Lauren Young here, Deputy Campaign Manager for Alexandra Chandler, sharing Alexandra’s statement on the policy proposal from Stephen Miller:
Three things you need to know about why this policy from Stephen Miller is wrong, what it really is about, and what I will do about it.
1. This proposal would harm our national security, in addition to being repugnant to our values. The Department of Homeland Security should focus on identifying and catching terrorists & traffickers, not investigating if legal immigrants ever sought benefits they paid taxes for. With finite resources in government, Donald Trump and Stephen Miller are putting America at risk for political gain.
2. This proposal will make our country weaker and less prosperous. First generation citizens are disproportionately economic drivers of our communities. How many future American entrepreneurs will we lose because we decided that if someone fell on hard times once (like so many do, wherever they are born) that we close the gate of citizenship to them? How many others that would have come here will decide that some other country is now the land of opportunity and liberty?
3. The real reason our country is slowly bankrupting itself is because the ultra wealthy have purchased politicians, Congressional majorities — and Administrations— that gave tax breaks to those that need it least, at the expense of the rest of us. The $1.2 trillion tax cut put our deficit above a trillion— immigrants, a net positive for our economy and society, have nothing to do with it. The Administration wants to set U.S.-born working class and middle class people against immigrants, when it is really all of us in America that need to stand against the destructive force of Big Money politics and the politics of division.
If this proposal is implemented, I will be #ReadyOnDayOne to use Congress’s constitutional powers to overrule it, to defund whatever is left of it, and to take on the politics of division that are behind it.
All good reasons, but you might also want to include the fact that the policy itself is wrong. Not just because it is against our country’s self-interested, but because involvement with other cultures is beneficial And excluding people based on their nation of origin is immoral in a democratic, plural society.
As Democrats, it’s time to reconsider morality as part of politics, not just people’s self-interest.
Mark, we agree. Alexandra starts by saying : ” …this policy from Stephen Miller is wrong…in addition to being repugnant to our values.”
Good, but we need to make them more than an aside. We need to make robust arguments.
I don’t mean this as a criticism of Lauren or Alexandra. This is a new item on my Democratic agenda.
Moral policy should be the cornerstone of our Democratic agenda. Mark, you are spot on about this.
Ethics in political discourse and Democratic policy is all the more important considering Trump is the most corrupt administration in American history.
I do wonder what “moral” compass you want to use. Some people consider abortion immoral. For me I hate to see our laws influenced by people whose religion gives them an imagined “moral” superiority. The Pope wants to take care of the poor, he can lecture me when he gets rid of the Vatican bank.
Religious mumbo jumbo is no way to run a country. Immams throw gays off roofs in some countries, priests assault kids and cover it up. Separation of church and state is one of the most important things we have.
In a democracy everybody uses the moral compass they have and, if the majority of them ‘consider abortion immoral’ — or, conversely if a majority of them consider it not at all immoral — then there it is and you and your hegemony are shit outta luck.
That’s the point of democracy: that neither you, nor I, nor anyone get to tell any other what ‘moral compass’ to use and there is no overall arbiter of morality. Sometimes that will lead to decisions that disgust you. Too. Damn. Bad.
Deal with it. .
I’m glad that you’ve apparently “dealt” with the results of the last election in our democratic Republic, and thank (deity here) it is a Republic. I don’t like Trump. I have no problem with abortion.
Let me ask though, since we’re on the subject, the basis of the pro-choice movement is the right of a woman to control her own body, why is prostitution a crime? If people want to give happy ending massages for money it’s none of my business.
Where is everyone’s “moral” stance on that?
There is a particular sublimity to your sliding between the general and the specific. You say “if people want” when talking about what women should want, when in fact the issue of prostitution has never been approached from so egalitarian a perspective… As if the fact that heterosexual men, who’ve had all the freedom in the world to choose, and haven’t, by and large, chosen to prostitute themselves, doesn’t tell you something.
Never mind the fact that the reality of prostitution is not, in fact, ‘control over her own body’ but the very opposite: selling control over the physical body.
My own moral compass says that prostitution is an ongoing example of social, economic and patriarchal oppression that is both vicious and demeaning. I suspect a large number of people in the democracy agree with this view, more or less, — or don’t disagree with enough vehemence to fight against that view– and that is why prostitution is a crime.
We are talking about a Republican proposal to persecute legal immigrants — not “happy ending massages for money”.
