Do you have any facts to back up your speculation that an "open" border has anything to do with the problems described?

The Op-Ed called it the poverty trap: "55% of immigrant families in the state get some kind of means-tested benefits, compared with just 30% of natives."

However, it failed to cite any kind of causality. It seems just as likely that those kinds of benefits are precisely why they come here.

I'd also be interested in knowing if it's truly a trap -- do immigrant families come here, get those benefits, then move up? Or is it the same 55% decade after decade?

immigrants via a loose border? or immigrants that arrived legally? Or immigrants that just came from other states? What does native mean in this context?

Immigrants from other states vs. native Californians.

I think his comment was tongue in cheek. The stats might look higher without immigrants, but that doesn't mean the problem is solved.

For sure it wasn't a serious comment, but there is a more serious facet of it I think. If our states aren't able to properly deal with the poverty that's already here, why are we inviting more of it in?

US psychiatric, APS, and CPS services are poor, and can't adequately deal with the needs of those already here. It's only going to get worse.