal Haitian immigrants.

Economic studies have found that although 1st generation immigrants may strain resources, their children (2nd generation) contribute back to the society with higher education and wages than children of native born individuals.

Would Harris or Trump do a better job addressing the issue?

Given the encounters, the Biden administration pushed a bi-partisan bill in the Fall of 2023 that allocated $20 billion funding for additional border patrols and security. The bill was eventually rejected by Senate Republicans at the urging of Trump. In response, Biden instituted an Executive Order in June 2023 that has maintained the lower number of encounters. Harris’ immigration policy would continue the Order and would advocate bi-partisan legislation like the one stopped last year.

Trump’s plan is to reinstate his previous immigration policies, to identify and deport large numbers of unauthorized immigrants, and to cut funding to urban cities housing immigrants. During his time in office, Trump did not pass any legislation on immigration, did not secure additional funding, and implemented his policies only through Executive Orders.  Trump’s immigration orders from 2016-2020 included: building a wall with Mexico funded by the US, creating a travel ban for citizens from Muslim-majority countries, attempting to cancel DACA which allowed children brought to the US to stay in schools and jobs, and separating migrant families and children at the border.  Most of these orders were considered unconstitutional by the courts including the Supreme Court.

With a second term, the Trump team will take action to re-start these orders, but has no legislation plan. Having witnessed his previous handling of immigration policy, I don’t think he has shown rational thinking, level-headed temperament or policy discipline to create a cogent agenda that addresses unauthorized entry into the US.

Harris’ plan and legislation may not be perfect, but it adheres closer to the American sentiment towards immigration as written on the base of the Statue of Liberty

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"