MAGA Isn’t Serious About the Border
Photo by U.S. Customs and Border Protection/Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Abraham Garcia, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
A lot of what goes on in Washington is political theater. Politics these days is performative art aimed at rallying the base and undercutting the opposition rather than getting things done. Sometimes this fact is more obvious than others. It was blatantly obvious this week when Donald Trump did his best to kill the border security compromise.
There have been a few times in our recent history when an immigration compromise was possible. One of those opportunities has presented itself over the past few months as a perfect storm of incentives materialized.
On one side, the influx of immigrants on the border has created a crisis that even Democrats are unable to ignore. The border crisis is one of the issues that is dragging down President Biden’s approval rating and endangering his reelection.
On the other side, many Republicans want to join Democrats in unlocking more aid to Ukraine. Despite continuing to receive aid from Europe, Ukraine (and Israel) is running short of artillery shells and missiles that primarily come from the US.
There seemed to be the recipe for a bargain. Democrats had the incentive to compromise on the border and Republicans had the incentive to compromise on Ukraine. There was enough cross-party support for both elements of the deal to make an agreement possible. In fact, Republicans for months sought to tie Ukraine aid to the border, and the proposed bill does just that. The bill would include defense funding for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan while tightening immigration rules.
Then the Great Negotiator stepped in. Trump attacked the deal, calling it “meaningless” and said that Congress would be better off killing it.
Trump’s motive for scuttling the deal is made plain in a Truth Social post in which he ranted, “ A Border Deal now would be another Gift to the Radical Left Democrats. They need it politically but don’t care about our Border.”
Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) put it bluntly, “I’m not willing to do too damn much right now to help a Democrat and to help Joe Biden’s approval rating.”
The MAGA line is don’t hand Democrats a win nine months before the election. Who cares if the border stays in crisis? That’s actually a good thing because it will hurt Democrats.
And that’s the core truth of the immigration issue, not to mention a number of other problems. The fringes of the parties don’t want a solution because the problem is valuable as a way to fundraise and rally the base. If the problem is solved, the wedge issue goes away.
The problem is that these favorable conditions for a deal won’t last forever. After the election, Democrats won’t have as much incentive to solve the border crisis because a) if Biden wins, the threat to his re-election will have passed and b) if Trump wins, they will have more incentive to deny him a win than to solve the issue, much as Trump is obstructing now. Why would Democrats deal with him after the election when he just killed a similar deal?
But won’t Republicans have the edge if Trump wins the election? Assuming that Republicans win control of Congress (not a safe assumption by the way), Congress is still going to be closely divided. Republicans will not have a filibuster-proof majority. The GOP can introduce its perfect border bill and then watch it die a slow death as it is filibustered.
Those are the options. On the one hand, Republicans can make a compromise and get the best deal possible to secure the border (I’m in favor of the foreign aid part of the deal as well so it’s a no-brainer for me) or they can propose the elusive perfect bill that will go nowhere.
So far, every time in my political life that the issue has come up, Republicans have chosen not to solve the border problem because the compromises didn’t give them everything they wanted. As a result, border problems that could have been solved more than 20 years ago continue to this day.
Hope remains that a bipartisan coalition will find a way to reach a bargain. After Mitch McConnell poured cold water on prospects earlier this week, the Republican leader is still pushing to close the deal.
“I think this is the ideal time to do it,” McConnell recently told reporters. “If this were not divided government, we wouldn’t have an opportunity to do anything about the border. In fact, I don’t think we’d get 60 votes for any border plan if we had a fully Republican government.”
It may be counterintuitive that a border bill is possible with divided government but wouldn’t be if Republicans dominated the government. Nevertheless, this insight reflects the realities of Washington politics and Senate rules.
The pieces are in place for a compromise that would benefit the country and please both sides. The problems are the fringe for whom the perfect is the enemy of the good and the MAGA faction that is trying to torpedo the deal for their political benefit.
