Bloomberg View (Opinion)
By Francis Wilkinson
August 17, 2015
Donald
Trump has an immigration policy. It's based on dubious assertions and
would be fabulously expensive, but as a statement of goals it's largely
coherent. And it may
mark a very, very dangerous turning point in the Republican
presidential primary.
There
are two main facets of illegal immigration: border security,
encompassing both the nation's geographic border and its ports and
airports, and the fate of the estimated
11 million undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S. All
Republican candidates support varying degrees of increased border
enforcement, repeating "secure the border" as a charm to ward off the
evil eye of the right wing.
The
party is otherwise fractured. Legal immigration is a sticky point,
pitting Republican donors against the party's sizable wing of
immigration restrictionists. And the
question of what to do about the 11 million undocumented immigrants in
the U.S., most of whom have been here for a decade or more, is even
stickier. Polls show that a majority of Americans support some kind of
path to legalization. But Republicans are more
opposed -- and opponents are particularly vocal.
Among
the top presidential contenders, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and
Ohio Governor John Kasich seem squarely in the legalization camp. But
many of their competitors
oppose such "amnesty" for undocumented immigrants. They have plenty of
support. Earlier this year, Republicans in the House of Representatives
voted to rescind President Barack Obama's executive actions easing
deportation for millions of undocumented immigrants.
If
a path to legalization or citizenship is foreclosed, two options
remain: continuing the status quo, leaving 11 million people residing
illegally in the U.S. Or deporting
them. Even the most virulently restrictionist Republicans have avoided
explicitly calling for the latter. Instead, they typically suggest that
the fate of the 11 million is an issue to be addressed only once "a
secure border" is in place. "A secure border"
being largely a matter of conjecture, there is no way to know how or
when the second phase -- dealing with the 11 million -- might ever be
attempted, let alone resolved. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and
Florida Senator Marco Rubio each have offered muddy
views on the issue.
The dodge works so long as Republicans are allowed to remain vague. But Trump just broke the party compact: He got specific.
Trump's
plan is an assault on legal and illegal immigration across multiple
fronts. He wants to shut off employment to illegal immigrants by
expanding the e-verify system,
which checks the legal status of job applicants (and job holders),
nationwide. He wants to "impound" remittance payments from illegal
wages, undermining a key rationale of illegal employment. He calls for
an end to birthright citizenship, but also a limit
on issuing new green cards and new restrictions on hiring high-skills
immigrants. He wants to triple the number of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement agents working to root out undocumented immigrants.
If
your goal is to drive millions of undocumented immigrants south across
the border, Trump's plan looks like a winner. In effect, Trump would
significantly increase deportations
while enacting enforcement policies intended to bring about Mitt
Romney's vision of mass "self-deportation." It's an easy set of concepts
for voters to grasp and for debate moderators to probe. Which of the
other candidates will sign on? Which side are they
on: mass deportation or mass law-breaking? Wisconsin Governor Scott
Walker said today that Trump's blueprint is "very similar" to his own
plan.
Amusingly,
Bush and Kasich may be the chief beneficiaries of Trump's astringent
effect. They've already defined the soft side of the party on
immigration. But now the
hardliners must come clean: Do they ratify what establishmentarian Bush
has been saying all along? Endorse Trump's new standard? A hypocrite's
dodge threatens to become a Hobson's choice.
Trump
has been leading the Republican pack in polls, with about a quarter of
the vote. Now, with his first real policy proposal, he has almost
certainly solidified his
hold on the party's most virulently anti-immigrant voters. Only nine
percent of Republicans in a July CNN/ORC poll said illegal immigration
would be their top issue in voting for a president. But drawing hard,
punitive lines against people on the margins never
seems to lose its appeal to the Republican base.
It
will be difficult for an eventual Republican nominee to navigate
Trump's challenge without alienating either the anti-immigrant cohort
that he is energizing or mainstream
voters. And it could get worse. What if Trump gets specific on other
policies? Taxes. Health care. Retirement security. Climate change.
Bombing Iran.
My
Bloomberg View colleague Jonathan Bernstein calls Republicans a
"post-policy" party for their reliable reluctance to fashion policies
that are structurally sound and
politically viable. The key is maintaining a perpetual fog. (Repeal and
replace Obamacare! With something. Pass Paul Ryan's budget! As long as
it doesn't become law.)
In
the greatest irony, Trump has the capacity to exploit the void, forcing
vaguer Republican candidates to respond to his specific proposals. He
is making immigration
a nightmare for Republicans. Other bad dreams could follow.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment