The debate on immigration, borders and the broad public policy issues addressing these matters deeply divides the citizenry of the United States. Clearly our current methods of grappling with these complex issues are yielding no consensus building; to the contrary, we are further polarizing and expanding the space between the opinions and those who hold them. The debate and the divide worsen and chaff with each proposal and counter proposal, producing further frustration and a worsening polarization.
I propose a plan to unite and clearly define each country’s destiny by putting these issues directly into the hands of the people themselves for a solution. We begin by placing a single, simple resolution on a US national ballot that will ask:
Shall the United States of America offer to the people and country of Mexico, the opportunity to become citizens of and a State in these United States? Simultaneously, voters in Mexico would be asked if they wish to become American citizens through Mexican statehood.
The success or failure of these resolutions will reveal each country’s actual willingness for addressing these issues with solutions either great or small. If the initiative fails on the US side, then it is clear that the majority of US voters prefer stronger border protection, as well as immigration policies and procedures that control access to the country. If the initiative passes on both sides, then with it would come all of the regulatory burden, oversight, taxation, policy enforcement, legal requirements, agency review etc. that all US states currently enjoy. The US Constitution and all of her laws, regulations, treaties and world-wide agreements would apply equally to the new state of Mexico. Compliance with OSHA, the EPA, FEMA, the IRS, all would embrace our newest state.
Should the Mexican voters decide against becoming a State in the United States, then it would be clear that border protection, immigration policy and questions of US national sovereignty and self preservation are proprietary questions answered only by the United States and not subject to debate and input from those interests outside of our country.
Admittedly anecdotal, I believe that the resolution, on both sides, would be soundly defeated. The open borders crowd in America is a small but shrill minority. The exposure to the bright light of simply proposing the resolution puts the question and its philosophy clearly into the open for unobscured observation in the absence of hyperbole. If defeated, the open border crowd would be rightly marginalized into non-relevance.
Judging by past mass demonstrations and rallies, the Mexican mainstream has a thinly disguised disdain of the US and holds strongly to its deep Spanish heritage with no desire to assimilate to US ideals of nationalism and heritage. By maintaining the stark economic disparity between our countries, the Mexican wage earner in the US does better when that difference is the greatest. Continued border porosity assures that outcome.
Solution through resolution would expose the hypocrisy on both sides and settle this long standing dilemma by placing the decision making authority exactly where it belongs, in the hands of the people.