Never Trumpers? Not Quite: What the World Thinks About America and Trump

 In 2016, the liberal left governments of the world were stunned as Hillary Clinton, the Democratic heir apparent to Barack Obama, was forced to conceded her candidacy for president. How was this possible, that a brash businessman and political outsider had denied Hillary her long awaited “coronation”  that the Left believed was all but inevitable?

For the next four years, Donald Trump proceed to dismantle the Status Quo. Nothing and no one was safe. Even the “Deep State’s” hold on government was threatened. Few of Americas allies and trading partners felt safe. Even military alliances felt threatened as Trump began demanding that allies start picking up more of the costs for their own defense.

Up to then, the burden fell largely on the United States while they redirected money to their economies. Then came the 2020 election, and the Status Quo was back in power, and their nightmare was over.  It was time to restore order. But that wasn’t all that happened, the 2020 election displayed for the world to see just how deeply divided Americans were.

To make matters worse, it showed the extent the Status Quo was willing to go to retain its power by propping up a man in obvious mental decline and expecting everyone to play along. This was “The emperor has no clothes” writ large for all the world to see. Confidence in American was now in a freefall.

 President Biden’s approval rating  averaged just 42%. His Vice President, Kamala Harris, was polled as the worse VP in U.S. history (and then the Democratic Party had audacity to put her up as their presidential nominee!). By the time Biden and Harris left office, America’s allies and trading partners had serious concerns. It seemed that nearly everyone was talking about America’s power in the past tense.

We left Afghanistan, after 20 years of war, worse off than when we arrived. Iraq wasn’t doing so great either, and our regional “arch-nemesis”, Iran and all its “baby vipers” like Hamas, Al Qaeda, ISIS, and Hezbollah, were feeling more emboldened than ever. China was now viewed as the new world economic superpower, and it wasn’t being shy backing it up. Not since WWII has nations in the Pacific felt so endangered.

We found ourselves butt deep in the shenanigans that triggered the war between Ukraine and Russia and even threatened the integrity of NATO over promises and deals which should never had been made.  Illegal immigration was out of control and our politicians lacked the will to stop it. But, as the expression goes, “history doesn’t often repeat, but it does rhyme”.

On November 7, 2024, Donald Trump accomplished what few---here at home or overseas--- thought was possible. He defeated the “swamp”, despite years of attempts to financially break him, attacking him and his supporters criminally, and constant political propaganda by the “impartial” mainstream media (cue sinical laughter). They even literally tried to assassinate him.  In Europe as well as Asia, Latin America, and Africa, friend and foe alike did their best to villainize  or humiliate him or anyone who openly supported “The Donald”.

It’s been written by biblical scholars that God would often consigned his chosen prophets to the desert wilderness, to be scourged by the blistering hot winds and sand, the blazing sun, the barren landscape, and constant thirst in order to prepare them for their chosen task ahead.

While no one (especially me) is claiming that Trump has been chosen by any other deity for anything, there’s no question that he has been purged of any doubts or illusions about who he is up against or what it will take to defeat an oligarchy which has destroyed the Republic and substituted in its place, a neo-fascist corporatocracy.  Perhaps more importantly, it has shown who has Trump’s back, both individually and globally.  So, where does the world stand?

Let’s start with Europe, which has traditionally been the focus of our interests for over 200 years. We were settled by Europeans and our country was founded on the ideals of the European Enlightenment and on the model of ancient Rome and Greece.  

Twice now we’ve bailed Europe out of two devastating world wars. We left some of our bravest behind, buried in European soil. Through the Marshall Plan, we invested billions to help raise the continent up from the ashes in which it found itself. We were also instrumental in saving western Europe from the clutches of communist tyranny. We’ve been there ever since, forging close partnerships politically, economically, and militarily.

According to a Visual Capitalist survey from January 2025,  40% Europeans generally are undecided about Trump’s second bite at the presidential apple (a Pew poll shows a 31% approval rating for Trump). While 38% see Trump’s presidency as a potential disaster of global proportions and 22% believe that it may herald in a new American “golden age” which could affect the world. Compare those numbers with that of President Obama where 53% had a positive opinion about him.

The UK is among those with a low opinion of Trump. Despite being our closest ally, 54% disapprove President Trump. 31% are on the fence and just 15% support Trump. As an aside, approval for Trump in Canada is a chilly 28% while the Aussie’s 35% positive rating.

In Germany, Trump’s confidence level is just 13% with 85% having low or no confidence in him. In Sweden it’s 81% no confidence. France and Spain both give Trump a thumb’s down with a negative 78% each. The Dutch and Greeks have only 25% approval rating for Trump. Among the Swiss, 44% are undecided while 23% like Trump, but 34% don’t.

The only place in Europe where Trump actually received positive numbers was in Poland with a 51% confidence level and Ukraine (which is heavily dependent on the U.S. for aid) which gave Trump an approval rating of 44%.  Still, 37% of Ukrainians had no confidence in Trump. As for Russia, 67% had a negative opinion about Trump with only 20% having a positive view of him.

Turning to Asia, only India and the Philippines had a positive impression on “The Donald”. In India it was 56% while in the Philippines that number was 77%. In South Korea, which is heavily dependent on U.S. military support, Trump’s confidence level was 46% with 52% have a negative opinion. In Japan, another country which depends heavily on the U.S., just 36% are confident in Trump and 61% aren’t. Lastly, in Indonesia, polling shows a 30% positive confidence level for Trump and a 40% negative.

In looking at Africa and the Middle East, our main ally, Israel has 71% approval rating of Trump. Israel’s neighbor, Lebanon, things were different. 67% voiced no confidence in Trump.  Nigeria, and Kenya do as well with a  58% and 65% positive approval respectively, whereas Turkey, a key NATO and EU ally, has an 84% negative level of confidence in President Trump. In Tunisia, just 12% said they had trust in Trump (75% didn’t).

In looking at three of the largest economies in Latin America, 89% of Mexicans reported no confidence in Trump (much of that, no doubt, coming from his crackdown on illegal immigration). Only 8% said they could trust Trump. In Brazil, President Trump’s positive confidence level was only 28%. 60% said “no”. Meanwhile, in Argentina, it was worse. 69% turned down Trump. 28% said “si”. It bears mentioning, that of the last five U.S. Presidents, Obama has had the highest global approval rating. First term Trump was the lowest.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that those on the political Right had the highest levels of confidence in President Trump. In Israel it was 86%. 55% in Australia and 50% in Italy. In Hungary, Trump polled a 57% positive rating. It was 58% among conservatives in South Korea. Among the Poles, it was a plus 61% for Trump.

Interestingly, however, among the Dutch and Spanish Rightwing parties, Trump’s numbers weren’t that high. Just 35% of conservative Dutch approved of Trump while 31% of the Spanish conservatives did. Conservative Germans had only a 21% positive opinion of him while it was just 21% among conservative Argentinians.

