Democratic politicians and their media enablers use emotional language to describe the immigration crisis. For example, they call children of illegal immigrants — undocumented minors who are here because of their parents’ decisions — “dreamers.”
They purposefully use language and images to manipulate the patriotic citizens who still believe in the American dream according to the rule of law. They paint their political opponents as “anti-immigrant,” “racist,” and “xenophobic,” even though President Trump has already offered a path to legalization for more Dreamers than anyone in history.
Yet despite Democrat and media manipulation, the vast majority of the American people disagree. Far more than half believe it’s time for solid border security and a comprehensive solution to the immigration issue in the United States.
According to pollster Scott Rasmussen:
Seven out of 10 Americans also support comprehensive federal immigration reform to secure our borders and resolve the status of illegal immigrants already living in the country. Fifty-five percent believe the top priority in any such reform should be ensuring that border security measures are implemented and effective. Only 34 percent take the opposite view.
In other words, American citizens want real border security, including a wall where necessary and appropriate, and they want a resolution to the sometimes very difficult situation of people already in the country illegally.
Unfortunately, Democrats refuse to even talk about really fixing the problem. Instead, they simply demonize their opponents with overheated rhetoric. For the time being, it appears that the only party coming to the table with solutions that address both sides of the issue are the Republicans.
The President has previously offered to exchange funding for the wall and border security (which Americans support), for a path to legalization for the “dreamers” (which the majority of Americans also support). Democrats are using immigration as a purely political issue to score points, and it appears — for a change — that Republicans are actually trying to solve a serious security and humanitarian crisis.
The headlines of American newspapers tell the dysfunctional tale. Illegal aliens with criminal histories use Obama-era DACA protection while shooting at cops, and committing heinous crimes against law-abiding citizens. Mobs of people attempt to get into the United States by intimidating border patrol agents. Vulnerable women and children are being smuggled across the border and experiencing unspeakable violence and sexual abuse.
Meanwhile, some young people living productive lives who are illegally in this country due to no fault of their own (smuggled in, or kept here illegally by parents and other relatives), are forced to live in the shadows with the fear of being deported to countries that are not their homes. These are serious problems that require serious action in Washington, D.C.
There are no easy solutions. We have too few immigration judges. Some are retiring rather than deal with this caustic environment, and there are not enough to replace them. The Executive Office of Immigration Review — the Justice Department’s immigration branch — has pulled judges from their assignments at critical border facilities, which has thrown local courts into chaos.
The cases of undocumented workers linger in the system for years. While the illegal aliens wait, they’re able to work and establish lives here … making it even harder to send them back to their homes if the time comes. This is not “justice” for anyone. Yet this is the state of our politics.
It’s a mess.
Democrats say that the president is “politicizing” immigration reform, a laughable claim since immigration reform is — by definition — nothing other than using politics to protect our nation. That’s what they are supposed to be doing while they’re in Washington, D.C., instead of mugging for the cameras and rubbing shoulders at parties.
This is literally what President Trump ran on during his campaign. Arguably, it’s why he won. And the reality is that Democrats are doing absolutely nothing to solve these problems. They are standing in the way of any solutions, demonizing their political opponents and simply trying to score points against the president and with their own party.
Since American and immigrant lives are at stake, and a humanitarian crisis has been playing out for decades, you would hope that these politicians could set aside their profound differences and try to work out a bipartisan solution to this challenging problem. But is such an agreement even possible? What can President Trump do to reach an agreement with the new Congress?
The amount of money the president has requested to provide border security doesn’t amount to much more than a rounding error in our current, outrageous, unsustainable budget numbers. (The issue of unsustainable spending proposed by our government will have to wait for another column.) Yet the Democrats toss out disingenuous complaints about spending $5 billion on a border security wall.
The party that is in love with spending is suddenly and suspiciously finding their fiscal restraint, on an issue where they stand in opposition to the American people.
Here’s a serious question: Why shouldn’t we enforce the law at our borders? And why shouldn’t we fix an immigration system that everyone acknowledges is badly broken?
Strip away the emotional language and what’s left? A national security and humanitarian crisis that demands solutions now. Liberals, however, make a mockery of the rule of law while pushing a false narrative down the throats of Americans: “Republicans hate immigrants.”
It’s an overused trope.
The only way bipartisan agreement is possible is if the Democrats get honest on this issue. Do they actually care about immigrants and American citizens, or just having the “Republicans hate immigrants” narrative for the election?
We’re about to find out.
Mark Meckler is president of Convention of States Actions, a nonprofit group advocating for limited government.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller.