A Different View of Illegal Immigration

Perhaps its time to look at the U.S. illegal immigration woes in a global way and begin to realize that any mechanisms the United States may implement to secure its border with Mexico can only be momentary, finger-in-the-dike solutions in the grand scheme of population migrations in the near future. As climate change marches relentlessly forward and sea levels rise, ice caps and glaciers melt, rivers dry up, and wild fires and devastating storms affect more people, the immigration problems that this country is now experiencing will seem like child's play. Instead, we need to consider the problem on a new philosophical basis, thinking in terms of how to accommodate populations rather than how to exclude them. Once we free our thoughts from a mindset of resistance to one of acceptance we can begin to utilize the combined resources that become available on all sides of the issue. We can begin planning, enlisting the aid of climatologists who are already charting the migration directions likely to result from increasing drought here and flooding there. We can project agricultural changes, such as the drying up of the vast grain production areas of the great plains and the warming up of more northern locations such as Bismarck, North Dakota (89℉ today) or Fargo (87℉) and begin now to plan an agricultural shift. We can take another look at the vast still uninhabited areas of the United States to find ways to make them more habitable for immigrants willing to adopt a pioneer spirit of hard work and creativity in order to establish a home. We can work closely and positively with the countries sharing our borders to formulate a cooperative and inclusive plan that includes all the people using combined technologies and utilizing that greater pool of physical and intellectual resources. 

When viewed through this lens, the growing dispute around the new immigration law of Arizona can be seen as useless and wasteful of both time and money. The miles of fences, hordes of patrol guards, and untold spending in detection technologies to keep our neighbors out is not the answer. Students of history can aver that since its inception the United States has learned and relearned the fact that an isolationist policy is ultimately an untenable policy. So it is now.

Instead, the United States must continue to do what it has always done: welcome the world's poor and needy. And it must do what it does best: lead the world by example. Let's address illegal immigration with planned migration strategies. Let's begin negotiations with Canada to work together to expand the future northern breadbaskets of Saskatchewan and Alberta into combined agricultural centers with Montana and North Dakota, sharing technologies for production and shipping to benefit the entire hemisphere. Let's tear down the walls and fences on our border with Mexico and in their place together construct an array of solar panels and lines of windmills to power future industry for both countries and to pump water inland from desalination plants on the Baja Peninsula. Let's prepare for the future and at the same time create industry, increase employment, and improve the shared economy of the this hemisphere.

And maybe, once we have accomplished this, once we have led the way, the rest of the world will follow.

This is too easy...

It would seem that the Senate has moved on to other issues that do not include unemployment legislation and the expiring benefits for jobless Americans. Nor has a realistic means of support been suggested for the projected 1.6 million people who will suddenly be without the means to purchase essentials. What issue could be of such importance to senators that the very survival of large numbers of the people that they represent is not their top priority? Apparently, politics.

I had not intended to target Congress yet again in this blog about leadership but this is too easy…and too necessary. Who should the Senate be representing if not the most needy residents of their states? In my home state of California unemployment hovers near 12.2%, which out of a population of about 43,310,433 people means well over five million of them are jobless and dependent upon unemployment benefits. Five million people! What could be the economics of ignoring their plight? Will it hasten recovery? It seems doubtful to me.

We all belong to gradually increasing and overlapping concentric circles of community: family, neighborhood, town, friends, colleagues, state, country, business and so on. Often these communities come into conflict and we find it necessary to prioritize one over another. Often such conflicts give rise to an ethical dilemma. In the case of Congress, the conflicting communities appear on the surface to be political party vs. constituents in need. It can be rationalized (and I'm sure it is!) that the greater good can be achieved by success at the polls leading to the institution of newer, better policies. But in so doing, by thwarting legislation of the current administration, these Congressmen are ignoring a greater need and responsibility as leaders, that of the huge numbers of unemployed. Fix the hole in the dam and then talk about whether it is in the right place on the river!

While the need for effective leadership in our country and the world grows, a void in leadership skills and tools is becoming increasingly apparent. As a leader, how do you make the right decisions for yourself? for the world? When looking at the ethical question, should it be about the greatest good, or about the greatest need? The Jones/Covrig decision making model suggests six questions when facing such dilemmas, including: "How important is the immediacy of this decision to other stakeholders?" and "How concentrated will the effects of this decision be on any one stakeholder?". While bias must necessarily effect the leader's consideration, particularly with so many powerful stakeholders involved, the totality of the responses to the six questions must identify the areas of greatest ethical intensity. Once established, it is time for the leader to look internally for personal honor and courage, and act.

Addressing an ethical dilemma can be difficult. But not recognizing that you face one is a travesty.