Yesterday I was doing some 'weeding thinking' and mulling over the Supreme Court decision allowing the administration to keep asylum seekers out of the country. Effectively, the decision eliminates asylum as an option for immigrants, because our law requires them to 'arrive' in the US to begin the process.
Here's where my mind wandered:
The person who might figure out how to cure Alzheimer’s is waiting on the other side of the border; so, too might be the person who can end our reliance on things that generate all the bad crap we get in our food, water, and the air we breathe.
The person who might come up with a way to allow us to identify who's sending all those UAP/UFOs, and help us interact with lifeforms from other planets, could be standing right next to her, staring up at the stars.
Someone who could figure out how to effectively provide reliable energy for new and existing homes, businesses, schools, hospitals, the dreaded data centers, and vehicles, without putting the environment and people’s health at risk, could be there, too.
The person who can calculate how to reliably fund a responsive government without spending trillions of dollars it doesn't have, and without unfairly taking from those who have less while favoring those who have more, might be waiting in their shadows.
The team of people who can figure out how to better and/or more cost-effectively prepare our children for their future (and for protecting ours) while we navigate AI, environmental calamity, global economic and military threats, and challenges that are not yet fully understood could be there, waiting, too.
The young adult who might eventually write the next Great American Novel could be standing at our border, eager to come in and go through our lengthy, underfunded, understaffed, misunderstood, neglected, outdated, and almost incomprehensible immigration process, all to have a chance to experience their own American Dream, the one they’ve heard about all their life.
Now, those things - the cures and the science and the ideas, might not happen.
Now, that book might never get written.
Instead, the book could tell a story of a great divide, far wider than any of our actual borders, between who Americans think we are and how we are presented to the world, or between who the parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents of the author understood Americans to be, compared to today's Americans who slammed the door shut.
It could tell of an America that will send thousands of people back to the "shithole countries" they fled (the president's term, not mine), countries our government has declared totally unsafe - for Americans, anyway.
It could tell of an America only welcoming to wealthy white people fleeing a black majority country, or to Christians being 'persecuted' by religious majorities, while feigning ignorance of the promises we made to refugees from other countries, including those whose lives are at risk solely because they helped America during our wars against their country.
It could tell of a president who has said that America, once the beacon of hope to the entire world, was a ‘dead country’ until he got back into office, that only he can save us, and who has worked to strip America of the things that make us ‘America’ as he labors to cement his legacy, the country's legacy be damned.
It could tell any of those stories, and more, seen through the eyes of someone stuck on the outside looking in, rather than the story we love to read about us: that of an outsider, threatened where they lived, who was welcomed into our country’s embrace and offered the experience of a lifetime: a fresh start, here, in America.
This morning, sitting on the porch with my coffee and sleepy kitties, I'm still mulling this over, and thinking about what we stand to lose compared to what we stand to gain with this decision.
On the losing side? The interwebs gave me a list of notable asylees, which, if correct, includes Albert Einstein, Madeleine Albright, Henry Kissinger, Elie Wiesel, and Gloria Estefan. Four of the five are recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Einstein died before the honor was created, but he, Kissinger, and Wiesel were awarded Nobel Prizes. Two were Secretaries of State; one is a Kennedy Center honoree. Their collective other accomplishments would fill a page or two, I'm sure. Would we have been better off not letting these folks in?
Also on the losing side: any effort to address what I described above as our "lengthy, underfunded, understaffed, misunderstood, neglected, outdated, and almost incomprehensible immigration process." What would be the point of trying to fix it when the current administration's goal, and that of those on the successor shortlist, is simply to slam the door shut on anyone who doesn't meet a very narrow definition of an ideal American?
I can think of lots more that could fall on this side of the ledger, but what's on the other side, the 'winning' side?
It's been several minutes since I typed the sentence above, and I've not come up with much for the win column, other than financial benefits.
Oh, sure - we have better control of who's being let into the country through legal channels (because asylum-seeking *was* a legal channel) if we don't let anyone in.
More importantly, based on what I've read and heard? We may save money because we won't have to temporarily house and care for these folks until they get jobs and start paying taxes, including the critical contributions they make to Social Security. We won't have to pay to educate their children, and, at least in theory, there'll be more jobs for Americans, assuming Americans are willing to take the jobs these folks will be leaving behind.
And, we might be able to clear the backlog of pending asylum cases, assuming anyone wants to address the backlog in the first place, and assuming there are still folks here who've applied for asylum and haven't self-deported out of fear and frustration, or haven't been detained and deported as the administration rounded up "the worst of the worst," or whatever it was it claimed to be doing.
Do those 'wins' outweigh the losses? I'm not at all convinced they do, although I'm convinced I could name several people in my own circles who'd disagree with me.
That may be the most American thing about this whole mess.
