« The Weeds

Covid-19 and the border

2020-04-07

Dara, Jane, and Matt on the intersection between the pandemic and Trump's border crackdown, and a white paper about happiness.

Resources:

"It’s Impossible to “Distance” in ICE Detention. Doctors Say Free All Detainees." by Jack Herrera, Truthout

"How ice operations in New York set the stage for a coronavirus nightmare in local jails" by Ryan Devereaux, The Intercept

"Leaked Border Patrol Memo Tells Agents to Send Migrants Back Immediately — Ignoring Asylum Law" by Dara Lind, ProPublica

"The Real Roots of Midlife Crisis" by Jonathan Rauch, The Atlantic

"Why Elders Smile" by David Brooks, NYTimes

White Paper

Hosts:

Matt Yglesias (@mattyglesias), Senior Correspondent, Vox

Jane Coaston (@cjane87), Senior politics correspondent, Vox

Dara Lind (@DLind), Immigration reporter, ProPublica

The Weeds is produced and edited by Jeff Geld

More to explore:

Subscribe to Impeachment, Explained on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, Overcast, Pocket Casts, or your favorite podcast app to get stay updated on this story every week.

About Vox

Vox is a news network that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines.

Follow Us: Vox.com

Facebook group: The Weeds

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Support for this episode comes from Clickup. We lose an average of three hours every day, switching between all our work apps, but you can get them back with Clickup a flexible platform that brings all your essential tools into one place where you can prioritize tasks: collaborate on docs chat with your team and track goals, so companies like uber and web flow use clickup is their mission control Center, replacing every other app that we're using before click up even guarantees to help you save one day a week and get more done. It's completely customizable! It's free forever! So try click up today and click up dot com, slash the weeds hotels com. The drama out of booking a trip with free cancellation on most hotels, the only booking drama is bad drama, like choosing between a room with two queen beds or a king bed for your trip with your new significant other you've only been dating for three weeks, but you were dating in your head for months before that. So it's serious is that clingy, oh man, maybe we aren't ready for a trip together? No, we are let's book this trip, so you can propose booking a trip
he'll dramatic, but with free cancellation. You can't go wrong with hotels, com term supply seaside for details, Jim they're, their falling down on the job here in terms of producing reliable gonna long. Saving, criticism of the academic community that chimpanzee is rarely are doing enough. Hello, welcome to another episode of the weeds on the box media podcast network, I'm met with Glacius with Jane Coston Propublica dare Lind. We got another non coronavirus white paper for you that still manages to not Happy fungi, no really come up with more optimistic white paper. It's not a benefit are big lacking, but you know it's it's it it's different, but you don't get it. Gonna talk about about the virus
in our main segment. I really wanted to ask Derek to sort of explain to us what is going on at the border with coronavirus obviously the? U S. Mexico border has not like, in a practical sense, been an important corona virus, hot spot but all countries around the world have been sort of cracking down on travel, hardening borders and stuff it in response to this end in Donald Trump case, this is an aspiration he has long had is to do a big border crack down and so what's what's happening. Right. So I think it's important to know both kind of his context for what we're about to be talking about, and just kind of generally, as people start to think about, kind of long term effects of the coronavirus pandemic, that one of the exceptions to the countries,
down on travel and being very aggressive and implementing social distancing has been Mexico. There have been a lot of questions about. Why Mexico has been slower than a lot of other countries, including much smaller countries with much less international travel in Latin America in you know, cracking down on international flights. In implementing aggressive ass oceans, didn't distancing policies, be president of Mexico somewhat. Similarly, to the President of the United States has been, you know, doing an aggressive public appearances, That raises lots about kissing babies, shaking that's arguing that religious amulets might help produce against corona virus. It's been very strange. You know, I point this out for the of saying that we actually may very well be looking at a period of time where the? U S, has taken an aggressive responses at
flattened the curve on corona virus. But Mexico, has not that's going to be a dynamic. I think we'd be dealing with for some time now. What relationship that bears to the actions the Trump Administration has taken is a big question. Both because we have a lot of pre existing evidence that the Trump administration sees sees people coming in via Mexico, often from Central America. Or even South America, or even in a vs central and South America, but coming from african and asian countries as an existential threat, regardless of whether there is a global pandemic spreading or not, and so there something of a boy who cried wolf problem. Here, in their attempts to for the sake of public health, legitimize a border crackdown? There are also, of course, questions about. Like the chronology of this right, we had first heard several weeks.
At this point back when there were barely any corona virus cases being reported in Mexico are really in Latin America. More broadly that the Eu S was considering doing more to shut down the with Mexico and, ultimately, the. U S did make agreements with both Canada and Mexico to limit cross border travel. Those agreements were by appearances legitimately bilateral, probably because the US at that point had more cases than either Mexico or Canada so There is, I think, a tendency among critics of the administration certainly listener. Most listeners of this podcast probably fall into that category. To assume that the attack is led by ideology at best, I guess, and that it's kind of reverse ends during everything from their. That may be true, but it's also the case like there is a tricky situation here, but what the? U S has done in practice is to say our primary concern is that, if
people are in holding facilities on the border in customs and border protection facilities. The kind of places where there were a lot of concerns about crowding a year ago, places that are built to be holding people at all for any period of time and that don't have the kind of minimum standards of care that exist in places that are supposed to be detention facilities. The concern is okay. If, if corona virus gets in there, we can't control the spread its goal to be a big problem for migrants is going to be a big problem for customs and border protection. Employees. It's going to kind of spread throughout the region and so to keep people from being held in custody. Border protection facilities. They are instituting a policy where, basically, everybody gets just sent back. They do not get processed for immigration purposes. Even when that processing is just saying you and
