Tag: Immigration
Immigration is clear, national security not
Trump’s appointments so far merit a first look. What do they suggest about the direction of the next Administration?
Deportation is for real
The appointments of Steven Miller as deputy chief of staff, Tom Homan as “border czar” (a White House appointment?), and Kristi Noem as Homeland Security Secretary send a clear message. They suggest that Trump is doubling down on deportation of undocumented immigrants. He proposes to start with those who have criminal convictions, in the US or abroad. But is a small percentage of the targeted population. Any convicted in the US are deported upon release. US Border Patrol has arrested about 17000 “criminal noncitizens” so far this year.
Focus on immigrant criminals was an election-year gimmick. Trump is really after the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the US who are not criminals. He wants to use the US Army to support that effort, which is estimated to cost more than $300 billion. Crime rates in this undocumented immigrant population are lower than among American-born citizens.
The disruption to the US economy, especially in some of the areas that voted most heavily for Trump, is likely. Especially if Homan follows through on threats to conduct workplace raids and deport whole families, massive economic damage will ensue.
Foreign policy is unclear
The signals on foreign policy are less clear. The named National Security Advisor, Michael Waltz, is a former Green Beret and China hawk. He is called a Ukraine skeptic, but that is vague. Would he advise against continued assistance to Ukraine in current circumstances? Or would he want it augmented to ensure a negotiated settlement on Ukraine’s terms?
The nominee for Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is similarly ambiguous. He favors a negotiated end to the war that maintains Ukrainian sovereignty. It is not clear what that means, though the Kyiv Post assumes it means concession of some territory to Russia in exchange for peace. Rubio is also an Iran hawk who favored the disastrous 2018 withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. That diplomatic malpractice resulted in Iran becoming a nuclear threshold state today.
The alternatives to Waltz and Rubio, even though both have become Trump sycophants, could have been worse. Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn is a nut job. Ric Grenell, a former Trump ambassador in Berlin and momentarily Director of National Intelligence, is a grifting dimwit. Grenell may still be in the running for a high position at State or elsewhere, so no one should assume yet that he is out of the running completely. He never had the stature to be Secretary of State, but that would not have prevented Trump from nominating him. He has strong business ties to Jared Kushner. That could be his trump card.
Defense: even more unclear
Trump hasn’t named a Secretary of Defense yet.* If it is to be Iowa Senator Joni Ernst, fans in Kosovo will cheer. The Kosovo Security Force collaboration with the Iowa National Guard has been consistently fruitful. It has also spun off academic, government, and commercial cooperation.
But there are lots of other candidates according to Fox News, including Grenell. Whoever gets the job will face enormous challenges. Defense of US interests abroad requires that Washington remain committed to NATO and other alliances in the Pacific. Trump has continued to be more critical of allies than of Vladimir Putin.
The Kremlin has denied Trump urged the Russian President to show restraint in Ukraine. That could suggest the beginning of some strain between Trump and Putin, but I’ll believe it when I see it.
A bit better than last time around, but not for Gaza and Lebanon
Trump’s appointments so far have all been loyalists, to him personally and to election denial. But they are also people who are arguably more suitable than some of his previous choices. He is getting through the process quickly and cleanly. There are lots of rumors, but little hesitation or confusion. Trump chief of staff Wiles is doing her job well.
In late breaking news, former Arkansas Governor Huckabee will be ambassador to Israel. That confirms what sensible people knew. Trump will back Netanyahu 100%. Not because of the Jews, who voted overwhelmingly for Harris, but because of the Christian Evangelicals. The wars in Gaza and Lebanon will end only when Netanyahu wants them to. Trump will back Netanyahu even more than Biden did.
*After I published this, Trump announced a Fox News talking head, Pete Hegseth, as his pick for Defense. I know nothing about him but what I read on Wikipedia. I respect his military service, but he hardly seems even close to the qualifications required of a Defense Secretary. And lobbying for pardons for convicted war criminals is disqualifying. He is certainly far below Joni Ernst in stature. Trump’s nominee to head the CIA, is John Ratcliffe. He had trouble winning Senate confirmation as Director of National Intelligence in the first Trump administration. Ratcliffe is notable for his lack of professional intelligence qualifications and partisan posturing.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Four more bad reasons to vote Trump
I somehow managed yesterday in citing ten reasons to vote for Trump to skip an obvious one: immigration. It merited mention, not least because it a very bad reason to be voting for Trump.
We need the labor
The United States needs more immigrants, not fewer. The tight labor market is driving up wages and productivity. That is welcome after many years that they lagged the increase in returns to capital. Incomes have been rising faster than prices since the epidemic. But there are limits. The US fertility rate (average number of children per woman over a lifetime) is down to 1.6. This is insufficient to sustain a stable population size. The resulting aging of the population increases the demands on Social Security and Medicare while decreasing their revenue streams.
Immigration can help to alleviate these problems. Immigrants to the US are younger on average and have more children than people born in the US. They help to pay the bills of those reaching retirement age, also relieving labor market pressure.
We need the entrepreneurs and executives
Immigrants are also disproportionately entrepreneurs. They do not on the whole take jobs from native-born Americans but create jobs for everyone:
…immigrants act more as “job creators” than “job takers” and play outsized roles in US high-growth entrepreneurship.
This is important, as US economic growth depends heavily on new, small companies. And small companies grow. Immigrants founded nearly 45% of the Fortune 500.
It is of course also true that immigrants play important roles in managing major corporations. The tech sector is rife with immigrant executives. Eighty per cent of privately held billion dollar companies have immigrants in a senior role. The American economy today depends on immigrant managers.
Getting rid of them isn’t possible
The Obama and Biden Administrations focused deportation on people who posed security risks. The Trump Administration did not have clear priorities. Biden has removed (often by expulsion rather than deportation) many more immigrants than Trump did.
That doesn’t mean Trump isn’t going to try to do what he said he would do. He has pledged to round up and expel millions. Trump’s effort would cost many billions and involve hiring ten thousand new immigration officials.
Even beginning that process will unleash chaos in the American economy, further tighten the labor market. It will also discourage immigration that we need for the purposes cited above. Trump’s election will slam down an economy that is landing softly.
There is a bipartisan solution already drafted that Trump won’t support
Republicans and Democrats have already agreed to a bipartisan immigration bill. Trump blocked its approval in the Congress. But the new Congress can revive the plan and pass it. Harris has pledged to sign it.
If elected, Trump will need to insist on something “better.” He is unlikely to get it if the Democrats control one of the Houses. Only Harris guarantees that immigration will be dealt with quickly on a bipartisan basis in the new Congress.
I could go on. World population growth is also slowing markedly. There soon won’t be as many people wanting to immigrate anywhere than there once were. Trump’s anti-immigrant efforts will encourage people to go elsewhere. That will not be good for a country that depends heavily on immigrant labor, entrepreneurs, and executives. We’d be well-advised to forget Trump’s grandiose plans and grab the bipartisan solution.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Hopeful v hopeless: guess who won
Last night’s presidential debate between former President Trump and Vice President Harris conformed to expectations. An ill-tempered Trump lied, rambled, and indulged in conspiracy theories. A smiling and bemused Harris projected herself as an agent of change and optimism. She was amiable and hopeful. He was threatening and hopeless. That’s what really counts.
Policy doesn’t count, but it is still worth considering
The economy: advantage Harris
On the economy, Trump promises little more than steep tariffs on everything, which a president can impose without Congressional approval, and extension of the tax cuts passed in 2017 for the (very) rich. Neither proposition should be attractive to 90% of Americans. He continues to insist that other countries will pay the tariffs, but they will also raise prices whenever they can to recoup whatever they pay. In addition, they will retaliate against US exports. So MAGA means higher prices and loss of market share abroad. Little to celebrate there.
Harris is flogging tax breaks for small business, families, and home construction. Not all of what she proposes makes good sense, and she has not said how she will pay for them. But her proposals respond to what most Americans are concerned about. All of what she wants would have to pass in Congress, which means there is at least a chance to get it right. Even if the Democrats were to gain control of both Houses, it would be difficult to hold together their majorities for proposals that don’t make sense.
Immigration: advantage Harris
This is Trump’s strong suit, but he played his hand poorly. He repeatedly claimed that immigrants are increasing the crime rate in the US. He even claimed that crime is down in Venezuela and other countries because all the criminals are being sent to the US. Harris didn’t respond forcefully on these points. I suppose she was wary of championing immigration. But crime is down in the US and it is not down in Venezuela and other migrant-exporting countries.
Harris hit a solid note with her response. She rightfully claimed Trump had blocked a bipartisan immigration bill that would have sharply increased the number of agents on the border. She did not say what a lot of us know: America needs immigrants. The labor market is tight and immigrants are prolific entrepreneurs who found a large number of new, small companies.
Foreign policy: advantage Harris
Trump was at pains to claim that he got NATO countries to ante up and that the world loves him. But America’s allies have been increasing military expenditures at least as fast under Biden. Trump repeated his claim that he would end the Ukraine war by negotiation before he even took office. The only way he could do that is by signaling lack of support for Ukraine. Trump was only able to cite Hungary’s would-be dictator, Viktor Orban, as a leader who appreciates him. Of course Putin, Xi, and Kim are also in that camp, but they are even less to Trump’s credit.
Harris cited Trump’s love affairs with those miscreants, as well as with the Taliban, as evidence of his failure to align the US with its democratic friends and allies. Even more important is that he failed to get anything worthwhile from his dreadful friends. Harris was effective in parrying Trump’s criticism of the Afghanistan withdrawal, which he had negotiated before Biden won the 2020 election.
Next
I expect the polls to show a visible jump for Harris in the next couple of weeks. She demonstrated at the debate a demeanor, temperament, and acuity that contrasted sharply with Trump’s. He looked and played the part of a tired incumbent. His ideas, insofar as he had any, were stale. Taylor Swift got it right. Kamala Harris will be the next President. That will give the Republicans time to end their romance with a crooked flim-flam man.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, February 16
– CBO says interest on the debt will cost more than defense this year.
– CBO also says immigration will add $7 trillion to GDP
– RAND analyst says DOD needs reform, not more money
–WH briefing on Russian ASAT and Ukraine
– Vox summarizes US space capabilities
– US has new satellite system
– Politico says Sullivan worked with Van Hollen on military aid conditions
– NYT investigates how Iran evades sanctions and how Russia mitigated them
– Politico says nobody knows which political ads work
From Punchbowl: Ten House members (five from each party) have drafted a compromise Ukraine-Taiwan-Israel-border security bill. You can read the text here, and the summary here.
—
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, January 30
– WSJ says defense contractors are turning down business.
– Axios says a Communist Party office is taking over from the foreign ministry.
-Steve Vladeck explains why Gov. Abbott’s actions are unconstitutional
– CIA Director Burns says CIA is changing
– African specialists say US gives too much military aid.
– Lawfare podcast discusses war powers against Houthis.
– What’s happened to the Heritage Foundation?
—
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, January 27
– WaPo says US isn’t planning Ukraine offensive
– Michael Kofman et al. have their suggestions on WOTR
– Kenya court blocks Haiti mission; Haiti suffers.
– Congress approves F16s to Turkey
– Additional countries halt aid to UNRWA
– Biden promises border crackdown if new law is passed
– WaPo says Trump plans expanded trade war with China
– Fred Kaplan revisits Ukraine nuclear decision with declassified documents
– SAIS Prof Hal Brands sees risks of global war
– NYT reviews Gaza peace efforts
—
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
RSS - Posts
