Immigration Watch International (2): Biden’s Open Border Chief Gets Hill Drubbing

Thursday, May 5, 2022

Biden’s Open Border Chief Gets Hill Drubbing

On its very first page, President Joe Biden’s new border security plan admits that it will lead to increased illegal immigration “as smugglers will seek to take advantage of and profit from vulnerable migrants.”

In a sane world, plans that benefit human smugglers would be scrapped. Instead, amid the worst border crisis in U.S. history, the administration is plowing full steam ahead to remove the last remaining major line of border defense: Title 42, which is scheduled to expire on May 23.

Under Title 42 authority, single adults and families illegally crossing the border may be expelled immediately to protect citizens from the spread of COVID-19. In March, 221,303 illegal aliens crossed our southern border, the most in over two decades. About half were expelled under Title 42. You don’t need an advanced math degree to figure out what happens when Title 42 goes away.

Despite bipartisan calls to keep Title 42, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas this week issued a vague 20-page document outlining how his department plans to deal the anticipated surge in border-crossings—expected to reach 18,000 per day. The plan boils down to this: process illegals into the interior as quickly as possible with the help of taxpayer funded, open-borders non-profits.

This did not sit well with Congress. Three House committees called in Mayorkas for a well-deserved drubbing. Things got off to a hot start at Wednesday’s hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee, where Rep. Clay Higgins pressed Mayorkas about his failure to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

When Mayorkas demurred, Higgins cut to the chase saying, “Step away from your talking points, and speak to the American people, and own this thing. We’re losing our country down there and need you to resign. Save the country the pain of your impeachment.”

Mayorkas hit headwinds again Thursday at the House Judiciary Committee, the committee that plays the lead role in impeachment hearings. Rep. Jim Jordan charged that the border crisis was no accident—an argument that would play heavily in an effort to impeach Mayorkas, should conservatives take the majority next Congress.

“It’s intentional. It’s intentional. It has to be. The chaos on our southern border is… deliberate; it is on purpose; it is by design,” he said.

Jordan then listed a series of ruinous policy decisions made as soon as the Biden administration took office, including ending almost all deportations, ending “Remain in Mexico,” terminating agreements with Northern Triangle countries and halting construction of border wall. This onslaught of early actions (tracked here), combined with Biden’s rhetoric beginning on the campaign trail, have had their desired effect: encouraging and enabling more illegal border crossings.

Words matter, and when Biden repeatedly promised to extend amnesty, to shut down Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and most famously “immediately surge to the border all those people seeking asylum,” millions of soon-to-be illegal aliens heard him loud and clear.

They know well enough that all it takes is to show up and say the magic words of “asylum” and they will be let in and never removed. Under Biden, the famous Field of Dreams quote has morphed from “if you build it, they will come” to “if you destroy our border security, they will come.”

Implementation of Biden’s open-borders agenda has been the primary responsibility of Mayorkas. With such responsibility comes accountability. And judging by this week’s hearings, and the American public’s complete lack of confidence in this administration’s handling of the border, strict accountability is on the horizon.

Let’s see if Mayorkas stays around much longer to face it.

https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/bidens-open-border-chief-gets-hill-drubbing

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Thursday, May 5, 2022

Biden’s Open Border Chief Gets Hill Drubbing

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors