A few days ago, I attended a panel at the Nixon Library on the topic of immigration reform. Given the panel's location and pamphlets by the drinks table reading "The Republican Road to the White House," I knew I was in for a conservative discussion. But after kind introductions to the panelists with an emphasis on the benefits of immigration, I was looking forward to hearing interesting opinions and fresh perspectives from the right amidst months of extreme political rhetoric on the topic. I was, unfortunately, disappointed.
Despite arguments on the pamphlet stating "Republican primary voters support a path to legalization," the conversation very much focused on who did and did not deserve to immigrate to the United States. Congresswoman Mimi Walters, a panelist, did her best to avoid strong political statements, but fully emphasized "securing our borders" as a No. 1 priority for immigration reform. She admitted that immigrants were beneficial to the economy, but emphasized their necessity for the sole purpose of making "our" country better for "us."
The panel also included Michael Dubin, founder and CEO of the Dollar Shave Club. I was, admittedly, charmed by his charismatic demeanor and impressed by the success of his business, but that did not stop me from wondering why he was invited to speak as an expert on immigration reform. It turns out, one of Dubin's "higher up" employees was from India and had trouble attaining an H-1B visa due to a random lottery. Dubin's comments about the arbitrary nature of the lottery and remarks that immigrants should be relabelled "American freshmen" as a less separating term were well-received, but they hardy made him qualified to answer crucial policy questions about immigration reform.
The turning point of the event was perhaps when Dubin recalled a common misconception of Mexican immigrants as "rapists who steal your job" and a man from the back of the audience yelled "THEY DO!".
The night went downhill from there. Statements were made regarding how American-educated immigrants should stay in the U.S. to contribute to society because they owe the taxpayers who funded their "superior" education; claims were thrown out that a person seeking entry into the U.S. could be evaluated and essentially ranked based on their qualifications on paper; and Congressman Walters even endorsed Donald Trump's idea of "building a wall," despite rejecting the feasibility of this plan.
The most jarring incident was when a woman from the audience stood up to contribute her thoughts. This self-proclaimed "4th generation Californian" complained about how crowded her Orange County neighborhood was and how we cannot group immigrants from "civilized Western countries" with those who, in her experience, stole our jobs. After referencing presidential candidate Donald Trump, a woman behind her catcalled in support.
Not knowing much about this event before attending, I wasn't quite sure what to expect. But never would I have imagined that I would be so offended at what someone said that I would feel the need to stand up and excuse myself in the middle of her sentence. It was shameful to watch such ignorant discourse riddled with privilege, entitlement, and a delusional notion that America somehow belongs to those whose ancestors arrived before others' — that somehow, its resources should only be shared with those with credentials and from developed countries.
On top of providing me with a disheartening personal experience (as both of my parents are immigrants and I am a first generation American), this immigration panel caused the importance of the upcoming election to hit me with full force. I had always known the stakes were high, but never has it been so real to me as it is right now.
According to Donald Trump's campaign website DonaldJTrump.com, Trump's immigration plan highlights: "A nation without borders is not a nation. There must be a wall across the southern border." Going on, the page lists "Make Mexico Pay For The Wall" because Mexico is "responsible for this problem, and they must help pay to clean it up." Trump also calls for tripling the number of ICE officers, ending birthright citizenship, and instating a requirement for businesses to hire American workers first.
As always, there are several things wrong with Trump's plan. Most importantly, the plan focuses on how best to exclude Mexican immigrants from accessing United States resources because of the alleged "problems" immigrants are causing — namely, worsening the economy, taking away American jobs, and increasing crime rates. However, despite accounting for only 13 percent of the United States population, immigrants share 14.7 percent of the total U.S. economic output. The Economic Policy Institute wrote, "The evidence shows that in the long run, immigrants do not reduce native employment rates."
In addition, according to the American Immigration Council, despite growth in immigration numbers between 1990 and 2013 from 7.9 percent to 13.1 percent (unauthorized immigrants from 3.5 million to 11.2 million), "FBI data indicate that the violent crime rate declined 48 percent—which included falling rates of aggravated assault, robbery, rape, and murder. Likewise, the property crime rate fell 41 percent, including declining rates of motor vehicle theft, larceny/robbery, and burglary." Additionally, only 1.6 percent of immigrant males age 18-39 are imprisoned, while 3.3 percent of the native-born are.
There has never been a time when there were no immigrants of color in the United States. That being said, supporters of a homogeneous white United States as the "Great" America are simply disillusioned. In fact, unless you are of Native American descent, you or a member of your family is an immigrant. As Jon Stewart brilliantly exclaimed on the Daily Show: "This country isn't yours. You don't own it!" This country belongs just as much to the first generation Mexican-American as it does to the seventh generation British-American. Rhetoric separating "us" from "them" simply offers a divisive pushback on multiculturalism, expanding horizons, and progress towards equality. Donald Trump's immigration plan poses a more extreme version of this pushback.
In contrast, Hillary Clinton said in 2015: "The American people support comprehensive immigration reform not just because it’s the right thing to do—and it is—but because they know it strengthens families, strengthens our economy, and strengthens our country…We can’t wait any longer for a path to full and equal citizenship." On HillaryClinton.com, Clinton's campaign acknowledges that "we are a nation of immigrants" and that we should prioritize a pathway to full and equal citizenship.
Clinton's plan, in stark opposition to Trump's, promotes the protection of immigrant families, the humane enforcement of immigration laws, and the promotion of naturalization. After her long record of fighting for immigration reform (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/05/05/long-record-immigration/), Hillary Clinton is ready and able to make positive changes.
This November when you go out to vote, remember that you are not only voting on personal preference or personal ambition. You are also voting on issues that affect hundreds of thousands of people — American or not — that may be bigger than decades of conservative smears attacking Clinton's credibility. You are voting on immigration reform, and whether you prefer an isolated, elite America or the open, inclusive one this country has always prided itself on being. For the latter option — a forward-thinking, progress-oriented United States — among countless other reasons, #ImWithHer without a shadow of a doubt.
