Practical, if not probable, solutions for immigration reform

Here it is, my feeble attempt to take on the mess that is our U.S. immigration system. However, I do not believe that a few simple fixes will fundamentally change the root cause of institutionalized immigrant discrimination. To end institutional immigrant discrimination you first need to eliminate institutionalized racism/sexism--and, unfortunately, I do not see that changing anytime soon.

Racism, sexism and classism will only abate when the social hierarchies of wealth and power structures in American capitalism are dismantled. Indeed, capitalism--especially late stage, unregulated capitalism, requires an ever-increasing number of hyper-exploitable, vulnerable workers to utilize against other workers in order to drive down wages for everyone.

Of course, race and sex are two favorite modes of classifying and segregating these workers: legal and illegal workers is another. It behooves capitalism to segregate workers in hierarchies in order to pit the various groups against each other. This ensures there is always a vulnerable group for capitalism to exploit (should one group get too demanding and uppity) and also keeps the working masses so busy fighting and blaming each other they will never unite together and fight their common oppressor: the elite capitalists.

Having said that, if I was the American President and had unlimited power (unrealistic--I know) I would do the following--listed in order of priority.

#1

The first thing I would do is ensure that The Family Unification Act and The Dream Act will pass. Two many wives, husbands, children, brothers and sisters are being needlessly torn apart with little prospect of reuniting. Additionally, many promising and intelligent young people are being deported before they can finish their degrees. The majority of them did not have a choice as to whether to stay in the US illegally. They came here as young children. Deporting any of these individuals-without a legal avenue to adjust their status-- is barbaric, ridiculous and goes against morality and commonsense.


#2

The second adjustment I would implement is changing our economic and foreign policies in order to foster cooperation with developing nations to strengthen their economies rather than plundering their raw materials, exploiting their labor force and undermining their autonomy. The stronger a nation becomes--and the more stable--the less likely people will move from their homelands. With that being said I will digress for a moment:

People don't like moving from their homeland, friends and families. In general, people prefer to remain in familiar surroundings with people of a similar language, customs and a shared history. Migrants don't like moving to foreign lands but they are compelled to do so for various reasons including extreme poverty, starvation, political/ethnic/religious violence and turmoil in their homelands. And although there has always been migration; the contemporary waves of immigrants from the southern hemisphere towards the epicenters of capitalism in the Northern hemisphere is unprecedented in history.

So, we need to ask ourselves, why is this mass exodus happening?

In a nutshell, these mass migrations are fueled by globalization and the unequal power dynamics between rich and developing countries that can be traced to colonialism, imperialism and the contemporary incarnation of unregulated turbo charged-capitalism. These policies of global de-regulation and unlimited free trade have been facilitated by IMF and WTO loan policies to control developing nations. The United States has significantly contributed to the financing of the IMF and WTO and therefore has undue influence in shaping these loan policies.

Jarrett S, Lovell, author and activist explains the history of the IMF specifically, and how it has metamorphosed into the neo-liberal institution it is today:

"In assessing the rise of corporate domination, many observers identify the aftermath of the Second World War as the era when corporate power became most pronounced. Indeed, the roots of contemporary discontent over corporate globalization can be found within the international trade institutions and policies that emerged at the end of the Second World War. Specifically after the war ended, the United Nations Monetary and financial Conference was assembled at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, where the International Monetary fund (IMF) was created to finance the construction of Europe and to prevent international financial crises. To be sure, the IMF is a public institution. It is financed by taxes provided by citizens from contributor nations. It was established to allow countries experiencing financial problems to continue with global trade uninterrupted. the IMF initially recognized that even so-called free markets require regulation to prevent economic and social catastrophe. By the 1980's, however, the IMF operated according to an ideology that viewed any regulation as a barrier to capital. Under a new doctrine of neoliberalism, officials from the IMF encouraged countries to "liberalize" their economies, that is, to reduce or do away with such barriers as tariffs and humanitarian or environmental regulations."

So, in order to pave the way for free trade in developing nations, the IMF and WTO will coerce a country to dismantle their social networks, eliminate environmental protections for their citizens, de-value their currency and implement any number of laws and conditions that favor commerce (aka "progress") over citizenry. Some countries have even been strong armed into altering their constitutions in order to placate transnational companies.

So, transnational companies move into an area, set up temporary factories and hire the indigenous people for a pittance. They exploit and mistreat their workers while simultaneously destroying and poisoning the communities and residential areas where their employees live.

Suddenly--they will close up shop, layoff their workers and move to another developing nation where they can pay the work force less and exploit the populace and environment further. Leaving all workers, the world over, vulnerable, subjugated and intimidated.

#3

If I was President, I would consider one of my most fundamental jobs would be to hold myself, and all other public people and institutions to a high standard of ethics, particularly paying close attention to how words can fuel hate and human rights violations.

Citizens in The United States are fearful and look to the future anxiously. When people are scared they tend to look for a scapegoat to blame their troubles on. As Bertrand Russell eloquently states: "Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd."
The President must be aware of this tendency and must not only choose his words wisely but must also publicly chastise those public individuals who use language unscrupulously to fuel hate and fear-mongering.

#4

As President I would completely overhaul the U.S. immigration court system. I would make sure that all judges sitting on the immigration court benches actually had a degree in immigration law. I would hire more immigration judges to take on the expanding load of immigration cases.

Additionally, I would expand the number of approved asylum quotas--based on need per each individual country.I would also implement some type of committee to oversee immigration lawyers. Any lawyers found misrepresenting themselves or exploiting immigrants would be fined and disbarred.

These are a few of the reforms I would put in place. There are more I could add but these are the most urgently needed.