Speaker 1: When the weather outside is frightful. The hunt a stata
Speaker 1: fe is what's the word delightful? Because it's got available
Speaker 1: eight track all wheel drive. To make being out together
Speaker 1: better enter for yours, she has to win the newly
Speaker 1: redesigned stat effect packed with all the jingle bells and
Speaker 1: whistles you need to go dash into the snow together
Speaker 1: to whitter. Visit Amazon dot com slash hunting, or scan
Speaker 1: the QR code on especially marks bread and green Amazon boxes.
Speaker 1: No person necessary called five six two three one four
Speaker 1: four six zero three for complete details before away. Bring
Speaker 1: on our yes. Talking about immigration and Trump's unveiling a
Speaker 1: major immigration proposal today that should, as far as I
Speaker 1: can tell, we're checking the polling on all the different points,
Speaker 1: should be overwhelmingly easily approved by our government since most
Speaker 1: people by far ear in favorite. The key part of
Speaker 1: Trump's immigration idea is merit. Based the polling on that
Speaker 1: answer this question, Should our immigration system be based still
Speaker 1: on a person's ability to contribute to America? Eighty four
Speaker 1: percent agree with that, as opposed to should it be
Speaker 1: based on person having relatives in the United States? It's
Speaker 1: only least sixteen percent for that, so it's eighty four
Speaker 1: to sixteen prefer a merit baite system, which is what
Speaker 1: Trump is gonna um uh talk about today. The lowest
Speaker 1: support for a merit based immigration system is among African Americans.
Speaker 1: It's still over two thirds for black people, seventy among
Speaker 1: self identified Democrats and liberals. Eighty three percent of Hispanic
Speaker 1: respondents agreed with that statement. This is a Harris poll
Speaker 1: out of Harvard, so that shouldn't be hard at all.
Speaker 1: But um because Trump. One of the things Trump is
Speaker 1: gonna put out there is he's not gonna lower the
Speaker 1: number of people coming into the country. He's gonna keep
Speaker 1: that flat. That's one of the reasons this Republican strategist
Speaker 1: I'm reading about in this article says it's dead on arrival.
Speaker 1: The whole thing is dead on arrival. Interesting. Mark Corrian
Speaker 1: is a nationally recognized expert on immigration issues. He is
Speaker 1: the executive director for the Center for Immigration Studies and
Speaker 1: a frequent guest on the Armstrong and get A show
Speaker 1: and joins us. Now, Mark, how are you. I'm doing
Speaker 1: very well? Thank you. I'm guessing there's some to love
Speaker 1: and some to dislike in this plan. What's your reaction
Speaker 1: to it? As you understand it thus far. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think that's a good way to put it. There's a
Speaker 1: lot to love in this plan and it's got it's
Speaker 1: it's both illegal immigration measures. Some of this uh fixes
Speaker 1: to plug the loopholes that are actually incentivizing the Central
Speaker 1: Americans to come up across the border. And then also
Speaker 1: the part you were talking about, the merit based parts.
Speaker 1: So what it does is it narrows the range of
Speaker 1: relatives you can bring in. You still bring in husbands, wives,
Speaker 1: and little kids, but it gets rid of some of
Speaker 1: the other categories for you know, adult brothers and sisters
Speaker 1: and what have you, and then moves all of those
Speaker 1: numbers over to a new merit based system. And I
Speaker 1: mean merit based is what the presidents called. It mean
Speaker 1: those people are better morally. It just means that they're
Speaker 1: more likely to be educated and skill that sort of thing.
Speaker 1: That's all to the good. A country that wants to
Speaker 1: better educated, more skilled people coming in just off as fashion. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it is shocking and in fact a lot of lobbyists
Speaker 1: have been complaining, corporate lobbyists saying no, no, we need
Speaker 1: lots of uneducated um people to do you know, grunt
Speaker 1: work and stoop labor, And I'm like, this is a
Speaker 1: modern society, why do we want that. There's nothing wrong
Speaker 1: with them. In other words, they're not morally defective because
Speaker 1: they didn't pass the sixth grade. They're regular people like
Speaker 1: anyone else. But what is a modern economy like ours?
Speaker 1: Why do we need more people with less education? It's
Speaker 1: just not right. Well, and you're in a weird class
Speaker 1: system if you. If you decide as a country, you
Speaker 1: know what we want is dumb people to do the
Speaker 1: kind of work we hate. We're gonna import a foreign underclass. Yeah.
Speaker 1: It is kind of like the Middle East, you know,
Speaker 1: where they import people to do all of their work
Speaker 1: and then the Arab Chics and the rest of them
Speaker 1: just sit there and benefit from it. But and this
Speaker 1: is the one big problem I have with this is
Speaker 1: that this isn't really a bill that's going to pass.
