Border security isn’t really about who is president | READER COMMENTARY

Trying to lay blame for the longstanding problems at our southern border on either Donald Trump or Joe Biden is just plain absurd (“Lax border security is Biden’s fault,” June 25). The porousness of our border is as old as the border itself. And all this business about a wall is just a bunch of hooey put out into the information sphere to stir up support for one side or the other. People find ways around, under or over walls.

Also, the letter writer mentions atrocities that have been committed by immigrants, and I would recommend that you look for unbiased reporting on the number of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants as compared to the number of crimes committed by citizens. I am fairly certain you will find that the vast majority of crimes committed in the United States are committed by U.S. citizens born right here within our borders (“A call for justice for Rachel Morin — and for rational immigration policy,” June 19).

Should our government have control of our southern border? Absolutely yes. Has any recent Congress managed to do anything about border security or immigration overall? Absolutely not. Rather than blaming this or that president, critics should think about directing their ire to our Congress, which has become less and less responsive to the day-to-day problems we U.S. citizens experience in our daily lives — even as they become more and more entrenched in their current positions. We need a Congress that responds to problems and keeps a strong check on the actions of our presidents, and we haven’t seen that kind of Congress for a very, very, very long time.

We could fix that if we demanded that the U.S. House of Representatives repeal the Permanent Apportionment Act and moved to enlarge the size of the House to at least 1,000 members. That would dilute the power of each individual member, force individual members to work to respond to constituent concerns, dilute the power of political parties in the House, and create new alliances based on natural affinities, such as districts that share in watersheds, districts that experience similar climate issues, or districts that share industries in common.

With a Congress that was at least 1,000 people strong, I suspect we would have an immigration and border policy that better reflects the wants and needs of all Americans. We wouldn’t be having discussions about which president issued what order because the statute would tell the president exactly how immigration and the southern border are to be managed.

— James Elwyn Lytle, Baltimore

Add your voice: Respond to this piece or other Sun content by submitting your own letter.