p********r
发帖数: 176 | 1 The one great service of Donald Trump's extended peregrinations on
immigration policy is to have demonstrated how, in the end, there's only one
place to go.
You can rail for a year about the squishy soft, weak-kneed and stupid
politicians who have opened our borders to the wretched refuse of Mexico.
You can promise to round them up -- the refuse, that is, not the politicians
(they're next) -- and deport them. And that may win you a plurality of
Republican primary votes.
But eventually you have to let it go. For all his incendiary language and
clanging contradictions, Trump did exactly that in Phoenix on Wednesday. His
"deportation task force" will be hunting ... criminal aliens. Isn't that
the enforcement priority of President Obama, heretofore excoriated as the
ultimate immigration patsy?
And what happens to the noncriminal illegal immigrants? On that, Trump
punted. Their "appropriate disposition" will be considered "in several years
when we have … ended illegal immigration for good." Everyone knows what
that means: One way or another, they will be allowed to stay.
Trump's retreat points the way to the only serious solution: enforcement
plus legalization. The required enforcement measures are well known -- from
a national E-Verify system that makes it just about impossible to work if
you are here illegally, to intensified border patrol and high-tech tracking.
The one provision that, thanks to Trump, gets the most attention is a border
wall. It's hard to understand the opposition. It's the most venerable and
reliable way to keep people out. The triple fence outside San Diego led to a
90 percent reduction in infiltration. Israel's border fence with the West
Bank has produced a similar decline in terror attacks into Israel.
The main objection is symbolic. Walls, we are told, denote prisons. But only
if they are built to keep people in, not if they are for keeping outsiders
out. City walls, going back to Jericho, are there for protection. Even
holier-than-thou Europeans have conceded the point as one country after
another -- Hungary, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Austria, Greece, Spain, why even
Norway -- has started building border fences to stem the tide of Middle
Eastern refugees.
The other part of the immigration bargain is legalization. What do you do
with the 11 million already here? In theory, you could do nothing. The
problem ultimately solves itself as the generation of the desert -- those
who crossed the border originally -- is eventually replaced by its American-
born children who are automatically legal and landed.
But formal legalization is a political necessity. It gets buy-in from
Democrats who for whatever reason -- self-styled humanitarianism or bare-
knuckled partisanship -- have no interest in real border enforcement.
Legalization is the quid pro quo. If they want to bring the immigrants "out
of the shadows," they must endorse serious enforcement.
Such a grand bargain could and would command a vast national consensus. The
American public will accept today's illegal immigrants if it is convinced
that this will be the last such cohort.
This was the premise of the 1986 Reagan amnesty. It legalized almost 3
million immigrants. Because it never enforced the border, however, three has
become 11.
And that's why the Gang of Eight failed. They too got the sequencing wrong.
The left insisted on legalization first. The Gang's Republicans ultimately
acquiesced because they figured, correctly, this was the best deal they
could get in an era of Democratic control.
The problem is that legalization is essentially irreversible and would have
gone into effect on Day One. Enforcement was a mere promise.
Hence the emerging Republican consensus, now that Trump has abandoned mass
deportation: a heavy and detailed concentration on enforcement, leaving the
question of what happens to those already here either unspoken (Trump on
Wednesday) or to be treated "case by case" (Trump last week).
The Trump detour into -- and retreat from -- deportation has proved salutary
. Even the blustering tough guy had to dismiss it with "we're not looking to
hurt people."
The ultimate national consensus, however, lies one step further down the
road. Why leave legalization for some future discussion? Get it done. Once
the river of illegal immigration has been demonstrably and securely reduced
to a trickle, the country will readily exercise its natural magnanimity and
legalize.
So why not agree now? Say it and sign it. To get, you have to give. That's
the art of the deal, is it not? | V*****i
发帖数: 9883 | 2 Charles is good.
one
politicians
His
years
from
tracking.
border
a
only
outsiders
American-
out
The
has
.
have
the
salutary
to
reduced
and
【在 p********r 的大作中提到】
: The one great service of Donald Trump's extended peregrinations on
: immigration policy is to have demonstrated how, in the end, there's only one
: place to go.
: You can rail for a year about the squishy soft, weak-kneed and stupid
: politicians who have opened our borders to the wretched refuse of Mexico.
: You can promise to round them up -- the refuse, that is, not the politicians
: (they're next) -- and deport them. And that may win you a plurality of
: Republican primary votes.
: But eventually you have to let it go. For all his incendiary language and
: clanging contradictions, Trump did exactly that in Phoenix on Wednesday. His
| j***j
发帖数: 1997 | 3 wow
查尔斯不计前嫌啦？
one
politicians
His
【在 p********r 的大作中提到】
: The one great service of Donald Trump's extended peregrinations on
: immigration policy is to have demonstrated how, in the end, there's only one
: place to go.
: You can rail for a year about the squishy soft, weak-kneed and stupid
: politicians who have opened our borders to the wretched refuse of Mexico.
: You can promise to round them up -- the refuse, that is, not the politicians
: (they're next) -- and deport them. And that may win you a plurality of
: Republican primary votes.
: But eventually you have to let it go. For all his incendiary language and
: clanging contradictions, Trump did exactly that in Phoenix on Wednesday. His
|
|
