Commentary Magazine takes on Trump’s misguided immigration plan

( – promoted by Paul R. Ferro)

Commentary Magazine has very little good to say about Donald Trump’s immigration platform. The neoconservative publication says the fiery candidate’s highly restrictionist plan to seal the borders spells doom for the GOP in next year’s election. Not only that but the entire plan to ship out the ‘dreamers” is “heartless” and an assault on American values. The pushback isn’t going to make many on the Right (some who don’t hold pro-immigration views) comfortable. The implications of such a far-reaching plan are counterproductive.

Trump’s “plan” is an assault on not merely the illegal immigrants who have violated American laws, but those who have played by the existing rules to come to the United States. This “plan” has left many immigrants confused about their futures. After having to deal with the confusion of acquiring the appropriate visa needed to legally work in the country, whether it be an h1-b or a H4 EAD, immigrants are now unsure of what their future holds for them in the United States. Many of them are worried about having to go back to their home country, which they were so desperate to leave. Whilst the proposal amounts to a declaration of war on America’s immigrant community, it is also an attack on the foundational nature of America’s character as a melting pot for all the peoples of the world, and the inception of a police state that is incompatible with a free republican democracy.

Trump’s “plan” to address his key belief, the need to construct a great wall across the southern border and make Mexico pay for it, is no plan at all. Rather, it is an effort to justify this retributive policy. There is not one Republican candidate who disputes the need to enhance border security provisions. Indeed, that was why so many Senate Republicans voted against the supplemental appropriations measure to address the border crisis in the summer of 2014 when Trump was promoting the latest season of his reality television show because it was not a border security bill but a measure to address a refugee crisis.

The problem with Trump’s wall is that it is infeasible; the geography of the border simply does not allow for one unbroken wall. Nor would it be effective. Even if you could erect this barrier around, say, Florida, walls can be surmounted, tunneled under, and circumvented in other ways. Policing the border requires police; human capital that comes at taxpayer expense. Mexico will not be paying their salaries, but Trump has a plan for that, too: confiscate all remittances from illegal immigrants working in America and hike the fees on all Mexican tourism and work visas. Erecting the structures necessary to identify much less confiscate illegal wages would prove daunting. Even if it was legal and could survive court challenges, a dubious prospect, this is a policy that would require a dramatic expansion of government’s ability to intrude on the lives of American citizens – a principle to which conservatives were once constitutionally opposed.

Trump’s “plan” should give conservatives who revere and appreciate their country’s history pause.

Add to that the fact that Trump wants to triple funding for ICE and you have the making of a disaster for the GOP says Commentary. Is the magazine correct? Are conservatives who support Trump selling their souls on the basis of a cheap issue?

Read the whole piece here.  

About Karl Marx

Left wing libertarian conservative.