There has been negligible population growth. Ina very distinct different the 1970s through 2010. There have been movements. Guest there has been movement. People have moved to places where they have cultural affinities. Liberal professionals and high skilled people. The server to dallasfort worth. People from either werent either one do not want to be transferred to the other. They move from high housing cost states. 19 million in 2010. Very small growth. Texas, 11 million in 1970. 25 million in 2010. It more than doubled. Migrants from internal migrants in the United States as well as immigrants from mexico and other parts of latin america and asia as well. Host the emergence over cultural issues and the sharp slowdown in internal migration has sharpened fears that we are flying apart. Michael barone wrote in his book, shaping our nation. Caller i am curious as to why we do not use our National Guard troops to guard the interior borders of the country just as we used the coast guard to patrol the waterways of the country. Guest that is not the statutory duty of the National Guard, which operates as a parttime force, which can be brought into play when you have National Disasters and civil disorders that ordinary police cannot take care of. We have a Border Patrol. We have different things. For many years, the Border Patrol in san diego, california, which is a border county, the Border Patrol was less interested in patrolling the border than having a checkpoint on interstate 5. A hot and dusty border. We put a border fence up there. If you look at the history of the u. S. Mexico border, there was not much migration going across it. The first attempt to secure it was a cooperative u. S. Mexico effort. The guy in charge of mexico said, die. The conditions along that border or so difficult. It is not the function of the National Guard. We have had a big increase in Border Patrol during the administrations of george w. Bush and barack obama. They were pushed by congress. We can do a better job. We need to use technology. In our recent experiences with the health care act, the government is not the best procurer of technology. It should be able to do better. We should check the legal eligibility of people getting hired to reduce the incentive of illegals to come over. If you reduce the possibility they can get a job and make a living looking forward, our biggest task is not so much preventing courts of illegal hoards hoards of Illegal Immigrants coming over, but shifting our immigration from what it currently is. It should be going from low skilled immigration to high skilled immigration like it is in canada. Guest there has been movement. When you see jews as you would say democrat or reductions. Intellectual brothers and sisters, why do you say that broughtpean for the this over here. I try to uses for framers of the constitutions founders for the the Members Group of the first congress. Sometimes i may get it wrong. Jewish americans are fascinating. What this is an antigen dinner in new york at a time when the jews were generally not welcome in large parts of europe. That has been part of our heritage. We have families dissented from that. They were really second class is a sentence. They were treated better in the hungarian and german empires in the early 20th century. They came over in large numbers. Very few of them ever returned. Italians returned to the home country as many Latin Americans have been doing in recent years. The Eastern European jews did not go back. They did not want to go back. You had the holocaust during world war ii. It destroys communities and killed 6 Million People, the nazis did. They move up very rapidly. It is a fascinating story. They are people with high skills, high academic aptitudes. They become people in the culture in show business and the movies, the Great Universal culture of the 1940s. A lot the studio executives responsible for making movies spoke with Eastern European accents. They figured out how to present a quintessentially American Culture that would appeal to just about anybody. That is one of the differences from the mid20th Century America today. We had had universal culture in the radio, in the movies, and television. We do not have it today. We have niche media, people watching different things, different forms of entertainment. Ronald reagan made his living and radio, movies, tv. In his farewell address to the country, he laments that the Entertainment Industry is not making patriotic movies anymore and helping people appreciate the American Heritage as much as they used to. He is lamenting the disappearance, as it is happening, of that universal media, from which he had made his living. Host we will conclude on that note. The book, shaping our nation how surges in migration transformed america and its politics. Our guest, michael barone. And you very much for being with us. Obama is in San Francisco today for a couple of fundraisers. To also make remarks on immigration policy this afternoon. We will happen live starting at 2 35 p. M. Eastern. Coming up, our special q a program will feature robin nagle on her experiences as a sanitation worker. Years ago, i do not think anyone was listening to the crystal ball that someone on a College Campus would be streaming netflix also an iphone to watch a movie. What is happening is are huge issues that the technology, and i remember in northwest ohio depending on the day the antenna on top of the house was right you got two channels. Sundays you did not get any. The wind andn light in everything else. The industry has changed so rapidly. Havet to make sure we things out there that spurred this innovation. I think we have created this. But 3. 