Policy Focus · Issue One
A data-driven framework for bipartisan dialogue on one of America's most complex and consequential challenges.
CLT Civil Discourse Roundtable — Official Position
The CLT Civil Discourse Roundtable recognizes that the current status of long-term undocumented residents — particularly parents of U.S. citizen children — represents an unresolved humanitarian and legal challenge that Congress has failed to address for decades.
We recommend that Congress consider a structured, conditional legalization program for undocumented individuals who meet all four of the following criteria:
The Data
Effective policy dialogue requires shared facts. These figures — drawn from Pew Research Center, DHS, and CBP data — provide the factual foundation for our roundtable discussions.
Legal Framework
Understanding the categories of lawful presence is essential to any serious policy discussion. Visas are issued by the U.S. government — not the person's home country.
| Category | Status | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Tourist / Business Visitor (B-1/B-2) | Temporary | Up to 6 months; must leave when authorized period expires |
| Student (F-1) | Temporary | Duration of academic program; limited work authorization |
| Skilled Worker (H-1B) | Temporary | Employer-sponsored; 3-year initial period, renewable |
| Agricultural Worker (H-2A) | Temporary | Seasonal farm labor; tied to specific employer |
| Lawful Permanent Resident (Green Card) | Permanent | Can live and work indefinitely; path to citizenship |
| Asylee / Refugee | Protected | Granted protection from persecution; not yet permanent residents |
| Temporary Protected Status (TPS) | Protected | Granted to nationals of countries with crisis conditions |
| Visa Waiver Program (ESTA) | Temporary | Citizens of ~40 allied nations; 90-day tourism/business, no visa required |
Discussion Framework
Immigration debates often conflate distinct issues. Our roundtable separates them to find where agreement is possible.
Identify shared values: national security, economic vitality, humanitarian obligations, rule of law, and America's identity as a nation of immigrants.
Border security, legal immigration levels, the undocumented population, asylum, temporary workers, and paths to citizenship are separate questions that deserve separate answers.
Ground conversation in actual immigration numbers, economic impacts, enforcement realities, and what past policies actually achieved versus intended.
Every approach has costs. Stricter enforcement means labor shortages. Expanded legal immigration means integration challenges. Honest dialogue names the tradeoffs.
Frame questions as "What combination of policies would actually work?" rather than "Which position proves my values?" Policy outcomes matter more than ideological purity.
Rather than demanding comprehensive reform, identify areas where 80% agreement exists: agricultural workers, high-skilled immigration, Dreamers, improved asylum processing.
Case Study
In early 2024, a rare bipartisan border security bill negotiated by Senator James Lankford (R-OK) collapsed — not because of policy failures, but because of electoral strategy. This episode is a defining case study for our roundtable.
Funding for border barriers, expanded detention capacity, more ICE and Border Patrol agents, expedited asylum processing, and stricter asylum standards — provisions that had long been Republican priorities.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Wall Street Journal editorial board, and the National Border Patrol Council — a coalition that crossed traditional partisan lines.
Senator Lankford himself acknowledged that Republicans were motivated by keeping immigration as a campaign issue for the 2024 election — choosing to preserve the problem rather than solve it.
When negotiated compromises are abandoned for electoral advantage, public trust erodes. Our roundtable uses this as a case study in why civic discourse infrastructure — separate from partisan politics — is essential.