Looking at another poll, this one done by the European Council on Foreign Affairs, the question was posed as to whether Trump was a good thing for the American People, 69% of those surveyed in Saudi Arabia said “yes”. So did 50% in China, 59% in Russia, and 85% in India. Ukraine and Indonesia weren’t so sure. Just 37% of Ukrainians said “yes: as did 38% of those in Indonesia.

Interestingly, when it came to Europe in general, only 34% of those polled thought that President Trump would be a good thing for Americans in general. England polled the lowest with only 24%.

The same poll also showed that 75% of Indians felt that Trump’s reelection was going to be good for the world in general. However, from there the numbers quickly drop. Just 49% of those surveyed in Saudi Arabia agreed as did only 35% of Russians. In China it was 34% and 29% in Turkey.

Once again, Europeans displayed their low opinion of “The Donald”. 22% saw Trump’s second term as positive for the world. 15% of the English agreed with 50% a hard “no”. However, a paltry 13% of South Koreans were looking forward to Trump 2.0. It bears mentioning that 48% weren’t sure. 15% were sure…that Trump needs to go.

In a related poll, this one from June 2024 by Pew, respondents in 34 countries were asked their overall opinion of the United States. In general, 54% had a positive view of U.S. while 31% held a negative opinion. In looking at those with the highest opinions of the U.S., Poland had the highest with 86%. Ghana and Kenya were tied with 78%. They were closely followed with Israel, South Korea, and Thailand with 77% each.

In looking at the countries with the highest negative opinion of America, we have Tunisia with 87%. Our NATO partner, Turkey, was second with a 77% negative view of the U.S. Malaysia had a 65% negative opinion of the U.S. followed by Australia at 60% and Singapore showing a 50% negative opinion of the United States.  As an aside, just one in five Europeans regard America as an ally.

There’s no question that Donald Trump is a polarizing figure. Most people, whether here in the U.S. or abroad, either like him or hate him. There are very few in the middle or with no opinion. With America’s influence waning, confidence in the American Presidency could have a serious impact on global relations no matter how much saber rattling there is. In the high stakes game of global politics, the only thing worse than being disliked is being ignored like Trump's predecessor was. 

Trump has proven to be an excellent business negotiator despite (or because of) his bravado and unpredictability. That’s good for America. But in our highly integrated world, success has to be viewed from a position of a mutual win for all concerned. Furthermore, we have to accept that we are no longer the “big dog” on the block. Might alone doesn't make right. We sometimes have to allow others their time in the sun. Is Trump capable of that? I don’t know. Only time will tell.

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Europe’s Concern Over Trump Isn’t a Universal Opinion

What People Around the World Like and Dislike --- About theAmerican Society and Politics

In a new poll, Europeans express little faith in America’sfuture influence

Why is the World Betting Against American Democracy?

Alone in a Trumpian World: The EU and global public opinionafter the US elections

Pew: Views of the U.S.

 

The National Divorce: Trust in the Government

When Donald Trump was first elected President, his campaign mantra was “make America great again”. Now that he’s back, it’s once again the mantra of his followers, but did you know the phrase didn’t originate with “The Donald”? It was actually first used by President Ronald Reagan in his 1980 presidential campaign. It was also included in his acceptance speech at the 1980 Republican National Convention.

The expression seemed to catch on and was later adopted by President Bill Clinton during his 1992 Presidential campaign, and again used in a radio commercial for Hillary Clinton during her run in the 2008 Democratic Primary. Ironically, we now hear from the Left asking, “what’s so great about America?” and “when was America ever great?”

Both Trump’s and Bill Clinton’s use of the phrase was to intentionally harken back to the popular myth of “the Gipper” who emerged from the anger and apathy of the preceding years like a candle leading the nation out of darkness.  America was still recovering from the hangover of 60's and 70's, the Watergate scandal, the defeat in Vietnam, stagflation, the OPEC oil crisis, the Iranian hostage crisis, and what was widely view as governmental incompetence.

Under President Eisenhower’s two terms, 73% of Americans said they trusted their government. Going along partisan lines, the trust level of government was 79% among Republicans. Even Democrats were happy (yes—actual “happy” Democrats. They did once exist). 71% said they trusted in the government.

The overall trust level had jumped to 77% by the time Lyndon Johnson took office. But as the war raged on and the causality rates rose (as well as lies by the military and government became public), those numbers started to drop. Still, they would be regarded as high by today’s standards with 66% confidence level by Democrats and a 60% by Republicans.  By the time Johnson left office, and Richard Nixon took over, public trust had dropped but still remained strong at an overall 68%.

Following Nixon’s resignation and the advent of Gerald Ford’s “caretaker” administration, public trust was floundering at 36%. Among Republicans, just 38% had any confidence in the government. The Democrats weren’t far off with 36%. Jimmy Carter was elected as the “anti-insider” in 1976. The American People had had enough of Washington insiders and Carter took office with a new high---40%---before falling to 28% by the time he left office.

Despite Reagan’s perceived popularity over his eight years as president, trust in the government never did any better than 46%, a pale reflection of the Eisenhower days which he often recalled in his speeches. By 1994, during the Clinton Administration, the public’s trust in the government hit a record low of 19% before rising to 49% by the end of his second term.

President Reagan was well known for his often quips. One involved his switching parties. When asked why he left the Democratic Party and joined the Republican, he famously said “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party left me”. I guess this was the time when the American People could say the same thing about both parties and the government in general. Government had left the American People. The national divorce had begun.

Sadly, it took a tragic event like 9/11 to rekindle America’s faith in their government, and it came shortly after George W. Bush (aka “Dubya”) took office. Poll numbers vary slightly, but trust in government ranged between 55% and as much as 60% according to some polls. Since then, confidence in the government by the American People has been on a downward trajectory ever since. As some have said, “we're on a roller coaster ride in a handbag to Hell and no one is driving”

The best Trump did in his first term was 27%. Under President Biden, levels of trust in the government again repeated lows of 19%. Even among Democrats, the trust factor never rose above 35%  while for Republicans, it remained at levels one could only call abyssal---11%. Today, Americans barely tolerate each other. We tend to live in our collective bubbles and regurgitate what we see and hear without bothering to question or investigate.

Even when we break down trust in government by race, we don’t see much of change. Using the Eisenhower/Kennedy/Johnson administrations as the starting point, Blacks and whites intersected in October 1964 with a 77% each having an overall government trust.

Staring in 1968, that trust among blacks plummeted. The next time it peaked was in 1993, corresponding with Clinton’s inauguration, when it hit 43%. Even under Obama, it didn’t do any better than 39% in February 2013. Biden got close in April 2021 with 37%.  Trust levels hit rock bottom in March 2019  during Trump’s administration when they dropped to 9%. 67% of blacks said they believed the political system as it exits is designed to hold them back. 

