The USA Today Editorial Board penned a strong editorial piece, condemning the Trump Administration for its racist rhetoric and highlighting that same rhetoric as destructive to bipartisan compromise and a catalyst to ‘global condemnation.’
Additionally, in response to the common argument that Temporary Protected Status was always meant to be temporary, the piece aptly states:
At some point, the meaning of temporary gets overridden by the reality of extensions, which these people relied on as they put down roots. Should they be punished for relying on the government’s actions? Should the Salvadorans be forced to return to a place where, the State Department warned last week, “violent crime … is common” and “gang activity … is widespread.”
The full editorial can be accessed here, and follows below:
If the Trump administration wants to tighten up the nation’s immigration system, there are plenty of places to start. One is to deport people who come to the United States illegally and commit serious crimes. Another is to target people who come on temporary visas, fail to leave when the visas expired, and melt into the population — a group that makes up more than 40% of the undocumented immigrants.
But smart changes do not begin with forcing out immigrants, such as nearly 200,000 Salvadorans who’ve been welcomed in the country for 17 years and who are primarily productive, tax-paying residents. Or, for that matter, the 800,000 young immigrants, known as “dreamers,” who were brought here as infants or children with no idea that their parents were doing anything wrong.
With so many people’s futures at stake, there are obvious deals to be made from which all sides — Republicans, Democrats and immigrants alike — could gain. But just when such an agreement seemed to be within reach, President Trump’s vulgar slur against some immigrants at a White House meeting Thursday blew up negotiations and, not surprisingly, spurred global condemnation.
As the world now knows, during a discussion about the future of immigration from Haiti, El Salvador and some African countries, Trump questioned why the U.S. was letting in people from “shithole countries” rather than nations such as Norway, according to Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., who attended the Oval Office meeting.
Racist language of any sort does not belong in the White House and demeans this country’s history as a beacon of hope and a haven for even the most downtrodden. That welcoming culture has made America a diverse, economically strong and powerful nation.
Consider, for example, these facts about the 195,000 Salvadorans and 50,000 Haitians who’ve been welcomed under “temporary protected status” here for many years but would be sent home by 2019 under Trump’s plan: Nearly 90% of Salvadorans and 81% of Haitians hold jobs and pay taxes. A third of the Salvadorans hold mortgages, and nearly half speak English well or very well. Together, both groups have nearly 220,000 U.S.-born children who are citizens.
All of those with protected status from 10 countries have been vetted repeatedly, including providing fingerprints about every 18 months. They are just the kind of productive, law-abiding immigrants on which this nation counts.
Trump tweeted Sunday that an immigration deal is “probably dead,” but if a compromise is still possible — and it should be — it could combine changes sought by each side.
For Republicans, the deal could include more money to strengthen southern border security, including electronic surveillance, drones and physical barriers where needed; a gradual move away from immigration based on family relationships toward immigrants selected for skills the U.S. needs; and a better system to spot and remove those elusive foreigners who overstay visas.
Democrats would get full-scale protection and an eventual path to legality for the 800,000 dreamers, along with a permanent reprieve for Salvadorans, Haitians and others who were given “temporary” protection from natural or man-made disasters in their home countries — protection that was extended by Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama for as long as 15 years.
At some point, the meaning of temporary gets overridden by the reality of extensions, which these people relied on as they put down roots. Should they be punished for relying on the government’s actions? Should the Salvadorans be forced to return to a place where, the State Department warned last week, “violent crime … is common” and “gang activity … is widespread.”
Future immigration policy needs a good dose of honesty to replace fiction, which hurts immigrants and erodes Americans’ belief in the rule of law. It is not honest for Congress to make it illegal to cross the border, then allow businesses to hire undocumented immigrants for years with no penalty. Nor is it honest to claim that a program is “temporary” and then extend it for two decades.
The contours of a bipartisan compromise on immigration are clear — but that won’t happen if the president, elected in part because of his supposed deal-making prowess, continues to roil the waters with racist rants.
