Immigration has been much in the news recently, and I thought we should restate what our policy is (it hasn’t changed since Tomas Leon and I hatched it up over lunch about 5 years ago):
1. We have a different take on securing the border. We probably need people to work, given the low unemployment rate, if it can be believed (that’s the topic for another blog). Hispanic folks want to come here, probably in fewer numbers than five years ago, but they still come.
2. As Brad Thor said, we can build a fence in a weekend from California to Texas. But, what we should do is put entry points in the fence every 10 miles or so. We do entry points in Canada, but not really on the Southern border.
3. When Hispanics (or anyone else) presents themselves for admission to the US, we should know who they really are, check identification, what their skill is, and where they are going. All this data goes into an all source ICE database, integrated with the one that they already have on immigrants.
4. All immigrants are required to check in with ICE every four months or so, to see if they’re doing what they’re supposed to, and how they’re coming on becoming an American citizen. We can grant them a provisional green card at the border, with a six month expiration date on it. So, they have to check in somewhere with ICE. If they don’t, they’re subject to deportation.
5. On deportation, if they commit even one crime, they’re going to be deported, or at least held in a jail until their court hearing comes up. They could be released on bail, but only if they appear to be of otherwise good character. None of this nonsense about having five felonies and still walking around.
6 . No sanctuary cities. Why were these created in the first place? Their mere existence seems counter to a sound immigration policy. I know San Francisco is out there, even for the Left Coast, but really guys and gals.
OK, ACLU, take your best shot at this. Let’s get a dialogue going.