Abortion Access Should Be Maintained, Tougher Immigration Restrictions at the Border is Necessary while Family-Based Immigration Must Be Protected

Polls show that abortion and immigration are among the top priorities this 2024 election. Historically, both have been magnet issues, bringing voters to the polls. But this election is different as the urgency to act is amplified. And it’s not just political pundits who are saying this, but average Americans who are expressing passion over these issues.

Abortion
Political conservatives on religious grounds applaud the Dobbs ruling that overturned Roe v Wade two years ago, ending decades of federal protection of abortion. This ruling gave states the power to decide how abortion should be handled. Some states like Hawaii have enhanced access to abortion; while others went the complete opposite, implementing bans on abortion that includes cases of rape or incest.

Then there are other states – mostly battleground states – where a tug-of-war on restrictions and rights to abortion has yet to be re-codified since Dobbs, and this election could determine that outcome.

Nationally, abortion is still a red-hot issue even for states like Hawaii that affirmed abortion rights because there is the possibility that a national band on abortion could take away states’ power to protect it. For conservatives, they see the ban on abortion as not complete if it could be performed in some states and not others. Furthermore, with the availability of abortion-inducing pills, it’s even conceivable for an abortion to be done in states that outlaw it.

While there is always a place for morality and religiosity in the legislating process, the issue of abortion is unique because it involves intrinsic rights to a woman’s own body and the freedom to have autonomy over it. This is the most basic of fundamental rights as a human being and for this reason the right to an abortion should be protected.

Additionally, there are cases where abortion must absolutely be protected like when a woman’s life is in jeopardy, or a pregnancy poses health risks. This then becomes a public health issue, and, in these cases, abortion should also be protected.

Where there is a compelling and strong argument for restricting abortion is when a fetus would be viable outside the womb. In these cases, there also must be protection of life for the baby. Many states that permit an abortion have such timeline provisions.

Immigration
It’s been close to three decades since the last sweeping immigration bill. President Joe Biden attempted an overhaul in his proposed U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021 sent to Congress. Former President Donald Trump also proposed a comprehensive immigration reform bill.

But both presidents did not have a majority in the Congress when they proposed their plan and failed to gain any traction.  Both Biden and Trump’s bills contained features that consensus could have been reached if it were not for politics, as well as features that were diametrically in opposition to their party’s fundamental approach to immigration.

Considering that Biden and Trump most likely will face off once again in a rematch, voters have an idea of what immigration plans might be brought to the table.

The cynical voter can rightly say that each administration after Reagan had legitimate opportunities to pass comprehensive immigration reform and either they didn’t prioritize it or used the issue as red meat to win elections. When Democrats held the presidency and a majority in Congress, they instead prioritized healthcare. When Republicans held a trifecta, they instead passed corporate tax cuts. But like abortion, there is an urgency to act on immigration like never before according to polls. So, the political environment in 2024 is ripe for immigration to finally get an overhaul.

Both Democrats and Republicans agree on a strong border security. In fact, in the latest immigration legislation this year at the Senate, President Biden said he would sign that working bill if the House approved it. Some of the features included perhaps would not have been agreed upon by past Democratic administrations, but the crisis at the border has worsened and even Democrats favor tougher border restrictions.  

Asylum laws must be changed to make it harder for migrants who do not qualify for legitimate refugee status to take advantage of the system. There should be a screening process before migrants enter the border. This would prevent massive entry, save on processing costs and expedite legitimate claims at the Immigration Court.

Homeland security should also be given the power to close the border when there is a migrant overflow. And catch-and-release must be dramatically altered or dismantled completely because too many migrants who come into the country knowing that they do not qualify for asylum simply do not show up for their court hearing.  At the same time, immigration via asylum should be maintained. The system just needs to be tightened to allow legitimate asylum seekers to gain entry.

Where Democrats and Republicans disagree on is on family-based immigration, which actually is the mechanism most immigration takes place.  Democrats want to keep family-based immigration and improve on it to eliminate lengthy wait times, clear back logs and increase per-country visa caps. They also want to make it easier for STEM graduates to stay in the US and improve access to green cards. Trump, on the other hand, had proposed to dismantle family-based immigration and replace it with an unfair merit system.

In this area of immigration, our Filipino community has a strong interest to vote for someone who would protect family-based immigration, not only in the spirit of perpetuating a system that many in our community has benefited from, but to enable the multitudes of families currently going through the process to be reunited with their loved ones.