Centrist Independent View on Immigration
The Centrist Independent Voter supports immigration reform with a preference for a more merit based system, greater emphasis on border security, expanded immigration courts to permit rapid adjudication of asylum claims, a method for screening asylum claims that does not leave the system open to abuse, a significant increase in the number of legal immigrants admitted to the U.S., and a path to legal residence (not citizenship) for those who are currently here illegally but have no other criminal record and who are willing to pay a fine of some sort for having entered illegally. For details see our policy proposal on immigration.
A Merit Based System
By a merit based system, we do not mean that we would restrict immigration to an elite group. Rather we would admit immigrants based on the economic value that they contribute to our society. This might include increasing the number of immigrants with advanced degrees in the sciences, but it also might mean an increase in the number of immigrants who would be joining the agricultural labor force. It would not necessarily mean a reduction in the number of immigrants admitted based on family connections, but it would mean that the increase in legal immigration would be based on adding value to the U.S. labor force.
Why Not a Path to Citizenship
There is a belief on the part of Republicans that Democrats favor immigration as a method for tilting political demographics in favor of the Democratic Party. The best way to dispel this concern is to limit any path to legal status for illegal immigrants to legal residency without citizenship.
Kamala Harris on Immigration
Harris has committed herself to the bi-partisan legislation crafted earlier this year in the Senate. She also supports creating a path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants. She supports expanded border security, but she opposes a border wall.
The bi-partisan legislation that Harris supports is, to my mind a good step. Unfortunately, it should have been proposed earlier, when it would not be seen as an attempt to diffuse a potent political issue. Having said that, the legislation that the House Republicans demanded was not a serious attempt at compromise.
Donald Trump on Immigration
Donald Trump seems to view immigration, both legal and illegal, as a threat to American culture, national security, and the economy. He makes outrageous and unsubstantiated claims about the impact of illegal immigration on crime. (In this regard, it is important to note that the plural of anecdote is not data.)
JD Vance went out of his way in his acceptance speech to note that he rejects the notion that America is an idea. He emphasized that America is also a shared common history and shared community. This view makes it pretty much impossible for immigrants to be viewed as fully American. I think that was his point.
Trump supports a massive deportation of illegal immigrants that would be harmful to the American economy, particularly the agricultural sector and residential construction.
A Centrist Independent View
We need to control the border. We need to reform the asylum system so that it cannot be easily gamed. Because of the huge backlog of asylum claims (cases can take many years to resolve), people seeking economic opportunity can easily make the decision that a weak claim to asylum at least gets them into the country and gives them a number of years to enjoy the benefits of living here. So why not come? If claims could be resolved in a matter of months rather than years, the incentive to make the dangerous journey would be dramatically reduced. The bi-partisan bill at least attempted to address this core issue. The Republicans have not suggested a reasonable compromise that would make a Centrist Independent Voter think that they take the issue seriously. Closing the border is not a reasonable compromise and would not be in America’s self interest.
On this issue, I would give a very weak nod in Harris’ direction. Not to the 2019 Kamala Harris, but to the 2024 Kamala Harris.