you weren't supposed to be here, we're deporting you they're, just doing a very quick kind of bio check and then sending people to Mexico is contingent. Obviously, on Mexico, accepting those people back is accepting not only Mexicans but guatemalans, hondurans and salvadorans as well. So that turns out to be an overwhelming majority of the people who are coming in without papers from Mexico. We don't have a ton of details still about how exactly this process works. We know a little bit more than He thing it appears to be a return to the policy of George W Bush. Mid, two thousands when there were a lot more people coming across where people weren't formally deported, if data got caught coming in. They were just sent back that got dismissed by immigration hawks as cotton release and was replaced with the holding people longer. So you could formally deport them, but it also does raise
the questions about the biggest difference between now and the mid. Just that isn't just fewer. There are fewer people coming over, but the people who are coming over are trying to seek asylum in the United States, and so there are massive due process concerns there. As far as I can tell, this is sort of what Donald Trump has wanted to do all along. I mean, as you say, the public health situation in Mexico is legitimately very concerning, and I think the administration would have a heightened concern. I mean both about the fact of the pandemic and the mexican government's pretty eccentric attitude toward it. But as far as I can tell from leaks and various things like, this has been frustration with the border, all along that, like that, it is a zone of law in which there is a processing of people, and there are steps at which they can raise certain kinds of objections, and even if he person
believe that their claims in bad faith or illegitimate, they have a right to a court hearing, and there are like questions about. Under what circumstances can you detain people and- and things like that, and that he wants the border? He conceptualize is the border as like up rubber band and that's it hereandnow the public health emergency is somehow illegally bureaucratic. Something has changed and is now able to actuated what has long been sort of his vision of how this audit function so bureaucratically what's happening is the kind of reversion to them to thousands the technical turn it term is that people are are not no longer being deported. They are being voluntarily returned legally. What you're doing is different. They are claiming that, because that they are invoking a
part of federal law that, like a lot of things under this administration, had been either dormant or like not really conceptualize. For this purpose, a lot of people in immigration. World were not familiar with this when they first invoked it it's under title. Forty, two of the: U S code, immigration stuff, is generally under title eight. This is under a kind of set of laws dealing with public health and what powers the government has in times of public health concern, and it gives the in practice the CDC the authority to ban the entry of people or things that might introduce an infectious disease into the. U S, and so legally. The administration has put forth an argument that a even if it is
is currently present in the US if it could be introduced into more places or spread further. That counts as an introduction that it can then ban things from. Secondly, that when it says that people can't come from places that have the disease, you can define a person as a place and therefore you can. You can ban a type of person from entering, and so therefore, as a result of concern about her own a virus, they can ban the entry of any one coming in without papers, which is an interesting legal org. They're essentially saying that not only is this legally separate from all immigration law that it basically Trump's existing immigration law that it gives them a totally separate channel through which they can deal with people But who are entering the? U S, and so therefore, the statutory things that are in place,
guarantee certain minimal amount of due process. For anyone who expresses a fear of persecution in their home country no longer need to apply, because this is not happening under title. Eight, it's happening under title forty, two it is not a tested argument- they have not issued any kind of office of legal counsel. Memo saying here is why we think this is kosher. As a matter of fact, they weren't really explicitly publicly saying that think Trump's, immigration law. That's the conclusion that's been drawn from you know what they've kind, said in private briefings. I got an internal border patrol memo on how processing whispers to happen under this. That made it pretty clear that they don't consider the you have to do x y and see if they express fear of persecution standards to be in place because they consider it a totally separate process. Then the title a process, but it's the sword
thing that, under general circumstances, you would see litigation. You would see arguments being made explicitly. Does this in fact trump all existing immigration laws and practices, but because both of the kind of speed with which this was implemented in the and because of the state of emergency concerns that conversation isn't happening in public and why? or not. It's going to happen at all me, be dependent not just on the shape of the corona virus arc itself, but also,
how long the Trump administration decides to keep this policy in place and whether they pushed the limits of what would be a kind of emergency time. On that point that this is not a general situation is so important because your things response on the mexican side of the border, where mexican authorities are attempting to clear the border themselves, so they're putting people on buses to go to other mexican states. Perhaps- and so you have a large group of central american migrants who are being pushed away from the border on both sides right into the clear? A lot of these people have been waiting for know, months and months, because even prior to this policy and like it can be well, but Turkey. If you haven't been following the developments over the border in the lap of the, if you ve, been following them a little bit over the last year and a half it kind of has seemed for
while, like? Basically nobody can claim asylum in the United States. But what's been happening, has been that regulatory speaking people entering without papers, are not allowed to get asylum, but that doesn't mean they're not allowed to get any humanitarian protection. They're kind of these lesser forms of relief written into the law that the administration can't regulate out of existence and they ve been getting sent back Mexico kind of temporarily indefinitely, while they have court proceedings in the? U S, that is what is changing now, not bothering to get any kind of? U S! Court date there isn't any promise of. We will consider some kind of persecution claim for some kind of legal status in the U S, but it means that the thousands of Other latin american migrants who have been kind of hanging out on the? U S, Mexico Border coming back and for their court deeds. Occasionally those court dates have been pushed back indefinitely.