The policy in question echoes the proposals of the Nazi party as it was emerging in 1930s Germany. Some of us know that this is immoral and must be stopped. Some of us do not.
The choice is yours.
You are the first person to bring up religion on this thread, which is not absolutely required for morality. There is an American morality too. I refer you to the Declaration of Independence, the Pledge of Allegiance, A New Colossus, inter alia.
Since Mark didn’t specify I asked what moral compass he meant to use. The Constitution, I’m all in. The (insert sacred text here) count me out.
Our Democratic moral compass begins with a tolerance for pluralism and individual differences; it’s arc bends toward justice and equality; it continues with faith that government, in spite of its shortcomings, can make people’s lives better; it pursues these goals with democracy, the worst form of government, except for all the others.
I’m still on vacation from BMG. I want to nevertheless offer a personal comment here.
We are living in an America that increasingly resembles the rise of Nazi Germany. My wife is Austrian, and has a particular sensitivity to such matters as a result.
My wife — whom several of you have met — is a legal resident alien who holds a green card. She holds an EU passport, and we are reluctant to give that up. She has also collected unemployment compensation — compensation that she was fully entitled to and that she and the rest of us pay for through employer taxes.
This policy threatens my wife. It threatens to block her way to citizenship. The bias against immigrants that this policy embodies is personally offensive to her and I. We are growing increasingly anxious about her ability to even renew her green card. We are among the lucky affluent victims of this prejudice. We have options, even though we hope to never have to exercise them.
A majority of self-professed Republicans support Mr. Trump’s call to shut down MSNBC and CNN. We have already seen this administration separate nursing babies from their mothers — with little outrage from Trumpist Collaborators. We already know that US agents are (improperly) stopping cars in Maine and demanding that citizens show “papers” or face “detention”.
Now come the calls to block perfectly legal immigrants from becoming citizens.
When do we say “enough”?
So it wasn’t my imagination that we hadn’t seen you for a while? You make valuable contributions here so don’t be a stranger.
It is impossible to imagine a more eloquent policy statement on why this Steven Miller proposal is foolish, against our values, and completely counterproductive.
It’s very possible to imagine a more eloquent statement since Alexadra Chandler (and/or her speechwriters) aren’t actually all that eloquent.
I appreciate the righteousness of her position and, once you get past the breathless urgency, there is a forceful something there. But it is more than a little over the top to say “It is impossible to imagine a more eloquent policy statement“
Stephen Miller is wrong on immigration policy? That’s a subjective statement.
Not when it comes to strengthening Trump’s base, he’s not wrong. He’s precisely on target. According to them, on your first point, “those people” are criminals, thugs, and do not share “our values”. On your second point, they are leeches on our welfare state, coming to the USA for the “free stuff” that liberals will give them in exchange for their votes. And on your third point, “The real reason our country is slowly bankrupting itself is because the ultra wealthy have purchased politicians”, they might agree, but only as it relates to Democrats and Deep State Republicans.
Steven Miller is one of Trump’s smartest advisers, helping to keep him from being impeached, and Trump knows it. If Trump adopted a different immigration policy, within days, he’d be waving good-bye from the White House lawn as he enters Marine One for his last official flight.
What can we do about it? I can tell you this, there is nothing that we can say to Trump’s base that will change their minds, nothing. I still know many Trump supporters. I watch FOX News. I listen to Hannity and Rush (but only for a short time, as much as I can tolerate), and these people are true believers. They are The People’s Temple and he is their Jim Jones.
All we can do is elect progressive, honorable, Democrats and enlarge our base by attacking the wealthy class, not Trump, and supporting the working class, not fractions of it individually.
Asserting that Mr. Miller is “wrong on immigration policy” certainly is “subjective” — as is any moral assertion.
In today’s Washington Post, E. J. Dionne Jr. observes that your argument applied equally well to Germany of the late 1930s. Referring to The Death of Democracy: Hitler’s Rise to Power and the Downfall of the Weimar Republic, Mr. Dionne says (emphasis mine):
I agree with you that opposition to these immoral policies is “subjective”.
I will NEVER “support the working class” if that means ignoring the outrageously flagrant hatred and bigotry expressed more and more openly by Mr. Trump, his government Collaborators, and his torch-bearing followers.
I agree with you that nothing will change the minds of these deplorables. I have been saying exactly that here at BMG for years. I hope and pray that these deplorables are in the minority.
I think civilized Americans need to shun, marginalize, and condemn the hate speech of Fox News and those who embrace it. I have not watched or listened to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or any of the hate-mongers on Breitbart.
