Give New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman credit for his admission, rare among the national news media, that President Trump’s immigration positions are logical, humane, and morally right.
Friedman wrote Tuesday that during a trip to southern border in San Diego, he became “more certain than ever that we have a real immigration crisis and that the solution is a high wall with a big gate — but a smart gate.”
I’m glad Friedman realized that walls are as effective as they’ve ever been, but this isn’t a new concept. Trump has been talking about it since 2015 and, more importantly, border agents have been asking for more wall construction since the 1990s.
Friedman said the wall should have a sign that says, “Besides legitimate asylum seekers, we’ll accept immigrants at a rate at which they can be properly absorbed into our society and work force, and we’ll favor visa seekers with energies and talents that enrich and advance our society.”
Wow, that sounds familiar. Oh, wait, it was the White House-backed bill proposed two years ago by Sens. David Perdue, R-Ga., and Tom Cotton, R-Ark., which did all of the things Friedman agrees with.
And what Friedman proposes includes all of the things Trump promoted during his 2018 State of the Union address, which Friedman’s own paper said was “injected [with] only poison and confusion.”
Here’s the “poison” from that speech:
Trump said in his address that immigration reform should include legal protections and a path to citizenship for the nearly 2 million “Dreamers,” illegal immigrants brought to the country as children; an end to chain migration, wherein immigrant citizens are allowed to bring the remotest relatives to the U.S.; and an end to the visa lottery, which gives out green cards to foreigners at random.
The goal would be to judiciously import immigrants with the highest potential to contribute to American society, and put an end to violent crimes that are committed by low-skilled, unassimilated immigrants.
Friedman is one of the last people to be convinced on most of Trump’s immigration proposals, which are overwhelmingly popular.
A Harvard-Harris poll released at the start of the year showed stunning support for limiting the number of immigrants into the country. The poll showed 81% of registered voters wanted the annual immigration rate reduced by nearly a third; nearly 80% said they favored an immigration system that prioritized education and skill level over the current chain-migration mess we currently have; and almost 70% said the lottery, which doles out visas to immigrants at random, should end.
The one proposal with only about 50% of the country’s approval is “the wall,” which I would guess has at least something to do with the national news media and the entire Democratic Party having called walls racist for nearly four years.
Most Americans know what a sane immigration system would look like. I’m happy Friedman has joined us.
