If they’re having to argue that they totally aren’t for open borders, then they are for open borders. Uber-leftist Peter Beinart takes a crack at convincing people at the uber-leftist The Atlantic that their policies are not open borders, they just don’t want to sound like Trump!
For Democrats, Health Care Is Easy, but Immigration Is Hard
The 2020 hopefuls aren’t for open borders—but they don’t want to sound like Trump either.
Among the many things we’ve learned so far in the presidential campaign is this: The Democratic candidates are talking more honestly about health care than about immigration. To develop a coherent approach to immigration in an era of rising asylum claims, Democrats need to explain—among other things—whom they would and wouldn’t let in. But Donald Trump has made that discussion extraordinarily difficult. In the shadow of his brutal policies and bigoted appeals, Democrats are wary of spelling out whom they would deport. That has led to a debate that’s evasive and vague. (snip)
But last week’s debates were less successful in clarifying how the Democrats differ on immigration. To be sure, the candidates offered policy proposals: They called for restoring DACA, reforming Immigration and Customs Enforcement, eliminating private detention centers, and giving undocumented immigrants health care and a path to citizenship. In the first debate, Julián Castro also declared his support for downgrading illegally crossing the border from a criminal to a civil offense, and then slammed Beto O’Rourke for disagreeing with him. But while O’Rourke has in the past argued against decriminalization, he wouldn’t defend that position onstage, and instead said he opposed criminalizing asylum seekers, thus evading Castro’s broader point. He was willing to play the centrist on health care, just not on immigration.
In the second debate, the moderator José Diaz-Balart asked for a show of hands on decriminalization. Eight candidates raised their hands; Biden—oddly—raised a finger. But the moderators didn’t ask him to explain. So while viewers were left with a sense that the presidential candidates have different views on decriminalization, they learned nothing about why.
Man, if only we had a Free Press to ask the candidates these questions!
At the debates, Democrats bellowed their opposition to Trump’s handling of the asylum crisis. And they rightly emphasized the need to help Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador battle crime, corruption, and poverty so that fewer of their citizens make the perilous journey north. Although they didn’t say so at the debates, the three candidates who have issued immigration plans—Castro,O’Rourke, and Jay Inslee—have also proposed pouring money into the asylum system so asylum seekers can get lawyers and interpreters, and a faster resolution of their claims.
The point is that there’s a trade-off. Make getting asylum easier, and you’re likely to increase the number of people who apply. When a surge of migrant children reached the U.S. border in 2014, the Obama administration answeredthat trade-off with a harsh message to desperate Central Americans: “Don’t come. And if you think you’re coming and once you’re here you won’t be returned, that’s not the case. You’re not going to be able to stay.†But in the Trump era, Democrats aren’t comfortable talking that way anymore. Private health insurance is something many Democratic presidential candidates are happy to support openly. Sending vulnerable mothers and children back to Honduras is not.
Everything pretty much says “Open Borders.” Obama might have talked tough, and deported lots of illegals. And separated children per the law as passed by the U.S. Congress. But, the Democrat base was actually rather upset about this. If the extreme policies from Democrats are simply due to Trump Derangement Syndrome, that tells us that they are dishonest and too immature to be in politics.
Regardless, none of this is new. They support sanctuary jurisdictions that are protecting illegal aliens, including criminal ones. They say they only want to keep the good ones, yet, these sanctuaries protect the ones with felonies on their records.
Make crossing the border not a criminal offense? Well, the law says the first offense is a civil crime with a small fine and deportation. After that, it becomes much more serious for each time caught. Democrats want to get rid of that? Sure sounds like open borders.
Health insurance for illegals paid for by U.S. citizens? That rewards bad behavior. And entices more to come illegally.
They do not want a border barrier of any type along the southern border. Many want to do away with ICE, and now are going after Customs and Border Patrol. They even are discussing doxxing and “shaming” members of both federal agencies.
Paying for even more lawyers to protect people who are here illegally? Entices more to come and give it a shot. Expanding the definition of asylum would mean more people showing up and crossing illegally.
They want to formalize DACA in what they call a “clean bill”, meaning not paired with any restrictions on people crossing the border illegally, which would mean more giving it a shot. They want comprehensive immigration reform, which means amnesty for tens of millions of illegals, which entices more to come, since they are not offering any measures to stop anything.
They call a border barrier immoral. They want the existing barrier torn down.
Did I mention that they want to decriminalize crossing the border illegally? If there is no penalty, there is no border.
But, no, no, they aren’t for open borders.