Among whites, their highest trust level in government following October 1964 wasn’t until October 2001 under George W. when it reached 61% (this was just a few weeks after the 9/11 attacked).   For whites, their low point was 8% in October 2011 under Obama.

According to this Pew poll, Hispanics weren’t tracked until December 1990 while “Dubya” was the president. Their initial start point was 39%. They quickly reached their highest level of trust of 57% in December 1998, late into Clinton’s tenure as President before rapidly dropping off. Their next high point came in January 2013 when it reached 44% under President Obama.  Interesting, their lowest level of trust in the government came near the end of Biden’s term when it hit 23%.

Lastly, Asians. Apparently, they didn’t reach ample numbers to poll until first appearing in August 2020 when they were polled with a trust level of 27%. They peaked in May 2022 at 37% under Biden and bottomed out a month later at 23%. Native Americans and Independents weren't included in the poll.

Now, President Trump promises to make us “great” once more. That would mean taking us politically, socially, and economically back to the       post World War II years of Harry Truman and Ike. The American economy was booming and we had taken center stage as empires of old, England, France, and Germany faded from the limelight. We had become a “superpower”.

Barely a month into office and Trump has already begun implementing many of campaign promises (a rarity in itself). He has started deporting illegal residents by the thousands (many of whom had previously just laughed at the usual empty rhetoric about deportation). He has started purging the government of useless and redundant bureaucrats, saving taxpayers millions in the process, and having an eye towards shutting down unneeded agencies. President Trump is, as promised, “draining the swamp”.

Of course, in his zeal, he needs to be careful of not overreaching into areas vital to ordinary citizens such as Social Security, unemployment, or WIC, while ensuring that those who actually need government services receive it. Often reformist zeal can turn into blind zealotry. 

Politics is a delicate balancing act between achieving results, which isn't popular with the vested interest, but necessary to the public at large, and being "Mister or Mistress Popularity". However, trust in the government is something altogether different. It’s based the public’s confidence in the government’s ability to get things done fairly and honestly irrespective of any other factor.

 For too long, the bulk of American citizens have seen government as inept and corrupt. Over 65% of Americans are unhappy with our position in the world. 72% of America agree with the statement that "America was once a good example of democracy, but no longer".  Among the OECD nations, the United States ranks near the bottom when it comes to trust in government at 31%. Only Columbia and Chile rank lower. Switzerland ranks the highest with 83.78%. 

We’ve watched the government slide from a Republic responsible to its citizens to a neo-fascist corporatocracy which serves Wall Street. Much of what President Trump has done so far bears that out. The question is, or will shortly become, “what now?” How do we keep the Status Quo in check? Can we root our the "Deep State"? How will other nations, especially the rising BRICS nations, react as the U.S. tries to reassert its global dominance?  

America has become so deeply divided between those who want to keep the size of government at a minimum…and at arm’s length…and those who want expand the “nanny” or “welfare” state. That means reform if not an all-out overhaul of government and maintaining the corporate-government status quo. Those who would seek balance---the Center---have been largely purged from both parties, yet comprise the nation's largest voting bloc as Independents. Who will prevail remains to be seen.

 Perhaps, like empires of the past, we are destined go our way separate ways. We are, as our Founding Fathers often said, a “grand experiment”. Our future was not pre-ordained. I suspect that we’ve already exceeded their expectations. One thing is for sure though. If we are to “make America great again”, we cannot continue to limp along as we have been and hope to maintain what remains of the Republic. Extremism and intolerance has no place among a free people. 

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Pew Research: Public Trust in Government: 1958 - 2024

72% of American say the US used to be a good example ofdemocracy but isn’t anymore

WEF: Trust in Government by Country 2024

Make America Great Again

The American Experiment

 

Gallup: A Third of Americans Satisfied With Global Position

Black Americans mistrust the US political system

Our Never Ending War on Illegal Immigration: A Brief History

Immigration has been an important issue in the United States since at least the middle 19^th century when the U.S. began considering the creation of immigration laws. During the post-Civil War period, the United States experienced an economic boom, and we were expanding westward at breakneck speed. We needed people able and willing to meet this boom head on. Men and women were needed to fill the ranks in factories, lay railroad tracks, bend rivers to our will, level mountains, build cities, work farms, raise cattle and sheep, and provide back breaking labor. The war had laid bare our "Manifest Destiny".

Starting in 1917, President Woodrow Wilson signed the first immigration law. The law included a literacy test, established a tax to be paid by new immigrants, and allowed officials a wide berth in deciding who could be admitted or excluded. The law also contained a “Asiatic Barred Zone”, which was a quota system to limit individuals from certain country entrance into the U.S.

Nevertheless, it paved the way for the Immigration Act of 1924. Originally, the laws were created with the purpose of keeping track of and limiting who was entering the country, their skill level or occupation, level of education, did they have the means provide for themselves until they got established, and country of origin. Eventually other statistics came along and asked questions about age, religion, overall health, or ethnic group to gain a more complete picture of our changing national demographics. America was, after all, a melting pot.

Today, we continue to regulate and monitor who comes and goes from our country, as does every other nation on the planet. Governments worldwide have a duty to secure their borders and an obligation to protect their citizens. It’s the central component to the legal concept of national sovereignty. Without a defined and secure border, it's not truly a nation. It's merely a territory.

America is facing a national crisis. Some even refer to it as a non-violent “invasion" similar to what Europe is currently experiencing (although that situation has become more violent due to an increase in physical assaults, murders, robberies, and rape gangs). While illegal entry into this nation (mainly along our southern border) has been going on in drips and drabs for decades, it’s been since the late 1970’s and early 1980’s that it has evolved into the serious problem is it is now. 

The primary reason for the influx of immigrants, legal and illegal, at least initially, was the social and economic upheavals happening in Latin America (some at our instigation), such as militarily in places like El Salvador, Panama and Nicaragua, or were due to violent hurricanes and tropical storms  hitting nations like Haiti and the Dominican Republic. President Ronald Reagan was the first post-Watergate president to address the issue of illegal immigration.

In 1986, Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act (aka "IRCA"). The law set new minimum guidelines for arriving immigrants and streamlined immigration policy.  It promised tighter border security and established strict penalties for employers who knowingly hired someone here illegally. In addition, Reagan granted amnesty to some 3 million, mostly Hispanic, individuals illegally residing in the U.S. 

In signing the bill, President Reagan made it clear that this was “one and done” and that the U.S. would crackdown hard on illegal immigrants and there would be no further amnesties offered or given. However, what would-be migrants apparently heard was that if they could illegally enter the U.S. and evade authorities long enough, they’d eventually be granted amnesty too. As a result, the flow of migrants crossing the border illegally increased over previous years.

