The Madness of Immigration Policy

Steve at Pragueblog posted some observations about the incompetence and pettiness of what used to be the INS (now the BCIS). As a former Prague ex-pat who often had to deal with INS, both on my own behalf and on behalf of my immigrant wife, I have to agree.

Immigration policy is one of the most important aspects of our political structure, but it is probably one that is the least understood by most American citizens. This is only natural, because most Americans never have to deal with the consequences of our immigration laws (at least not in a direct sense).

As a libertarian, I favor in principle a relatively open immigration policy, one which encourages those who are able to find a niche for themselves in the "American Dream," but also one that would discourage people from coming here and becoming dependent on public assistance and becoming a burden on public services. I am by the same token troubled by policies that seem to reward those who don't play by the rules while penalizing those who do play by the rules. The latter is essentially what we have, today.

Obviously, our immigration policy was thrown into greater chaos by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. While it grieves me to create a sort of "fortress America," I understand the necessity of doing so, at least until we feel reasonable sure that we are safe from terrorism. (As a side note, this was a major reason why I supported the war in Iraq -- if we can bring political reform to the Arab/Muslim world, where people can direct their frustrations inward toward their own elected representatives and institutions, the likelihood of being attacked by terrorists will be significantly alleviated, if not eliminated).

But placing so much power in the frontline representatives of immigration enforcement -- that is, the average BCIS screener at the airport or at the border -- has had some unfortunate effects. Many of these people behave in an unnecessarily aggressive manner toward visitors. Their rudeness could be tolerated if they were not so often incompetent at doing what they are charged to do -- screening out undesirable aliens.

Part of the problem, of course, is that they are charged with enforcing laws and executive policies that frequently don't seem to make sense. For example, next month the BCIS will begin fingerprinting and taking photographs of all visitors from non-visa waiver countries. In other words, if you are coming to the U.S. on a visa, you can expect to be put through what amounts to a rather humiliating process as a condition of entry.

This means that my Czech mother in law, should she ever visit this country again (that seems to be in doubt), would be fingerprinted and photographed at the airport before being admitted. Now, my Czech mother in law can be difficult, but anybody looking at her can make a common sense judgment that she doesn't represent a threat to U.S. national security. The same will apply to numerous other visitors -- grandmothers and grandfathers, children and their parents -- regardless of what would be obvious to the average, naked eye.

This one-size-fits-all policy is especially ludicrous in light of the fact that most of the 9/11 hijackers entered our borders from E.U. countries. Granted, they were not carrying E.U. passports, and thus still had to obtain visas, but there are many Islamists who do carry E.U. passports and who could just as easily do harm to us (shoebomber Richard Reid comes to mind).

The fact is that the threat to us comes from adherents of radical Islam. We should have an immigration policy that addresses that threat. Instead, we try to pretend that the threat could comes from anybody, anywhere, and so we implement policies that are only going to succeed in offending everyone, everywhere.

Part of the war on terror should be focused on building the kind of America that we envision for the future. I worry that our current immigration policy is not taking us in the right direction.

UPDATE: From the world of perfect timing comes this article in the Washington Times in which the contradictions of U.S. immigration policy are discussed at some length (to the extent possible in a newspaper article).

Comments

[Steve]

Good stuff. Needless to say, I agree. People worry about the supposed goodwill abroad that has been squandered by U.S. diplomacy and policies. France and Germany are mad now, we're told, and won't play nice. They should see what's going on in the international arrivals queues in our airports. I'm of the school that doesn't believe that any truly exceptional goodwill was ever really there to squander. But here we are, actively beavering away to piss off the world, one visitor at a time, sending them home humiliated and disgusted. People should wring their hands about that instead of worrying about the mythical lost goodwill of 911.