I don’t feel the need to attend a KKK rally to know that it’s abhorrent and that I want NO part of it.
Tom, it’s good to have you back in the fight again. You’ve been away too long. “This time I know we’re going to win.” Victor Laszlo to Humphrey Bogart in CASABLANCA
In order to support the working class, one simply has to support the working class. To assume that the working class is predominantly bigoted and a basket of deplorables is an assumption that, as we have seen, leads to the abandonment of the working class by the Democratic Party. Nature abhors a vacuum, enter Donald Trump to fill that void.
To gain back the votes of the working class, many of whom voted for Obama and then Trump, talking points on abortion, immigration, gay marriage, minority rights, women’s rights even climate change are simply wasted words. Noble causes all, but not presently discussed at the kitchen tables of most working class Americans.
Let’s talk about how wages were supposed to soar after the tax cuts for the corporations but so far, have barely enough to cover inflation. Let’s talk about the factories that continue to close. Let’s talk about the $12 Billion dollars that our farmers now need to continue farming after Trump’s brilliant deals. Let’s talk about the price of gas. Let’s talk about the high cost of a college education and finally, let’s talk about the two things that all working class Americans fear the most: losing their jobs and getting sick.
Has Trump done anything to calm these fears?
No.
You are making the assumption that the working class is uniform and monolithic, not me.
To wit (emphasis mine):
For the past few months, I’ve sat at tables with working-class black Americans, working-class women, and working-class Hispanic Americans. THOSE working-class Americans tell me that the “talking points” you treat with such contempt are gossamer threads that they desperately hang on to in hopes that they will be restored by newly-elected Democrats.
You again conflate “working class” with “white working class”, and even “white working class men”.
Our job is to continue to advance our values and priorities. Our job is to raise, not slash, taxes on the wealthy and very wealthy. Our job is invest in our children and grandchildren.
When and if we do our job, some number of Trumpists will see the error of their ways and return to us. Those that remain attached to their bigotry and prejudice are not worth pursuing.
Quite the contrary. On many social issues, they are not in sync and as it relates to ranking of importance of social issues, there is a wide variance within the working class.
On economic issues, however, there is a uniform and monolithic stance, as there should be.
I’ve done no such thing.
I simply do not accept the idea that dividing the working class into opposing factions is a wise idea. I also refuse to accept that “all women” or any other physical identity think alike.
A propos of the working class, not necessarily anyone’s comments: https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/08/07/what-democrats-still-dont-get-about-winning-back-the-white-working-class
That was an excellent and smart piece Mark. I highly recommend everyone here read it, it really outlines how we can shift the conversation.
The author put my main 2016 takeaway more eloquently than I have:
It is that second sector, and only that sector, I am interested in reaching out to. I think we make a categorical error when we lump the entire Trump coalition in with the politics of white backlash that certainly fueled his ascendency within the Republican primary. I also think successful Democrats have already figured this out. I am a lot more bullish about taking back the House.
Danny O’Connor made up a 17 point deficit to nearly beat back a Republican incumbent in a district that has not voted for Democrats since the Nixon era. Cathy McMorris Rogers is the fourth highest ranking member of the GOP leadership and represents a district that has been Republican since the Gingrich Revolution. She is currently losing to her Democratic challenger in the top two primary in WA, an 18 point deficit from 2018 that has been entirely erased. We are looking at at least a D+7 swing nationally, the bare minimum to flip the House, with 85 days out. It is my hope we can see an even greater swing by November.
I note that the author of Mark’s cited piece (Andrew Levison) explicitly and frequently notes that he is describing white working class families — even the headline emphasizes his focus.
The claim made upthread is:
These are “simply wasted words” for some segment of the white working class. For the rest of the working class — and for a majority of Americans — these words describe core values and priorities.
We are watching America spin deeper and deeper into a maelstrom of scapegoating, bigotry, and hate. This maelstrom is driven by the same forces and has the same end as the death spiral of German democracy that brought Adolf Hitler to power.
I agree with jconway that retaking both the House and Senate in 2018 is within reach of the Democrats. We are making these gains by embracing, emphasizing, and celebrating our core values while we simultaneously emphasize that we are the only party that relentlessly fights for EVERY working class American on the most important economic issues:
– Wealth concentration
– Health care
We do not need to pander to or attempt to win back the votes of white working class deplorables — whatever share of Donald Trump supporters fall into that category.
