This a post I submitted on Tom Campbell’s website under his views on immigration.
Dr. Campbell,
I watched your debate held at Chapman and although I agree with many of your ideas, I can’t help but to cringe when you focus your immigration solution on building a physical barrier. If you think a physical barrier will keep illegal immigrants out then you must imagine that it will keep out drugs as well, right?
Supporters of a physical barrier are highly underestimating the level of human ingenuity that comes from desperation. As long as there is a strong incentive or benefit for people on one side of the border to get to the other side there will be a number of creative methods to cross. If there was no demand for cocaine in the U.S then there would be no lucrative incentive for traffickers to dream up creative importation methods.
The illegal crossing of a substance or person is a variable dependent upon the destination. Placing a futile wall up on the border just opens the door to different ways of crossing being created and potentially adds to an underground smuggling market.
Unlike drugs, the crossing of illegal immigrants should be easier to reduce because the incentive to come here is controllable. Quite simply the reduction of social services and state subsidized accommodations utilized by illegal immigrants will decrease the incentive to come here. When we look at the birthrate among immigrants, coupled with the cost of having a child, and relate that to the average income among immigrants it is obvious that we are completely subsidizing childbirth and pre/post-natal childcare. The cost ranges from thousand to tens of thousands of dollars per child. This is a small glimpse of a program that acts as an incentive for illegal immigration among the poorer citizens of our neighboring country and an example of scarce public dollars that could otherwise be saved or spent elsewhere.
Your idea about penalties for employers of illegal immigrants is along the same lines of making the state less hospitable to illegal immigrants, however the public assistance issue cannot be ignored as being a huge factor of attraction for them. I do imagine the issue of illegal immigration is such a key issue not because of cultural clashes but rather the absorption of public resources consumed by non-citizens, for this reason eliminating incentives need to be examined as the most compelling element to reducing illegal immigration.
You also speak of deploying the national guard to our border. This is just another form of a wall or barrier that disregards the whole reason we have illegal immigrants wanting to come here. Essentially, I’m hearing that you want to beef up the border to reduce immigration yet we cannot forget the reason they want to come here and that an organized war on an unorganized and underground effort like people trafficking or drug trafficking yields little in return for large effort and resources spent.
I recently took the 8 freeway from Arizona to San Diego and was subjected to three border patrol checkpoints. Would it be your intention to turn life at our border into a militaristic police state? At what point do you think citizens will become angered by being subjected to consistent inspections? Unwarranted stops like this are an encumbrance on Americans’ peaceful and private lives. Sure we may catch the occasional criminal, same if police were ordered to stop all cars operated by Hispanic looking people to check if they are American citizens, we may catch the occasional offender however we certainly wouldn’t be living in a free country.
His Response:
TomCampbell |
We need to work on all fronts. We agree on some approaches; I just would do more.




