Good morning.
Today is the nine hundred ninety-fourth day.
On this day in 1971, the Apollo 15 mission lands astronauts, and a lunar rover, on the moon.
Recommended for reading in full:
Julia Brookins writes Trump’s immigration plan endangers America’s ability to integrate foreigners (“It’s family reunification, not highly skilled workers, that allows the U.S. to form a cohesive national identity”):
President Donald Trump’s Rose Garden speech on immigration Thursday [5.16.19] proposed an eye-catching but ultimately short-sighted approach to immigration: the notion that we should strongly favor highly educated, highly skilled visa-seekers over those with family ties to people in the United States.
As a historian of U.S. immigration, I have seen such notions floated many times over the years because they promise to improve the economy by recruiting better talent. But the politicians and policymakers who promote them don’t seem to notice or appreciate how central prioritizing family-based migration has been to our phenomenal, long-term success in integrating foreigners into the fabric of American life.
When declarations about America’s “broken” immigration system ring out from all political quarters, we should take stock of what is not broken within the system, and resolve not to break it. I’m resigned to the fact that most policymakers’ measures of success focus on narrowly defined economic needs and less on the full range of costs and benefits large-scale immigration has for the country. But I still hope that someone, somewhere is concerned about the needs of our democratic republic and wants to perpetuate the best ideas that have sustained it for nearly 250 years.
Rachel Maddow reviews the family history of Donald Trump aide Stephen Miller, as told by Miller’s uncle, to highlight how the openness of the United States to immigrants saved Miller’s family from poverty and allowed it to thrive – a policy Miller hopes to end through Donald Trump:
How Far Back in Time Could an English Speaker Go and Still Communicate Effectively?: