 |
| Portland Women's March 01/19/19 |
I heard about the remarks, and today, as a strange series of weather wave shifts —sleet, snow, freezing rain—argue about which should dominate through wind gusts, I listened to the proposal. Now, you have to understand that I assumed that the point was ending the government shutdown.
I admit it: I thought the crisis to be addressed was the economic sledgehammer coming down on federal employees and those who depend on them, directly (like their families) and indirectly (small businesses, lenders, services…), an economic impact that will ripple out beyond those now immediately involved as time goes on. In my naiveté, I was waiting for the president to acknowledge a problem well on its way to affecting everyone in the country in one way or another and to propose its solution.
Instead, I learned that the president has suddenly discovered that the conditions his policies cause on the border have created a humanitarian crisis. This isn’t news to anyone who has been following the situation pretty much since the president was elected, but evidently it wasn’t clear to him. The other border problems he referred to are ongoing and hardly constitute a crisis; moreover, a wall won't do a lot to forestall them for multiple reasons I won't regurgitate here.
When the president's remarks were finished, I was left perplexed and a little angry. The anger strengthened when I listened to specific parts of his comments again, just to be sure I didn’t miss what I was looking for.
First, in this nationally broadcast statement, in the midst of a government shutdown that is, among other things, on the verge of being a national security crisis (if it isn’t already), the president’s reference to it was limited, and never did he speak to or of the men and women that bear its heaviest burden. At the start of his remarks, he described his plan as providing a “path forward to end the government shutdown”; toward the end, he said his plan “immediately opens government,” and then he talked about how, “once the government is open,” his administration would take bipartisan steps toward a consultation on comprehensive immigration legislation. How this works in practice regarding the shutdown is apparently that Senator McConnell will “bring up legislation that would immediately reopen the government and incorporate President Trump’s proposal to offer temporary protections to some immigrants in exchange for $5.7 billion for his border wall,” this according to a McConnell staffer. [ Emphasis added; New York Times on line, 20 January 2019.]
Second, insisting he was being reasonable and that the Democrats had been taken over by radicals supporting open borders, the president urged acceptance of his "common sense" plan. But the only people I’ve heard talk about "open borders" are those fixated on a border wall from sea to shining sea. The president made it sound like anyone who opposes his wall opposes any border security at all. Yet the Democratic Party platform provides "Democrats will continue to work toward comprehensive immigration reform that fixes our nation’s broken immigration system, improves border security, prioritizes enforcement so we are targeting criminals – not families, keeps families together, and strengthens our economy.” [Emphasis added.] I've heard no Democratic spokesperson refute this principle. (Interestingly, in a kind of footnote no one seems to have remarked, the president appeared to imply that the border would be more or less open for agricultural workers as he conceives border reform, saying that "lawful and regulated entry into our country will be easy and consistent" for them so "our farmers and vineyards won't be affected.")
 |
| 500 year old wall, Machu Picchu |
But the Senate Majority Leader bears responsibility for this situation as well. His cynicism in coupling the president’s plan with the reopening of the government in an effort to force Democrats to agree to the 5.7 billion is transparently obvious. If they don’t do so, presumably the GOP will claim (as they’ve been doing), that the Dems are obstructionist and for “open borders.” McConnell COULD just allow the spending bills both houses previously approved to go to the Senate floor for a vote, and the Senate could exercise its constitutional duty by a veto-proof vote. Even McConnell must see that the precedent of allowing a president to hold the entire country hostage through a government shutdown is unacceptable and contrary to every principal of good governance to which we supposedly adhere!
Perhaps McConnell feels that upholding his oath of office would cripple the president who, among other things, is giving him the judges he wants. McConnell’s already managed to reshape the U.S. federal court system significantly. He should take his wins and run. It's past time for him to do his duty and reopen the government. The immigration and border security aspects of the president’s plan can then be debated, discussed, negotiated and settled--without harming federal public servants who are now being punished for choosing to serve us. Because, in case anyone's forgotten, WE--all of us, whether or not we voted for the president--are the boss of all of these people. Including the occupant of the White House.
