Trump's Narcissistic Desire to Use the Border Wall to Cement his Legacy Has Created a Cruel and Unnecessary Government Crisis

Two and a half weeks into the partial government has given Americans yet another opportunity to assess the leadership skills, or lack thereof, of its current President, Donald Trump.  While I am not a psychologist and don’t claim to be making a clinical diagnosis, Trump’s refusal to sign a budget that doesn’t appropriate $5.7 billion for a wall on the US-Mexico border only further shows his dangerously narcissistic tendencies.

 

Like many narcissists, Trump is manipulative.  He has shown his character for taking advantage of people’s weaknesses for his own benefit.  For example, all during the presidential campaign Trump insisted that not only would he build a wall, but that Mexico would pay for it.  Having Mexico pay for the wall was never even a remote possibility.  But the claim won him cheers ad accolades from his supporters.  Now that it is clear that Mexico will not be paying for the wall, Trump is manipulating the ignorance of trade agreements and how tariffs work among his supporters to make the claim that Mexico really will be paying for the wall.

 

Trump argues that by scrapping NAFTA and concluding the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), Mexico will be paying for the wall through tariffs paid to the United States.  Let’s breakdown the inaccuracies of this claim.  USMCA did not really scrap NAFTA.  Rather, it built upon NAFTA structures to adjust some of the agreed upon tariff rates.  In fact, trade agreements are not really a vehicle for a country to raise revenue.  Government typical enter into trade agreements to try to open more markets for its exporters by having their counterparts lower their tariffs.  The United States attempted to open more markets for US agricultural goods, for example, by getting Canada and Mexico to lower their tariff rates.

 

At any rate, governments do not pay tariffs.  Importers do.  Importers need to make a profit, so they typically pass the tariffs of to the consumer in the form of higher prices.  Even where US tariffs increase, Mexico will not be footing the bill.  US consumers will.

 

Moreover, USMCA is not yet part of US law.  To become US law, Congress will have to act.  Either 2/3 of the Senate must ratify it as a treaty, or both Houses of Congress must approve implementing legislation, just as they did for NAFTA.  Until Congress acts, the USMCA has no effect on US law.

 

However, many Americans lack the very specific knowledge of how trade agreements and tariffs work.  Trump is manipulating that ignorance to make it appear as though he is living up to his campaign promise.

 

Trump is attempting to  manipulate the racially-based fears of his supporters to support his refusal to sign legislation to fund the Government unless he gets his wall.  In defending his desire for a wall, Trump cherry-picks cases where heinous crimes were committed by undocumented aliens.  In doing so, Trump creates the impression that all undocumented aliens are violent criminals.  This is consistent with his claims during the campaign that Mexicans are rapists and murders.  He and his supporters ignore statistics showing aliens, including undocumented aliens, commit fewer crimes than native born US citizens.

 

Trump has demonstrated a complete lack of empathy for those adversely affected by the shutdown.  Indeed, through some of his public statements, Trump appears to be saying that those suffering because of the shutdown are getting what they deserve because of their lack of support for him.  He has tried to change lexicon of the debate, calling the shutdown a “strike” in closed door sessions with congressional leaders, as if to shift the blame on the governmental employees.  He has noted that most of the workers furloughed or working without pay are Democrats, as if to say that they deserve what they get for supporting the opposition party.  He has shown little concern for the 800,000 who may be going without a paycheck.  Moreover, he has given no attention to the government contractors, who will not only be going without a paycheck, but who, unlike government employees, will not receive back pay.

 

This is another example of Trump’s manipulation of the ignorance of his supporters.  Many of his supporters, who do not understand how government works, have been quick to argue that since only non-essential employees are being furloughed, it shows the government is too big and ought to be cut.

 

The fact is, Trump is using an immoral tactic essentially to extort something he wants, but for which there is little support, for the sake of creating his legacy.  A government shutdown is immoral because it adversely affects people who have no role to play in the debate over the border wall.  Government employees risk falling behind in mortgage payments, utility bills and other bills because of a lack of a paycheck.  Some employees risk losing health insurance for dependents.

 

Yet, it is being viewed as simply just another tactic to get something out of Congress despite fierce resistance.  The last government shutdown, for example, was forced upon the United States by the Tea Party, who demanded the showdown over funding the Affordable Care Act.  Because the Tea Party saw that as a successful demonstration of its power, it has become just another arrow in the Republicans’ quiver.

