A Conservative Perspective on Border Security
“Any law is meaningless unless it is upheld, and those surrounding immigration are no exception. ”
Editor’s Note: This piece by Erel Arnold is only half the conversation. Click here to be directed to the liberal opinion piece on border security by Leila Pifko. Be sure to read both in order to form a complete opinion.
In today’s political discourse, whether it’s our elected officials debating on Capitol Hill, or high schoolers sparring in a lunchtime conversation, border security is often framed as a complex issue fraught with moral considerations. In straightforward terms, the issue is not actually that complex: there are legal channels of immigration, which are a gift to the country, and there are illegal ways to enter the country, which are problematic.
My stance on this issue is not based on xenophobic attitudes; I believe that immigration is a great benefit to American society. As an immigrant myself, I cannot support exclusionary philosophy in good conscience. I completely support a thoughtfully designed, legal system of immigration in which we give people the chance to live and work in America—not only to take advantage of its abundant resources—but also to contribute to its society. What I do find troublesome is that many Americans today are turning a blind eye towards the problem of illegal immigration.
I believe illegal immigration is a problem and should be stopped in order to preserve the integrity of our immigration laws. Any law is meaningless unless it is upheld, and those surrounding immigration are no exception.
There are many proposals I believe will be effective in thwarting illegal immigration and smuggling, but the one that has most recently been under the national spotlight is President Trump’s proposal to build a wall on the southern border. Many argue a wall won’t be effective, an unnecessary waste of national funds. However, data compiled by US Border Patrol since 2000 shows a marked decrease in apprehensions of people crossing in sections where a wall was installed. One such example is the Yuma Sector in Arizona, which experienced a 90 percent decrease in border apprehensions. It is important to note that these decreases cannot necessarily be attributed to just the wall; they are quite possibly a result of combined security measures. However, securing the border isn’t limited to simply building a wall! There have been numerous ideas to prevent illegal immigration and smuggling, such as surveillance drones that could be used in tandem with the wall. The US could work with Israel, its closest ally, to advance the development of tunnel detection technologies and other means of border enforcement that would be beneficial to both sides. Bottom line: increasing security at the border works.
Why does all this matter? Why should we spend large amounts of resources on security measures? Why am I even writing this piece urging America to secure its borders? The answer is simple: weak borders hurt Americans. People who would otherwise be denied entrance for reasons such as criminal history or ties to a terrorist organization can enter the country illegally, often despite having been previously deported. There are many examples of this phenomenon, especially in the place we call home: California. One case that stands out is the murder of Kate Steinle. Steinle’s shooter, Garcia Zarate, entered the country illegally after being deported five times before shooting Steinle fatally on the San Francisco waterfront in 2015. Had the US implemented strong barriers to illegal entrance, the death of this innocent young woman could have been averted. We can’t change what we can’t control; in order to prevent tragedies from happening in the future, we must take charge of our borders.
Weak borders also hurt Americans economically; both legal immigrants and native-born Americans suffer financially from illegal immigration. A common argument is that unauthorized immigrants perform labor Americans don’t want to do. However, many of these professions, such as housekeeping, taxi driving, construction working, and janitorial work are actually performed by a majority native-born demographic. This isn’t to say that jobs shouldn’t be given to immigrants, but that it is unjust that illegal aliens compete with legal residents for these jobs. Weak borders hurt lower class Americans by inundating the low-skill market with illegal immigrants who shouldn’t even be in the country in the first place. Additionally, as a young adult, I can vouch for the fact that for many people, there is no job they wouldn’t take to earn some money. Why should a person who resides in America legally have to compete in the job market with someone who entered illegally and evaded the law? This is simply unfair.
To be clear, I hold this stance towards the phenomenon of illegal immigration, not towards the immigrants themselves. There is a big difference between advocating for lawful immigration and opposing immigrants. I believe that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are likely good people with good intentions, and I think that efforts should be made to assist those already in the country to achieve legal status. It’s true that many are fleeing oppression in their home countries, and I believe that measures must be taken to help people in the face of inhumane and dictatorial governments. However, turning a blind eye towards the problem of illegal immigration undermines the foundations of our society. America is truly a nation of immigrants, but in order to preserve everything that makes America the freest and most prosperous country in the world, Americans must realize how important it is to secure our borders.
Here are some additional sources for those interested in exploring this topic further:
https://cis.org/Camarota/Enforcing-Immigration-Law-Cost-Effective