During George H. W. Bush's administration in 1990, Congress modified and expanded the Immigration Act of 1965, which increased immigration levels by 40% and included a provision for allowing family members to join those already here. It also doubled the number of work-related visas and increased the number of applications available to “underrepresented” nations.

 In 1994, under Bill Clinton’s presidency, Congress also pardoned roughly 548,000 illegal immigrates living the U.S. while fining them $1000 (which was waived). This amnesty was renewed in 1997 and again in 2000. Also in 1997, Congress passed the Nicaraguan Adjustment Central American Relief Act (“NACARA”) which give legal status to over one million illegal residents (most form Latin America) who had lived here since 1995. Facing claims of discrimination, NACARA was amended in 1998 to include an undisclosed number of Haitians illegally living here since 1995.

However, President Clinton signed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRAIRA”). Critics thought the bill went too far.  Under the bill, immigrants, regardless of the legal status, could be deported if they were convicted of having committed a felony. The new law would also remove anyone who overstayed their vistas, by so much as a day, could be deported and would automatically be ineligible to apply for a new non-immigrant visa. From 1996 through early 2000, deportations went from 50,000 to more than 200,000.

In 2000, the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act (“LIFE”) was passed, giving amnesty to illegal immigrants attempting to obtain permits (aka “green cards”) to work here legally and had married legal or natural citizens. This allowed them to jump to the head of line, thus bypassing millions of other would-be immigrants waiting to gain legal entry into the United States. And who says crime doesn’t pay?

Despite promises to crack down on illegal immigration while running for office, President Barack Obama signed an executive order called the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”). This allowed some allowed some 700,000 individuals who had come here illegally while under the age of 18, de facto U.S. citizenship in the form of renewable grants.

In 2013 and 2014 two efforts were made to allow illegal immigrants a path to remain in the U.S. The first was the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013. The bill would also dramatically increase the number of work visa programs from 65,000 to 180,000. In 2014, President Obama attempted to get Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (“DARPA”) into law but failed. This was another efforts to provide a pathway for approximately 3.6 million illegal immigrants to become citizens.

During this same period, dozens of American communities opted to ignore federal immigration laws by declaring “sanctuary” status. What this meant was that they would not cooperate with federal immigration officials is identifying, apprehending, or detaining any non-resident, illegal or otherwise. Not unexpectedly, there were massive increases in illegal migrants which brought huge jumps in demand for government services.

As a result, local taxes were dramatically increased along with demands for more state and federal money. Can you imagine refusing to cooperate with federal authorities while demanding they send more money to help them in breaking the law? Talk about a sense of entitlement!

Under President Donald Trump’s first term, there were several attempts made to curtail the tidal wave of illegal immigrants coming from our southern border, but from Asia (including China), Africa, the Caribbean (many of whom were fleeing areas hard hit by storms and corrupt governments), and the Middle East, which included not just refugees from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, but unfortunately members of Al Qaeda, ISIS, and other terrorists as well.

Trump went so far as to try to contain the influx of migrants attempting to cross illegally by beginning to be a massive wall along the southern border. While nationally, many people supported the concept, which was also locally popular, Trump face widespread criticism from Democrats and some Republicans, various pro-immigration groups (many of whom had strong church ties), and even foreign governments.  In addition, Trump was urged to suspend all border crossings under Title 24 because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Starting on day one, President Joe Biden sat about dismantling as much of Trump’s immigration policy as he could by signing the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021. He ended Trump’s travel ban which prohibited unrestricted travel from known terrorist countries like Iran and Libya, started tearing down the border wall, and reaffirmed the legal status of DACA recipients. 

 In June 2024 he signed legislation to shut down the border in illegal crossings that surpassed 2500 a day.  Between January 2021 and January 2024, ICE encountered 7.2 million illegal immigrants attempting to enter the U.S. In 2023, there were a record 2.5 million occurrences.  The bill also suspended protection from deportation to anyone unable to provide proof of need for asylum.

It's also worth mentioning that international law states individuals seeking asylum may do so if they are being persecuted due to their race, religion, gender, or ethnic status. Seeking asylum for economic purposes is not recognized as a legitimate reason to be granted asylum. Secondly, the individual seeking asylum must apply to the next closest country, not the country of their choice.

Now that Trump is again president, he has hit the ground running on the immigration issue as promised. With nearly 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. and decades of bipartisan blunders to correct,  thousands of illegal immigrants have already been deported to their home country, despite a lot of gnashing of teeth by their respective leaders.  Apparently, they think that the United States is somehow obligated to accept and provide for these individuals. Ironically, if this happens there, the outcome wouldn’t be so amicable. Individuals caught in their country illegally face an automatic prison sentence as does anyone who aids them in any way.

Some leaders of foreign countries have been openly critical of the United States efforts to exercise this most basic of national rights, while at the same time exercising their right to secure their national borders and protect their national sovereignty.  The media makes sure you see migrants carrying signs which read "We're Human" and "No One is Illegal". No one is doubting their humanity or that people aren't illegal. However, sometimes their actions are. That's why we have laws and courts to enforce those laws. It's the price we pay for a civil society. 

Clearly there needs to be a single universal law regarding the disposition and repatriation of individuals seeking to enter a country illegally which protects the right of a country to secure national borders and maintain its national sovereignty.  It should also include guidelines for dealing with individuals, groups, or associations (and private or religious) who promote the breaking of international and national laws concerning immigration. It should be up to each nation to provide for any exceptions such as a natural or manmade disaster.  

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We do ask, however, that you be sure to "like" us on whatever site you found us on in order to keep our articles available for others, and that you please pass our post along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

 Historical Overview of Immigration Policy

The Immigration Act of 1924 (The Johnson-Reed Act)

 

Immigration and Immigrants: Anti-Immigration Sentiment

Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Actof 1996

Immigration policy under the Joe Biden administration

Turnabout and Consequences: Illegal migrants in Liberal Martha's Vineyard

There's a certain comedic justice unfolding at Martha's Vineyard. Perhaps a better expression would be a comeuppance for the Limousine Class of liberals and conservatives living behind their gated communities on the posh getaway island of the rich and somewhat infamous. 

For those of you not familiar with the situation, about 50 illegal immigrants (the establishment media is calling them "migrants" and "future asylum seekers") were dumped off in front of the homes of some of the nation's wealthiest and most powerful residents, which includes the Obamas, the Clintons, Oprah Winfrey, and the Kennedy's, on Martha's Vineyard, which is an exclusive enclave off the coast of Massachusetts. Somehow, it's just seems appropriate, and why not?   

After all these individuals have been actively encouraging illegal immigration along our borders for  so-called "humanitarian" purposes for decades. They even symbolically declared Martha's Vineyard to be a "sanctuary destination", apparently assuming no one would actually take them up on their rhetoric. Well apparently no one told Florida Governor Rick DeSantis (R) that it was "BS" designed to win votes and that no one really meant it.