And the mexican government is making a much more aggressive effort to kind of clear them out. Why me, this is part of a larger trend, in Amerika, where the pandemic is a state of exception. This is something we will talk about: an pike ass before Obviously there are still laws in America and court proceedings happen on various topics: but there's also a lot of weird stuff happens like slightly head scratching stuff. Like can the government tell business owners they just have to close with no hearing or anything like what statutory authority is that being done under and let just say that there isn't some, but the way it is promulgated is not bureaucratic
rational or in the normal sort of way right. It's like different leaders, state and city leaders will just like put out tweets and press releases that are like sorry, no more bars and restaurants, and then they clothes and then we ve had you know that the president just kind of sees the airwaves for a couple hours every evening evening after evening, and you ve had Democrats just putting forward like policy concepts like we should give unimportant low wage unemployed workers actually more money than they were earning when they were working, which is like a suspension of that. The normal logic of the American Welfare State, in a profound kind of way or for that matter, the calls for,
governors to postpone primary elections, that kind of thing exactly and you had you know a lot of people. I think most ways- people probably fairly outraged that Tony ever was not allowed to change the date of the Wisconsin primary for public health reasons. But like what happened, there was first, he tried to call a special session of the legislature to get them to do it, which everybody agrees would have been within their power. Then the Republicans unleaded such a refuse to because they think a low turn out primary but help them at which point every just said he could cancel it on his own for cognizance as a public health measure, there was litigation, and this was a rare case, in which I mean I think, because it
we're electoral upside for Republicans in slapping back an emergency measure, but it's the only instance I can think of of any executive official at any level anywhere in the United States being told by courts that something they were doing because of corona virus was was going too far right. It's a big sort of opportunity, an you! Don't you see like like Victor Orban, is using this too, like entrench and autocratic government Hungry Donald Trump aspirations are much narrower than victor or bonds. Unlike the think, this idea that we should hermetically sealed off the southern border is like a rare instance of something Trump has pursued fairly doggedly for a period of five years. But, like all kinds of I don't know what to say,
Their exceptional things are happening all across America, because the emergency is understood to trump the sort of normal, slow grind of adversary, legalism yeah. I mean something that I I thought a lot about when I was looking at this border patrols no and talking to two folks about it, is to us extent weighing this kind of exigency and the need for executive flexibility to respond quickly to emerging circumstances versus the procedural constraints of like guaranteeing certain rights to certain people is basically what you know that that's like been the fundamental concern facing liberal meant for hundreds of years- and you know how- how do u way those two things- and there are certainly cases in which the Eu S has assumed for the most part,
but your novel. There are certain rights that you're not allowed to just kind of justifies giant circumstances to strip you know: Abraham Lincoln suspended Habeas corpus, even those and of non negotiable constitutionally explicitly guaranteed rights can, in practice get a little bit fudged because for one thing, judges are people to and are going to come into a case with a certain degree, more deference if they think that there is something dangerous there being protected from and also frankly, there's just a lot of discretion bill. Into the federal system, to allow the executive to determine what is an emergency and what isn't and therefore when the law applies like there is, in any case
the formal process that the CDC had to go through in order to decide that desk warranty in order could be invoked. That there's a lot of assumption that lake. You need to entrust the executive to know when things are going to really go to the heart of the existence of the american people and that's the context in which a lot of- and it's easy to forget this, because there have been so many injunctions aspire, in the first two years of the Trump Administration against the administration on immigration stuff, but like in general. The executive branch does get difference on immigration law, because a lot of that case law was built in the context of the cold war when it was very easy to justify existential threat, you know even on fairly edge cases, because anyone with ties to communism you couldn't very easily make. The case was like on the side of America's biggest enemy and between that and the post nice
Levin situation in which the government acted very rapidly to curtail the it's a lot of muslim women in the United States. There's certain I dont want to say. On a sailor and helplessness, because that's way way way too strong bet even among people who believe that what the government is doing on the right now, he's obviously illegal. There is a lot of pessimism that any cord, not just like, not just that they would get the Supreme Court to uphold it, but there's pessimism that any court would be willing to say that because they don't want to get into a situation where the executive has to go through it,
its long litigation process. In order to act, you know swiftly when swift action is needed right, and I think that this has been the concern for a lot of people about I, hypothetical, a pandemic or a disaster in some kind. Is that you had this idea that you would have that kind of emergency standing of people saying that? Yes, this is bad, but were in them of a crisis. You know the same thing that took place after nine eleven we're still dealing with the impacts of the Patriot ACT or warrantless. Tapping, and I think that for a lot of people, specifically libertarians have been saying essentially like the emergency measures being taken on both the state and federal level. Definitely, in some cases have the sense of things that, like you, it that people wanted to do anyway, and so I think that
specifically on immigration. We see that this kind of thee, to quote Rama Manual, not letting a emergency go to waste concept, which I think is sucked, has become more of an accusation than something that people are actually saying that they are doing, but I think that concept seems to come across and I'm I'm interested to get your thoughts Jara on our if there is any way to no moving forward. What this looks like, because I think that, especially because I think it's important to remember that this is a global pandemic, and so, as Matt mentioned, Hungary has been you taking its view.
Draconian measures of its own and one would expect at a certain point in the next couple of weeks, horrifying Lee as Mexico situation may start to get worse, especially because you have these weeks and weeks of Anglo denying that this is taking place in a very much. You kind of reminds me of the reaction coming from Brazil's leadership of just like Brazilian, can jump and sewage and come out and be just fine. So this road impact us so as we are on these different staggered timelines around the world of either of the first wave of the virus or the second way,
