Immigration Policy and Border Security
A points-based system like Canada's would recruit high-quality new immigrants AND retain Dreamers. Enforcement of visa overstays would be more cost-effective than securing 7500 miles of border.
My family’s immigration story: My parents and sister came to this country in 1978 amid the political turmoil of the Middle East. I was born in Glendale in March 1979. I would be considered an anchor baby for tourists who overstayed their visa, and my 3-year old sister would be considered a Dreamer. Even before they were lucky enough to be granted amnesty, my parents stressed assimilation into the United States: my father started his small business and worked towards his general contractor’s license while my mother took English classes at night with me in tow. As an extended family in Glendale (with my uncles, aunts, and cousins), we all assimilated and became productive members of American society
My parents were lucky enough to receive amnesty by Ronald Reagan in 1986; since that time, there have been several more amnesties passed by Congress, none of which has provided a long-term fix. Ergo, the debate continues on our (lack of) immigration policy.
If Americans invested as much enthusiasm into immigration as they do to the yearly NFL and NBA drafts for their favorite teams, they would realize that a points-based immigration system would recruit the best and brightest individuals as new Americans. Canada has been using a points-based immigration system for over 50 years,1 and nobody calls them racist for being particular about their immigrants.
Canada grants express entry to applicants who possess skills, demonstrate language proficiency, have relevant work experience, and have pursued higher education. A similar points-based system would not only recruit valuable new Americans, but also effectively address the dilemma of Dreamers who already possess the language proficiency, work experience, and education/skills that would qualify them for express entry and allow them to participate in the American workforce.
A system similar to Canada’s, with allowances for existing undocumented immigrants and new asylum-seekers, would hit a number of high points that currently drive immigration concerns from both sides of the aisle:
an emphasis on English language proficiency
a preference for younger, skilled workers with advanced education
a no-fault application for existing undocumented immigrants whose deportation proceedings would be deferred while their status change is in process
an early-review channel for asylum seekers whose applications would not earn extra points for asylum status but would be evaluated sooner than non-asylum seekers’ applications
Dreamers who have been raised in the US and have achieved the language proficiency and necessary skills/education would quickly accumulate points that would rank them high on the list
This points-based system would have to be paired with robust immigration law enforcement, not simply with southwest border protection, but also (and more importantly) with enforcement and expulsion of the estimated 500,000 annual visa overstays that enter the country legally through airports and have no recorded exit from the country.2
The coverage of undocumented immigrants apprehended and turned away at the Mexican border distracts our attention from the half-million visitors who arrive every year legally but overstay their visas illegally. Although 2 million enforcement actions (denials to undocumented immigrants seeking lawful entry) were recorded at the Mexican border in 2021, 25% of the people apprehended (1 in 4) were repeat offenders. In different terms, persons A, B, and C were arrested once in 2021, and then person A was arrested again at least one more time (if not more) in 2021. Therefore, although 2 million enforcement actions were reported, there were only 1.5M unique individuals trying to cross the border.
After excluding 2020 and 2021 due to worldwide disruptions from the Coronavirus pandemic, we see that 2019 and 2022 had vastly different apprehension numbers at the Southwest border.3 There was an over two-fold increase in border apprehensions in 2022 compared to 2019; although both years lacked a cohesive federal policy on immigration, the antipathy of the Trump administration dissuaded immigration attempts compared to the ambivalence of the Biden administration. Prior to 2019, Southwest border apprehension numbers were unchanged (roughly 500,000 annually) during a 5-year period4 spanning the presidential administrations of both Donald Trump and Barack Obama (labeled “deporter-in-chief” by some immigrant groups).
By contrast, the visa overstay rate for lawfully-admitted visitors has remained constant at 1%, translating to at least 500,000 new undocumented immigrants annually from 2015 to 2020.5 In different terms, nearly half of all undocumented immigrants every year escaped our attention and remained in the country while we focused on the Southwest land border. Furthermore, because the majority of these visa overstayers are not Mexican or Central American, they avoid scrutiny while the popular face of illegal immigration remains overwhelmingly Mexican and Central American.
Therefore, the implementation of an explicit, equitable points-based system would dissuade unplanned land border crossings more effectively than the Biden administration’s current policy of ambivalence while being more sympathetic to immigrant’s situations compared to the denial-and-deportation practices of the prior administrations. Fewer southwest border crossings would free up more resources to locate and enforce visa overstays. Meanwhile, the queue of legal immigrants would include skilled, productive individuals who would contribute substantially to American society.
How my family would have fared with the points-based system: my parents would have scored points for English proficiency, education (high school for my mother and university for my father), and skills (my father was an engineer who subsequently obtained his general contractor’s license). If there had not been any social upheaval in the Middle East, they would have applied from afar and ranked relatively high on the list; with the upheaval in the Middle East and an unplanned asylum journey to the US, they would have had the same application rank them highly while their asylum status would have ensured them faster review of the application (but no added points compared to someone who wasn’t applying with asylum). If they were existing undocumented immigrants with their Dreamer daughter, their anchor baby son, my father’s small business, and my mother taking English classes at night, they still would have been able to rank highly while their no-fault application prevented deportation during evaluation.
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/express-entry/eligibility/criteria-comprehensive-ranking-system/grid.html
https://www.dhs.gov/publication/entryexit-overstay-report
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-border-encounters-fy22
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration/fy-2019
https://www.dhs.gov/publication/entryexit-overstay-report