The Florida governor apparently reached out to about 50 "migrants" in Texas and offered them a one way ticket to swanky Martha's Vineyard where they could expect housing, food, and all the usual amenities the Limousine Class promises those who cross illegally into the border states (they also provided them with $10 gift cards from McDonalds).  

Attorneys for the Boston based "Lawyers for Civil Rights", a nonprofit group which represents primarily liberal causes, is currently representing 30 of the 50 recent arrivals (mostly from Venezuela). They claim their clients were "misrepresented" and cite a brochure given to the "migrants" promising housing, food, and cash assistance.  The brochure allegedly originated from an organization run by Governor DeSantis.

It should be noted that Venezuela has been in economic and political freefall  due primarily because of U.S. led economic sanctions. The sanctions result from a pissing contest starting in 2014 between former U.S. President Obama and the late Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez. The resulting sanctions triggered economic and political instability throughout the region (and devastated Venezuela). The meltdown has slowly been finding its way along the U.S. border.

Although numerous reasons have been cited (depending on who you ask), the primarily reason most often mentioned is Venezuela's cozy relationship with America's arch-nemesis, Cuba, which has survived an 59 year old (and largely failed) embargo amid claims of civil rights violations and election fraud by the Chavez Administration (not like the U.S. has much room to talk on the later issues). 

While the above mentioned resources (along with others) are available as outlined in the brochure, they are for those determined by the State Department to be refugees, which is a very specific term and generally applies to those forced to leave their country to evade persecution for political, ethnic, or religious reasons.  It does not recognize "economic refugees" (economic refugees are those seeking to improve their economic condition).

At present, it doesn't appear that any of the 50 individuals who voluntarily undertook the trip from Texas to Martha's Vineyard qualify. As an aside, the attorneys representing these so-called "migrants" expect that some or perhaps all of their clients will ultimately qualify as refugees as defined by the State Department (with the proper coaching no doubt).

The attorneys are also alleging that the relocation program by DeSantis and Abbott violates their client's "rights" under the Fourth and 14th amendments, as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Apparently those having illegally entered the United States are entitled to the same rights as U.S. citizens, which also overlooks the fact that these individuals are, by definition, criminals until a federal court determines otherwise. Therefore, while certain international and domestic laws would seem applicable, their legal protection would be limited. 

But then, who knows? Perhaps the newest way to achieve the "American Dream" is to enter the country illegally (immigration laws? We don't need no stinking immigration laws!"), find some bleeding heart liberal attorneys who are starving for some national notoriety, and sue the state and/or governor!

The old way was just a waiting game. It required the illegal alien to hide under some religious organization's wing until some poll told the president that voters wouldn't oust them out if they granted amnesty to a few million illegal immigrants. It worked for Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Obama!

Governor DeSantis, who is a likely Republican presidential candidate in 2024, said that no laws were broken, despite claims by the Lawyers for Civil Rights. The $12 million dollar program, based a similar program by Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R), is aimed at redirecting illegal immigrants from non-sanctuary cities and states to sanctuary locations.  I guess liberal politicians should be careful what they promise. They just might have to deliver.

Abbott has sent so-called migrants to not only D.C., but also New York City and Chicago.  Arizona's Governor, Doug Ducey (R), has also sent illegals to Washington D.C.  Both DeSantis and Abbott have indicated that they intend to continue to do so despite the threatened lawsuit by Lawyers for Civil Rights for fraud. 

The downside has been that mayors from these "sanctuary" cities (like San Francisco), have asked Washington for millions more in federal aid to cope with the influx of illegal residents. There's something wrong about a city or state which openly decides to blow off federal immigration laws, and then have the moxy to ask for federal (taxpayer) dollars to bail them out of the problem they created.

Illegal immigration and border crossings have largely dropped off the establishment airwaves given that so much time needed to cover Trump, although there is a sprinkling here and there about the crisis in Ukraine, rising inflation, Putin's impatience with the EU and pending dual economic and social disasters with cutting off gas and oil shipments to Europe just as winter approaches, the climate change situation, China's  growing imperialistic aims, Biden's and Harris's pathetic approval ratings, and expected Democratic butt kicking at the midterm elections in November.

Nevertheless, illegal immigration remains a serious problem, and few can doubt that much of it is the result of U.S. foreign policy. At present, there is an estimated 14 million individuals living in the United States as of 2021 who are here illegally. Of course, no one knows for sure.

According to FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform), one of the nation's largest monitor of illegal immigration, these 14 million or so individuals cost taxpayers around $143 billion dollars annually, which is up by $9.4 billion over 2020.

That's money which could be used to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure such as roads or bridges, our antiquated and vulnerable electrical grid, our failing schools, and so forth.  Instead, it's going to support those who refuse to follow our immigration laws and apply like any other law abiding individual wanting to enter our country.

True, many take jobs that most Americans don't want, but if they weren't there, employers would be forced to raise wages and offer benefits to fill those positions. Instead, they offer low wages and few, if any, benefits. They force employees to work in unsafe and unhealthy conditions, long hours without so much as a restroom break because they know these individuals, whom they hired illegally, can't do anything about it.

Few speak the language and fewer still know the first thing about U.S. labor laws. They're desperate for the money and the employers know it. Besides, where else are they going to go? These low life employers who use the argument that they're holding down prices are using the argument that plantation owners used about slave labor. Cheap prices based on human suffering is nobody's bargain.

If they get busted, the employees lose everything, and get deported (or possibly face jail time) while the employers barely get an slap on the wrist. That's not justice regardless of how you feel about illegal immigration. At the bare minimum the employers should lose their business licenses, face minimum fines and jail time. Religious groups should face the same as well as lose their tax exempt status.

What governors like DeSantis, Abbott, and Ducey are doing may not be the right thing, but then they are forcing individuals who want others to deal with their decisions to step up and take responsibility for the political games they play with other people's lives. It's one thing to say "let 'em in" when it's someone else's yard but quite another when it's your backyard. Meanwhile, those who are being sent here and there are pawns caught in a political game.

The majority of our problems with illegal immigration are the result of poor foreign policy decisions. Most of these decisions are the outcome of a handful of very wealthy individuals and corporations attempting to gain greater shares of markets or control of assets and resources. People are a inconsequential byproduct; chattel to be used and discarded. What, I often wonder, would happen if the wellbeing of people was the priority rather than profit?

America is a nation of immigrants. As the country grew, it developed laws pertaining to immigration just like every country on the planet has. It is our right as a sovereign nation just as it is for every other sovereign nation. There's a popular sign at pro-immigration rallies which reads "No One is Illegal", which is true. But a person's actions can be. That's why there are laws, and laws are meant to be enforced until such time as they are changed.

Playing economic and military chicken for the sake of power and wealth makes absolutely no sense. In the name of acquiring resources, we disrupt and destroy the most precious resource of them all--- human life.  How does that benefit Humanity? How does that create a more productive and sustainable planet?  