that's starting to hit in Taiwan and elsewhere, you're going to start seeing the responses to our own actions on the border. How will Mexico respond in the coming weeks, as this becomes more serious, especially in northern Mexico? How will all of these countries look, and then you have the sense that if every country is doing something similar, then I think for some of the United States, it's kind of a sense of like oh. This is just how we react to a disaster, yeah, it's very difficult to make predictions, especially about the future, and I really lasher you that was kind of down here. No, it's it's! So here's your kind of what I'm thinking about. First of all, All I think there is one of the logical conclusions: if you believe that this is something the administration is wanted to do this whole time and has just found the opportunity to do it as it stands today,
in that. You would believe that it's going to remain in place basically forever unless stopped that they're not going to actually rescind this court in order ever even if hypothetically were, we were to totally eradicate the coronavirus or whatever I am not saying that. I think that there are frankly things we just don't know about the internal politics of the CDC right now, and whether this is something that public health officials would be. Bull with continuing, etc. They did also in me the that they put out as an interim final regularly, that allows this. You know that like gives kind of illegal space to this order, they said that in general, these things should have end dates and there wasn't an actual and eight on the CDC order, so they may have. They may feel that they have to pay provide one, but I think that that is domestically
question is when is the is there? Is there something that is going to cause the administration to kind of turned back on its own? And if not at what point will it seem? politically or litigated Lee. I guess more prudent to Tyler legal Challenge and Coralie to that. We see in that, our judges, even when they think that the administration is doing things that are illegal. There are less likely to try to put those things on hold if there already, place for a long time. So, if this have you know if the litigation happens, but it happens months in the future, will it in fact not have the effect of putting anything on hold? So I think that that's kind of one line of questions other wayne of questions is it's not exactly lake. The only difference between the catch and release policies of the mid term Thousands and formally deporting people was just a matter of paper. Work like this. The logic there
was that it was going to have a stronger deterrent effect in preventing people from just trying to cross into the. U s again because though every indication we have is that a higher percentage of people who cross without authorization, are getting caught now than were when immigration much higher like a. We don't have numbers to put that because you can't know what you don't catch. Also, customs and border protection has kind of steadfastly resisted any effort to estimate what they don't catch is an official metric. So there's been a lot of difficult, do what kind of groggy, just how many people are evading apprehension and while, over the last several years, that's become less of a concern, because so many people are just turning themselves in because they're trying to claim asylum, if that's no longer a thing that you can do. It's real to expect the people are going to try to evade, and so what does that look like in a world where it's difficult, but not impossible to get through in the back of a truck or in the
A car or where certain stretches of desert are less guarded that, I think, is a very open cancer. It lets let's take a break, and then I kind of wanting to delve back into this cause. It's it's a little bit about a thorny situation that I think we should try to understand if you're a gig worker- or Selfemployed there's, some good news about PPP loans. You might want to consider millions of self employed workers may qualify for up to fifty thousand dollars in one hundred percent forgivable loans. You might be one of those million as the leader in PPP allowance wobbly, can help you find out. They ve helped over three hundred thousand small businesses across Amerika get a ppp loan funds are limited, so apply now wildly dot com, slash, vocs and see. If you qualify for a ppp loan, that's w o m p l why dot com, Slash Veo Ex Wobbly is not a lender terms and programme rules apply
If it feels like you, don't enough hours in the day to get everything done, it might be because you're missing out on three of them. Where does three hours go? They probably fall into a deep dark abyss that opens up when we switch between work. Apps, add those three hours to all the productive time. We miss out, thanks to add home distractions, disorganization fatigue. It's no wonder the days feel too short. Work should work and with click up it does pick up, is a flexible productivity platform. That brings all your work into one place. That's all your chats, apps docs and tasks in one centralized place kind of like mission control companies like uber and Google use click up to make
days more productive and manage projects, people and goals more effectively built for teams of all sizes and industries. Pickups blazingly fast features and one zero plus integrations. They get a must have for anyone wanting to track, manage and tackle their work in one place. Get your hours back with Clickup. Try it for free. Today, at Clickup COM, the weeds. I live in so old school right, the Bush era, immigration, problem was people largely working age. Man without their children were trying to so to speak. Sneak across the border like actually not be detected, then get in
to a community somewhere in California, Arizona Illinois. What have you and then go work without papers and the practice at the time was if the border patrol did catch you they would like driving back to Mexico and be like hey man get out of here, and immigration hawks saw that as a soft policy, because all that happened was is you were back in Northern Mexico, which is exactly where you were before you tried to stick across the board, so you could just try again right and since the border patrol, obviously not now, and especially not then did not have the capacity to catch everybody whose neck across the board
the mere fact that some people were getting nabbed and sent back to Northern Mexico had no super meaningful, deterrent impact. It was like it was still a no brainer like if, if you wanted to live the life of an undocumented immigrants in the United States of America, the fact that the border patrols might catch, you wasn't a good reason not to try. And so that's why there was this push to a much more bureaucratic process in which you, be officially stamped as a person who had broken the law who had been deported. Who was ineligible for all kinds of things in the future right was it like? You had to suffer negative consequences from having been apprehended and that That was going to discourage people from commenting, and some of those are criminal punishments. That's when we start to see the rise in criminal press
