This week, our readings and lectures highlight that partisanship is the driving force behind immigration policymaking in Congress. Casellas & Leal (2013) and Wong (2014) find that the key determinant of voting pattern is party affiliation: Republicans consistently vote for anti-immigration policies; Democrats consistently vote against such measures. Professor Massey’s lecture extends this partisanship to the executive branch, specifically to President Trump, who has just declared a national emergency to secure $8 billion in border wall funding. Given the overwhelming evidence that a wall is ineffective, Massey posits that the wall is a white nationalist political statement feeding into the Latino Threat Narrative.
The aggravated fight between Congress and President Trump over the National Emergency is a prime example of partisanship driving immigration policy (See USA Today article linked below). Amidst his sharp criticism of Trump’s wall obsession, Professor Massey highlighted a silver lining: the declaration sparks a discussion in Congress and forces Republican senators clearly choose whether to vote partisan or not.
Bipartisan opposition can occur when immigration policies are perceived as “too far right” (Wong 2014). If Congress votes to override the National Emergency, it will be a litmus test for whether Trump’s policies are seen as extreme enough to transcend the partisanship that typically determines Congressional voting outcomes (See 538 article linked below). A vote to override the emergency will pass the House, forcing Senate Republicans to decide whether to vote with their party or against it. At least eight Republican senators have already stated opposition to the emergency declaration. A Senate vote would be a real-world example of whether the strictly partisan camp of scholarship holds or whether Wong’s added nuance of rare, but possible, bipartisan agreement occurs.
Discussion Questions
- Do you think the National Emergency Declaration is “far right” enough to push more moderate Republicans to vote against their party to override it?
- Professor Massey thinks the solution is to legalize the 11 million undocumented currently in America and then process border arrivals as refugees and asylum seekers. Do you agree or disagree with this solution, and why?
News Articles:
Hayes, Christal, and John Fritze. 2019. “Trump Declared a National Emergency over a Border Wall. What Happens next?” USA Today. February 16, 2019. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/16/donald-trump-national-emergency-border-wall-fight/2876668002/.
Bacon, Perry, and Nate Silver. 2019. “Could Congress Block Trump’s Emergency Declaration?” FiveThirtyEight. February 18, 2019. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/could-congress-block-trumps-emergency-declaration/.
1. I think that the National Emergency’s “far right”ness is not the factor that causes moderate Republicans to oppose the national emergency, but the fact that a border wall seems like a trivial reason to declare a national emergency.
2. I agree that the 11 million undocumented immigrants should be legalized, but I do not believe that future entrants should be considered asylees or refugees if they are not. This is because if the immigration system is going to categorize entrants, the categories should be accurate regarding the members of the undocumented population and allow them the LPR status based on their correct reason.
You pose two interesting and of course, timely questions. In regards to President Trump’s National Emergency Declaration and the resolution the House will be voting on to stop it, I think it definitely places pressure on moderate Republicans in the Senate to be careful on how they vote. Especially with the 2020 Elections in sight, in a way, it’s twisting the arms of Republican Senators like Collins, Sassee, and Tillis and others, who have already stated their opposition to the declaration and seem to want to show some independence from the president. It is very likely that there will be enough votes in the Senate to get the resolution to the president’s desk, which he will most likely veto. Then, I think the interesting thing to look at would be how Republicans in the House will vote, especially since there will need to be a lot more Republicans House Members voting with the Democrats to get the required two-thirds majority. However, I don’t think the current Republicans in the House need to show the same type of independence from the president as some Senators do, since they all just faced either election or reelection and won, possibly the ones that won by close margins will align more with the Democrats.
Now, in response to your second question, I’m sure Professor Massey will encounter lots of push back in regards to his proposal on legalizing the 11 million undocumented currently here and probably less pushback when it comes to processing border arrivals as refugees and asylum seekers. However, I do think that a two-prong approach like the one he proposes seems to be a strong starting point. In the current discussion surrounding immigration, there appears to be no real progress, partisanship aside, because there tends to be a sole focus on the flow of illegal immigration, but I think there also needs to be a greater focus on the immigrants already in the US, legally and illegally. With that in mind, a possible solution or step in the right direction could be having an actual pathway to citizenship that immigrants are aware of and access to more information about the process itself.