Speaker 1: This is more like a statement of goals and principles,
Speaker 1: kind of like almost a campaign document. And I don't
Speaker 1: mean that in a bad way. It's just laying out
Speaker 1: what the White House is for on immigration, not just
Speaker 1: what it's against. And that's good. The problem is it
Speaker 1: doesn't contain even a modest cut back in legal immigration.
Speaker 1: It embraces and endorses the current level of one point
Speaker 1: one million new immigrants every year. And that's a problem,
Speaker 1: especially in a document that is basically presenting itself as
Speaker 1: a sort of campaign platform, because the fact is that
Speaker 1: there are lots of problems with taking in more than
Speaker 1: one million new immigrants every year, even when the economy
Speaker 1: is good like now. And it would be good if
Speaker 1: the White House followed through on the President's commitments from before,
Speaker 1: you know, he became president, during the campaign, where he
Speaker 1: said he wanted a more moderate, somewhat lower level of
Speaker 1: legal immigration. And it's just not in there. And I
Speaker 1: think that's a serious problem. Mark Corey and Executive Director,
Speaker 1: Center for Immigration Studies on the line talking about the
Speaker 1: president's new proposal. So listen, people spend their lives reading
Speaker 1: in the mainstream media that immigration all immigration. Isn't that
Speaker 1: a positive? Um? So I think you need to at
Speaker 1: least briefly make the case why would you reduce lawful immigration. Uh,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of reasons. The basic overarching reason is
Speaker 1: that high levels of immigration are a problem for a
Speaker 1: modern society. In a way that wasn't the case a
Speaker 1: hundred or two hundred years ago. In other words, what's
Speaker 1: what the problem today is is not that the immigrants
Speaker 1: are different. There are no better or worse than anybody else.
Speaker 1: They're just regular people. Our economy and our society and
Speaker 1: everything has changed. We have a post and the austrial
Speaker 1: knowledge based economy, we have a welfare state, we have
Speaker 1: an assimilation system in our schools and what have you
Speaker 1: that isn't working very well. I mean, we're not even
Speaker 1: teaching our own kids what it is to be an American,
Speaker 1: let alone immigrant kids or kids from immigrant families who
Speaker 1: don't you know, who don't know and so and even
Speaker 1: um the security aspect of immigration. If we're gonna let
Speaker 1: in lots more skilled immigrants, that means lots more people
Speaker 1: from China and India, and frankly, the Chinese have been
Speaker 1: aggressively using foreign students and immigrants as um, you know,
Speaker 1: for their for espionage purposes. It doesn't mean all of them,
Speaker 1: and most of them are just regular people, but it's
Speaker 1: a serious problem. And so the fact is that high
Speaker 1: levels of immigration, however you arrange it, are a problem
Speaker 1: for a modern society like ours. And acknowledging that just
Speaker 1: by saying maybe cutting the level five or ten percent
Speaker 1: in this proposal would acknowledge that there are problems there
Speaker 1: that we need to deal with. And frankly, there was
Speaker 1: just pulling by the same Harvard Paris poll that you
Speaker 1: just referred to, where they asked people, what do you
Speaker 1: think the president's number one priority should be? And among
Speaker 1: people who voted for Trump, almost the same percentage said
Speaker 1: reducing immigration as did say build the wall, and both
Speaker 1: of those were the number one and number two goals
Speaker 1: for people who voted for Trump. People identify as Republicans
Speaker 1: or Conservatives, so this is an important issue for his base,
Speaker 1: and I think they're misreading their own voters concerns by
Speaker 1: ignoring all together concerns about taking in, like I said,
Speaker 1: one point one million new immigrants every year. All right,
Speaker 1: let's touch on one more thing, at least briefly, if
Speaker 1: you can, uh the way the immigration system is being
Speaker 1: exploited currently by the cartels, the human track pickers, and
Speaker 1: what this measure does about that. You mentioned removing some
Speaker 1: of the incentives for for flouting the system. What stands out. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we haven't seen all the details yet, but it's almost
Speaker 1: certain they are going to be things. Uh, they're going
Speaker 1: to be measures, for instance, to fix the rule that
Speaker 1: we're currently stuck with that says you can't keep a
Speaker 1: minor an the illegal immigrant under eighteen in detention for
Speaker 1: more than twenty days. What that means is if you
Speaker 1: bring a kid with you and then we detain you
Speaker 1: because you're an illegal immigrant, or say you're applying for asylum. Um,
Speaker 1: but it takes a while for that case to work out,
Speaker 1: and most people don't get asylum, they just use it
Speaker 1: as a way of getting past the border patrol. But
Speaker 1: if you bring a kid with you, we either have
Speaker 1: to let the kid go within three weeks and split
Speaker 1: the family by keeping the adult in detention and exactly,
Speaker 1: or we let the parent go to And so what
Speaker 1: has now become is if you bring a kid with you,
Speaker 1: that kid is a ticket to guaranteed release into the
Speaker 1: United States. Whether you end up showing up for hearings
Speaker 1: or what have you after, that is something we don't
Speaker 1: have any control over, right And the cars literally yeah,
Speaker 1: they're advertising with the cartels are advertising in Central America,
Speaker 1: bring a kid with you. It's a golden ticket into
Speaker 1: the US, and people are taking them up on that offer.