8 million jobs. Technology issues in front of the current congress. Does that mean . One Million People lined the roof of president canneries kennedys funeral procession. Millions more watched on Live Television coverage. Starting tonight, watch nbcs coverage of president kennedy state funeral. During the historic trip to they noticed how mrs. Nixon was looking at packages of cigarettes. I also asked ceo in meyer this. She said arent they dolling. Hell arent they darling and he said you will go home with them. It was afford for her to support her husband. Just her being married brought so much goodwill. Come up. Rts would would always say what a wonderful job this was. Tonight live at 9 00 eastern. Also on cspan radio. Until then more discussion on immigration from saturdays host ourn journal next guest joins us from new york. With the council of foreign relations, their International Economic senior fellow. Also a professor at columbia university. Thanks for joining us. Guest thank you. Im delighted to join you. Host you have a recent op ed in Foreign Affairs magazine called a kinder gentler immigration policy. Could you give us a seps of what you make of current efforts here on capitol hill when it comes to immigration policy . Guest i think its a very good idea to have Something Like that for the people whom you are going to benefit, actually. I dont want to knock the idea that the thing is entirely useless but the whole thing is predicated on the assumption that somehow you can get rid of Illegal Immigrants. And therefore, what we want to do is come up with a set of penalties and incentives which will somehow reduce the influx of new Illegal Immigrants and will somehow get rid of the stop of Illegal Immigrants. And i dont think that those are possible feasible objectives. And for the very simple reason that each time we try and do Something Like this, at the washington level, things really get worse for the Illegal Immigrants and we dont really gain anything in terms of what is commonly known as controlling our borders. And the main reason is that we have a right brainleft brain approach to Illegal Immigrants. The right brain says they are immigrants and therefore we should be kind to them. We should be considerate to them. But the left brain says oh but theyre illegal and therefore we believe in the rule of law and therefore we should be unkind to them. And its like a bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. And we go from one to the other. And the democrats who generally are in favor of being kinder actually wind up having to make all kinds of concessions to get a comprehensive Immigration Reform in washington through the legislative process. So they wind up imposing all kinds of terrible conditions at the border in terms of disruption of lives of people internally to massive deportations, massive border expenditures to bring the doubting thomases on board and it really doesnt deliver anything. Because we tried that last time with the Immigration Reform control act of 86 and we tried exactly the same tact 86 and look where we are at now doing the same things all over again and its not going to produce any results other than deterioration in the conditions of the Illegal Immigrants. Host Border Control being one thing but what about some proposals that would put some on a pathway to legalization . Guest i think the problem there again is that many people are not going to be able to use that pathway. For the very simple reason that today if you say because were making concessions to the opponent of such legalization, theyre saying its going to be a protracted process. There are all kinds of restrictions going to be imposed by people being able to do it. People also looking at the situation will say look if its going to take 10 years to get through the process we know through president obamas behavior that through executive action you can null if i whatever you promise. Also, the opponents may get into the congress and then may withdraw these things. So either you do it very quickly or you dont do it at all. My prediction is that no more than about half at most of the estimated illegals, stop of illegals which is at 11 million, not more than half will take advantage of it. And this is the situation in 19 86 when we also had the amnesty, as you remember. At that time 3 million out of an estimated 6 million chose the option. The others refusesed to come out. And today theyre protected by their ethnic counterparts of trying to be tougher with the illegals who are really here you cant really do that because immediately theres the problem of the ethnic counterparts going to the political and saying look were not going to be able to the washington cannot really enforce draconian measures against us so were not going to come out into the open and take an amnesty if you want to call it. It is amnesty but with restrictions, and we call it legalization process. Theyre not going to get started on this because it simply doesnt make sense. And about 30 of the people who are actually illegal in some form or the other, many studies show that about 30 actually manage to become legal through marriage and all sorts of existing provisions, and so the compulsion to come out like this is going to be meaningless and i do think that theres also politics involved here. I myself am a democrat as you know, and we want a legalization process which ultimately results or immediately results in some stage in the people being able to vote. That automatically divides the republicans and the democrats because the democrats expect these people to be voting for them. The republicans to some extent oppose the legalization process in the sense of reaching citizenship because they think the votes will go the other way. Host i apologize for