John of illegal entry and illegal re entry, some of them are immigration consequences like if you are formally deported. You don't get to emigrate to the? U s legally, for a pure it of years, or even you know, under some sort circumstances permanently. So, whereas, if you just get it voluntarily returned like and detention is unpleasant gets in detention, s end to end and the experience of being detained and just as importantly like, logistically speaking, if you're being held for a few days, that's a few days in which you can't then try again right so then the whole story, flips in the late Obama administration, because more people are coming and they are deliberately getting caught up in the bureaucratic ma because they want to make asylum claims and that's why now the hawkish position is to do the thing that the hawks
to criticise and just round people up and like take it back to where we say more people are coming like fewer people are coming right, that fewer people are coming and came then came prior to the great recession. Although in ITALY, with the exception of like the first half of last year, where briefly are seeing pre like seven comparable levels, but more of them. Overcoming then we're coming during me, like post crash Obama years and as you ve seen from this administration, relative rises in numbers start to seem like there is a problem, especially because, because these people, but many of you People were making asylum claims, they couldn't even be deported after a couple of days. They would have to be held for certain period of time and other parts of the system were being overloaded as a result, as You may recall, if you, you know, remain
some of our podcast when this was a big issue about a year ago. When so I mean it suggests, a kind of interesting turner, many many wild to me. I you know I kind of I feel very odd feeling, like I'm, the only person in the room Hoover Members, the late Bush era specially cause like I wasn't even following the immigration I was still in college then, but it is wild that no one has pointed out that this is what used to be called catch and released before Captain Release was passionate release. But this is just to say, like we don't have fixed opinions as to like how the border patrolling process should work as a processing thing. The common thread is that there is a sentiment that border patrol should be discouraging people from trying to cross the border and what processes seem to people to be a good way to accomplish that changes in response to who is coming our percent
of why they are coming, but then, of course, like the flow also switches in response to the policy, so I mean for the limited circumstances of the United States having a thirteen percent unemployment rate and there being a raging global pandemic. This probably doesn't matter that much, but the question is like, since this pandemic response, intersects like some of what's going on, like hotels, being empty, very much cuts against like how Donald Trump thinks the world should work, but what's happening at the border right now, a lines with how he thinks the world should work. So obviously he is gonna try to keep really tough border measures in force as long as its legally and politically viable to do so, because I
The emergency is Rio, but like his desire to do. This is like much much larger than the facts of the pandemic, but, like we don't really know what would emerge if you like, if you, if you adopted catch readopt in catching release, is a long term border security strategy at like it's really not clear that that would work people, people criticized for re I mean there are a couple of factors here. If we're dealing with a pandemic that is married to a great recession level like class unemployment and sort of certain sectors, in so far as the people who want to made, apprehension are people who are looking to come and work under the table, who don't necessarily need to get humanitarian protections or legal status. To do that, those people might be likely to come into a weakened economy, you know they're, not gonna, jobs anyway. On the other hand, if the problem with catch and release was primarily a problem of lake Mexican, it immigrants could be
swiftly just turned around and come back and now we're not only doing that for mexican immigrants, but also for some central Americans, then, yes, that is going to that kind of revolving door might be a concern. And, furthermore, if Mexico really is a particular problem, point for this ban, in the medium term, that's going to be both a drain on the mexican economy and a very Good reason that people might want to leave that country, or course. On the other hand, you could see a world where its less appealing for say a salvadoran to try to travel through Mexico for several weeks just to get to the United States, if that's a severe pity me illogical of risk. In general, the argument by immigration hawks is that you have to have consequence delivering people who are entering the US contrary US law need to have
the ones is levied on them. That will make it clear to people in their networks were considering migrating, that it's not worth it. If you take that to its logical conclusion, given that, as you said, Matt like the flows to respond to the policies to a certain extent, you're playing Wakeham all and it's just a question of how efficient Lee your machine can pivot and how good. Your capacity is to see everybody coming in, so that there isn't a massive, totally unmonitored channel, but it's also true that the harder you make migration and the more likely it is that someone who is migrating is going to be doing so out of desperation and the concerns of a of people, being a kind of you know in the worst case scenario, essentially, a collapsing mexican state aren't something that a cash and released system is super equipped to deal with Ray. I feel like the pandemic has scrambled so much so many of these priorities are understandings, because I
kept thinking. Would people travel through Mexico even if it was an epidemic epidemiological risk? Yes, if where there were coming from was far worse than Mexico and they had the idea of the okay, if we can make it to the U S, Mexico Border, it will be safer there. I think that that's the challenge here is that, at a certain point, as you ve both pointed out, you want to make the risk seem far more certain than the potential reward, but at a certain point, if you are in the midst of a pandemic, there's a certain level at which the reward will always out strip the potential risk if the reward is not just entering into the aid states for economic reasons, but entering into the air states for health reasons, and I think that that's a particular challenge it. I dont really see a workaround before and I dont know if there is a viable one and it just it's so challenging having US government, because they think you're. We pointed out that the lot of these borders
