I realize that the topic of immigration and any potential solutions are likely not to come back into the limelight until it is time for election season AKA “we need divisive issues to drive supporters to the polls” season. I also understand that there are more political risks with actually doing anything about immigration than there are upsides to finding a concrete solution (at least for conservatives). However, I write this to explain my thoughts as how to approach the subject and work towards a solution than can help get our country back under control, while skirting around the inflammatory rhetoric that makes for good TV and not much else.

Note that I am not espousing any sort of “expertise” here, and this isn’t going to be a “here’s who to let into the country and how” solution, though I will provide my own preferences to that end. It’s more of a thoughtful framework on how to address the issue and work towards a compromise solution, the details of which can – and should – be deliberated by Congress. But with all the complexities to our immigration system and the murky history of imperfect solutions and setbacks, I really think we can solve the crisis in 3 (rather oversimplified) steps.

STEP 1 – SECURE THE BORDER

This probably sounds like a right-wing talking point only because everything has become partisan in today’s day and age, but bear with me. A common argument I hear from those opposite of me on this issue is that people who cross the border illegally only do so out of desperation, fleeing a broken and violent nation in crisis and seeking asylum, and that we shouldn’t just turn away. This type of appeal-to-emotion is common from the progressive point of view on immigration, but it isn’t helpful from any policy standpoint. We need to be able to see the forest for the trees, which means looking at the issue as a whole instead of exclusively through the eyes of the hungry family just trying to get by (though by no means should we completely ignore this reality either.)

Yes, people come across the border seeking safety in the United States, some good and some not the best. But there is also the reality of other things crossing the border: illegal drugs, human traffickers, illegal firearms, and more come across the border and into our nation, endangering our citizens. If for no other reason than this, we need to crack down on our border security. It will help us clarify the extent of the immigration problem (discussed below) as well as prevent numerous other abuses only tangentially related to immigration. A nation without borders is like a home without walls, and we have the means to protect our border and severely limit the amount of unwanted smuggling that occurs currently. Whether that means increased manned patrols by military/law enforcement, a physical wall, increased cameras and security drones, or ideally a combination of physical barriers, tech surveillance, and human guards, is up to Congress to muddle through. But in order to fix the leak in our boat, it would be wise to plug the gap first.

STEP 2 – DEAL WITH WHO WE HAVE NOW

It’s worded rather bluntly, but the next most obvious step is to take care of the number of “illegal immigrants” currently inside our borders. If we followed step 1 correctly, we have halted the influx of unchecked crossings into our country, so now we can figure out what to do with who is already here. In this step I figured it would also be important to cover those with expired green cards or who overstayed visas, as that often gets roped into the conversation as a type of “illegal immigrant” as well.

The two extremes to this solution fall to “deport everyone” and “amnesty for all,” neither of which is a measured and logical answer. Not to sound like an Enlightened Centrist, but I think the best solution lies somewhere in the middle. The DREAMers come to mind, as those who might obtain conditional residency because they were brought to the country before the age of 16 and were under the age of 31 as of June 2012 (not to mention the thousands of children I can only assume arrived after 2012 but meet the same age requirements). Most of these people, as long as they don’t have some other violent or criminal history, should be allowed to become citizens by some process. On the other hand, stories like Kate Steinle’s show that not everyone who is here illegally is otherwise an innocent saint, and we shouldn’t just have a catch all to grant citizenship to everyone without some kind of vetting process. My preferred solution would be something akin to the following:

1-2 year grace period where deportations are paused and we tell everyone “Now is your chance to start the process to become a citizen” just like people from other parts of the world have been doing. We won’t ask questions, and as long as you start the paperwork before the end of the grace period (I hold no illusions about the efficiency of our current process to go through everyone in <2 years) we will allow you to continue while the process is going on, regardless of the circumstances of how you came her initially. Same goes for anyone who overstayed a visa and the like.

However, if you DO NOT start this process at any point during this grace period, we will round you up and spit you back out on the other side of our border, which now has a thick reinforced concrete wall and a few snipers armed with tranquilizer guns. Good luck getting back in now. Also, if there are any blemishes on your record that we find during the citizenship review process (like if you killed someone, etc.) then you don’t just get a pass because you were brought here at 5 years old. You, too, get the boot. Otherwise, if everything checks out, you get to become a full citizen just like anyone else in the process. Welcome to America, here’s your complimentary Big Mac.

Some may see this as too harsh, others as too lenient, and I think that speaks to the compromise element. It acknowledges the imperfect gray area our reality faces and doesn’t kid around with an unreasonable “all-or-nothing” Hail Mary. You would think that would be the end of this subject, no? Did I accidentally skip a step, or find the perfect solution in 2 steps instead of 3? Do I just not know how to count?

STEP 3 – FIX THE DAMN SYSTEM

Overhaul it. Set it to fire and rebuild. Pass some meaningful reform so we don’t just end up at this same spot in another 30 years. Progressives have a fair point when they acknowledge that the system is to burdened and complicated, because it incentivizes people to just skip the line and hope they don’t get caught (another incentive tends to be the fact that progressives usually promise catch-all amnesty if they are in power, or even if they aren’t). Anyone who has taken a basic economics course can understand why incentives matter, and I’ll address the political implications of that maxim in a future post. So, if we want different results, if we want to encourage people to follow the rules and submit to the legal process instead of looking for a workaround, we should change the incentives. A massive reform of the immigration system as it currently stands ought to balance the interests of streamlining the process so you don’t need to hire a lawyer just to stay in the country AND the interests of weeding out any characters whom we deem unfit to be Americans, i.e. they have a dangerous history, would be a drain on our system, put pineapple on pizza, etc. I don’t know what that could or should look like, but it seems obvious that if we don’t make some major changes to our current system, we’ll only be having these same arguments later down the road because we didn’t tackle any of the roots.

The reason I put this last is that whenever I see a politician propose we take a look at the actual system, I often see rebuttals that we should address the issues in Steps 1 or 2 because they are of “more immediate concern,” blah blah blah. I think this is the most important step, but I made sure to get rid of any excuses that politicians use to weasel their way out of helping anyone but themselves first.

“First we need to secure the border—” Nope, stop grandstanding, we already fixed that. See Step 1.

“What about the DREAMers? We need to help them before—” Already fixed that too. Sorry, not sorry.

Now sit down and figure it out.