Right On: Making sense of immigration

January 10, 2018 Utah Channel 3

OPINION — I am a supporter of legal immigration.

I have escorted African political refugees from Eritrea and the Congo to an American embassy to fill out immigration applications. I was thrilled to hear one refugee tell me after he’d been to the United States for several months that “America is double good.” He’s since earned a mechanical engineering degree, become a citizen and works for the Department of Commerce.

I believe our country has been and will be bettered by legal immigrants like my friend. I believe that our country’s stature in the world is enhanced as we serve as a beacon of liberty in turbulent times.

Nonetheless, political commentator Heather Mac Donald made an observation that gave me pause: “Immigration is not a service we provide for the rest of the world.”

If immigration is not a service we offer to all comers, what should our policy be?

In the last few months, terrorist acts have been committed by Islamic immigrants residing in this country for years. Apparently they self-radicalized by visiting violent Islamist websites.

Several had been admitted as extended family members of naturalized citizens. This fact has focused attention on our policy of allowing extended family members to immigrate.

Most of us are comfortable with uniting nuclear families: fathers, mothers, children and grandparents. Dreamers who know no other country have my support as deserving to stay. But I find it hard to extend that sympathy to uncles, aunts and cousins and all their spouses and all their children.

Whether Noah’s ark is taken literally or if instead the Ethiopian fossil “Lucy” is the progenitor of the human race, we’re all part of one big extended family. Does that mean we should open our borders and let anyone come and go?

I believe that people who choose to immigrate to the U.S. are making a decision to leave their extended families behind. The first step in making sense of immigration is stop admitting extended family members; stick to nuclear families.

A good second step would be to end the so-called diversity lottery program. Enacted in 1990, the program admits immigrants from around the world, diversifying our citizenry. While noble in intent, Reuters reports that a majority of Americans oppose the program. It is subject to fraud and has admitted terrorists including one who drove his truck onto a New York sidewalk and killed eight.

While ending the diversity lottery program draws widespread support, Congress has tied its termination to other more controversial actions, leaving it in limbo for now.

The best solution to our patchwork of immigration laws is to implement a merit-based system. The benefits of this approach have been demonstrated in other countries.

Canada implemented merit-based immigration in the 1960s. Its program ignores race, religion and ethnicity and instead considers only age, education, job skills, language ability and other attributes that define immigrants’ potential economic contributions.

The result: Canada has the most prosperous and successful immigrant population in the world, despite having a per-capita immigration rate three times higher than the United States.

The U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, chaired by Democratic Representative Barbara Jordan in 1995 issued merit-based immigration reform recommendations. These recommendations were endorsed by President Bill Clinton and then promptly forgotten.

They’ve been resurrected by President Trump. Despite his well-known anti-immigrant views, he’s received a surprising amount of support. Even the liberal Huffington Post ran an article headlined “Trump is Right.”

A merit-based immigration system would prioritize those with education and job skills that would give them the best chance of success in our increasingly demanding economy. Equally important, our economy would benefit from their skills.

According to the National Foundation for American Policy, 44 of 87 startup companies valued at $1 billion or more as of 2016 were started by immigrants. These are the kinds of folks we ought to be admitting, not the second cousins of refugees admitted years ago.

Implementing a merit-based immigration program need not exclude reuniting nuclear families. Nor need it preclude admitting refugees in desperate straits in their home countries. But such situations should be targeted and limited. Europe’s experience admitting large numbers of Middle Eastern refugees in recent years is a cautionary tale.

We should expect all those we admit to become Americans first and foremost. Our culture is the most diverse and accepting in the world. Immigrants can be proud of their heritage while being patriotic citizens.

Those who practice identity politics prefer to keep immigrants in ethnic pigeon holes and pander to grievances real or imagined. Immigrants with the skills needed for economic success will escape this trap.

Merit-based immigration is a proven success in Canada. Our expanding economy needs more workers, not fewer, as baby boomers retire. Now is the time for bipartisan support for this sorely needed change.

Howard Sierer is an opinion columnist for St. George News. The opinions stated in this article are his own and may not be representative of St. George News.

Email: hsierer@stgeorgeutah.com

Twitter: @STGnews