An Open Letter on the Dignity Act of 2025: A Bipartisan Start

To Representatives María Elvira Salazar (R-FL), Veronica Escobar (D-TX), and all Americans:

In a time of partisan deadlock, your Dignity Act of 2025 (H.R. 4393) shows promise through bipartisan backing, including eleven Republicans and eleven Democrats. However, it risks failure because it repeats previous mistakes. As a commentator who recently completed a four-part series on immigration reform, I recommend that you focus on framing your bill strategically, prioritizing overhaul of the 1965 Immigration Act, and enforcement and reform of immigration related policies before legalization.

Where the Act Gets It Right

Your bill’s enforcement measures are robust. A $46.5 billion investment in barriers, technology, and ports of entry, along with 24/7 aerial surveillance and harsher penalties for smugglers and repeat offenders, demonstrates genuine seriousness. The phased rollout of mandatory E-Verify is vital. These measures echo my call for “relentless enforcement” at the border and in the interior as the non-negotiable precondition for any agreement.

Your asylum reforms are equally important. Humanitarian camps to process claims within 60 days, penalties for fraud, and regional processing centers abroad are practical steps to prevent abuse of the asylum system. If executed correctly, as part of broader reforms, these changes could help close the “catch and release” loophole and restore trust in our asylum laws.

I also see value in the Dignity Act’s restitution requirements. Requiring undocumented immigrants to pay $7,000 over seven years, undergo biometrics, check in regularly, and remain ineligible for federal benefits acknowledges that legalization must be earned, not handed out. These elements closely align with the Temporary Guest Resident and Special Legal Permanent Resident models I have proposed.

Where the Act Falls Short

Still, your bill falters on core lessons from history.

First, it adopts an omnibus approach that combines enforcement, visa modernization, and legalization into a single package. That sequence damages trust; legalization should not commence until enforcement benchmarks are met. Enforcement must come first, with precise and measurable results—such as fewer visa overstays, E-Verify compliance, and fully operational border systems—before moving on to legalization.

Second, it fails to end the chain migration system established by the 1965 Immigration Act. By expanding family visas and exempting spouses and minors from caps, the Act perpetuates a system that prioritizes extended family ties over national interests. A merit-based selection system that emphasizes skills, civic compatibility, and economic contribution is needed to replace the chain migration system.

Third, the bill offers Dreamers and many with Temporary Protected Status a clear path to citizenship. While this is politically popular, this provision faces strong conservative opposition that could weaken the bill's chances of success. Citizenship should not be a reward for entering or remaining in a country illegally. Instead, a permanent legal status without voting rights is a fair compromise—compassionate but respectful of sovereignty. Without this distinction, the bill risks collapsing under the “amnesty” critique.

Fourth, assimilation is often overlooked. Legal residency should require proficiency in English, a basic understanding of civics education, and active participation in American life. Promoting geographic dispersal can help prevent the creation of permanent ethnic enclaves that resist integration. Without these measures, we risk repeating the failures of European multiculturalism.

Finally, the Act overlooks deeper demographic, economic, and technological realities that require a flexible system. With U.S. fertility at 1.6, which is well below the replacement level, America will need 2.5–3 million legal immigrants in the short term to sustain population and workforce stability. However, a sustainable plan must clearly connect immigration levels to demographic and economic needs, adjusting annually based on birth rates, labor shortages, and productivity gains from technology like AI.

Recommendations for Improvement

Your bipartisan proposal could be transformed into a lasting strategic solution by incorporating these essential reforms:

• Sequence enforcement before legalization, with measurable benchmarks for border control, E-Verify, and visa tracking.
• End chain migration and replace it with merit-based admissions tied to skills and assimilation potential. 
• Mandate assimilation: functional English, civic orientation, and geographic dispersion. 
• Clarify birthright citizenship prospectively, limiting automatic citizenship to children of citizens and legal residents. 
• Link immigration numbers to demographic and economic realities, adjusting annually for fertility, employment, and productivity.
• Cap humanitarian programs tightly, restoring them to narrow, exceptional use only. 
• Provide legal status without citizenship for long-term undocumented residents, balancing compassion with sovereignty. 

The Political Reality

Immigration reform will not move forward without President Trump’s support, because only he has the trust of enforcement-first voters to secure a deal that includes legalization. However, the bill, as it is now written, cannot gain that support. Representatives Salazar and Escobar should revise the bill to address the concerns mentioned above, prioritizing enforcement before legalization, limiting asylum and humanitarian programs, ending chain migration, and requiring assimilation.

Equally important, visible progress must come first: genuine enforcement successes in interior deportations and significant self-deportations are essential to your bill becoming law. Those benchmarks are being delayed by Democratic sanctuary jurisdictions that refuse cooperation, thereby hindering national enforcement and encouraging further illegal immigration. If those obstacles persist, the public will lose confidence in any new legalization process. Convincing local Democratic leaders to drop these policies is essential to overcoming the hurdles of doubt that your bill will not be just another 1986 amnesty without enforcement.

Time is limited. The window for comprehensive reform exists during Trump’s presidency. His successor—whether Republican or Democrat—may not be willing or able to pursue such an ambitious initiative. Representatives Salazar and Escobar must act quickly to craft a revised, bipartisan compromise that forms a center coalition strong enough to overcome resistance from both extremes. If they succeed, they will establish the only conditions under which lasting reform can occur.

The Path Forward

Representatives Salazar and Escobar, I commend your bravery in tackling this issue. Do not give up. Continue refining the Dignity Act to ensure it is durable, enforceable, and strategic. The passage may not happen today, but it is possible within three years. If you base it on merit, enforcement benchmarks, assimilation, and demographic realism, President Trump will have the credibility to help pass it and sign it into law. This will give America the kind of reform that truly matters: one that endures.

America deserves security, compassion, and renewal, not another cycle of broken promises and shattered trust. Let’s make the next reform the final one.

*******

My work on immigration reform is available at the following links:
Immigration Reform Part 1: Necessary and Possible
https://www.libertytakeseffort.com/2025/07/immigration-reform-part-1-necessary-and.html
Immigration Reform Part 2: Why We Keep Failing, and What It Will Take to Succeed
https://www.libertytakeseffort.com/2025/07/immigration-reform-part-2-why-we-keep.html
Immigration Reform Part 3: The Strategic Imperative
https://www.libertytakeseffort.com/2025/07/immigration-reform-part-3-strategic.html
Immigration Reform Part 4: From Strategy to Action
https://www.libertytakeseffort.com/2025/08/immigration-reform-part-4-from-strategy.html

------

SHARING: Please consider sharing these blog posts via social media or email if you find them interesting by providing a link to either https://www.libertytakeseffort.com or https://libertytakeseffort.substack.com

DISTRIBUTION: Liberty Takes Effort shifted its distribution from social media to email delivery via Substack as a Newsletter. If you would like to receive distribution, please email me at libertytakeseffort@gmail.com. To see archived blog posts since 2014, visit www.libertytakeseffort.com.

DISCLAIMER: The entire content of this website and newsletter are based solely upon the opinions and thoughts of the author unless otherwise noted. It is not considered advice for action by readers in any realm of human activity. Its purpose is to stimulate discussion on topics of interest to readers to further inform the public square. Use of any information on this site is at the sole choice and risk of the reader.