Sudden mass and unregulated shifts of population typically result in conflict, be it cultures, laws, values, traditions, and incompatible religions. Ultimately, it sets the stage for the annihilation of one or the other under the euphemistic term of "multiculturalism". 

When population shifts are gradual and relatively small, there's an opportunity for absorption of cultures and everything migrants bring. When the influx is large and unexpected, there is no time for a "cultural courtship" to take place. Conflict occurs as one (usually the incoming group) attempts to assert itself. Not all conquest are at the tip of a spear or bayonet, but they are conquests nevertheless.

Martha's Vineyard is, in the short run, a minor blip in the news cycle. But the accumulative affects of these "minor blips" are how empires fall and civilizations vanish into the dustpan of history.

 

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

Migrants who landed on Martha's Vineyard were tricked by misleading brochure, lawyers say

Migrants flown to Martha's Vineyard file class-action suit against DeSantis

Martha's Vineyard is a magnet for millionaires, CEOs and celebs...

 

Why Hollywood hides at Martha's Vineyard

Celebs on Martha's Vineyard

International sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis

United States embargo against Cuba

How many illegal aliens live in the United States?

 

 

 

The Quiet Invasion: Illegal Immigration Under President Biden

Not much has been said or written about illegal immigration lately. We've been focused on inflation, the war in Ukraine, the growing aggression of China, the "Great Resignation", and gas prices. However, none of that, as severe as they may be on their own, replaces the issue of illegal immigration which goes back to at least the presidency of Ronald Reagan, and yet we're hearing very little about it.

Illegal immigration is "the quiet invasion". Currently there is an estimated 11.7 million illegals currently living in the United States. 53% are believed to be Mexican. 16% are from Asia (mainly China, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Korea), followed by El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. About 4% or 430,000 illegal residents are from India.

However, 17% or about 2 million are from elsewhere, such as Russia, Africa, Middle East or Europe. Most come from "south of the border", however, Canada has become an important crossing point due to its largely open and thinly monitored border. Amusingly, there's an estimated 70,000 Canadians living in the U.S. illegally. Most of those are thought to be residing on either coasts. California and Texas saw the biggest influx with a combined 40% of all illegal immigrants. 

Other crossing points includes U.S. coastlines which are typically unmonitored and typically close to large cities.  The good news is that the border patrol usually intercepts up to 2/3 of those attempting to enter illegally. A record 210,000 were arrested in March 2022; a 24% increase from March 2019. 

During President Trump's Administration, illegal immigration dropped  off significantly due to his crackdown, starting with a wall along the Texas/Mexico border. 2017 saw a 46 year low; down 25% from 2016, although still well less than under the Obama Administration's high of 298,000 arrests in 2009 compared to Trump's high of 143,000 in 2019. Nevertheless, President Biden promised to undo many of Trump's immigration policies.

As promised, on his first day in office Biden signed six executive orders reversing portions of Trump's immigration policies. He also sent Congress a comprehensive immigration reform bill. Biden has taken steps to boosting refugee admissions (and expanding the requirements to qualify as a refugee), protecting so-called "Dreamers" or those who came here illegally as a minor alone or with their parents, and expanding Obama's "DACA"  or "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" program.

It should be noted that under United Nations guidelines, refugees are considered those fleeing their country due to war/conflict or ethnic and/or religious persecution. UN guidelines state that refugees must go to the next nearest safe country, not traverse the continent to find one of their liking.  However, per the UN, those seeking economic betterment do not qualify as refugees.

Biden's proposals ignore that exception since most individuals seeking entry into the United States are doing so to improve their economic status. Biden has stated that the U.S. is committed to settling some 20,000 refugees, particularly from Latin America, and most notably from Haiti. He is also resuming the Cuban Family Reunification Parole Program which will allow reunification of Cubans with their American relatives (a similar program will be made available for Haitians). 

He also decided not to enforce the "public charge rule", denying green cards to those who would use them to obtain taxpayer backed benefits such as Medicaid and Social Security, as well as food stamps. Biden also supports legislation to allow the estimated 11.5 million here illegally a means whereby they can remain legally, and even obtain citizenship over a eight years period.  

69% of those issued a green card are based on pre-existing family ties here in the United States. 14% are issued for purpose of obtaining legal employment. 8% are given to refugees while their application for permanent residency is being processed under the Temporary Protection Program.  Another aspect of Biden's loosened immigration policy is broadening standards needed to obtain a H-1 Work Visa, especially for highly skilled or agricultural workers (which comprised 22% and 24% of the visa's issued). 

Another change made by the Biden Administration has been the restructuring of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (or better known as "ICE"). From now on, it will restrict its immigration enforcement to those who pose a threat to U.S. national security such as felons and recent illegal immigrants (thus excusing the so-called "Dreamers").  It would also reprioritized  to lower status those with older non-felony criminal records.

In the last 11 months of the Trump Administration, an average of 6,000 illegal  immigrants were arrested  monthly by ICE. Under Biden, that number has dropped by half for the first 11 months of his administration.  Biden also moved to halt Title 42, which was the last effective legal mechanism for deporting illegal immigrants.

Title 42 was a public health order which provided government the power to deport an immigrant for health reasons such as the spread of contagious diseases like STDs or Covid. This was to have gone into effect in May 2022. However, just prior to being halted, a federal judge in Louisiana blocked the move which means immigrants can still be deported for spreading certain diseases...for now.

Also among those whose arrest have been reprioritized  are illegal females who are pregnant, recently given birth, or are currently nursing, along with those currently hospitalized, under doctor's care, attending a public function like a wedding or funeral, attending a religious function, or is at a social services facility. Children at school or on a playground may not be apprehended (including their parents or other relatives). The idea appears to be to create a softer and more compassionate immigration enforcement agency.  

ICE raids of businesses are known to strike fear in the hearts of illegal immigrants out of fear of arrest and deportation, while proving to be an annoyance to employers who are often fined but rarely arrested, face the loss or suspension of their business license, or serve time.  Between 2000 and 2020, there were nearly 30,000 arrests of employees as a result of these raids but fewer than 75 managers.  

Now, under Biden, such raids have stopped. In addition, now the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are actually encouraging illegal employees to rat on employers for "exploitative" or unsafe employment practices in exchange for legal protection and deferred deportation status (in other words, DHS looks the other way while they're given a head start to get out of Dodge and find another job). 

Lastly, the Biden Administration ended the family separation program, which was begun under the Obama Administration, but for which President Trump was blamed by the media. In conjunction, Biden also ended the long term family detention program which had been in effect since 2001.

