The Presidential Race and Immigration

I am a registered Democrat, because there is no viable third… Socialist Party.  I like Bernie a lot.  I admire his guts and his principles, and agree with most of his positions on the issues—except for one—the issue of open borders.  That’s a position that he seems to have ceded to the Democratic Party.  It’s an issue too important to let stand, because it is key to the fate of the American people and our Nation.  For that reason, I, along with many other Democrats, have been tempted to support Trump.  But I could not, because I find too much about Trump repugnant.

Trump has paid close attention to the millions of angry American citizens whose wages have fallen in terms of spending power, or who have lost jobs to foreigners with H1B visas, or who have been displaced in their businesses or jobs by immigrants, both legal and illegal in the last thirty years.  He has empathized with them, and he has played to their anger to build his position as a candidate.  No one else has dared to bring up the subject of immigration, yet he has made immigration the campaign issue.  I applaud him for that.  However his loose cannon approach to foreign relations, the environment, and health care, and his generally crude approach to everyone who doesn’t agree with or isn’t Donald Trump is not dignified, adult, or Presidential.

I just wish that at least one of the Democratic candidates (i.e. Bernie Sanders) could get past the Democratic Line and come up with his or her own plan that would work. It would take all the wind out of Trump’s sails, because this is the issue that has caused many Democrats to side with Trump.

According to Politico in June of 2015:

In 2007, Sanders was part of the charge from the left to kill an immigration overhaul bill.  Back then, the Vermont independent warned that the immigration bill — a product from then-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) — would drive down wages for lower-income workers, an argument that’s been used by hard-liner reform opponents. He paired with conservative Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on a restrictive immigration amendment. And Sanders backed provisions characterized as poison pills to unravel the bill, while voting to block the final measure in June 2007.

And in an interview early in 2015, prior to entering the race as a Democratic candidate, Sanders was adamant about the importance of securing borders and controlling immigration as key to National Sovereignty.

Either Sanders or Clinton would make a far better president than Trump or any of the Republican candidates.  The real question is whether they have the courage to stand up for the American people and stick a pin in the Trump balloon.

More on Immigration Reform

Corporations, rich people, and politicians benefit from excessive, uncontrolled immigration; the citizens of this country do not.

Immigration is not about race, but about jobs and wages for American citizens (no matter what their color) and social stability.  It is about National Sovereignty, and the environment, and education, and health care.  For more on this, read, How Many is Too Many by Philip Cafaro (a Democrat), and Barbara Jordan American Hero, pp 343-350, by Mary Beth Rogers (both Democrats.)

Here are some needed actions we need to take to solve the immigration problem:

  • Shut the door on immigration until there is a proven need for more labor—not a “need” for higher profits for corporations or for more Democratic voters. When we do open our doors on immigration again–carefully–we should also be careful to apportion immigration fairly among citizens of every nation, not focus on labor from south of the border.
  • Return to enforcing with increased vigor our existing immigration laws, with the goal of deporting all illegal immigrants.  If we need to hire more ICE agents and Judges, then that will be job opportunities for many years to come.
  • Stop birthright citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants.  This is a relatively new phenomena.  We can reverse it.
  • Put a stop to chain migration—bringing family members of immigrants—both legal and illegal—here in droves (another relatively new phenomena.)
  • Implement E-Verify, an Internet-based system operated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in partnership with the Social Security Administration (SSA).
  • Strengthen interior enforcement.  The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1996 added the 287(g) provision that allows the Department of Homeland Security to enter into contracts with state and local law enforcement agencies.
  • Improve border enforcement. More, better trained agents, more surveillance, more barriers.

Extreme measures?  Yes.  But we do have an extreme problem.

Many will say, “That’s not kind… to send them all home… break up their families.”  But no one made them come here or stay here illegally, and it isn’t kind to our own people to allow them to stay here, against the law, and take our jobs, and use our social programs.  They can be reunited with their families back in their home countries.


Sanders vs. Clinton vs. Trump vs. the other Republicans

I’ve been watching both parties’ debates with much interest, in large part because Trump holds views regarding immigration that rightly belongs to the Democratic Party, but which it doesn’t dare to espouse, because it just might lose a bunch of votes from people of color and their advocates.  In that respect Trump advocates for the citizens of this country  better than the Democratic Party does.  The only problem is, he would make a terrible president, because he’s impulsive, sloppy in his presentation, doesn’t think well on his feet, and is childish—he acts like a thirteen year old bully.

Lately the other Republican candidates are acting a lot like Trump.  Are they thinking that that would put them on a level playing field with him?  Why would they want that?

The contrast between the Party debates has been remarkable.  The Democrats act like adults. They make sense.  Orchestrated?  Yes, but beautifully, civilly orchestrated.  The Republicans act like they are in a middle school playground brawl.


I wish to advance a perspective not often put forth by politicians or the media to many of the problems–social, economic, and political–which hold the attention of the citizens of the United States of America, though rarely that of our lawmakers, and hopefully offer some practical and fair solutions.

Although I have been a registered Democrat since 1963, and I approve its philosophy for the most part, I disapprove much of the Party line in particular, which is a large part of my motivation to write this blog.  Since there are positions held by all the parties that I both agree and disagree with, I cannot completely adhere to any party line.

It seems obvious the political parties are creating more problems than they solve.  This is in large part because they are big money-generating/vote-getting machines, dedicated to their parties and idiologies—not to the needs of this Nation and its citizens.

Thomas Jefferson, said:

I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.

I agree, though I have no idea if there is a heaven or hell other than on this wonderful planet.