In the more than 30 articles I have written in the last three years, I have spoken from the perspective of a person with a Ph.D. in social work, concentrating on the study of migration.
In the more than 30 articles I have written in the last three years, I have spoken from the perspective of a person with a Ph.D. in social work, concentrating on the study of migration.
As we enter a new presidential term, the social policy question before our nation will largely be the restriction or expansion of immigration. A recent study succinctly put it in these terms: “Immigration has both advantages and disadvantages that must be considered. It provides economic benefits, fills labor gaps, promotes cultural diversity, and supports the global economy through remittances. However, it can also create pressure on public services, impact wages, and give rise to social challenges.”
Deportation is often seen as a last resort in enforcing immigration laws. It is not considered a punishment but rather an exercise of a government’s sovereign right to exclude from its nation whomever its laws dictate.
The results of the election and its effect on national migration policy will become evident over the coming months. It might be useful, however, to understand how this presidential election issue came to the forefront. In one of the most dramatic shifts in U.S. public policy opinion, the last four years have shown a new public view of migration. In 2020, 28% of Americans told a Gallup poll that immigration should decrease.
On his return to Rome from Southeast Asia, Pope Francis was asked about whom he would vote for in the U.S. election. First, the Holy Father said he does not vote in U.S. elections, and then said, “Both are against life. The one who kicks out migrants and the one who kills children. In general, it has been said that not to vote is bad, it is not good. You should vote. You should choose the lesser evil. Who is the lesser evil, that man or that woman? I do not know. Everyone should think in conscience and vote.”
Now that the slate for president and vice president has been firmed up by both parties, the issue of immigration certainly is paramount in their presentations. Even more so is the media spending being done on the issue of immigration.
The Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA), affiliated with Georgetown University, last month published a study on Catholic attitudes toward immigration, migrants, and refugees. It is a significant study, not just about attitudes on migrant issues but also about Catholic attitudes on other social issues. Catholic social teaching has been a concerted effort of the Church to apply moral teaching to everyday life issues.
Do you commemorate or observe an anniversary? It all depends on how you see it, either as a positive or a negative event. This is the very case that we have today with the anniversary of the 1924 Immigration Act, which severely curtailed immigration from Southern and Eastern European countries as well as Asian nations.
Public opinion on immigration has never been more negative. The latest Gallup Poll as of Feb. 24 shows that only 28% of the population is satisfied with the current immigration situation, making 72% dissatisfied. For comparison’s sake, it is the same percentage of dissatisfaction that the population has with public schools.
What will America become? The migration issue we confront today will greatly determine our future self-awareness and identity as a nation. It cannot be denied that we are a nation of immigrants. The current negative national narrative on migration has been influenced by various attitudes, such as racism and the fear of the strangers, for sure, but most of all by a misunderstanding of the present migration situation.