Harris can become worse than Trump regarding immigration.
Todd Miller critiques the Biden administration's shift toward stricter immigration enforcement, arguing that it betrays the Democrats' campaign promises of a more humane and inclusive approach. Despite pledges to end harsh policies, Biden has overseen more deportations than Trump. Kamala Harris's campaign ads, emphasizing being more demanding on immigration, reflect this rightward shift. Miller warns that this strategy risks alienating the Democratic base and deepens the harmful "border cold war" with Republicans. He proposes a return to humane policies, addressing migration's root causes and rethinking the immigration system to prioritize human dignity and human rights.
Todd Miller, a seasoned journalist for "The Border Chronicle," writes about a compelling critique of the current state of U.S. immigration enforcement, particularly under the Biden administration. In his analysis, Miller argues that the Democrats, despite their campaign promises of a more humane approach to immigration, have not only continued but intensified the policies they once criticized. His central thesis is that the Democrats are making a grave mistake by shifting to the right on immigration, adopting enforcement-heavy strategies that echo and even exceed those of their Republican counterparts, particularly Donald Trump.
The Democrats' Mistake: Moving Right on Immigration
Miller begins by highlighting the big contrast between the Biden administration's campaign promises and policies. During the 2020 presidential campaign, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris positioned themselves as the humane alternative to Donald Trump's draconian immigration policies. Biden promised to halt the construction of the border wall, end the practice of family separations, and implement a 100-day moratorium on deportations. These pledges resonated with a large sector of the Democratic base, which saw Trump's policies as authoritarian and cruel.
However, Miller notes that since taking office, the Biden administration has overseen the deportation of more than 4 million people, a number that surpasses the deportations carried out under Trump's tenure. Miller argues that this shift towards stricter enforcement is a betrayal of the administration's initial promises and a strategic misstep that risks alienating a significant portion of the Democratic base.
Miller is particularly critical of Kamala Harris's recent campaign ads, in which she promises to outdo Trump on border enforcement by hiring more Border Patrol agents, enhancing surveillance technology, and increasing prosecutions. Harris's ads, which boast of her role in backing the "toughest border control bill in decades," are emblematic of the Democratic Party's shift towards a more hardline stance on immigration. Miller contends that this approach is fundamentally flawed because it misunderstands the nature of Trump's appeal to his base and the broader political dynamics at play.
The Border Cold War: A Race to the Bottom
Miller uses the term "border cold war" to describe the escalating competition between the Democrats and Republicans over who can be more demanding on immigration. He argues that this competition has led to an arms race, with each side trying to outdo the other regarding enforcement measures. Trump's response to the border bill, which Harris supported, was not to reject enforcement but to propose an even more extreme scenario: the mass roundup and deportation of 15 to 20 million undocumented people. This, Miller suggests, illustrates the futility of the Democrats' strategy. By moving right on immigration, the Democrats are not only failing to differentiate themselves from Trump. Still, they are also entrenching the very policies that they once opposed.
Miller's critique goes further to address the consequences of this approach. He argues that the focus on heavy-handed enforcement has led to a dehumanization of migrants, who are increasingly treated as security threats rather than individuals seeking a better life. The scene at the Nogales border crossing, where disoriented families are herded off deportation buses, is emblematic of this dehumanization. Miller suggests that this is not only morally wrong but also politically misguided. By doubling down on enforcement, the Democrats risk losing the support of the progressive base that helped propel them to victory in 2020.
Proposals for a Better Approach
Miller does not merely critique the Democrats; he also offers proposals for a more effective and humane immigration policy. First and foremost, he advocates for a return to the promises made during the 2020 campaign:
- Halting further construction of the border wall
- Ending family separations
- Implementing a meaningful moratorium on deportations
He argues that these measures would help rebuild trust with the Democratic base and demonstrate a genuine commitment to human rights.
Moreover, Miller suggests that the focus should shift from enforcement to addressing the root causes of migration. This includes investing in development and stability in the countries migrants are fleeing and creating more legal pathways for immigration. By addressing why people migrate in the first place, the U.S. can reduce the pressure on its borders more effectively and humanely.
Finally, Miller calls for a broader rethinking of the U.S. immigration system, prioritizing human dignity and migrants' rights. This would involve dismantling the enforcement-heavy infrastructure built over decades and replacing it with policies emphasizing integration, support, and the protection of human rights.
Conclusion
Todd Miller's analysis starkly reminds us of the dangers of the Democrats' current approach to immigration. By trying to outdo Trump on border enforcement, the Democrats are not only betraying their promises but also engaging in a futile competition that could have severe consequences for their political future. Miller's proposals for a more humane and effective immigration policy offer a path forward that aligns with the values of human dignity and justice the Democratic Party claims to uphold.
Thanks for reading. Please follow my blog and write your feedback.
