Our view: ‘Abolish ICE’ plays right into Trump’s hands
With President Donald Trump and the Republican Party so thoroughly abandoning the political mainstream, Democrats have an opportunity to position themselves as the ascendant party for years to come.
But that assumes they don’t commit their usual blunders, which they appear to be doing right now on immigration with an “Abolish ICE” campaign. That campaign, pushed by young activists and adopted by several office-holders, is a non-starter.
While Trump’s immigration policies are unpopular, abolishing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency is not a message the mainstream will buy. In fact, it plays right into Trump’s tweeting hands, allowing him to change the subject from the inhumane treatment of immigrants to Democrats’ perceived weakness on border security.
The campaign is a classic liberal overreach, following the argument that the Democratic Party should push further to the left to counter the rightward turn of Republicans. That ignores political reality. Liberals, while growing, are still a considerably smaller part of the electorate than conservatives.
In the 2016 election, for instance, 35% of voters identified themselves as conservative while only 26% said they were liberal. The largest group — 39% — called themselves moderates. Forming a liberal-moderate alliance is a necessity for Democrats.
To that end, they could advance sensible immigration policies that are more humane than Trump’s, reflect the values of a great nation, and continue the works of former Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
But such policies should also strive to keep the flow of illegal immigration at manageable levels. This requires border enforcement and an acknowledgment that the law must having meaning.
To be fair, the Democrats’ problem with their ICE campaign is more one of messaging than substance. While the campaign has multiple strands and considerable ambiguities, it does not appear to support ending border enforcement altogether. Rather, it argues for returning to something more like what existed before 2003, when the old Immigration and Naturalization Service, or INS, was replaced by ICE.
The changes of that year split the INS’ visa-issuing division from its enforcement arm. It also moved that enforcement arm (renamed ICE) from the somewhat deliberate culture of the Justice Department to the urgency of the Department of Homeland Security.
But such a nuanced message will be lost with a call to abolish ICE. It would be better to advance a mend-don’t-end approach. Proposals to fix the agency, put forth by 19 senior ICE officials, could serve as a starting point.
Ultimately, however, the push for inhumane immigration positions isn't coming from ICE. It is coming from the White House. If Democrats want a less cruel immigration policy that will resonate with moderate voters, they should focus their energy on abolishing the Trump administration.