So, what does all this mean? As a result of the changes discussed above, the border patrol has stated that they are anticipating as many as 18,000 attempted illegal border crossing per day. Yet, despite the changes, Biden didn't change the funding for DHS or ICE in FY 2022.  But for FY 2023, he is requesting $56.7 billion for Homeland Security, which includes an 80% increase in funding for immigration courts.

However, Biden is also asking for a 8% reduction in funding for ICE's Enforcement and Removal program while funding of the Border Patrol is expected to see a 13% increase over the previous funding. This increase calls for the hiring of an additional 300 border agents.

More technology will be added to border protection, which will increase to $309 million. It includes funding for additional watch towers, personnel sensors,  aircraft/drones, and aircraft monitors to detect incoming planes. Lastly, funding of ICE's detention operations will see a drop by about 25%.

This represents a decrease from 34,000 beds to around 25,000, meaning that ICE will not be capable of holding as many detainees, which in turn, encourages fewer arrests and more rapid processing. Overall, Biden's FY 2023 budget, as it pertains to containing and curtailing illegal immigration isn't much different than President Trump's. Critics of the budget are already chiding Biden for "more of the same". 

With just under two more years remaining in office, it's unlikely Biden will do anything dramatic. It's also just as likely that, given his consistently poor approval rating (which is currently at 36% for the fourth straight week), that Biden will see a second term (not to mention his declining mental health). There's also an increasing likelihood that the Democrats could lose control of at least one chamber of Congress in the midterm elections this November.

Overall, his FY 2023 budget appears more of a readjustment of both Obama's and Trump's immigration policies rather than anything new. Having said that, the ongoing situation in Ukraine will likely result in more refugees being accepted than expected.

Afghanistan too is continuing to unravel as the Taliban slowly try to re-impose its version of Sharia law despite assurances to the contrary. This has been particularly hard on female professionals who had begun to thrive during the American occupation as they had during the pre-Taliban era. The same thing applies to females being able to attend school. 

In addition, there were thousands who aided the U.S. military in various capacities that were left behind. The number of these individuals applying for emergency refugee protective status will grow and for the most part will be granted.  The situation in Syria for the Kurds and Yazidis who face severe ethnic and religious discrimination, and in some instances, attempts at genocide, will worsen as will their applications for emergency refugee status. Additionally, there has been an increase in illegal immigration from countries in Asia facing unstable political situations, not to mention the growing threat of war due to China's growing aggression.   

Finally, there will be continued mass migration from South and Central America due to growing economic instability, increasing violence, and political corruption (which tend to include the police and military).   Thus far, most of it is stopped at the Mexican/U.S. border. However, the influx has put a tremendous strain on Mexico's resources, despite increased U.S. aid (the State Department confirms that in 2021 we gave $321 million dollars to Mexico and Central America in humanitarian aid). This money covered refugees, asylum seekers and other migrants, and is expected to increase under Biden.

It's worth nothing that while amnesty isn't on the table this go around, the Biden Administration has switched gears when it comes to businesses hiring illegal workers. Now, under Biden's revised plan, ICE agents would "look the other way" in exchange for employees ratting out employers, meaning more illegal workers will remain in the country rather than be deported.  

Also not on the table is what to do about individuals and groups who undermine U.S. immigration law by illegally bringing illegals into this country and providing them with housing, jobs, and other forms of assistance (most of these are religious groups who believe they're exempt from the law). 

Like with businesses, those caught could face fines, loss of their tax exempt status, and/or jail time. Taxpayers pay out an estimated $113 million dollars a year to support these illegals, not including what they unknowingly give in the way of donations to certain churches and religious institutions. Apparently, there will no change in the existing laws unless forced by U.S. citizens. 

Until the political class in Washington and around the country develops the fortitude to put an end to illegal immigration while simultaneously proving aid to legitimate humanitarian needs, illegal immigration will remain a growing problem and will lead to a destabilization of the U.S. economy, as well as the political and social structure of this nation. This will require the American voters to reward and punish those politicians at the ballot box and to call them out at every public venue possible.

 

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!  

 

Biden Administration moving to protect Dreamers after Texascourt ruling

2022 Changes to the Public Charge Inadmissibility Rule andImplications for Health Care

Key facts about U.S. immigration policies and Biden's proposed changes

Biden Advocates More Legal Pathways to Reduce IllegalImmigration

 

Biden at the One-Year Mark: A Greater Change in Direction onImmigration Than Is Recognized

President Biden's Executive Actions on Immigration

Judge blocks Biden Administration from lifting public healthorder

How border apprehensions, ICE arrest and deportations havechanged under Trump

 

Biden's Grasp on Illegal Immigration

 

As America and the rest of the world continue to deal with Covid and its latest variant, along with the aftermath of our less than valiant departure from Afghanistan, rising inflation, a potential crisis in Asia between an increasingly aggressive China and its neighbors (especially Taiwan), and growing tensions between the U.S. and Russia over whether the Russians will or will not invade the Ukraine (the Russians say no and U.S. intelligence agencies say yes), we've nearly forgotten our ongoing border crisis and influx of illegal immigrants.

Since Joe Biden took office in January 2021, there have been record levels of migrants attempting to cross illegally into the United States, especially after Biden announced cutting back or eliminating many of former President Trump's initiatives to bring the situation under control. Many of the migrants had hoped that Biden would adopt former President Barack Obama's policies which essentially left the border with Mexico virtually open. 

According to Biden's Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, by the end of 2021, the Border Patrol will have had some two million "encounters" with migrants trying to enter the U.S. illegally (that's an increase of 33% over the Trump Era high of 144,000). Bear in mind too that very few of these individuals have been immunized against rudimentary viruses and diseases such as the measles, TB, whooping cough, typhoid, chickenpox, let along Covid, which makes them a extreme health risk.   

In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in August that the spread of Covid by "non-citizens" was a "serious danger", which came just as 4000 Haitians were caught in Del Rio Texas, making them yet another unvaccinated group attempting to illegally enter the U.S..

Speaking of Afghanistan, some of our intelligence agencies have projected that cells from ISIS or Al-Qaida may attempt to cross our southern border in retaliation, likely with the help of the major drug cartels who have been stepping up their own operations, including the smuggling of individuals across the border frontier using "coyotes" or guides at $10,000 a head, who are often passed off to one of the associated gangs on this side of border such as MS 13 or Latin Kings, who are known for their violence.

What's Biden to do? Mayorkas has informed the President as well as U.S. senators that the immigration system is "broken", which comes as no surprised given the decades it's been kicked around like a political football with no real direction.  Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands continue to march their way north. Why?

The situation in several of the countries in South and Central America, such as Venezuela, is desperate. However, in that particular case, it's economic implosion has been more the result of U.S. sanctions and embargoes than anything else, especially given its near singular dependence on oil exportation.

As a result, many Venezuelans had fled to neighboring countries, creating a greater strain on their economies. As an aside, several of these countries offer little to no public safety nets even for their own citizens, let alone migrants. The result is the continual shift northward (in some cases with the tacit encouragement of local and national governments).

