Immigration Solutions Should be Realistic
A fundamental aspect of any policy must be its feasibility within our political system. The size and support of coalitions in Congress, and the public’s recognition and demand are critical variables when deciding which ideas to embrace. These factors should be the starting point to solving problems in our system.
So much of our national discourse can be simplified when we consider these fundamental questions since even the best solutions may dissolve if they lack support from a majority in the House and Senate. Therefore, substantial effort is required to advance such a proposal through the legislative process.
This effort applies equally to the persistent issue of immigration. According to Gallup, Americans’ concerns about immigration have reached levels not seen since 2007. This heightened focus addresses one facet of the criteria: the public’s acknowledgment of the problem and their quest for solutions. The next step is to determine which policies the public favors, with the expectation and hope that representatives will be more inclined to vote in alignment with these preferences.
What we need are bipartisan solutions to solve the illegal immigration problem. When I mention bipartisanship, I don’t imply unanimous agreement on specific policies but rather popular ideas with a reasonable chance of becoming law. Given the slim majorities in Congress, persuading a few members from the opposing party, depending on their constituents’ leanings, might not be too difficult.
The form of bipartisanship I am arguing for is about stressing practicality. Traditional bipartisanship necessitates concessions from both sides — compromise. This notion doesn’t have to be the case here; plenty of sensible solutions enjoy public support and already garner agreement from party representatives of each party. Those are the types of solutions we should pursue, rather than the radical all-or-nothing approaches that have become the recent norm.
During the Republican primary debates, we observed an approach contrary to what I advocate. Some of these propositions include defunding sanctuary cities and ending birthright citizenship. Apart from not addressing the problem of undocumented immigrants crossing the border, these ideas are unpopular amongst the general public and infeasible in Congress. One approach, deploying US military and special operation units to the border and into Mexico, is indeed popular, but only to stop illegal drug smuggling — not to detain or stop all undocumented immigrants.
While researching potential immigration solutions, I sought to identify proposals that would garner broad support among Americans. Unfortunately, many of the ideas are frequently discussed but rarely acted upon.
One widely accepted view is increasing refuge to those fleeing violence and war. While most Americans do not feel strongly about this idea, it would be challenging for any representative from either party to oppose it. Humanitarian assistance for refugees is something most individuals can endorse and campaign on with minimal backlash from opposing members or their constituents.
Another highly favored concept among the public is the general prescription of enhancing border security. Although former President Donald Trump did take steps in this direction, the scale of the effort was relatively minimal, with only a 1.5% increase in staffing from 2017 to 2020. During this time, the United States Border Patrol encountered more immigrants than in any year since 2007.
While Trump did call for additional resources for border protection and enforcement, he also spent over $10 billion in funding for a border wall. Proposals like the border wall fail to meet practical criteria; most Americans did not support it, and there was no viable path for a congressional majority to back it.
Under President Biden, there have been notable improvements in this direction, with an increase of more than 20% in CBP staffing since 2021. Additionally, he has proposed $25 billion for border security, an increase of over $800 million since last year. Even if Republicans find this funding insufficient or disagree with the specific allocation efforts, increased funding for staffing, surveillance, and processing at the border should be a foundational aspect of negotiations since both sides proclaim to want them.
Republicans could also negotiate aspects related to deportations, which are regarded as very or somewhat important in immigration policy by 57% of Americans, particularly among Republicans. Under President Biden, deportations have increased by 32% since 2022, while encounters at the border are up less than 24%, according to US Customs and Border Protections. Although there are more border crossings than a year ago, the consistent rise in deportations should resonate with Republican voters and representatives.
Expediting the process for those who aspire to work and become citizens is less popular but a potentially viable solution to the problem as well. Few would dispute the high participation rates of undocumented immigrants in areas like agriculture and construction sectors — jobs that many Americans are not inclined to take.
Both Democrats and Republicans acknowledge that undocumented immigrants fill positions that are less appealing to American workers. Simplifying their path to citizenship while making the process more efficient, can lead to them obtaining additional education and, consequently, greater job competition, benefiting wages for all workers and potentially boosting the economy by $2 trillion over a decade. Increasing the number of immigration judges and altering the sponsorship process — both of which Democrats and Republicans generally agree — would be good places to start.
All solutions involve financial considerations. While the currently viable and popular solutions may come at a cost, more radical proposals would entail unsustainable expenses for the US, particularly in the long run. For instance, mass deportation efforts would cost an estimated $115 billion, with implications significantly increasing this amount by as much as five times that figure. The Bipartisan Policy Center projects that deporting all unauthorized immigrants would shrink the labor force by 6.4% over two decades, potentially reducing the US GDP by a substantial $1.6 trillion.
The solutions outlined here may not be flashy or solve the problem overnight, but they represent a pragmatic approach. To address immigration-related issues seriously, we must identify solutions that are not only effective but also politically viable.
The United States has been too preoccupied with debating radical solutions, often leading to neglect of the problem altogether. This process, in turn, results in less effective solutions due to the evolving nature of the issue. Representatives then modify their proposals, often radicalizing them even more, in response to the heightened intensity, rather than pursuing viable and practical propositions the public supports.
Though I think bipartisanship is part of the solution to immigration, that does not mean we should stop trying to create better proposals. Even if these proposals indeed work, we should maintain attention and focus in order to find better solutions. But for right now, Republicans and Democrats offer valuable ideas for addressing the problem, and many of the potential starting-point solutions enjoy broad support. We should explore these agreeable solutions before delving into more ambitious, impractical, and polarizing proposals.