 

It is particularly egregious where polls have shown that a majority of Americans oppose the border wall.  In fact, Trump clearly made tough immigration enforcement a hallmark of his message in the mid-term elections, which resulted in the Democrats taking control of the House of Representatives.  Yet, while Republicans like to point out that elections have consequences, they refuse to accept the consequences of losing the House, which include a lack of political support for the wall.

 

Trump has ignored all of this, just so he can push for the wall to have tangible proof of his legacy in American history.  The shutdown is a very selfish use of an immoral tactic for something that does not have strong public support.

 

Indeed, Trump’s mistake is that he has failed to learn from history.  There is strong and vocal support for the wall among hard core Trump supporters.  Trump has chosen to play to his base by projecting an image of being tough on immigration enforcement.  But, Trump engaged in the same tactic leading up to the mid-terms.  He used news coverage of a large group of Central Americans traveling together through Mexico in an attempt to apply for asylum in the United States to incite fear among his supporters of the caravan.  He labeled Democrats as soft on immigration enforcement and supporters of open borders.  In the end, his party lost the majority in the House, giving Democrats a power base upon which to oppose the President.  There is no reason to believe that playing to his base will be any more successful here.

 

As usual, Trump has made this dispute about him.  While he attempts to avoid responsibility now, claiming Democrats won’t give him what he wants, he can’t escape that the government shut-down has real world adverse consequences on people who have nothing to do with immigration policy.  Because Trump is such a wild card, there is no way of telling whether he will back down and attempt to paint it as a victory, or let the shut-down drag on and continue to cause widespread pain.  One can only hope that Trump can overcome his stubborn streak, agree to legislation to re-open the government, and continue to negotiate immigration reform without holding the welfare of government employees hostage.

 

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.

Harsh Republican Action May Spur Administrative Response on Immigration

In a move largely seen as pandering to Tea Party activists, House Republicans passed a bill Friday that would increase funding for border security and attempt to send the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors attempting to enter the United States over the southern border back to their home countries expeditiously. House Republicans also took action to undo President Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. 

The move appears to be a purely symbolic one, since the bill has no chance of passing the Democratically controlled Senate. Still, House Republicans have sent a signal that they may not be willing to consider serious immigration reform. 

In a purely political calculation, House Republicans may see a greater threat from more conservative candidates in the primaries than from Democrats in the general election. The stunning primary loss of Eric Cantor has only emphasized this line of thinking. This, House Republivans do not appear to be willing to be seen as supporting anything closer to "amnesty" prior to the November elections. 

The House move, however, may have encouraged the Obama Administration to take drastic measures on its own. Democrats are already facing the prospect of the Republic as maintaining their majority in the House of Representatives. There is a possibility that the Republicans could take the Senate as well. Either way, the chances of legislative action on immigration reform before the end of President Obama's term appear almost non-existent. 

The President may, therefore, take executive action to ease deportations and removals for non-criminal undocumented aliens. One proposal that has been floated has been to grant the parents of DACA recipients deferred action. Another has been to grant deferred action to all undocumented aliens without a criminal record. 

The Administration appears to have anticipated the argument that such a move would be overreaching. Articles have already appeared in the media warning that Republicans may seek to initiate impeacent proceedings if the President takes such action. This could be an attempt to portray Republican resistance as being unreasonable. 

What action may happen is now hard to predict. William J. Kovatch, Jr., Attorney at Law, PLLC will remain on top of decelopments, ready to assist those with immigration issues when any action occurs. 

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.

(703) 837-8832

Wkovatch@kovatchlegalservices.com

The Boston Bombings Should Not Prompt Us to React out of Xenophobia

Now that this chapter of the Boston Marathon bombings has come to a close, and a new chapter about to open, I'd like to start this blog entry with a prayer.  Dear Lord, thank you for the wisdom and skill of the FBI, and the Boston area police and rescue departments.  Thank you for allowing the authorities to apprehend this man alive.  Be with the family of all the victims and grant them your strength as they learn how to recover from this horrible chain of events. Watch over the souls of all of those who lost their lives this week.  Guide us with your wisdom and your sense of justice as we as a society respond to these events.  Amen.

As I sit here, watching the coverage on CNN and Fox News, I cannot help but feel a certain sense of apprehension.  I am apprehensive that we will allow fear and xenophobia guide our response.

The xenophobia was certainly present in the media coverage during the week.  Thursday, as I was listening to Sean Hannity (yes, I am a fan), he kept harping on the 20 year old Saudi student who was a victim of the bombing but was questioned earlier in the week by the authorities.  Hannity kept insisting that certain unnamed sources, whom he did not identify, had told him that the student was scheduled to be deported on Tuesday, that there was a secret meeting between the President and Saudi officials that afternoon, that because of that meeting the deportation might be placed on hold, and that this was all being kept quiet.

