On Tuesday night, Mr. Suozzi — and sensible border reform — won by nearly eight points.
With record or near-record numbers of migrants still crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, immigration is a top voter concern nationally: Twenty percent named it as the most important problem facing the country in a Gallup poll conducted in January, ahead of every other concern except “government/poor leadership.” The matter is especially acute in New York City, a sliver of which forms part of the Long Island-centered 3rd Congressional District, and which has seen an influx of more than 100,000 migrants since April 2022. Mr. Suozzi’s victory in a closely contested suburban district suggests there is a market for pragmatism. He argued on the stump that blocking the bill will only mean “more migrants coming,” while his campaign ads promised that he will “work with both parties to close illegal immigration routes but open paths to citizenship for those who follow the rules.”
In short, Mr. Suozzi ran on the kind of thinking that motivated the Senate deal. Characteristically, Mr. Trump appears immune to this obvious lesson. He blamed Ms. Pilip’s defeat on her unwillingness to fully support him, calling her a “foolish woman” on social media and saying his supporters “stayed home” because Ms. Pilip didn’t unequivocally endorse his presidential campaign. In truth, the former president has boasted repeatedly in recent days that he convinced congressional Republicans to kill the deal. Ms. Pilip suffered at the polls for supporting that.
The House GOP pays a significant cost for this loss. Its majority is now even thinner than it already was; it will be 219-214, with two vacancies. Nevertheless, House Republicans spent Tuesday voting to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas after falling short last week. This week’s 214-213 vote would not have passed if Mr. Suozzi had been seated. Their insistence on this symbolic scapegoating of Mr. Mayorkas — dismissal of the charges, or acquittal, is all but assured in the Senate — speaks volumes about the priorities of Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).
Mr. Johnson had half a point, though, when he said Mr. Suozzi only won because “he sounded like a Republican.” National Democrats played down the importance of getting control over the border for too long and Mr. Suozzi’s tougher note is a welcome refrain for the party and good policy. (Only 18 percent of voters approve of President Biden’s handling of immigration, according to an ABC-Ipsos poll, half as many as three years ago.) Other major cities, such as Chicago and Denver, face instability as a result of the migration wave. In other words, the White House and Congress ignore this at their peril.
What’s more, the Biden administration should not release thousands of detainees into the country and slash capacity to hold undocumented immigrants, which U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is contemplating because of a $700 million budget shortfall. Understandable as such a move might be in light of Congress’s failure to provide funding, it would exacerbate an already difficult situation. Illegal crossings along the southern border are expected to spike again in the spring. Congress would do well to appropriate the money necessary to secure the border, but DHS ought to reprogram money from other agencies if it does not.
It is still not too late for Republicans to reconsider their rejectionism on the border deal. Instead of demagoguery, they could suggest adjustments to the package. Maybe they want restrictions on the use of humanitarian parole to apply to those who come via airports. Maybe they don’t want the bill’s heightened presidential authority to shut the border to expire after only three years. As unlikely as it is because of Mr. Trump’s influence, Democratic leaders will be willing to deal if Republicans show a willingness to compromise in good faith. New York’s voters just gave them a reason to do it.
Credit: Source link
