WASHINGTON - Chase Oliver sees the majority of immigrant families being like those generations of immigrants who came before them: They want to cross the border, get a job, and provide for their families.
“Come right through, submit yourself to a background check in a 21st century Ellis Island model, and then come right in and get to work - well that eases the strain on law enforcement to take care of those who are being trafficked across the border,” says Oliver, 38, the Libertarian candidate for president. Oliver paired with Robby Soave (Reason, The Hill) for the pro-immigration viewpoint on the Zero Hedge Debate on Wednesday, June 26.
Jack Posobiec and Ryan Gidursky argued against it. Ryan Grim (The Intercept) and Emily Jashinsky (The Federalist) moderated.
Oliver continually pushed back on arguments that immigrants cause more crime than native-born citizens - crime statistics have shown the opposite for over a century. Likewise, opening ports of entry would reduce dependency on organized crime - they won’t need criminals to get them around immigration bans if the bans end.
Easing counterproductive immigration restrictions would improve the lives both of those trying to immigrate and current U.S. citizens, who would benefit from gaining new neighbors who commit fewer crimes than native-born citizens and who open new businesses at twice the rate.
“They’re not going to go across a port of entry if they’re human trafficking, you’re not coming across a port of entry if you’re carrying tons of fentanyl that’s been pressed to look like Xanax pills that’s going to cause the next O.D. in our communities. Those are the people that we need to have law enforcement stopping.”
The Border Debate is available on Zero Hedge’s YouTube channel at
Comments