How about we first decide on what criteria we wish to make judgements of policy?
Are immigrants bad? My family all immigrated, and not on the Mayflower, but in an era when the first generation lived in isolated ghettos and were discriminated against. Most people’s families were. That’s how the country was made.
What does it say about us, a country founded on religious freedom, that we want to declare a religion verboten? Why do I not fear my long-persecuted religion is not next? Why do we believe that a belief test is efficacious?
Is there a real security threat from the recent immigrant population? I can’t tell. But I am inclined to say no.
What does preserving or promoting an economic underclass mean about our country? Maybe nothing good.
What is the economic risk of eliminating an underpaid immigrant workforce? Maybe not more jobs, but more robots, or higher prices, or fewer services.
What are the real numbers? Unemployment seems pretty low, and wages pretty good. Crime is at almost historic lows. But you can’t tell from much political speech, or alarm company TV ads. How can we have a debate without agreeing to the core data even?
The plural of anecdote is not statistics, so we have to learn to research, and trust the math.
Until then, it’s all emotion. Is that any way to make public policy?