Trump’s vanity wall is biggest obstacle to protecting Dreamers

Trump’s vanity wall is biggest obstacle to protecting Dreamers
© Getty Images

Border communities and Dreamers are both victims of thoughtless obstructionism at the hands of the Trump administration. Take the current negotiations to protect Dreamers in exchange for border enforcement, which seemed to have reached an impasse over a useless wall and other immigration provisions.

But there is a way forward.

ADVERTISEMENT

There are two moderate, wall-less bipartisan companion bills in the House and Senate that would provide a balanced approach to both a Deferred Action for Child Arrivals (DACA) fix and border enforcement.

 

Introduced in the House by Reps. Will HurdWilliam Ballard HurdDemocrats claim new momentum from intelligence watchdog testimony Romney: Trump requesting Biden investigation from China, Ukraine 'wrong and appalling' GOP lawmaker: 'It is terrible' for Trump to call on China to probe Biden MORE (R-Texas), Pete AguilarPeter (Pete) Ray AguilarHillicon Valley: Zuckerberg to testify on Libra | Extremists find home on Telegram app | Warren blasts Facebook for not removing anti-Biden ad | California outlaws facial recognition in police body cameras | China rips US tech sanctions House Democrats introduce new legislation to combat foreign election interference Democratic leaders seek balance amid liberal push to go big on immigration MORE (D-Calif.) and Jeff DenhamJeffrey (Jeff) John DenhamChina's TikTok turns to former lawmakers to help with content moderation policies Hillicon Valley: Warren turns up heat in battle with Facebook | Instagram unveils new data privacy feature | Advocacy group seeks funding to write about Big Tech TikTok adds former lawmakers to help develop content moderation policies MORE (R-Calif.) and in the Senate by Sens. John McCainJohn Sidney McCainLawmakers toast Greta Van Susteren's new show Meghan McCain: It's 'breaking my heart' Warren is leading Biden in the polls The Hill's 12:30 Report: Video depicting Trump killing media, critics draws backlash MORE (R-Ariz.) and Chris CoonsChristopher (Chris) Andrew CoonsMeet the dog and 'sea turtle' who launched campaigns for office Senators demand briefing on Trump's decision to withdraw from Syria 2020 Democrats push for gun control action at forum MORE (D-Del.), the Unifying and Securing America (USA) Act would offer immigrant youths a pathway to citizenship along with a data-driven evaluation and cost analysis — per linear mile — of the resources truly needed for border enforcement. These proposals also suggest the use of surveillance technologies, with adequate privacy protections, as a better and more effective alternative to a concrete wall.

Although we do not believe any more border enforcement is needed, these proposals lay out a process for assessing what, if any, additional enforcement is appropriate — and do so in consultation with border communities and other stakeholders. Both proposals rightly remove Trump’s vanity project, the border wall. The wall not only represents a costly and ineffective solution, but also would prove damaging to the environment and several endangered species; would rip away land from private U.S. landowners; and would cause life-threatening flooding.

Nearly nine out of 10 Americans support a permanent solution for DACA recipients, while six out of 10 oppose a border wall. If the people’s voices were heard, these bills likely would pass if congressional leadership simply allowed them to go to the floor for a vote.

But the main obstacle to these bills is a fear-mongering and nativist administration, supported by a few congressional members who —with no regard for how the public feels and with no real input from border communities — declare these bills non-starters for failing to fully fund the wall.

The president and Congress would be smart to check in with border communities, get a dose of reality, and narrow their negotiations to what is really needed.

Communities along the U.S./Mexico border are home to 15 million people. These communities are culturally and socially vibrant, serve as a gateway for trade that strengthens our nation’s economy, and are among the safest in the nation. Apprehensions of unauthorized border crossers are at historic lows, and even the Department of Homeland Security has stated that the border is more difficult to cross than ever before.

Furthermore, in the past two decades, anti-immigrant policymakers have used a negative narrative about the border to justify the exponential growth in border enforcement resources, including the doubling of Border Patrol agents, almost 700 miles of fencing, and all sizes and shapes of surveillance technologies. The fear incited by this rhetoric, which didn’t start with Trump, is responsible for countless immigration checkpoints located miles away from the actual border. These checkpoints interfere with local families’ ability to go to a doctor’s appointment or school without suffering the indignities of racial profiling, or worse.

In short, we don’t need a border wall. What we need is a narrow, commonsense approach that ensures that border policies are based on facts, not fiction. This is why these newer Senate and House proposals are the right approach.

Vicki Gaubeca is policy and communications strategist with the Southern Border Communities Coalition. Follow her on Twitter @vgaubeca.