With regards to Australian immigration policy, it is notable that both parties in the Australian government basically agree that no one who enters the country illegally (including if they don't go through the proper pathway to apply for refugee status or asylum) can ever become and Australian citizen. There is no amnesty.
The island the guest is referring to I suspect is Nauru, which is a former Australian territory that is now an independent country. Like many small islands, it lacks resources and its own economy is limited, so accepting the Australian detention center is a huge economic boon for them. Because it is not technically in Australia, this allows the Australians to cut corners with civil rights, and the center has generated considerable controversy domestically and abroad due to the treatment of its detainees.
Enforcing borders is important, but keeping in mind the costs of doing so is also important.
This is episode is just prime Glenn Show, The Glenn Show at it's best. A deep, nuanced, non-partisan look at a complicated issue. I learned so much here I might need to watch it again to make sure I followed everything.
Fascinating show! Mr. Di Martino taught me a lot about the border crisis. It is a lot more difficult to resolve than I thought. Mr. Di Martino offered the idea of detaining people in the U.S. until they can be legally approved to immigrate, but did not provide many details about the nature of the detention or how much it would cost.
This is the kind of transparency that I seek from my media and political class. I heard details upon details that are glossed over in our national debates. Bravo, Glenn! This is the clarity I need to function in a complex world.
First of all, I appreciate Glenn doing what seems to be so rarely done in the immigration discourse - bring in an expert who obviously knows what he is talking about! This was a very good episode.
A few thoughts.
1. I appreciate the importance of focusing on high skilled immigrants and particularly recent graduates and people with sustainable income. But what about the other end of the spectrum - the lower skilled immigrants who harvest crops, replace our roofs, and happily take on the loss jobs that "Americans won't do." I'd love to know where Di Martino thinks they should fit in.
2. I'm skeptical of the political feasibility and sustainability of Di Martino's detention approach. While it may be, on the one hand, just a matter of appropriating money and not even requiring 60 votes, I think the kind of large scale detention that would be required, not just of criminals but of minors, families, even very young children in conditions that are bound to be inhumane due to limited funding relative to the sheer numbers of people involved... I think such a program would start out as politically very unpopular and would only become moreso as horror stories emerge.
3. The reason why Donald Trump talks about other countries "sending" insane people is pretty simple. He conflates asylum as in "a political status sought by migrants who cross the border" and asylum as in "a place where insane people are held." It is why he brings up "the late great Hannibal Lecter" while he is talking about the border at his campaign rallies. Hannibal Lecter is an example of a person who belongs in an insane asylum.
Di Martino provides a tightly thought out framework to address the imbalances in legal and illegal immigration. The policy prescriptions generally make sense. One caveat that is tied to the sequencing of reform. One needs to think of the bipartisan deal of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. The three legged stool brought amnesty, border enforcement and employer sanctions. In effect, amnesty was frontloaded while the other two anguished. If amnesty was delayed until the other two were effectively implemented, the practicality of further illegal immigration would have been significantly minimized. That's why Di Martino's suggestion of frontloading more immigration judges, more detention centers and returning "credible fear" to its former understanding follows what would have been a greater deterrent in the 1986 bill. A good interview. Thank you Glenn.
OMG! if Daniel Di Martino is a representative of Venezuelian youth, then they remain largely misguided, misinformed and a long way from recovery. What happened in Venezuelia happens in many third world countries and boils down to an IGNORAMUS electorate electing an IGNORAMUS bunch of legislatures. The inculcation of what Americans call 'CIVICS' and reverence for the US Constitution, binds MATURED electorates in a profound belief in what is loosely called the rule of law. Provided the Superior Courts of Adjudicature remain independent and politically non-alligned, and support law enforcement, the country can survive. Venezuelia can only recover if the electorate follows a decent and capable leader, like Donad J. Trump back to health. The USA has been in decline and going down the same path as Venezuelia. Make no error, DJT is the panacea, and without him things will be break. The whole world is waiting with baited breath for the 5 November 24 results. The hope of the mature world is that the IGNORAMUS Democrat Party and Deep State will FAIL hopelessly, so that US CIVICS can be made compulsorary in junior schools.
