Donald Trump has been widely derided as a joke candidate who is only running for President for spurious reasons. Whether it's because he's a Clinton pal, sent by Bill to help torpedo the Jeb campaign (as if Jeb! needed help); or because he's trying to feed the flames of his gigantic ego, Trump's run is not serious.
This may well be true, but this supposedly less than serious candidate has released a very important (and quite serious) policy paper on the subject of immigration. It has three main points:
1. A nation without borders is not a nation. There must be a wall across the southern border.
2. A nation without laws is not a nation. Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced.
3. A nation that does not serve its own citizens is not a nation. Any immigration plan must improve jobs, wages and security for all Americans.
This is quite refreshing. Let's delve a little deeper into each of his points.
1. Every nation is a geographical entity, and is thus defined by its borders. It is possible for a nation to remain indifferent to its geographical definition, but only if it likewise indifferent to whether its neighbors parcel out its land or migrate and take that land for themselves. Such a nation is as unserious as Trump's campaign is reported to be. If we would not carve out the southwest and give it to Mexico, nor more should we risk the accomplishment of the same through mass migration.
2. A law that is not enforced is no law at all. While ordinary Americans are penalized for the smallest infractions--missing a solitary line on any number of bureaucratic forms, having too much liquid in one's container at the airport, etc.--illegally trespassing into our lands is so ill enforced that the number of criminals is estimated in the millions.
The counter argument is that illegals are sometimes deported, and, much more frequently, stopped and turned away at the border. But the salient point is that with so many successful trespassers, potential law breakers are only encouraged.
This ill enforcement inculcates a culture of lawlessness. If a host country doesn't enforce the most basic procedures concerning who may reside in that country, why would it enforce less important laws, such as those governing the roadways or commercial transactions? And even if the latter are more readily enforced, how does one prosecute someone for, say, drunk driving if the driver is uninsured and unlicensed, as well as illegal?
3. This point is perhaps the most sound, as well as the least likely to be mentioned by any of the other candidates. We are not bound to take in masses of immigrants in perpetuity. On the contrary, we should take in only those immigrants who will help the nation as a whole.
Except for the sort of people, i.e. the rich, who are anxious to clamour for more illegal immigration, i.e. cheap labor, wages have been stagnant during this most dismal of economic recoveries. We don't need unskilled laborers, no matter how hard working, when our own citizens are underpaid (or unemployed). We don't need guest workers to compete with skilled workers, competing with them and driving down their wages in the process.
There may come a time when these sorts of workers will be needed. Then again, given the trend towards automating most manual labor jobs, such a time may never come. Regardless, the government ought to set policies that serve its own citizens first.
These positions shouldn't be controversial. They should be cosigned by every candidate for national office. Trump has many flaws, but it is to his lasting credit that he introduced the national question into what otherwise would have been another dreary election cycle.