Speaker 1: And that has to be fixed. That's one of the
Speaker 1: things in this proposal that would be fixed. We are
Speaker 1: going to check in with Mark tomorrow when the details
Speaker 1: of the plan come out, and we will look forward
Speaker 1: to that market Coryon and the Center for Immigration Studies.
Speaker 1: Thanks Mark, good to talk to you. We'll talk to you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, all right. And one aspect of this plane
Speaker 1: that I really really like is it says, look, you
Speaker 1: apply for refugee status in your country period. You don't
Speaker 1: show up without an appointment. You can't do that at
Speaker 1: your hair salon and ala, go to a barbershop and
Speaker 1: you can, but you know you can't do that virtually
Speaker 1: anywhere of seriousness. Doctor's office, denis officers, Hey, I need
Speaker 1: a cleaning, just doesn't work that way. You apply for
Speaker 1: refugee status in your country period, you can't show up
Speaker 1: and demand to be let in. So the biggest change
Speaker 1: would be to switch in the merit based I mean,
Speaker 1: that would be standing our current system on its head.
Speaker 1: But if if organizations like MARS organization and I understand
Speaker 1: his argument, I could even agree with him. But if
Speaker 1: you're gonna pick out yeah, but I don't like this part,
Speaker 1: and then you always get to that we need comprehensive
Speaker 1: and comprehensive never happens. There is a reason why we
Speaker 1: can't just do one of these at a time. Just
Speaker 1: decide everybody in America practically agrees merit based is better
Speaker 1: than family, let's pass that. Do it. Then get to
Speaker 1: how many or the refugee or whatever other thing we're
Speaker 1: gonna deal with. Well, the political parties would tell you,
Speaker 1: and this is a two part answer, the political parties
Speaker 1: would tell you that, well, if you do it one
Speaker 1: chunk at a time, you've removed some of the horses.
Speaker 1: I wanted to trade for this other thing. Um, you
Speaker 1: give me merit based. Well, I was gonna trade that.
Speaker 1: I was gonna put that up against how I said,
Speaker 1: do something for the docapee. But how is that something
Speaker 1: to trade when everybody agrees on it. Well, that's not
Speaker 1: just a Republican issue or a Democrat. We went through
Speaker 1: the polling. Everybody wants that, which brings me to part
Speaker 1: two of the answer. The parties are lying to you
Speaker 1: all the time about what they want to do and
Speaker 1: what they're gonna do on immigration. They both want the
Speaker 1: issue to remain. You solve the issue, you lose it
Speaker 1: as an issue. I mean I understand trading DOCCA for
Speaker 1: they have to speak English. Those are two completely different
Speaker 1: sides of the argument. But everybody wants the merit based
Speaker 1: It's just not even close, right, Yeah, yeah, well this
Speaker 1: is true, and people who listen to the show now
Speaker 1: know it. You will not hear that from the big
Speaker 1: American media. I can scan the big American media stories
Speaker 1: I've seen so far, I don't recall if they've addressed it.
Speaker 1: I have a feeling they haven't. Well, Democrats nearly over
Speaker 1: the near unanimity among the American people on certain main
Speaker 1: points of the plan. The Democratic and Republican strategies have seen.
Speaker 1: It's all said, there's not a chance that this is
Speaker 1: gonna happen. So that's just fantas no way to run
Speaker 1: a country, no kidding. When the weather outside is rightful,
Speaker 1: The hunt Santa Fe is what's the word delightful because
Speaker 1: it's got available eight track all wheel drive to make
Speaker 1: being out together better. Enterpy your chance to win the
Speaker 1: newly redesigned sant Effect, packed with all the jingle bells
Speaker 1: and whistles you need to go dashing through the snow together.
Speaker 1: To enter, visit Amazon dot com, slash hunte or scan
Speaker 1: the QR code on specially marked bread and green Amazon boxes.
Speaker 1: No purchase necessary. Called five six two three one four
Speaker 1: four six zero three for complete details