With regards to Australian immigration policy, it is notable that both parties in the Australian government basically agree that no one who enters the country illegally (including if they don't go through the proper pathway to apply for refugee status or asylum) can ever become and Australian citizen. There is no amnesty.
The island the guest is referring to I suspect is Nauru, which is a former Australian territory that is now an independent country. Like many small islands, it lacks resources and its own economy is limited, so accepting the Australian detention center is a huge economic boon for them. Because it is not technically in Australia, this allows the Australians to cut corners with civil rights, and the center has generated considerable controversy domestically and abroad due to the treatment of its detainees.
Enforcing borders is important, but keeping in mind the costs of doing so is also important.
This is episode is just prime Glenn Show, The Glenn Show at it's best. A deep, nuanced, non-partisan look at a complicated issue. I learned so much here I might need to watch it again to make sure I followed everything.
Fascinating show! Mr. Di Martino taught me a lot about the border crisis. It is a lot more difficult to resolve than I thought. Mr. Di Martino offered the idea of detaining people in the U.S. until they can be legally approved to immigrate, but did not provide many details about the nature of the detention or how much it would cost.
This is the kind of transparency that I seek from my media and political class. I heard details upon details that are glossed over in our national debates. Bravo, Glenn! This is the clarity I need to function in a complex world.
First of all, I appreciate Glenn doing what seems to be so rarely done in the immigration discourse - bring in an expert who obviously knows what he is talking about! This was a very good episode.
A few thoughts.
1. I appreciate the importance of focusing on high skilled immigrants and particularly recent graduates and people with sustainable income. But what about the other end of the spectrum - the lower skilled immigrants who harvest crops, replace our roofs, and happily take on the loss jobs that "Americans won't do." I'd love to know where Di Martino thinks they should fit in.
2. I'm skeptical of the political feasibility and sustainability of Di Martino's detention approach. While it may be, on the one hand, just a matter of appropriating money and not even requiring 60 votes, I think the kind of large scale detention that would be required, not just of criminals but of minors, families, even very young children in conditions that are bound to be inhumane due to limited funding relative to the sheer numbers of people involved... I think such a program would start out as politically very unpopular and would only become moreso as horror stories emerge.
3. The reason why Donald Trump talks about other countries "sending" insane people is pretty simple. He conflates asylum as in "a political status sought by migrants who cross the border" and asylum as in "a place where insane people are held." It is why he brings up "the late great Hannibal Lecter" while he is talking about the border at his campaign rallies. Hannibal Lecter is an example of a person who belongs in an insane asylum.
It's gonna be a shitfest.
Donde esta mi benefits?
Di Martino provides a tightly thought out framework to address the imbalances in legal and illegal immigration. The policy prescriptions generally make sense. One caveat that is tied to the sequencing of reform. One needs to think of the bipartisan deal of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. The three legged stool brought amnesty, border enforcement and employer sanctions. In effect, amnesty was frontloaded while the other two anguished. If amnesty was delayed until the other two were effectively implemented, the practicality of further illegal immigration would have been significantly minimized. That's why Di Martino's suggestion of frontloading more immigration judges, more detention centers and returning "credible fear" to its former understanding follows what would have been a greater deterrent in the 1986 bill. A good interview. Thank you Glenn.
OMG! if Daniel Di Martino is a representative of Venezuelian youth, then they remain largely misguided, misinformed and a long way from recovery. What happened in Venezuelia happens in many third world countries and boils down to an IGNORAMUS electorate electing an IGNORAMUS bunch of legislatures. The inculcation of what Americans call 'CIVICS' and reverence for the US Constitution, binds MATURED electorates in a profound belief in what is loosely called the rule of law. Provided the Superior Courts of Adjudicature remain independent and politically non-alligned, and support law enforcement, the country can survive. Venezuelia can only recover if the electorate follows a decent and capable leader, like Donad J. Trump back to health. The USA has been in decline and going down the same path as Venezuelia. Make no error, DJT is the panacea, and without him things will be break. The whole world is waiting with baited breath for the 5 November 24 results. The hope of the mature world is that the IGNORAMUS Democrat Party and Deep State will FAIL hopelessly, so that US CIVICS can be made compulsorary in junior schools.