Some migrants report being told by the police or military that the U.S. was encouraging immigrants to come. They're are told there are ample jobs and public support waiting for anyone crossing into the U.S. (all lies of course). Many of these same immigrants also report extreme abuse by some of these same police officers and military personnel including assault, rape, extortion, theft, arrest, and even murder.

As heinous as this may be, it's not surprising. Government authorities are often under orders to keeping the immigrants moving. However, that's no excuse for their behavior. It does, however, explain why a large number of migrants are scared of police or other "authority" figures. This is typically exploited by sweat shops and "boiler room operations" who employment illegals; paying them next to nothing, working them long hours in often unsafe conditions knowing they're unable run to the police.

 

So, what's being done? Well, after campaigning against many of Trump's policies on illegal immigration, the Biden Administration has quietly reinstated a few of Trump's programs such as encouraging immigrants to remain in Mexico or return home; returning "asylum seekers" to Mexico while their application is reviewed and processed. Meanwhile, asylum seekers are vaccinated against Covid and given a six month time limit to comply with any requests supporting their status.

It should be pointed out that neither the United States, the United Nations, or organizations such as Amnesty International recognize "economic asylum seekers". That's individuals leaving their home country looking for jobs. Additionally, those seeking asylum for political, racial, ethnic, cultural, or religious reasons (such as persecution) are required by international law to seek asylum in the next closest country.

So that means if their coming from Venezuela for instance, the next closest countries would be Columbia or Guyana. Perhaps, maybe, Ecuador or Panama.  But certainly not Mexico or the United States.  Thus, if they are coming for economic betterment they would be classified as a "migrant", and would have no have legal status to enter and remain in the country.

It should noted that the U.S. Border Patrol has reported that for the first time there are a significant number of  individuals coming from countries such as Ecuador, Brazil, Nicaragua, as well as Haiti and Cuba. The reasons again appear to be mainly economic, especially given the recent downturn in certain key commodity industries such as coffee, papaya, or banana exports, not to mention climatic disasters.

On his first official day in office, Present Biden ordered a stoppage to the border wall and cut all funding for the project. Biden also ended the national emergency declaration President Trump had previously issued regarding the border crisis. Biden has also transferred the care of unaccompanied children and minors to the Department of Health and Human Services for temporary settlement while they await a decision on the permanent status.

As for the separation of families, which Trump was accused of instituting by the media (although originally implemented under the Obama Administration), in which, in some cases, resulted in parents being deported without their children, has been stopped...mostly. Under Biden, most, but not all families, have been reunited while remaining in custody.

Previously, migrants or coyotes would send children ahead of their parents in the hopes they would granted at least temporary sanctuary in the United States. Meanwhile, the parents (or those claiming to be their parents or a close relative) who demand entry to be reunited with their children. Once they were allowed entry into the country, many of the children were simply abandoned by the faux parent or relative.

Another old "trick" was to smuggle pregnant women across the border (while others would come pretending to be a "tourist" or visiting family). Once they had their child on American soil, the child would be granted American citizenship in a deliberate misuse of the 14th Amendment.  

Obviously the mother would remain. She would then demand that her spouse be allowed in. Later, other family members such as brothers, sisters, grandparents (and in some cases even uncles and aunts) would be granted entry under the pretext of keeping their family unit intact. This was termed "anchor baby" (in Canada it's called "passport baby").  This same ploy has been used in other countries by those seeking to skirt existing immigration laws.

Lastly, the Biden Administration, in another reversal of  Trump policy, has decided to raise the ceiling on the number of refugees allowed in the U.S. from 15,000 under Trump to 125,000 for this fiscal year beginning in October (he had allowed 62,000 refugees from April through September 31).  Under President Obama, that number was 110,000.

The primary location of settlement for most of America's estimate 10.7 million illegal immigrants has been the southwest running from California to Texas. Most tend to live in one of 20 major metropolitan areas, especially San Diego, Las Angeles, San Jose, Ft. Worth, Dallas, and San Francisco.

However, other large metropolitan cities with growing Hispanic populations include Seattle, Denver, Chicago, Miami (mainly Cubans), Atlanta, Las Vegas/Reno, Phoenix, and along the northeast seaboard which takes in Washington D.C., New York City, Boston, and Philadelphia.  There are also small pockets in rural states such as Kentucky, Kansas, Iowa, Tennessee, the Carolinas, and Nebraska which depend on seasonal farm help.

An interesting aside is that while Hispanics are now the largest minority block in America, surpassing blacks over a decade ago, and on track to be on par with whites in about two decades (or less), Asian presence in America is also growing dramatically.

While Asian immigrants tend to live in other Asian countries, about 15% of the 114.9 million Asian immigrants live in the U.S..  Almost half live in California, New York, or Texas. It's notable that while the largest group are Chinese, it's those from Southeast Asia (Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, and Indonesia) as well as Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, and the Philippines whose percentages have increased the most. Meanwhile, immigrants from India, Mongolia, and the former Soviet Union Republics of countries like Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, which are predominately Muslim, has risen sharply as well.

It's also worth nothing that, unlike many of the Hispanic immigrants,  Asian immigrants typically have a strong working knowledge of English. Some are not only proficient in English, but speak a third, fourth, or even fifth language with some degree of proficiency.  They also tend to be well educated, with many holding college degrees, especially those from India, Taiwan, Hong Kong, or Japan. 

America is changing. We are becoming with no clear cut majority. There is no stopping it. While we would, as a country, prefer the better educated Asians, we must accept that we also need the lesser educated field worker too. However, we cannot continue to allow illegal immigration to continue.

It creates a health concern with those entering the U.S. unvaccinated. It places a tremendous strain on our already deeply frayed social safety net with many paying little or nothing in taxes, leaving American Taxpayers to pick up the tab. However, Big Business likes the inflow of immigration since it increases competition for jobs and drives down wages and boost profits. It also allows the unscrupulous an opportunity to exploit workers for an even fatter profit.  

Uncontrolled immigration also creates a security crisis since we don't know who might be entering this country as friend or foe. We've already caught terrorists trying to sneak in. But for every one caught, how many made it in? The failure to speak English or conform to our laws and values destroys the fabric of the nation.  That reminds me of an old Irish saying which says that a land without a common language is a land without a soul.

Every country has the right and legal, as well as moral obligation to secure and protect its borders and its citizens. The U.S. is no different.  We need to stop playing political football with immigration. If we're going to end this partisan nonsense, stopping illegal immigration would be a good place to start.

 

What are President Biden's challenges at the border?

Refugees, Asylum Seekers and Migrants: A Critical Difference

 

20 metro areas are home to one in ten unauthorizedimmigrants in the U.S.

 

What's happening at the U.S. - Mexico border in 7 charts

Immigrants from Asia in the United States