Party Games

Advertisement
Dr. Malcolm Cross

The controversy around Donald Trump’s immigration policies remains unabated. How these issues will be resolved remains unknown.  As noted elsewhere, some legal analysts believe that the Supreme Court may well uphold the constitutionality of Trump’s executive order banning  travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries as well as refugees in general, at least until they can be more thoroughly vetted.  After all, the law says that “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.But however the Supreme Court rules on this issue, intense opposition to Trump on this issue and, no doubt, others, will continue to exist.  At least part of the reason is that Trump is currently a Republican, and for millions of Democrats, that fact, and that alone, will be reason to oppose him.

The growing ideological distance between the Democrats and the Republicans, and the growing allegiance of large percentages of voters to their respective parties, is well-documented.  See, for example, http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/ for facts, figures, data, and statistics on how the Democrats have become more liberal and the Republicans more conservative.  In each party, those most likely to vote and otherwise work for the party are also the most ideologically committed, whether as devoutly liberal Democrats or devoutly conservative Republicans.  Immigration policies offer a prime example of the increase in bitter partisanship.  Consider:

  • The Democrats oppose Trump’s wall.  Yet President Bill Clinton’s administration built a 325-mile fence along the California-Mexico border.  Why are the Democrats condemning Trump’s wall when it’s merely an extension of a project Clinton started?  And why won’t Republicans credit Clinton for beginning a program they want Trump to continue?
  • The Democrats are condemning Trump’s deportation plans.  Yet in the first five years of the Obama administration, federal immigration authorities deported 2.5 million illegals—more than were deported in any previous administration.  Why are the Democrats condemning Trump’s plans to continue Obama’s work?  And why won’t Republicans give Obama credit for the deportations which the Republicans want to continue?
  • The Democrats are also condemning Trump’s limits on travelers from the designated seven predominantly Muslim countries, as well as refugees in general.  But President Obama ordered, if not a ban, than a more thorough vetting of immigrants and refugees from Iraq for six months– which effective reduced the number of Iraqis coming to the United States during his first term–after discovering that some who had entered earlier legally were proving to be terrorists.  Moreover, the list of the Muslim Seven countries was also compiled in the Obama administration, which identified these countries as possessing governments unable or unwilling to help vouchsafe the credentials of those citizens who wanted to migrate to the United States.  Why are they now opposing Trump’s relatively similar policies, and why aren’t the Republicans acknowledging Obama’s pioneering work in this field.

The pattern that emerges here is simple:  The Democrats seem to be opposing the Republicans for policies not dissimilar to those the Democrats once championed, and the Republicans seem equally determined to refuse any credit to Clinton or Obama for policies of which the Republicans now approve.

And the situation will only get worse before it gets better.  If the immigration controversy is any indicator, Democrats will continue to oppose every policy Trump proposes, and every appointment Trump makes.  In fact, the Democrats’ leader in the Senate, Charles Schumer of New York, has sparked intense and bitter criticism from Democratic partisans for suggesting that each of Trump’s cabinet appointees be considered on his or her individual merits, and that those who prove worthy be confirmed, even if it was Trump who appointed them in the first place.

Nobody, regardless of party, should be happy with this state of affairs.  As decision makers of both parties use ideology and partisanship rather than facts and reason, the quality of decision making will decline.  No matter which party wins the battle on a particular issue, America will be the loser.

Malcolm L. Cross has lived in Stephenville and taught politics and government at Tarleton since 1987. His political and civic activities include service on the Stephenville City Council (2000-2014) and on the Erath County Republican Executive Committee (1990 to the present).  He was Mayor Pro Tem of Stephenville from 2008 to 2014.  He is a member of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church and the Stephenville Rotary Club, and does volunteer work for the Boy Scouts of America. Views expressed in this column are his and do not reflect those of The Flash as a whole.

3 Comments

  1. How can a “class of aliens” be the population of an entire country or members of a religion? we have more crimes and terroristic events on US soil committed by native-born Americans, so will the president soon ban us?

    The wall is not only opposed by most Democrats, people of all political persuasions are speaking out against it, and what Bill Clinton did has no relevance to what Trump is doing. Trump is talking about spending tens of millions of taxpayer dollars on the wrong thing. It makes more sense to develop a guest-worker program to ease illegal entry. The wall is a stupid idea that won’t prevent illegal entry anyway.

    Many Democrats opposed Obama’s deportation plan and many of us are still against it. Just because President Obama did something, it doesn’t mean the Democrats “championed” it. And you know very well that Obama didn’t ban people coming here from Iran, Iraq, etc, he just slowed down the vetting process so it could be more thorough. Trump is creating an authoritarian state that is now checking IDs of American citizens disembarking domestic flights. There is no comparison to be made between this and the previous administration. And, thankfully, we are seeing some Republicans coming out against these policies.

    The divisions between us are due largely to the Republican stonewalling during the past administration, hence that 2014 statistic. The treatment of Merrick Garland was shameful, the refusal to come to the table and reform healthcare was unethical, the way women and the poor have been mocked and humiliated is something we will take time to overcome. If we’re not going to have a government that is willing to work FOR the people instead of for its own members, we need to change the government.

    • Thanks for your remarks. I’m glad to see someone read the article and took it seriously enough to offer so detailed a reply. I was simply reporting the law as written; how it will be interpreted remains to be seen. I mentioned Clinton and Obama only to show that whether Trump’s policies are right or wrong, they are not outside the political mainstream. I specifically and explicitly said Obama slowed down the vetting process for Iraqis but did not bar them. In a blog post a year ago I said Merrick Garland should have been granted a hearing and a vote. As a free market capitalist I’m skeptical of the value in limiting the free flow of labor and capital across international lines. I’ve written favorably of Trump’s policies for the time being, given that he has said they are meant to be temporary to give more time for developing better vetting procedures. However, I may change my mind if they morph into permanent policies.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.