Where We Stand: Our Principles On Combining Sensible Immigration with Assimilation

Congress has the constitutional responsibility both “to establish an uniform rule of naturalization” that sets the conditions of immigration and citizenship and to ensure the fairness and integrity of the process by which immigrants enter the country legally. The U.S. government has a duty to know who is entering, to set the terms and conditions of entry and exit, and to control that entry and exit through fair and just means. A disorganized and chaotic immigration system encourages the circumvention of immigration laws and is a clear invitation to those who wish to take advantage of U.S. openness to harm this nation. Secure borders, especially in a time of terrorist threat, are crucial to American national security.

The principles upon which this nation is established mean that an individual of any ethnic heritage or racial background could become an American. These same principles also call for—and a successful immigration policy is only possible by means of—a deliberate and self-confident policy of patriotic assimilation that seeks to educate immigrants about this country’s language, political principles, history, institutions, and civic culture. While the larger formative influence occurs through social interactions, private institutions of civil society, and public and private education, the federal government has a strong and legitimate, though limited, role in this process.

Immigration is no exception to the principle that the rule of law requires the fair, firm, and equitable enforcement of the law. Failure to enforce immigration laws is unfair to those who obey the law and go through the regulatory and administrative requirements to enter the country legally. Those who enter and remain in the country illegally are violating the law, and condoning or encouraging such violations causes a general disrespect for the law and thereby increases the likelihood of further illegal conduct.

In accordance with the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), Congress should place renewed emphasis on the process by which American principles are inculcated in those who seek to become U.S. citizens. The activities of the Office of Citizenship in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ought to be encouraged, reinforced, and expanded. The test taken by candidates for citizenship should be strengthened to focus on core history and civic principles rather than trivia or process. The requirement that applicants understand the English language must be enforced, and English language instruction should be strongly promoted. The oath of citizenship—the contents of which are described, but not specified, in the INA—should be codified in law.

As a matter of national security, Congress and the Administration must secure our national borders—addressing the issue from the point of origin, in transit, at the border, and within the United States. Thus, Congress should strengthen the activities, assets, and programs necessary to enhance homeland security, including providing the necessary resources for border protection. In addition, because the U.S. Coast Guard’s many missions touch on virtually every aspect of maritime and border security in coastal areas and at many ports of entry, Congress should accelerate spending on Coast Guard modernization and make additional investments in assets that support this essential aspect of border security.

While recognizing legitimate concerns about creating a national identification card, Congress must ensure that Social Security cards are less susceptible to fraud.New measures to regulate the issuance and monitoring of visas and the enforcement of existing visa laws should be a priority for Congress and the Administration. Congress should follow the recommendation of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the 9/11 Commission) and set nationwide standards for the issuance of key documents, such as driver’s licenses, that are used for purposes of establishing identity. These standards should require proof of citizenship or lawful presence in the United States as a prerequisite for such documents. Because of the security aspects of the visa process, Congress should transfer the Office of Visa Services from the Department of State to the Department of Homeland Security.

Immigration reform in general and any new program in particular must go hand-in-hand with a much stronger approach to violations of U.S. immigration laws.While recognizing the difficulty and challenge of finding and removing every illegal immigrant in the United States, Congress and the President must take credible steps to reduce illegal immigration in both annual and absolute terms. Until Congress gives the U.S. Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement sufficient manpower and resources to carry out an extensive enforcement program, the bureau must be more efficient and effective. In addition to various targeted enforcement efforts, a good place on which to focus is finding and deporting criminal illegal immigrants and those who have fled after having been ordered deported.

The full potential cost of a legal non-immigrant worker’s becoming an illegal immigrant should be borne by the would-be employer. Congress should consider requiring sponsors of immigrants to demonstrate sufficient financial ability to prevent the risk of welfare dependency by those who come to the United States and to create an incentive for the employer not to hire immigrants who might violate the terms of their immigration status. An experience-rated bond or insurance system for employers of temporary workers would encourage employers to uphold the law and to weigh the full private and potential public costs against their own benefits.

In the normal course of criminal investigations, state and local law enforcement should neither ignore immigration law nor hesitate to cooperate with federal immigration officials. Section 287(g) of the INA provides adequate authority for state and local enforcement to investigate, detain, and arrest aliens on civil and criminal grounds. An existing Section 287(g) pilot program with the State of Florida could serve as a national model. Congress should appropriate funds for the DHS to expand Section 287(g) initiatives, the DHS should encourage other states to adopt programs based on the Florida model, and states should use the Florida initiative as a model for expanding their own domestic counterterrorism programs and improving cooperation with federal authorities.