I was immediately struck by the complete ignorance and irresponsibility Hannity had shown.  First of all, having gone through a number of deportations and voluntary departures with my clients, I know that ICE will not divulge when an alien is being deported.  It is considered a security risk, and they just won't do it.  I can't imagine how someone in the know would break that rule by informing Sean Hannity, even if it was off the record, knowing that Hannity would then go on the air and publicize that information.

The second problem is that people are not just simply deported.  We have a legal system.  Even aliens present in the United States illegally may have certain forms of relief available under the law.  A person with a student visa cannot be deported without going to Immigration Court, and being found in violation of that status.  Hannity's statements seemed to betray an ignorance of how the system works.

Finally, I was deeply disturbed by this focus on the student's nationality.  It played upon the fear and distrust many have for Arabs in this country.  Never mind that the Sa'ud family itself is a close ally with the United States.  Never mind that painting with such a broad brush has the effect of perpetuating fear and bigotry against Arabs, when only a very small minority want to do us harm.

In the end, Hannity's focus on the Saudi student proved misguided, as we later learned that the suspects were ethnic Chechens, not Saudis.

But even then, the reaction I heard from some continued to disturb me.  When tuning in to the Rush Limbaugh Show on Friday, I heard Mark Steyn railing against the immigration system, and how the Government could have let these two live in our country.  I saw some of my "friends" in social media have similar reactions, complaining of how we could let people from these areas of the world come to our country.  Even Senator Grassley has used these chain of events in debating immigration reform.

Has the immigration system failed us?  From what is being reported now, these two men were granted refugee status almost twelve years ago.  They spent their teenage years in the United States.  One became a citizen of the United States.  We are not talking about someone who snuck across our borders illegally.  We are not talking about someone who misused a temporary visa to gain entry to the United States to perpetrate these attacks.  We are talking about a family who escaped violence and persecution overseas, and who has been present here for over a decade.  Whatever hate entered these two men's hearts, entered after they had come to this country.  Overhauls in the immigration system would have not likely prevented the Boston attack.

If there was a failure in the immigration system, it was a failure in enforcement.  Specifically, the older suspect apparently had a conviction for some sort of domestic violence.  Yes, certain crimes of domestic violence make a person, even a permanent resident, deportable.  But, at this point, the only information available on that is vague at best.  Domestic violence encompasses a wide array of crimes, not all of which would necessarily be deportable offenses.  Without more information, I cannot criticize immigration enforcement as it applies to these two individuals.

What I do know is that knee jerk reactions, especially when it comes to the immigration system, are unwise and unwarranted.  We can't simply ban a whole class of nationalities from entering the United States because we think that they are unfriendly to us.  Perhaps those who propose such a thing forgot our shameful past of detaining Japanese families during the Second World War for no reason other than ethnicity.  No.  We are the United States, and we are supposed to rise above such bigotry (a sentiment reinforced in me tonight, after having taken my children to see that fabulous movie about Jackie Robins, 42).

Plus, the politics of the Middle East and the Russian interior have very little to do with one of the main issues to be addressed in immigration reform: the millions of undocumented aliens already present in the United States.  The overwhelming majority of those aliens are Latinos who came to this country simply looking to work hard and send money home to their families.

No, the evil perpetrated upon Boston this week had very little to do with immigration policy.  Putting the brakes on immigration reform now, in reaction to the Boston bombings, would simply be a reaction out of xenophobia and bigotry.  We are better than that.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

President Promises to Press for Comprehensive Immigration Reform

In his first press conference since the November 6th election, President Obama promised to press for comprehensive immigration reform in early 2013.  According to the President, immigration reform will include strengthening the borders, greater penalties for employers who hire undocumented aliens, and a pathway to citizenship for those already present in the United States illegally.

The last attempt at comprehensive immigration reform took place during the Bush Administration.  The Bush proposal also included a pathway to citizenship.  However, the legislative package failed to pass Congress.

In 2010, Congress came close to passing the DREAM Act, which would have given legal status to young people who were brought the United States as children and who have attended school in the United States or were honorably discharged from the U.S. military.  The DREAM Act died in a Senate filibuster.  However, the President announced a program to grant some form of relief to those who would have qualified for benefits under the DREAM Act through his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.  The deferred action program, however, does not lead to permanent residency.

Click here to read more on the President's statements concerning immigration reform.

By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com