I am writing in response to a request from The Shorthorn’s editor stating the opinions of publishing or not publishing Mae M. Ngai’s “Reforming Immigration for Good”. The author claims the government's approach to protocols regarding controlling future immigrants are failing ideas of sustaining illegal immigration. She inflicts sympathy to the reader on the idea of why illegal immigration will not stop. I consider Ngai’s writing to appeal to readers of The Shorthorn because of the relativity of ideas of demographic predicaments of their future. This text brings forth ideas of why actions of legalization happen. One point being the loss of money regarding border control, but not halting the true problem all together. Ngai’s states her central …show more content…
The first reason being, capital spent on reinforcing the Mexican border, which does not stop illegal immigration but reduces it. She states, “The promise to ‘secure the border’ made for good politics even before 1986, when Congress passed the last comprehensive immigration reform bill. In the last quarter-century we have spent approximately $187 billion on enforcement, mostly along the United States-Mexico border.” This is very much relatable to Shorthorn audience because of government continuously spending of money that can go to better causes of a problem that has arisen long ago. Stating this contributes to the authors’ claim of advancements in handling immigration instead of subtracting …show more content…
She provides a statement in which unauthorized migration happens because of our system of allocating green cards and visas are seven percent total each year. This suggests the limitation to minimum number of people contributes to the rise of illegal migration, because families are not given a chance to come to America. The Shorthorn readers will find this intriguing because it’s an alternative means to perceive the problem. Ngai provides the audience with this conviction of immigrants being the fault, but establishing blame on American methods of controlling it. Changing the ideals of illegal immigrants being the cause of tedious amounts of capital going into border control versus Ngai states limitation on immigration is that cause makes readers second guess the argument, which I believe is a good thing. Ngai gives deeper understanding to readers instead of general information with backing the