More Misinformation from the Media:
Everyone loves a litmus test, and because abortion has proved too thorny these past few years, some on the left have proposed another bright line for candidates to toe: the abolition of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. . . .
It may seem odd, or even radical, that Democrats are asking for an agency to get the ax. Small government has always been a Republican principle. But the Democrats have some principles too, and one of them is the old concept of the United States as a nation of immigrants. Prospective presidential candidates claim they’d like to enact comprehensive reform to restore that vision. There’s no reason reform shouldn’t include disbanding a deportation squad. – ICE Deserves to Be Abolished, The Washington Post, Molly Roberts, 3/13/18 [Link]
Fact Check: Abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is an idea that seems to be picking up support on the far left. That isn’t surprising because it’s a truly radical idea. Eliminate ICE, and you virtually eliminate any effective immigration control. ICE in the interior of the U.S. to enforce immigration law. Without it, all an unauthorized foreigner has to do to stay here permanently is slip across the border or come in on a legal visa and then overstay it.
Abolishing ICE is the equivalent to inviting the world to come. A few years ago a Gallup Poll found that 150 million adults would like to move to the U.S. With their spouses and children who would come too, we would face a tidal wave of humanity, perhaps 400 million people. Can Ms. Roberts acknowledge that this might pose some real practical problems?
And simply citing the mantra “nation of immigrants” will not make those problems go away. This buzzword commonly works to silence any intelligent discussion of immigration policy. By suggesting that immigration alone defines America, it ignores numerous other facets of our national character. We’re also a nation derived from Western Civilization, with a strong affinity toward representative government and the rule of law. We’re a nation aspiring to a broad middle class with adequate wages and working conditions for working people. And we are a nation cherishing wide-open spaces and environmental protection.
To set immigration policy, we need to weigh all of these attributes. Saying we’re a nation of immigrants, does not answer such questions as whether the high level of immigration we had as a frontier country in the 19th century is appropriate for a fully-developed country in the 21st century. It does not give us guidance as to whether our diversity is becoming divisive.
“Nation of immigrants” doesn’t appear anywhere in our law. It’s a slogan and not a sacred precept. Those like Ms. Roberts who use it appear to concede that we are a nation, but abolishing immigration law enforcement effectively abolishes our nationhood. It negates the significance of our citizenship. If citizens cannot determine and enforce who comes and settles here, we simply become a colony of the world.
Roberts maintains that Democrats have principles, and one of them—it most definitely appears—is using immigrants to create a powerful Democratic voting bloc. A leading Democratic analyst even admits this strategy. Current immigration policy has the effect of “importing poverty,” which means many new constituents and voters for the Democrats’ agenda of Big Government. As Democrats pursue cheap votes, Republicans are scarcely blameless as they pursue cheap labor from immigration.
The only effective counter to these agendas is an informed citizenry that won’t be taken in by the “nation of immigrants” mantra and other propaganda for mass immigration. They must insist that we are a nation of Americans before anything else.