or things that trouble want to do anyway. But I also think that we have no idea about what the potential impact of that will be or would be. Our existing context for immigration is largely based on a US centric centric model under and were reasons, but while we are in close contact with other countries that are all facing the exact same challenge and doing so in very different ways, how does that shift the calculus? How does the mexican government react if it is itself in the face of potential economic or societal collapse because of a pandemic that they didn't get in front of enough? How did they react? Are they still bussing people away from the border are mexican border police still attempting to move people just away from the border in any means necessary. What does that look? Like I have no idea why and think you think Mexico has a sort of
dream economic vulnerability to this sort of pandemic. Separate from the question of the adequacy of the government's response, I mean, if the responsible, extraordinarily good, that might help them, but that's not the case, and you know Mexico Oil exporter, but has a sort of ailing oil industry from an investment perspective and now, with global commodity prices in the toilet, both like their ongoing earnings from that oil are gonna, be minimal, and nobody is going to want to invest in improving that that industry I mean which been a problem for their economy, but like now, it's taken up to that to the nth degree. They also do a lot of tourism, which you know has always been liberated: dicey situation with tourism, Visa v, gang violence for a long, long, long time, fun, fat, the image
the security situation does continues to deteriorate even under conditions of kroner virus. That right will end a bay, but this there's a feedback loop bright because, like one of the things has been there's a lot of corruption issue is, I am not an expert, but you know: there's an interplay between like stayed failure, organised crime, economic dysfunction and one of the things that keeps like can Kuhn and instead of container through going well, is that the economic value of the tourism is high enough. That is worth officials Y all to keep those tourist zones safe. There is money to be made in that justice is money to be made in cartel work, but so, if the economic value of the tourism vanishes, simply because nobody like
wants to go on vacation in the middle of a huge economic, then the the cost benefit switches of where the money is, and then you can. Even if the pandemic pass is right, you have entrenched security problems that now can't be overcome in an easy, obvious kind away, and so we have been seeing a real waning of short of push factors in mexican economic migration over the past five years, and it seems a very realistic that those will come back in a major way. Separate from this can be a public health situation for months or maybe even a year. But what's the economic sort of balance of risk? Gonna, look like four Mexicans to say nothing of Central America is like a big open. Question, but just as like old policies are making a comeback like the old policy problems, you could imagine making come back as well. Yeah I mean we really. We already were seeing a relic
the rise in mexican migration, though nothing comparable to mid two thousands levels and really you know it It was not even making up for the collapse in central central american migration. The second half of last year we are seeing a lot of was mexican, seeing a little bit more was mescal family migration from me, a con from other states that have had a particularly bad crime problems. So how that's going to be affected by things? Continuing to your sideways is not super clear, but it is totally plausible that, between the kind of changes in demonstrated need and urgency of leaving and the extent to which smuggling networks are going to take advantage of that need by identifying new markets for people to me no charge money to get into the United States, especially variable to charge them more money by saying. Well, we're going to be able to get you through safely, it's now risky because we have to evade, apprehension but we're gonna get. You
rule without anybody noticing that you're there if they can make that promise reliably which is kind of the sixty four thousand dollar question, then there's a very strong incentive for them to aggressively market to the most desperate people in the region. As Democrats have not made any points on this, a super high profile part of their response, but there is a push from from some Democrats to change immigration, detention circumstances where they mean there's a whole nexus of concerns around jails in prisons that immigration detention is part of that with at least like some activists, energy and some congressional Democrats pushing fur pushing for why you're right that this is kind of out of in next s, of an ancient democrats have been a tune
to thinking about. How is the coronavirus pandemic going to hurt people who are already vulnerable, and how can we, as the Progressive Party, raise alarms about that and jails presence in detention? Centers are also an epidemiological problem because, especially in the case of jail, people are cycling in and out with, some frequency, it's impossible to practice, effective social, distancing and confinement circumstances, people who are employed at these facilities are cycling into and out of the community, and so it's easy for pathogens to get brought in some of them This is where a lot of people are being held are epidemiological hotspots in terms of ice detention. There are a lot of you held in ice detention in New Jersey, county jails. There are a lot of people federal detention centres in loose
Vienna, which is really becoming a significant national hotspot. And so they concern isn't just our people sitting ducks because they are facing a pandemic in these constraints. Circumstances, but also our these going to become petri dish is that are going to keep the life of this infection going by creating kind of a safe zone for the virus. The other reason is particularly salient for ice detention isn't just like, unlike the overwhelming majority of criminal, confer, in the? U S is state and county based, and so it's hard for the federal govern, to easily move levers on that, but ice detention is federally run and is largely discretionary. There are rules that say you have to detain. People they have certain criminal convictions, but in general, even though the
Administration has tried to reduce the amount of discretion through a bunch of avenues. The people actually have to release people from detention in general. It is ices decision who is detained in who isn't, and so there are a lot of people who are currently in less. Ideal epidemiological conditions who, if they were allowed to leave, could make themselves safer, so ve seen this push to. It was first push for ice to stop engaging in aggressive immigration, raids and arrests, which they more or less told Congress they would. They would scale back For health concerns and now a push for ice to start exercising its discretion to release either pretty
where we met her medically vulnerable people and attention like people who are HIV positive or have other underline health conditions that would make it particularly lethal for them to get the current a virus or to exercise discretion to dislike. Let a ton of people out so that you don't have a situation in which people are packed with in the way fewer than forty six feet of each other. It's interesting as ice will dropped into shown us, but there are a couple of pieces on this issue.
