Anti-wall is not a border policy: How Democrats can sell an immigration plan

 

The 19th century German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck once observed that “If you like laws and sausages you should never watch either one being made.”

Well, there was sausage making in the Oval Office this week and it wasn’t pretty.  

ADVERTISEMENT

It was a generally unedifying exchange between politicians who lacked wit, deftness and eloquence but were adept at posturing for their bases. Unedifying except in one sense: Democrats showed once again that they lack a border security policy — seem even reluctant to talk about the subject in any detail.

On Tuesday, President TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate GOP budget ignores Trump, cuts defense Trump says he'll nominate Stephen Moore to Fed White House: ISIS territory in Syria has been 100 percent eliminated MORE, House Minority Leader Nancy PelosiNancy Patricia D'Alesandro PelosiThe Hill's Morning Report — Washington readies for Mueller end game Dem divisions deepen over approach to climate change 2020 Dems avoid this year's AIPAC conference MORE (D-Calif.), and Senate Minority Leader Chuck SchumerCharles (Chuck) Ellis Schumer4 in 5 Americans say they support net neutrality: poll GOP senator: Trump's criticism of McCain 'deplorable' Schumer to introduce bill naming Senate office building after McCain amid Trump uproar MORE (D-N.Y.) met to discuss spending bills necessary to fund the government, specifically, whether to include $5 billion for a border wall. Vice-President Mike PenceMichael (Mike) Richard PenceOvernight Health Care: Trump officials sued over Medicaid work requirements in New Hampshire | Analysis contradicts HHS claims on Arkansas Medicaid changes | Azar signals HHS won't back down on e-cigs Trump health chief backs needle exchanges in anti-HIV strategy Pence travels to Nebraska to survey flood damage MORE was also there but successfully camouflaged himself in the upholstery.

Trump asserted that, if he didn’t get funds for a wall,  he would be “proud to shut down the government for border security.”  The Democrats helpfully reminded Trump of “the whole lot of ‘Pinocchio’s’” that The Washington Post had just given him for making false claims about the wall.   

The best Democratic leaders could do in the Oval Office meeting was to assert a mantra that “we are going to have border security” without explaining just what exactly that security would look like and why it would be more effective than a wall. 

After the meeting, Pelosi derided Trump's wall proposal as nothing but “manhood thing" for the president. But agree with him or not,  Trump at least has a clear, sound-bite sized border security policy. It’s easy to grasp and understand because walls are simple — they keep out people who appear threatening.   

The Democrats have an amazing blind spot when it comes to immigration. They appear not to appreciate that popular support for legal immigration, and for issues dear to them such as permanent status for the Dreamers, depends on convincing Americans that their borders and immigration are under control.  

study by Allison Harell of the University of Quebec and others found that an important predictor of attitudes to migrants was whether people felt in control of their lives, including that their country had control over immigration. “Feeling in control,” the study asserted, “makes it psychologically easier for people to deal with the changing  social landscape in their environment because they feel capable of responding to these changes.”

Yet, the Democrats have ceded border security to Trump. The best example is the recent ill-fated “Abolish ICE” campaign by progressives in Congress and immigration advocates. They quickly retreated after Trump started bashing  Democrats as “open border” believers. 

Democrats don’t have to support the wall to prove their border security bona fides. One approach might be to adopt a variant of then-Sen. Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaJennifer Lopez and Alex Rodriguez's engagement win Obama's endorsement Pence lobbies anti-Trump donors to support reelection: report The Hill's 12:30 Report: Trump attacks on McCain rattle GOP senators MORE’s criticism of the Iraq War, which was that he wasn’t against all wars, just “dumb ones.” That the wall is dumb is easy to demonstrate, not least because no one knows whether it will be effective and how much it will cost. 

But not all walls are dumb, especially in the right place such as urban areas and in combination with other effective measures. Walls, technological upgrades and additional personnel put in place in San Diego, long before Trump was elected, reduced apprehensions of illegal immigrants from half a million a quarter century ago to 32,000 in 2016.       

ADVERTISEMENT

Democrats certainly should be talking about the Dreamers, ending family separation and a humane asylum policy. At the same time, they should be proposing effective immigration law enforcement measures such as better technology, more border personnel, more immigration judges, more effective tracking of visa overstays and efficient deportations of illegal immigrants convicted of crimes. In short, the Democrats’ border security policy should be to build “smart barriers”  and not “dumb” walls.

Such an approach, in fact, is pro-immigration because it will build support for lawful immigration and for much-needed reforms. 

Until Democrats grasp that promoting border security and enforcement of the immigration laws is necessary to keep immigration part of the American fabric, they will go on ceding border security to Trump. 

Gregory J. Wallance was a federal prosecutor during the Carter and Reagan administrations. He is the author most recently of “The Woman Who Fought An Empire: Sarah Aaronsohn and Her Nili Spy Ring.” Follow him on Twitter at @gregorywallance.