Immigration Reform in the U.S.: A View Through the
Immigration Reform in the U.S.: A View Through the
Introduction
The United States of America, a country so poetically nicknamed to be “a melting pot” of cultures, has always been a more than desirable destination for the immigrants from all over the world. However, as the” times of economic uncertainty and social transformation have complicated American ideas about national and racial identity and have raised moral dilemmas concerning America’s obligations to immigrants from neighboring countries” (Duncan, 2007), the current U.S. immigration policy has started to age and cause concerns. Old practices become outdated, sometimes even irrelevant, and it is not wonder that society is now more fascinated with finding a solution for this issue than it has ever been before.
Unfortunately, during this seeking process people tend to take rather extreme positions while ignoring all the middle grounds. Such disregard of compromises causes a lot of troubles in society, because middle grounds are the main holders of ethical grounds.
Thus, this essay will mostly view this situation through the prism of utilitarianism, deontology, and ethical egoism. In taking this approach, an effort will be made to present complications that might arise if this issue is not handled immediately.
Immigrants come to the United States in the search for better life conditions. It does not always mean that live in their native country is tremendously difficult, but it does mean that the anticipation of the American Dream seems to be much more pleasant for these people. Putting all the reasoning aside, this step is always done out of self-interest, either this interest is forced or created voluntarily. Nonetheless, a lot of people are highly concerned with the number of immigrants incoming, and with all possible dangers that might bring along.
Depending on the group of people or the location, there are two general utilitarian approaches to the problem with immigration. However, it would be odd to evaluate anything through the utilitarian point of view before introducing what the word “utilitarianism” stand for.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states that “utilitarianism is generally held to be the view that the morally right action is the action that produces the most good”, and “the right action is understood entirely in terms of consequences produced” (Driver, 2014). Thus, from this perspective, any utilitarian opinion towards the immigration issue emerges from person’s perception of morality, ethics, and, of course, the goals this person aims to achieve.
Generally speaking, utilitarianism by itself evaluates actions through the means of their usefulness. When it comes to immigration, people tend to either concentrate on the benefits for their own nation or on the benefits for the incoming nations. The third group of people, the most objective one, tries to find solutions that would satisfy both parties and simultaneously bring good to the common table.
For instance, the supporters of Donald Trump’s “huge wall”, strongly believe that the increasing number of illegal immigrants will bring terror, unemployment, cultural disrupt, and will take away a hefty majority of the liberties an average American is so proud about. All these consequents are at the very least scary, but what is more terrifying that many people accept them as the only possible outcome, and this is where all of the fuss begins.
After all, illegal workers are the ones that come to make money, they take the most tedious vacancies, do the most humiliating jobs – the ones that “proud Americans would never take”. By letting immigrants make money, and do their job, employers in the United States benefit greatly: all of this together is a nice utilitarian symbiosis (everyone is useful to each other).
However, illegal immigrants still do break the law, and yet another definition from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy comes in handy here: “deontology falls within the domain of moral theories that guide and assess our choices of what we ought to do, in contrast to that—fundamentally, at least—guide and assess what kind of person are and should be” (Larry, Moore, 2015).
Because laws are made for a good reason, it is presumed that any person has to obey the laws of the land they stand at. The problem with egoistic illegal immigrants arises when they do the job, take much less money than a legal employee would, and, to top it all, pay no taxes to government. As a result, their choices produce poor consequences for the people who already live in the U.S.
A lot of arguments protecting immigrants comes from the historical heritage of the United States: “All Americans, with the possible exception of the Native Americans, are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants” (Schuck, 2008), and many see hypocrisy in the criteria deciding for who will become a legal resident and who will not. It is clear that already rich and well-educated people have way more chances to become a U.S. citizen than those who are only on their way of development, and this is not a proper approach.
This system is rather discriminatory and violates the Equal Liberty Principle: “Each person has an equal right to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties which is compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for all” (Maco, 4). By this, any person has a right to be treated as a person, to be given a chance for improvement and development.
After all, if someone is already stable and successful in their native country, chances are rather slim they would decide to come to the U.S, and because the idea behind establishment of the United States of America was to provide freedom and possibilities for those who seek them, it seems more fair to upgrade the current immigration system in order to provide satisfaction to as many people as it is possible.
Conclusion
If there was a way to make the visa acquiring process easier, the United States would benefit more. After all, there is always a way to start taxing workers without citizenship to provide actual citizens with improved health care and educational system, because money is always good, and a wider variety of employment competition would create ambitions and a desire in people to improve themselves and do something incredible.
This way, everyone benefits from the utility of the whole process, and no laws are broken, which altogether is an ultimate ethical middle ground – that same one capable of satisfying as many people as it is possible through the achievement of a healthy compromise.
References
Driver, J. (2014). The History of Utilitarianism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/utilitarianism-history/
Duncan, A.W. (2007). Scholars Discuss Ethics of U.S. Immigration Reform. University of Virginia: School of Law. Retrieved from: http://www.law.virginia.edu/html/news/2007_spr/immigration_reform.htm
Larry, A., Moore, M. (2015). Deontological Ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/ethics-deontological/
Maco, D. J., Smith, I. E., Watson, J. R. Ethics in Current U.S. Immigration Policy. Retrieved from: http://www.ethicapublishing.com/confronting/5CH18.pdf
Schuck, Peter H., "The Morality of Immigration Policy" (2008). Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 1678. Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/1678
