Where Trump can make a deal with Chuck and Nancy
Funding for the wall is a lost cause. But there is another route to meaningful immigration legislation.
The White House showdown between President Trump, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and House Minority Leader (but soon-to-be House Speaker) Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) made for great television. But theater is all it was, because there's no real deal to be had on the border wall.
Trump's border wall was perhaps his signature campaign promise. On Tuesday, he said he'd be willing to shut down the government if he doesn't get the $5 billion in funding he so desires in order to build the wall, and would gladly assume "the mantle" of such a shutdown. In doing so, he may have backed himself into a corner. To Democrats, the wall symbolizes everything they despise about Trump's immigration agenda, and they believe their incoming House majority constitutes a repudiation of the president's rhetoric about the border. So Democrats are unlikely to give in on the funding, and if Trump is willing to own the shutdown, they're even less likely to budge.
The good news is that there's a better way for Trump to enforce immigration laws than by building the wall. He should put the responsibility of immigration enforcement primarily on employers, not the undocumented immigrants themselves. He should impose the employer sanctions already enshrined in law and use E-Verify or another reliable system to help ethical businesses screen out illegal hires. And he should fine violators.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
By accepting this route, Chuck and Nancy could help redirect resources away from the images of raids, deportations, and family separations that so enrage their base, without embracing a radical policy of non-enforcement verging on open borders. This provides another opportunity for Democrats to demand fair play from businesses who shortchange American workers and exploit immigrants. And for Trump, it is a kinder, gentler way of delivering on his immigration-related campaign promises, especially as visa over-stayers grow as a percentage of the undocumented population relative to those crossing the border illegally.
As a libertarian-leaning conservative, I don't love the idea of E-Verify. It could be improved, especially in terms of accuracy. But such methods are among the least coercive means of achieving interior enforcement of the country's immigration laws. Mitt Romney got a bad rap on the idea of "self-deportation," not least from Trump himself, and even though it is an awkward phrase, it's certainly more humane than the ICE-centric version of deportation.
True, some Republicans might object to targeting business as part of immigration enforcement. But Trump is supposed to be a different kind of Republican, more pro-worker and populist. He has already delivered substantial deregulation for businesses, even as he has been willing to alienate them with tariffs. What he hasn't done is make comparable progress on immigration.
Employer sanctions were a key part of the deal that granted legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants in the 1980s. But those sanctions have only periodically been enforced, which is a major reason why "amnesty" became so unpopular with voters concerned about illegal immigration. Trump and Democratic congressional leaders could spearhead a bipartisan push to revive the sanctions. A meaningful provision to this effect could also create openings for a deal on Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals (DACA).
Voters approve of this idea: Requiring employers to verify that their workers are in the country legally had nearly 80 percent support in a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll. In the same survey, just 37 percent said they wanted to see a border wall built.
Sure, this solution wouldn't resolve all immigration-related disputes, such as whether current law is too permissive or too strict, whether current legal entries are too high or too low, or whether skill-based immigration or family reunification should be the higher priority. But Republicans have to remember that any other solution is unlikely. Democrats coming to Congress in January weren't elected to compromise with Trump — and progressives are already suspicious of their party's leadership — while most Republicans weren't sent to Washington to cut deals with them. Pelosi in particular must protect her left flank; Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and incoming House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy must watch out for the right.
The failure to work out something this obvious on immigration will send an unmistakable message that even under Trump, Washington Republicans are more interested in cheap labor, and that Democrats are continuing to move left on the issue in anticipation of the fast approaching 2020 elections.
A deal on immigration can — and must — be made. This might be the best shot.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
W. James Antle III is the politics editor of the Washington Examiner, the former editor of The American Conservative, and author of Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?.
-
The hunt for Planet Nine
Under The Radar Researchers seeking the elusive Earth-like planet beyond Neptune are narrowing down their search
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK Published
-
Magazine interactive crossword - April 26, 2024
Puzzles and Quizzes Issue - April 26, 2024
By The Week US Published
-
Magazine solutions - April 26, 2024
Puzzles and Quizzes Issue - April 26, 2024
By The Week US Published
-
Arizona court reinstates 1864 abortion ban
Speed Read The law makes all abortions illegal in the state except to save the mother's life
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Trump, billions richer, is selling Bibles
Speed Read The former president is hawking a $60 "God Bless the USA Bible"
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Rwanda plan is less a deterrent and more a bluff'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By The Week UK Published
-
Henry Kissinger dies aged 100: a complicated legacy?
Talking Point Top US diplomat and Nobel Peace Prize winner remembered as both foreign policy genius and war criminal
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Last updated
-
Trump’s rhetoric: a shift to 'straight-up Nazi talk'
Why everyone's talking about Would-be president's sinister language is backed by an incendiary policy agenda, say commentators
By The Week UK Published
-
More covfefe: is the world ready for a second Donald Trump presidency?
Today's Big Question Republican's re-election would be a 'nightmare' scenario for Europe, Ukraine and the West
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published