I agree.
While not everyone who voted for Trump was a racist, it is clear to me today that anyone who is still supporting him on any level is a racist. Some are hard core racists, the sorts with Confederate flags and so on however, there is also what I see as a soft racist, a person who may not hate blacks or Mexicans or the rest but is afraid of becoming a minority, afraid of change, afraid of what “those people” will do to their world.
On the latter group, I don’t think there is anything we can say or do to get them to not vote for Trump in 2020, but should we win the White House, we can work on ways to show them that their fears are unfounded.
Tom, your problem, as i have stated before, is that you did not grow up in a real working class family down there in bourgeois Maryland. Your parents, and you, never had to worry about having or keeping a job. Try to think a little more out of the box as far as t hose of us who are the “deplorables” are concerned. By the way, i am glad to see that you have returned. I always enjoy reading your posts because you have a great intellect and insight in many matters.
I am sick of using peoples backgrounds and identities to judge their ability to comment on this, that or the third.
We know the facts about Trump. High tariffs and a trade war that hurt American farmers and manufacturers, improving relations with rivals like Russia and North Korea at the expense of long time allies in NATO and EU, appointing radical right wing justices and government officials, cutting taxes for the wealthy while endangering long time entitlement programs and the Affordable Care Act.
This is a record that hurts working Americans of any race or background. This is a record that has hurt upper middle income Americans when it comes to killing SALT tax aid leading to higher property taxes. This is a record that undermines national security and democratic institutions. It is a record that undermines civil rights for immigrants, women, minorities, and LGBTQ Americans.
A Coalition of the Decent can be assembled from center-right conservatives, centrists, populist independents, progressives, and social democrats. The only priority we should have is to elect a Democratic Congress capable of checking President Trump and restoring oversight and integrity to the federal government. Anything else is a priority after this priority is achieved.
Total unadulterated horse manure.
You have NO IDEA AT ALL about my family (“bourgeois Maryland”?).
My parents met in Washington DC as teenagers, both there because of the Great Depression. My maternal grandfather and his family, from Louisiana, lost EVERYTHING and spent a decade moving from town to town across America — anywhere he could find work. My paternal grandfather had a fifth-grade education, and was in DC doing track maintenance work for DC Transit (the now-defunct streetcar company).
My father fought in the Pacific theater in WWII, and never fully recovered from the PTSD he came with. When I was a toddler, he was hospitalized with TB for two years. He scraped together a living as an optician, working for peanuts. My mother was herself quarantined from me in those early years. I was forced to stay with family and friends until my father came home.
My parents had a second child who was born with profound disabilities, likely brought on by the massive amounts of X-Ray radiation used on my father during his hospitalization. She died before her 2nd birthday.
My mother was forced to return to work, and ultimately was able to support our family.
My family lived a hand-to-mouth existence for most of my childhood.
Your projections and fantasies about me are not remotely grounded in fact.
I’m glad you like my commentary. I wish you would pay rather more attention to who I actually AM and rather less to who you think I am.
I am sorry, Tom. I had the wrong impression of your background.
Apology accepted
I’m all for tailoring our message to the audience as long as we aren’t contradicting ourselves, but can’t we walk and chew gum at the same time? Seems to me our cultural and economic messages all fall within the theme of standing up for society’s vulnerable and underrepresented.
Too often I also think people also forget that cultural liberalism is a form of economic populism. Women having control over their bodies gives them economic options and opportunities, equality for minorities is ultimately a fight for economic opportunity, equality for LGBTQ Americans is about helping a population with the least access to housing and health care. Not to mention a protected class that can be married on Sunday and fired on Monday . Or my friend who just had a baby with her wife via in vetro who has to pay more to adopt her daughter than a straight couple undergoing the same procedure. This fight for equality is ultimately about economic fairness and opportunity; the fight for economic fairness and opportunity is ultimately a fight for equal dignity under society.
And not to mention with the thread starter families being able to stay together, become Americans together, and keep what they earn by working hard for their slice of the American Dream. How anti-American is it to deny them their slice of the pie while making it even easier for the wealthy to hoard a bigger slice?
Miller’s uncle speaks out in Politico: “I have watched with dismay and increasing horror as my nephew, who is an educated man and well aware of his heritage, has become the architect of immigration policies that repudiate the very foundation of our family’s life in this century.
If my nephew’s ideas on immigration had been in force a century ago, our family would have been wiped out.”
Stephen Glosser