In a perfect world, if the bill dies Republicans would stop hounding Democrats for doing nothing on the border. You know that won’t happen though. Sometimes getting things done gets in the way of whipping the base into a frenzy.
When it comes to Democrats, they are ignoring their fringe on this and a whole host of other issues. The Republicans have expanded their fringe so much so that it serves as their base, and is thus necessary for reelection. One of these things remains not like the others.Report
Seeing how eager the Republicans are for a showdown with Biden, reminds me of the observation that one of the key aspects of fascism is the desire for epic struggle and eternal war.
For them, this isn’t a mundane legal matter or even a serious policy issue.
This is part of their Flight 93 narrative, the epic clash of cultures in which they will emerge victorious and their hated outgroups be vanquished.
But the important part, is that the struggle never be over. That there is always and forever a hated EastAsia or yellow horde or some other enemy who keeps the base in a frenzy of fear and hatred.Report
Which is also why Bidens de-escalation and low key approach is likely the right one- though we won’t know until after November.Report
De-escalation works when the other party wants something and can be negotiated with.
What the MAGAs want can’t be given, by anyone. Their set of grievances can’t be solved by any law or regulation or court ruling. There isn’t any compromise that can mollify them.
It may be possible to sidestep this, but eventually will come a situation when we can’t because they are desperately searching for that very situation and will eventually find it.Report
Pot, meet Kettle.Report
What the Magas want, above all, is a confrontation on their terms. Thus Abbots antics on the border. Biden may not be able to cut a deal with them but by not giving them the confrontation they, and especially a massively unpopular Abbot, want he denies them what they want.Report
Sounds great.
1. How, exactly does Biden enforce federal action while not giving them the confrontation they want?
2. Why should we care if they want a confrontation or not?Report
The problem is that Biden is failing to enforce federal action.
The Supreme Court ruling was also kinda narrow. It merely said “Texas can’t stop the Feds from taking down razor wire.”
And you know what? I agree that Texas can’t.
But I wouldn’t over-read into that ruling. Not when you’ve got a bunch of cities considering getting rid of the whole “sanctuary” thing while a whole bunch of others are pointing out that “sanctuary doesn’t mean ‘illegals welcome’, that’s dishonest!” at the same time that cities are screaming about being overwhelmed with undocumented dreamers who are just looking for a better life for themselves and their families.
These hands are *EXCEPTIONALLY* easy to overplay. Texas has not yet overplayed. Neither has Biden.
You’d be better off changing the subject to abortion.Report
If Abbot wants to play Jefferson Davis to Biden’s Lincoln, well, all I can say is, “Please proceed, Governor.”Report
Nah. That sucks. Go for something like “Abbot is George Wallace standing in the schoolhouse door!”Report
How so? As of 2020, there were 19,740 Border Patrol Agents (I can’t find any 2023 staffing levels). The number of enforcement actions is growing every year, not shrinking. In this year’s budget request, Biden has has asked for funds to cover an additional 1,300 border patrol agents, 375 immigration judges, 1,600 asylum officers, and over 100 cutting-edge inspection machines – which Congress has failed to appropriate.
So it appears Joe Biden is doing everything he can consistent with the resources he has been given.Report
“The problem is that the schools are graduating illiterates.”
“As of 2020, there were 19,740 teachers!”Report
How is the President failing to enforce federal action on immigration?Report
This is from the House Committee on Homeland Security:
Now I suppose the argument could be something like “show me the law that says that people have to cross at a legal port of entry” and then someone says something like “8 U.S. Code § 1325” and then we can come back and ask “ARE YOU A LAWYER? ARE YOU A LAWYER?” and that’ll be fun.
For the record: I am not.Report
So to be clear, encounters rising is an indicator of a lack of legal action by the Biden Administration?
Fascinating.Report
The reversal of the “Remain in Mexico” policy resulted in that sort of thing.
We’re probably not in agreement on “ought” vs. is” here.
