Unspeakable, not Unsolvable

Those who regularly follow my blog know I rarely venture into political commentary, as that field is overgrown with poisonous weeds and nasty critters. Sometimes, stuff happens that you just can’t ignore; this is one of those times.

The current US administration policy requiring the separation of illegal migrant children from their parents–for whatever reason–is an abomination. The DHS Secretary and others claim that this is simply the inevitable result of a series of court findings and laws passed under previous administrations. That is a technicality, and irrelevant. If it were the case, the separations would have commenced back in January 2017. Attorney General Sessions has admitted part of the reason is ‘to send a signal’ to deter further illegal immigration. You do not send a signal by mistreating children, unless you are the Mob, or MS-13.

This is an administration choice: a conscious policy decision. It must be reversed.

Why is the administration doing this? I contend that President Trump is irritated that he cannot get his border wall funded by Congress. Further, the policies of President Obama set a precedent that children illegally entering the country would be treated more favorably, and this predictably caused the latest immigration challenge of minors (with or without parents) arriving at our borders. It was a crisis in 2014; it is less so today, but still a challenge. We must be honest about the conditions that created the opportunity for this vile policy.

All that said, nothing justifies the current policy: it is abhorrent. We have to come to grips with several real issues.

First, the Unites States cannot accept all families and children who are threatened by violence in their native lands. It sounds sweet, but it cannot be. Thus we have to give our immigration officials guidance to determine who does qualify for asylum under such circumstances, and who does not. This will be hard, and will result in some sad cases. Anybody who wants to join the argument must answer the question “where would you draw the line?” If you just want to post pictures of children crying, you disqualify yourself from the debate. Posit a solution.

Second, we need to clearly publicize our policies in those countries which are the primary source of such immigration, mostly in Central America, and we need the cooperation of local governments with our policy. We also need to improve our relationship with Mexico, as this is the means for such migration and when we have poor relations, the Mexican government feels no need to assist us in reducing it.

Third, we probably need to fund President Trump’s wall. Notice I didn’t say “build it,” just fund it. It won’t work; I explained why here. But as long as it remains unfunded, he will continue to search for ways to leverage any issue into a trade for funding. That is what is happening now, in my opinion. It is a huge infrastructure project, it won’t get done anytime soon, and we can pull the funding as soon as the chief proponent is gone.

Fourth, we need a rational policy for temporary workers from Mexico. We had a good guest worker program (Bracero) for years until President Kennedy went along with spiking it in the 1960s. Re-institute it, which will immediately improve the US- Mexico relationship, help ICE re-direct to more important matters (like violent criminal aliens), and provide needed workers in agriculture (we are approaching full employment, meaning soon there will be more jobs than people to do them).

Fifth, whatever rules we come up with for families with asylum requests, or for entering illegally, we will need to have some way to detain them. Anyone arguing to resume the failed “catch-and-release” policy of past administrations is being irresponsible. While there is no immigrant crisis, the notion that we can simply detain such people then release them in the country until they eventually (could be years!) get a hearing is unworkable. Think it doesn’t cost us much? It led to the Trump phenomenon. Ponder that for a moment. Therefore, detaining families or unaccompanied minors is going to mean some type of camps, and we need to be clear-eyed about the conditions. They need to be safe, secure, and comfortable (remembering the standard of comfort migrants expect). The camps we have now are pretty good; don’t believe me, read this from the Washington Post. When we compare them to the Holocaust we undermine the case. The camps are not the problem; the stupid, immoral policy is the problem.

I will not apportion blame in this case; there is plenty to go around. Both sides are playing to their bases, using images and sound-bites to fire up the crowd. Since Mr. Trump is President and the Republicans are in control of both houses, it is incumbent on them to lead. The Democrats must stop using this issue as a tool for the mid-term elections. If anyone really cares about the people, the children, they will stop scoring political points and act, by compromising.

This is difficult, not impossible. This is unspeakable, not unsolvable.

4 thoughts on “Unspeakable, not Unsolvable”

  1. I agree. You have written quite clearly.
    I am thinking back to WWII. We put innocent Japanese into internment camps. BUT WE DID NOT SEPARATE FAMILIES. Children should not be pawns of any political party.

  2. Does ‘fund the wall’ mean all $25B now or through the appropriation process? The president does not seem to be happy with the $2.2B in the latest budget.

    The rest sounds like common sense, especially for guest workers and improved relationships with our neighbors in Central America. The question is who is going to step up and lead?

    1. Approps, as they say in DC. Not real money, “out-year” money. You can always claw it back later. I don’t think POTUS understands the federal budget process well enough to catch on. And yes, TJ, you are right: where are the leaders?

  3. Thanks, Pat. Good commentary. The last time the US was big-hearted about refugees was Vietnam: we took in 1.6 million Vietnamese between 1975 and 1997. We helped make the mess, and we at least partially atoned. During the Syrian disaster, the US took in @12,000 in 2016 under Obama …a pittance compared to what the Europeans have been doing…and held up by a Republican congress whose main aim since 2010, according to Mitch McConnell, was to stymie the President at every turn. But the US allowed in 84,000 from the Middle East between ’08 and ’16. It gets worse: under Trump, 3024 Syrian refugees entered the US in 2017, most of whom were approved under Obama. This year so far: 11. Despite our tendency to “pat” (sorry, bad pun) ourselves on the back for our mythical compassion and generosity, we fall far short (on a per capita basis) compared to many of our allies on both foreign aid and refugee resettlement. A tough issue: heard tonight on CBS that El Salvador has 30,000 police–and 60,000 gang members. As Kathleen Parker noted in Today’s Post: the republicans, in crumbling to Trump, have “created a scenario in which virtually no one of Latino descent would consider supporting a republican candidate.” The occupant of the White House is a clear and present danger to American democracy, With Trump it’s not about policy or country, it’s about winning. He’s been that way his whole depraved life. Giving him his wall in the gamble that he’ll be out soon and we won’t have to pay for it to dealing with the devil. In the meantime, reunite families (which will take months because DHS scattered kids around the country and admitted its book keeping is flawed), make them comfortable and not scared, work with Mexico rather than alienate it, and adjudicate as quickly as possible. These folks will be good citizens. The US turned away Jews before WW II and interned Americans of Japanese descent. Can’t let it happen again. Hard work with open hearts awaits.

Comments are closed.