Immigration is the Solution Today and Tomorrow

Although the United States clearly faces many social and economic stresses today, it also has a distinct advantage: it is a nation of immigrants with a history of assimilating waves of diverse peoples into a common culture. The United States has been more successful, albeit imperfect, “governing over diversity” than virtually any other country. Ever.

So, as we face a surging labor shortage, may I ask, when did America start hating immigration? I am not an apologist for colonization over the native peoples. My own Oklahoma ancestry includes Native Americans. But hating immigration is a form of self-denial at the least, and self-loathing at its worst. 

I would posit that the us/them tension is a natural tribal tendency in all human beings but has been amplified to a destructive degree by vested interests on both sides of the political spectrum, and a media that thrives on outrage and provocation. Consequently, policy solutions become evasive and unpalatable to the political class that is loath to address them. (For greater detail, visit my 3-part series on immigration).

There is no politically viable resolution to the current bitter divide over immigration policy that does not include some recognition that all countries have legitimate rights and need to control their own borders. So let’s move past that and focus on the real challenge – determining the criteria for citizenship. 

In his recent book on identity, Francis Fukuyama has written that Western democracies must “promote creedal national identities built around the foundational ideas of modern liberal democracy and use public policies to deliberately assimilate newcomers to those identities.” If this strategy is to work in the United States, we require humane but effective management of immigration flows to allow time for absorption and assimilation of diverse peoples is paramount. 

What people fear most about immigration, and what feeds the support for illiberal regimes, is the anxiety that their own country will be overwhelmed by those with a different culture and different values, leaving the native-born with a feeling of being foreign or left out in their own country. Those fears can, and must, be addressed by creating and enforcing clear immigration rules that restore people’s trust that their government is protecting them and their national values. When I say “rules,” I mean transparent and clear guidelines as to who may apply for temporary and permanent citizenship, and what are the obligations they must fulfill to succeed, coupled with uniform, clear, consistent enforcement.

Why am I advocating for immigration expansion and clarity? “It’s the economy, stupid,” to quote James Carville. Our economic growth will depend on integrating immigrants into our aging nation. Anyone who thinks we can slam the door shut to foreigners is dangerously ill-informed about how the economy works, and those same people deny the make-up of our society. We have chronic employment shortage issues. There are 11,300,000 open jobs. The “great resignation” continues. We need people who want to pursue the “American Dream,” by working hard, paying taxes, educating their children, and becoming full citizens.

But in case you think the impact is limited to business, think about Social Security; it’s been derided as a Ponzi scheme in its structure, and underscoring that structure is the number of workers required to sustain retirees. If we don’t have enough workers in the future, the scheme will collapse. 

I have strongly championed a new immigration regime that must be sufficiently open to allow needed workers to enter but firm enough to ensure that immigrants are vetted for criminal or terrorist ties and provide enough support and follow-up to help immigrants be fully productive. Procedures must be in place, along with resources, to deal with crisis-driven surges of refugees in an orderly and humane manner. Unfortunately, today’s immigration policies have no such rational foundations. Rather, they respond to symbolic problems by adopting symbolic solutions. 

For example, the U.S. enjoys a significant competitive advantage in the global economy by being home to the majority of the world’s leading universities, which attract the elite of global talent. Recruiting high-skilled immigrants is a tool that can be amplified.

More importantly, we have adopted immigration policies that make it difficult for international students who graduate from U.S. universities to remain and work, in essence, sending their increased value back to their homeland. We have done this for the simple reason that it is an easy way to look “tough” on immigration; in my opinion, “tough and stupid.” 

On the other extreme, we need a refugee policy for asylum seekers. We should give work permits to refugees while their asylum hearings are being heard. This keeps them from being wholly dependent on public funds for months or longer while awaiting judgment. This policy avoids refugees being targeted as a burden on the public purse.

We need to communicate predictable messaging to the rest of the world, so immigrants of any kind have clear expectations regarding their

 potential status. Outright rejection due to being overrun, or releasing asylum seekers into the country in the hopes that they may show up for their immigration hearing status, is not a sustainable strategy.

But between these two extremes, we find the economic reality – we must not only accept but encourage immigrants to support our population growth and sustain economic expansion. We must plan accordingly. To be clear, if deaths exceed births, a society is mathematically entering an economic decline. A shrinking population does not increase GDP. We need legal and appropriate immigration not just for the immediate open jobs, but for the long-term. 

What should our policy look like? We should give preference to those who have already learned English; or those with needed skills (which might be high-tech or low-tech, for example, the U.S. requires hundreds of thousands of foreign workers to sustain our farms). We must develop a variety of short, medium, and longer-term work and resident visas that allows those who have established good records on work and residence to seek citizenship. We must embrace our history of social diversity, and build a resilient and dynamic democracy through strong and shared bonds. We must reject those who promote division, anxiety, and fear. 

To become a full citizen, an immigrant must have familiarity and compliance with our dominant native laws, language, and customs that support daily and institutional life. We need immigration policies that are simple and easy to understand, that restore a dual sense that 1) there are rules but 2) there is openness to —and indeed recognition of —the need for continued immigration. As a business leader, selfishly for the economy and society, I wish to help educate the public on our need for immigrants—properly screened, vetted, and integrated into society—to keep pensions, health care, innovation, and other key elements of the economy from slowing, and eventually, grinding to a halt.

The U.S. needs to realize that young workers are becoming a scarce commodity, and we will be competing more strongly than ever before to attract the most productive immigrants to our shores. 

I titled part II of my aforementioned article series, The Enduring Problem Of Being Desirable; people from all over the world want to come here. It’s a feature, not a bug.

We need to capitalize on that fact.