I mean, if we were really willing to go with POSIWID, we’d see that Trump’s border policies were to keep undocumented migrants out and Biden’s is to allow undocumented migrants in.
And it’s that simple.
“How is Biden failing? He’s *SUCCEEDING*!”
So maybe I was just unclear on the goal.
I’d say that Abbot and the other 25 states have one idea of what border policy ought to be, Biden has a different one.
And Biden has the power.Report
If Trump were in office, his sheer masculine presence and glowering posture would cause would-be migrants to tremble in fear and decide against migrating.Report
Well, Phil’s not actually wrong here. The federal agents pulling down razor wire are enforcing federal action on immigration.Report
The fact that Biden is actually doing the job properly s of no interest to MAGAs.
As others have pointed out, MAGAs don’t actually want to DO anything serious about the border.
Their grievances are rooted in humiliation and emasculation so their solutions involve theatrical displays of dominance.Report
I see the problem a bit differently. We’ve had two Supreme Court rulings that essentially held that the President does not have to follow immigration law, Biden possesses enforcement discretion to ignore it. That means the only way toward policy goals, whether they be in the direction of open or closed borders, who is in the White House is the only thing that matters.
(The two rulings are Biden v. Texas (2022) (Biden has the discretion to end the Remain in Mexico policy even if assuming for the sake of argument his new policy contradicts immigration law) and U.S. v. Texas (2023) (Biden has the discretion to enact a policy “Final Memorandum” to not detain and remove classes of convicted aliens required to be detained and removed by law))
The second case made clear that democratic accountability for discretionary acts of the President is at the ballot box:
“through elections, American voters can both influence Executive Branch policies and hold elected officials to account for enforcement decisions.”Report
Didn’t US v. Texas just say that the states don’t have standing to challenge? Like, not that Biden has that discretion, just that the states don’t have legal standing to say that he’s not doing his job?
But, in any case, oh yeah. Those rulings are different ones entirely than the one that said that the states can’t interfere with the Feds removing razor wire.
I do wonder if we are going to see stuff come to a head…Report
Texas lacked standing because the SCOTUS determined that detention and removal mandates are ultimately discretionary acts, like whether to arrest a person for jaywalking. In those situations, a plaintiff is not entitled to enforce a statutory mandate in federal court. (This isn’t how Texas characterized it, of course, they wanted the Court to strike the passages in the DHS Final Memorandum that contradicted federal law)
Chicago is almost certainly violating the Constitution by impeding transport of aliens in interstate commerce. I wonder if the administration will file an amicus brief on behalf of the Texas bus companies?Report
But the important part, is that the struggle never be over. That there is always and forever a hated EastAsia or yellow horde or some other enemy who keeps the base in a frenzy of fear and hatred.
Climate change pretty much guarantees a steady stream of economic refugees for the rest of the century. Sort of a side note to that: climate change is driving the drought in Panama that has forced the Canal Authority to reduce operations, from about 38 ships per day to 24. The solution that’s being pushed is to dam a river and drill a five-mile water transfer tunnel, costing billions of dollars.Report
Racism will never be fully vanquished. Equality will only be reached when each person has the same goods. As long as young people are confused by sex, teachers will be more important than parents. None of this is ever over.Report
Ofc not. It’s part of the hindbrain of mankind. “The other” is to be feared. Not part of the tribe, be suspicious. That helps you survive on the savannah. Give it a thousand more years or two. Maybe then.Report
My point was that neither the left nor the right talk solely about issues with eventual solutions. And that’s reasonable, because they shouldn’t. There’s no shame in addressing crises that can only be mitigated.
Also, while it’s common to fear “the other”, people tend to react even more negatively to betrayal within the group. And individuals can overcome either impulse. So it strikes me more as a matter of sin than of tribal impulse. Also, you’d better hope I’m right, because if it is genetic, it’s not going away for millions of years. Better that it’s individual or cultural.Report