And you'd. The immigrant defenders law centre in California has organised a free them all campaign, which is focused on this particular issue, and the executive director of the organization makes the point that I still tension is discretionary said they could do this. It so interested. You put this of like everything, about ice detention and this process even outside of the issue of immigration and detention. In that setting, we ve heard a lot about prisons. I wrote a peace this week on issues facing folks who are living in grew poems who might have intellectual developmental disabilities. I know it's right seems obvious to say this, but so much of how we organise our society is not at all conducive to responding to a pandemic and were saying that
in calls to release prisoners or at least low level offenders, and to release people from ice detention, which is, as they note, a discretionary impetus. But I do think that there is a sense that when I talk to conservatives about this particular issue, this seems to be kind of like well. You would want to be doing this any way right. This is a very good converse image of what we were talking about with Trump in the border right basically no one. He was out there explicitly saying look. Usually I think that I should be given a lot of deference if they say that someone is at risk of absconding and therefore needs to be held intention. Then I think they should have that power, but in this case I think there are people who generally should be detained, but right now shouldn't be detained. You dont really see that, and so is an absolutely fair accusation that could be levelled at. This is another kind of never waste a crisis sort of thing. It is an interesting question, though, because if you're looking
at this from the epidemiological perspective of this, isn't just actions earn for the people who are themselves incarcerated, but also for people who like work in those vessels, These few are a lot of frontline workers there, not as really being given personal protective equipment day. Are not necessarily them of being monitored, monitored for symptoms. They may not be getting super aggressive ability to take leave if they're feeling sick or if they need to take care their family or anything like that. That does militate to see for seeing this as something as like exceptional thing where, even if you would normally be detaining people you might give it a little bit of a break, but it raises the exact same.
Ensuring that any other kind of social reform question does right now is: if you do this, and things turn out. Ok, why would you ever stop? And so, if you believe that it is important for consequence, delivery reasons for people to be detained, there's a totally stand will reticence to the kind of conceding that you should ever make an exception yet carried out. So I think we should wish wrap this up here. Take a break and talk about how the three of us or I'll hurtling toward misery, if you're, having trouble meeting your goals focusing at work. If you have feeling stressed you're having trouble sleeping better help is here for you, it's not a selfhelp class and it's not a crisis line. Better help is secure online professional counseling with real licensed therapist, who have the tools to help. You feel better, just fill out a questionnaire about how you're doing and better help will match Youwith your own life
step as an under forty eight hours, no more awkward, therapist waiting rooms, no more limitations and the type of experts in this area and in between weekly appointments. If you need some more guidance, you can send free. Unlimited messages to your council will get back to you with timely thoughtful answers. If the matter, the therapists doesn't feel just right, better help will quickly help you find a new one for free, but help is more affordable option than traditional therapy and financial aid is available. Therapies. Great I've done a different times in my life super helpful, but we all know that gets really expensive and sometimes hard to find some good. Better help is like making this much more accessible is great for these pandemic circumstances, but just like a cool model to this progress is sponsored by better help and listeners. The weeds get ten percent off their first month at better help them
harm, slash weeds, get started today, better help, dot com, slash weeds visit, better h, E Lp, dotcom, slash weeds and join the over one million people who have taken charge of their mental health with the help of an experienced better help professional. If the last year's taught us anything. If that we don't know what will happen next, but there's one thing we can all be sure of the only future is one we can all share and leading the charge and building that future. His mercy core with over forty years of humanitarian work under its belt building together, is a mercy course here, and as the climate crisis increases their partnering with those on the front lines, making resources more accessible to farmers across the globe, strengthening communities against against escalating natural disasters and ensuring people, the the tools they need to thrive mercy is doing the work that matters, but they can't do it alone. That's where you and I come in
together. We all have the power to reshape the world when it seems like every day brings a new crisis when every news alert makes you want to throw your phone across the room. We may see to feel a little powerless mercy court here to remind us we don't need to through commute based action. We can make change. We are nothing if not in this together. What's next is up to all of us learn how you can be a part of is possible at mercy core dot org. That's our see why c, o r p s dot org our white paper, for you today is called is happiness. You shaped everywhere, agents subjective well being in one hundred thirty two countries is why David Blanche, flour from Dartmouth- and this is a kind of a demolition of of certain arguments,
had that have been offered before this is a paper with like it's got some beef yet like there's a bet. There's some back store here is a long running dispute in the literature between one empirical finding, which is that young people are happy and then people get less and less and less happy until sort of late middle age, and then they get happier and happy again in life. That's one theory, the the! U shaped theory, and then there are other sceptics of the: U shape, theory and Blanche. Flower is a leading proponent of you shaped happiness, and he is here with all guns, blazing surveys of dozens of different country is. He have presents evidence that the? U shape happiness curve exists in great apes as well as in Europe, the United States, poor countries, rich countries exists with statistical controls and exist without statistical controls,
He is really loaded to tell you right. Like late. Forty is middle age. You are gonna, be miserable, whether you're in a rich country, a poor country, a man, a woman, a fuckin chimpanzee like tell him at this, is this is the future that you are headed for, and I don't know you know as a sitting here at thirty eight MIKE I'm getting preemptively dissatisfied with family life. Looking at the bleak ten years, I have in inhuman ad hoc about the great apes thing, though, because that Dublin jump out as an enemy as well, and to be clear, because this is in a volley in an ongoing dispute within the literature. There is kind of the original research portion of the paper, which is this like massive comparative look at good Julian's in your Gillian of countries, and then there's also a pretty robust Lear view section prior to that.
