Free Immigration Verses Restricted Immigration

Free Immigration Verses Restricted Immigration Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Introduction Immigration is increasingly growing into an issue of concern due to its impacts on the fiscal burden of states. The issue of immigration can be viewed in both positive and negative perspective to both the country of origin and that of immigration. For instance, the degree of immigration can preferably influence the skill composition of both immigrants and the natives. The policy regime impacts the form of immigration of a country, classifying a state as free immigration or restricted immigration state. Different researchers have presented diverse views on the issue concerning their justification for either free or restricted immigration. Presentation of justification of free immigration by Mathias Risse and Chandran Kurathas as well as the justification of Brock and Mills on the support of restricted immigration provides a baseline to support either free or restricted immigration in the United States as discussed herein. Synopsis Free and restricted immigration have been discussed in details by various people concerned with the issue of security in terms of both resources and employment skills. For instance, Mathias Risse Wrote “On the Morality of Immigration” on the Journal of Ethics and International Affair debating on the moral consideration about immigration. The article by Risse discusses the justification of immigration policies rather than restricting or justifying immigration concerning “what is good” for a state or country. He mainly focused on the United States’ current situation of complete desperation in their stance toward immigration. In the same case, Chandran Kurathas wrote on “The Case of Open Immigration,” linking the issue of restricted immigration as the political strategy to restrict movements. The argument based on sociologic and scientific perspective provides the classical and modern perspective of favoring open borders which allow free immigration among different ethnic groups. “Should active recruitment of health workers from sub-Sahara Africa be viewed as a crime (2008)” by Edward Mills, William Schabas, and Jimmy Volmink illustrates the desires of health professionals to work in foreign countries. They illustrate that health workers always feel insecure to work in their own country thus creating a need to allow free immigration, especially at the professional level. Brock argues in his book on “Compatriot priority, health in developing countries, and our global responsibilities (2011)” that people are mandated to enhance social justice and global dynamics in healthcare sector without restricting movement of healthcare providers. This is an approach for ensuring the eradication of health disparities, especially in the developing regions. Comparison of the Texts Concerning the four discussed materials, the authors have both integrating and differing arguments on the issue of freeing or restricting immigration. For instance, Mathias Risse pleads on the relevance of moral consideration on the global debate over the issue of immigration. Mathias argument is based on the use of humanity while assessing matters relating to immigration policies. His standpoint on “the earth belongs to humanity in common” shrinks the United State population in two groups which mainly regulates the access into the country through the established sophisticated border surveillance strategies (Risse, 2008). He argues that the controllers of the United States boundaries should allow free movement of the people as the territory is mainly underused under their control. Allowing free immigration is necessary for ensuring full utilization of available resources and opportunities within the boundaries which cannot be exhausted by the native population. The United States government should, therefore, naturalize illegal immigration and permit unrestricted immigration for full utilization of the state’s resources. Risse also argues that both temporary and permanent immigration at a global level is viewed as a way of satisfying duties across the world. This is about allowing transfer of skills to enable handling of tough tasks which also allows dissemination of knowledge across the world. The argument is agreeable to most of the political leaders, philosophers, and citizens especially those who find the need for importing source of labor to cover the scarcity of the country. However, the issue of immigration is raised on the question of morality and political feasibility. In controlling morality in immigration especially from the borders of Mexico, the United State should ensure the introduction of mandatory identification cards with a sophisticated registration system that would make it easier to track immigrants (Risse, 2008). According to Mathias Risse, crime and immoral behavior cannot be controlled through restriction of immigration but by taking the initiative to address the loopholes for criminals within the state. Similarly, Chandran Kurathas argues that greater freedom of movement should be allowed at both the state and global levels. The argument dismisses most of the critics for the immigration while focusing on changing the mentality of some of the less enthusiastic friends of immigration, especially in the United States, which is currently faced with the debate on the restriction of immigration from M...