How Does Biden’s Border Mess Compare to the Immigration Scandal in France?

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

via Mike Shedlock:

There’s a big political scandal in France over Immigration. The French president stands accused of ‘Trumpism’. Let’s compare events in France with events in the US.

For background on this post, please see Trumpism in France, Le Pen Claims ‘Ideological Victory’, What’s Going On?

French president Emmanuel Macron passes hardline immigration bill supported by Marine le Pen. Macron’s Health Minister resigned causing a political crisis.

Le Pen claimed it was an “ideological victory” because for the first time an immigration law would recognize the principle of “national preference” – long a cherished goal of her National Rally party.

Manon Aubry of France Unbowed called the law the “most xenophobic in French history” and the Greens’ Yannick Jadot said it marked the arrival of “Trumpism” in France.

What’s in the French ‘Trumpism’ Bill?

  • Delays foreigners access to state subsidies like housing aid or family allowances for several months or even years
  • Toughens family reunification rules for immigrants
  • Forces children born to foreigners in France to request French citizenship upon reaching adulthood, rather than having it granted automatically
  • One-year, temporary residency permits under some conditions for skilled workers in fields experiencing labor shortages

Immigration Mess in the US

President Biden faces the same dilemma as Macron, except here, the fate of an immigration bill is also tied to funding for Ukraine and Israel.

Ukraine, Israel, and immigration are logically unrelated. However, Republicans want immigration restrictions in return for more aid to Ukraine.

Democrats in general are OK with more immigration even as blue state governors are pleading for help.

US Mud Slinging Delayed

The US mud slinging will come next year as the Senate Left Town for the Holidays Without Border Deal.

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby on Tuesday said it was “critical” that Congress pass the bill because the White House only has one more security assistance package they can deploy to Ukraine as it fends off a Russian invasion before the end of the year, when funds will run out. [Excuse me for pointing out Ukraine is not a national security issue.]

But when they return in early January, lawmakers face a rush of funding deadlines that could make it even harder to push through the complex deal that would provide $110 billion to arm Ukraine and Israel, beef up border security, and provide humanitarian aid in Gaza and elsewhere as a government shutdown looms.

“It’s a mess,” said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), the No. 2 Senate Democrat, referencing the Jan. 19 deadline to fund several critical functions of the federal government. “A lot of deadlines we face in the first few weeks of next year — and we don’t have a great record when it comes to that.”

“I’ve been doing political work for over 20 years, and this is the hardest issue ever,” Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), one of the three main Senate negotiators, said in an interview with The Washington Post last week. “It’s hard because it’s very emotional for people on both sides of the aisle, like viscerally emotional, but it’s also the most complex area of law in our federal system.”

The GOP-controlled House and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) have also been noncommittal about whether they would pass the package even if the Senate reaches a deal, with many conservative members demanding more sweeping immigration changes and opposing Ukraine aid altogether.

Senators have kept details of their talks under wraps, even among their colleagues, but senators and aides briefed on the negotiations said they are discussing a mechanism to summarily expel migrants when border crossings are particularly high and a policy change allowing for speedy deportations of some migrants who lose their immigration cases, among other issues. [Really?! How will speedy deportations work when an immigration case can take months if not much longer, decided by whom? Then factor in finding a person hiding in a sanctuary city. ]

Former president Donald Trump has made the large numbers of migrants showing up at the U.S. border with Mexico a key campaign issue, recently saying the migrants are “poisoning” the blood of the country, which civil rights groups have compared to the writings of Adolf Hitler.

Everyone Will Be Unhappy

Some liberals have bashed Democrats and the White House for considering policies they say are more in line with Trump’s.

“What Donald Trump did and said was despicable,” Schumer said when asked about the comments on Tuesday. “But we do have a problem at the border … and Democrats know we have to help solve that problem, but in keeping with our principles.”

Republican voters, meanwhile, oppose further aid to Ukraine, according to polls, and many Republican lawmakers, especially in the House, have said they don’t want to send further aid to that nation.

“That’s what this sort of deal is all about,” Durbin said. “You got to have unhappy people on both sides of the table.”

Surprise Champion for Money to Ukraine

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is the person to watch. Previously he vowed no aid to Ukraine.

But on December 2, the Journal noted Mike Johnson Becomes Surprise Champion of More Ukraine Aid

—Less than one month before Mike Johnson’s sudden ascent to the speakership, the Louisiana Republican, then a little-known member, joined with most GOP lawmakers to vote against $300 million in U.S. security assistance for Ukraine.

Now, as speaker, Johnson has surprised many on Capitol Hill by publicly and repeatedly calling Ukraine aid a critical priority for the House.

“We can’t allow Vladimir Putin to march through Europe and we understand the necessity of assisting there,” Johnson said this week at a media event in Florida. He expressed “a sense of urgency” and said he was confident that he would get Ukraine aid passed, while stressing that Democrats would need to agree to border policy changes demanded by Republicans.

The effort to secure funding for Kyiv is part of a complicated set of negotiations that will again test Johnson’s leadership, a few weeks after he pushed through a short-term spending bill, with Democratic help, that puts off a government shutdown until early next year.

A surprise champion for more money, gee who coudda thunk?

I commented on that “surprise” in advance.

Please recall my November 11 article No Surprise, House Speaker Johnson Proposes Same Plan as McCarthy

There are likely big surprises elsewhere, but there is no surprise in this corner regarding Johnson’s plans to keep the government running.

“It’s…100% clean. And I 100% oppose,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R., Texas) on social media.

Many people told me Johnson would be different. Will they pretend Johnson is different or will they act surprised?

Even though the WSJ was surprised, votes for more money are never a surprise in this corner. It’s a matter of principle.

More Money for This and That

The most likely result will be more money for this in return for more money for that.

It’s possible though, this blows up due to Democrats not wanting to fund border controls. Other Democrats will not want to fund Israel.

If Democrats are united, Johnson would need support of all but three Republicans when he was once against aid to Ukraine. Democrats are unlikely to be united but so are Republicans.

Johnson won’t commit because he hopes the problem goes away. It won’t. But there is no deal to commit to anyway.

There are many Republicans who do not want any aid for Ukraine and others who no matter what concessions the Senate grants on the border, will not be enough.

 

Source link