Less elite review then hear all the citations that prove that I am right, and here are some people who have recently criticised me and why they are wrong, and so the great apes thing comes up in that in a study. A previous sadie folks- but he summarizes this previous study study, in which researchers were familiar with these populations. In and orangutans raided their appearance cheerfulness and looked at that This is saw the saw the same you I curve. I mean this. I kind of I cracked up a little bit that, like that, was one of those like my partner, looked at me across the room and said your skeptical of something bad. It does get at the kind of core methodological question that comes up whenever we discuss questions of happiness, which is obviously it's apples to oranges. To compare
Does this chimpanzee? Look cheerful too, am I an individual survey, respondent saying that I am happy, but it does remind us that when we talk about happiness were actually using it as a proxy for am I, in the context of a survey, question saying that I feel good compared to what I think I could ideally be feeling, and that kind of gap between expectations in reality appears to be driver of a lot of dissatisfaction and might reflect some of the concerns about middle age, where you know, once you get to a certain point in your life, you mean feel grateful, you may be less inclined to think about the breed greater fortune, may have and more inclined to think about the fact that you're still alive and wouldn't necessarily have to be, but that dynamic might be overcoming a longer run dynamic of the older. You get the more where you get of different ways your life might have gone and when asked by a survey, researcher think about your life in context
you know middle age might be where you are more likely to focus on what you dont have. I am still back on the idea of cheerful great apes and how one where the person like perceived cheer, which seems to be a concept that perhaps we invented, and maybe just maybe chimpanzees, do not have the same concept of being cheery, which just makes me think of a bunch of chimpanzees enjoying a cup of tea and just thinking about how great life is began. It seems to be a a survey question that is so experience Chile's specific to people of how they think about this. It seems to me I understand this is a long running disagreement, no literature, but I feel as if I am disagreeing with the concept of the literature in the first place. That's what makes it so interesting that this is so consistently expressed right and, like I definitely read this with something of Adonis died for, like you can't really
countries with different life expectancies, and it does seem fairly robust to that that even in countries where the life expectancy in general might be shorter, there is a demonstrated like decline where you know where we are supposed to be like in in the kind of late forty and then and then it rises back up again. So it is surprising to me, given how culturally contingent I assume and not just culturally contented but like individually contingencies, him all the stuff is that you do have something. This robust and,
Maybe there is something here that doesn't necessarily mean its biology, but he may need which interesting is actually how robustness, because a lot of commentary that I have read on the usual happiness curve, which would have been most people who looked at it think is real. I've read some pretty good articles, but Jonathan Roush by David, Brooks about this, but they both focus very much on the circumstances of American Yankee Right, and so they say things that, like kind of ring, true to me as, like, I don't know like a white male
writer, who is somewhat younger than David, Brooks and shouted the rapids. I would read these you may like this is really inside for Guys- and you know they talk about how like your young in your life, full of hope and promise, and then you get older and you come to be like very frustrated by the ways in which you fallen short of readjustment aspirations in life. But then, eventually, you come out on the other side and you reach this phase of like higher enlightenment, and you see the value of community and family and friends, and and you you, you accept life and you become more comfortable with Inherent ambiguity is of of the situation and I've it like enjoyed a lot of essays along those lines. It's that super plausible to me that that characterizes the emotional lifecycle of like a subsistence farmer in Kenya in always like who freely.
Forty seven, that their career aspirations weren't really met in the way that they wanted. The uniformity of this makes it seem like it is something more tied to, I think, like biological rhythms. Rather then, like attitudes of of life, because, like we know, people just like change as they age and in various ways, and that we also know that, like most things in life, happiness, wise people rebound from pretty well ride. So one of the other things that you know comes up in this paper is as a handful of exceptions right, long term, unemployment really really bombers. People out married people are happier than single people, but people whose marriages bus stop are the ones who are really noticeably unhappy. That's the thing that like sticks with you, but people for cover happiness wise for MIKE
Really serious injury is like pretty well, I made its painful it's a bit, but they they bounce back. People are quite robust till I most changes in objective life circumstances, but being in late middle age, seems to like really bum people out, for whatever reason I mean yeah. It seems like what is needed here from our perspective. Isn't necessarily more extensive documentation of the U ship curve but more intense, and you know if, if the persistence is what's striking, these desperate contacts. It would be useful to to know a little bit more about Lake white people in different contexts. Being about their lives and whether they are expressing the same kinds of dissatisfaction or how that gets filtered. I'm not saying that in that literature is an out there. Almost certainly, as this is almost certainly me speaking from ignorance, so people showed should send out some sites and we cannot get it.
Here's some more open, ended survey, work that may rely a little less on just demonstrating that the basic shape persists and the chimpanzee community needs to put forward some administrative data that we can. We can really take either Swedish administrative data for the chimpanzee communities areas there falling down on the job here in terms of producing reliable, it's been a long standing. Criticism of the academic community- that chimpanzee is rarely are doing enough yeah, so you know fill out your senses forms of apes out there you know, see, see what we can, but we can do no
and you know, if you, if you were there at home, quarantining away, you know, stave off middle aged depression by connecting with other people in the weeds Facebook group by e mail in your hosts and sharing the joy of the weeds podcast with others. Thank our produce, Eric every girl and the weeds will be back on Friday.
Transcript generated on 2021-05-19.