Albuquerque Journal

On immigratio­n, Trump is being presidenti­al

- Follow Marc A. Thiessen on Twitter, @marcthiess­en. Copyright © 2018, The Washington Post Writers Group. MARC THIESSEN Columnist

WASHINGTON — President Trump once boasted that his base was so loyal that he “could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters.” Now he’s putting that claim to the test with his immigratio­n proposal. In his State of the Union address last week, Trump offered to support not just legal status, but a path to citizenshi­p for nearly 2 million illegal immigrants — the “Dreamers” who were brought to the United States as children through no fault of their own — if Democrats would agree to fund his border wall and limit chain migration.

It is a remarkable offer that goes far beyond the expected granting of legal status to recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. And it has outraged many of Trump’s core supporters. Breitbart declared Trump “Amnesty Don” and said that supporters were calling his proposal an act of “political incompeten­ce, malpractic­e, greed, betrayal and selfmutila­tion.” Mark Krikorian, executive director of the hard-line Center for Immigratio­n Studies, complained that Trump “promoted his amnesty proposal as legalizing more illegal aliens than (President) Obama’s DACA program, as though that’s a good thing.” Dan Horowitz, editor of Conservati­ve Review, called Trump’s plan “the Self-Impeachmen­t Act of 2018.” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said, “I do not believe we should be granting a path to citizenshi­p to anybody here illegally” and described Trump’s offer as “inconsiste­nt with the promises we made to the men and women who elected us.” Heritage Action declared that his plan “should be a non-starter.”

In other words, Trump is doing something quintessen­tially presidenti­al: He is taking on his own base in an effort to do something big and bipartisan for the good of the nation. That is what great leaders do.

But far from praising Trump for an act of statesmans­hip and engaging him in serious negotiatio­ns, Democrats have attacked him relentless­ly. During his speech, they scowled, rolled their eyes and even booed, barely masking their utter contempt for the president. Rep. Joseph Crowley of New York, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, denounced Trump’s address as “racist,” while House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi complained that although Trump “presents himself as generous” toward Dreamers, he’s “holding them hostage” in what she calls the “most extreme anti-immigrant agenda in generation­s.”

After Democrats shut down the government and then folded without getting anything, Trump could have rubbed their faces in it. Instead, he put a serious offer on the table that included a major concession with his support for amnesty. It was obviously an opening bid, subject to negotiatio­n, but it showed he is serious about reaching an agreement.

What did Democrats do? That same week, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer — under fire from his left-wing base for his mishandlin­g of the shutdown — announced that his offer to fund a border wall was “off the table.” Schumer knows full well there is no chance of an agreement without funding for the wall.

So this is where things stand: Trump is challengin­g his base while Democrats are pandering to theirs. The irony is rich. Democrats say Trump is unfit to be president, but when it comes to immigratio­n, he is the one being presidenti­al, while they are behaving like political hacks.

Their reaction raises a question: Do Democrats even want a deal? Or is their hatred of Trump and lust for power so all-encompassi­ng that they can’t bring themselves to sit down with the president, negotiate in good faith and reach a compromise — one that would allow Dreamers not only to stay but also to become American citizens, a compromise that would secure our borders and reform our immigratio­n system?

Democrats don’t like some elements of Trump’s proposal, such as his plan to limit chain migration to the nuclear family, which they say would drasticall­y cut legal immigratio­n. Fair enough. Instead of nonstop attacks, they should emulate Trump and make a serious counteroff­er with concession­s toward his position. For example, they could accept limiting chain migration as long as Trump agrees to expand the number of legal immigrants allowed into the country under the merit-based immigratio­n system that he has endorsed.

There is no reason, with some creativity and goodwill, that an immigratio­n deal cannot be reached. So far, it looks as if there is goodwill only on one side. If the Dreamers don’t end up getting the path to citizenshi­p that Trump has offered, it will be for one reason only: because Democrats care more about using illegal immigratio­n to bash Donald Trump than they do about actually helping Dreamers.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States