interrupting. I want to make sure the callers get a chance to talk to you as well. Before we do let the callers talk to you i want to get a seps of your op ed, the kinder gentler immigration policy. Heres a line that you can expand on. You say that the United States should stop attempting to imgrate Illegal Immigrants. Principal among them would be a shift from a topdown approach to a bottom one letting states compete for Illegal Immigrants. Could you talk about that last part of that. Guest i think the implication which i was saying so far was basically that it is impossible to think of a suitable way in which washington top down approach will work. It didnt work in 86. It is not going to work because it is even more difficult now to get it through the congress. So what we have to do is think in terms of being able to do something which actually works outside of washington. That is the principle basis. Now, the bad states are going to lose labor if they keep enacting legislation which is designed, like drivers licenses the ability to send children at school. Those states are going to lose labor because Illegal Immigrants just simply avoid them when theyre coming across the desert to talk about the rio grand border or they simply leave these states and go to the better states. Labor is required to be there because we need the Illegal Immigrants. We need the immigrants. The effect is to shift the political equilibrium in the states towards reducing the badness of their legislation. And you see a lot of evidence of that in arizona, alabama, et cetera. Businesses turning around joining the lawsuits against the draconian legislation. So that is what i call race to the top or towards the top. The bad states through competition for labor will in fact be improving the legislation and that actually is going to help improve the humanity with which we treat immigrants. Nothing is required from washington for this. Host richard from wisconsin, republican line. Go ahead. Caller my wife is an immigrant and she came to this country in 1960. I dont understand why the illegal ones in this country our president seems like he wants to give them a free ride. And my wife never did become a citizen. Now shes 82 and would like to be a citizen and they want to charge her 600. And we cant afford it. And i dont understand why our president can give these people a free ride. Host go ahead. Guest i think you put your finger on a real problem which we have with washington handling this sort of problem. Because exactly as you said, a lot of people feel that here are Illegal Immigrants who violated the law and who are going to be open, or given the right to have a legalization process, where yazz there are a lot of people like your wife who are already here and have not been given this right. More than that, there are a lot of people, millions of people who legally are now waiting their turn. So they think this is a case of unfair allocation of rights to the Illegal Immigrants. So i think if were going to rely on the washington doing it, this conflict between being nice to immigrants, Illegal Immigrants, and the rights of the people who actually waited in line and are waiting patiently, that is what we call a problem. I think that makes it difficult. Spain has an amnesty but they dont have it through quickly because they dont have the of people cued up. Guest i think thats a very good idea in my opinion. And i think we really need to have something which is shorter which is short of the actual issuance of citizenship. Because a citizenship is not really what people want. When i came to this country years ago, i was given a greed card by my university. At that time it was easier to get them. And i looking at the situation, there was no distinction between green card holders and citizen. The only thing you could do more or less was a duty. That was a benefit rather than you could offer them a green card, or call red cards, to distinguish them from the normal green card. And i think that would be sufficient to help a lot of people. But we democrats unfortunately want it we want to give them not just the red card or green card, whatever you want to call them, we also want them to be citizens. I think thats where we really have to step back and say we could really help these guys come out of the shadows, have respectable lives, have most of the rights which citizens have, but not the citizenship. Because that citizenship is really what we want as democrats in order to get the vote. And the republicans oppose it because they think they will lose the vote. Host independent line, california. Caller everything ive heard out of your mouth is a bunch of hog wash. You dont live in the area where they are not in the shadows. They keep saying 11 million. We have more than that in southern california. Theyve overcrowded our schools. When they came here with work orders, they came, did their jobs, went back. They didnt bring their whole flipping families that we have to educate. They cost california over 10 billion a year. While they send 50 billion a year back to mexico. Were supporting a situation that is against our laws for one thing. We have no it seems like the people in washington have no respect for our laws. Host go ahead. Guest i think i sympathize with your kshes but i think the facts are that actually the immigrants are making a contribution to the tax revenues rather than subtracting from them. This is a perception which many people have including yourself. But i would simply say this is one area where in the article which we couldnt get into that, i said there are many ways in which we could actually work with these misperceptions like you have about how much theyre costing us and have the Mexican Government<