Rethinking Immigration Law

At some level immigration law has always struck me as vaguely un-American.  

My basic vision of what America should be is each individual is free to do what he wants, unless his activities impact other people.  If there is potential conflict between different individuals activities, government mediates by setting rules.   So in my idealistic vision America is should be about protecting individuals from groups of people banding to use government to control the lives of other people whose activities aren't really impacting others.

The notion of "controlling our borders" is an artifact we inherited from the age of Kings and dictators who ruled by force of arms.  Certainly border checkpoints are justified where we try to identify and weed out terrorists, or smugglers, or other persons bent on fraud, theft or violence.  But why do we work so hard to keep out regular folks coming to try to improve life for their families?  That part of immigration law is always based on the most crass form of lifeboat ethics - I  got mine and I'm not sharing.  It is rooted in a view that life is a zero sum game where new folks will take from the existing population, rather than the reality in which immigrants add value to a greater society.

I think it is entirely reasonable to  have citizens who have committed to this country have the sole privilege to vote, or receive other benefits from citizenship.  But I don't think it is reasonable to set up hurdles to stop people who seek economic, political or religious freedom from coming, and staying, in this country.  

Freedom of movement about the world is is a moral issue for which we should be leader, not a naysayer.