On Tuesday, Oct. 1, Ohio Senator JD Vance and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz faced off in a mostly cordial vice presidential debate. Early on, moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan pressed Vance on the specifics of Trump’s immigration policy. To their credit, the two recognized that the border crisis is one of the top issues for American voters; however, its significance was deliberately understated.
Similarly, Vance’s response was somewhat underwhelming. Unsurprisingly, the senator blamed the ongoing crisis on the Biden-Harris Administration. It is obviously true that Biden’s undoing of Trump era policies have worsened the immigration problem, almost certainly on purpose. Vance claimed that there are at least twenty to twenty five million illegal aliens in the country, and he proposed beginning mass deportations with violent criminals. In his own words, “you’ve got to stop the bleeding.”
Walz responded with the recently common retort of the “James Lankford Bill.” According to Democrats and the mainstream media, this bill would have magically solved illegal immigration, and Trump only killed the bill to score political points! Of course, it’s only a coincidence that the left falls back on this during an election year.
The bill grants the president new emergency powers to handle illegal immigration. What they don’t tell you is that these powers only become available to use when there is a weekly average of 5,000 border encounters each day. Further, the president is only required to use these powers when it’s up to 8,500. Both of these numbers are far higher than the averages of the last twenty years. Indisputably, this bill would only worsen the immigration problem. Why didn’t Senator Vance mention this?
Despite Vance’s missed opportunities on immigration, he did win the debate. If Republicans want to win in 2024, they need to capitalize on the crisis more effectively. Never stop talking about immigration. Immigration. Immigration. Immigration.
President Trump understands this. In his September 11th debate with Vice President Harris, he famously and hilariously said “In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in, they’re eating the cats. They’re eating — they’re eating the pets of the people that live there.”
Two days later in Las Vegas, Trump remarked “I am angry about young American girls being raped and murdered by savage criminal aliens that come into our country very easily, but very illegally.” The president’s controversies on immigration won him the September media cycle, and he regained momentum against Kamala Harris.
Trump’s bombastic language on immigration has always been one of his strong suits; everyone remembers his announcement speech from June 2015. On Mexican illegal immigrants, then candidate Trump stated, “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people.” Can anyone think of a more provocative or genius way to begin a revolutionary campaign?
Despite Trump’s rhetoric on illegal immigration, his 2024 campaign has unfortunately softened its stance on legal immigration. On multiple occasions, Trump has proposed stapling green cards to the diplomas of every noncitizen graduate of American colleges and universities.
This would be disastrous for many Americans whose families have been here for generations. For too long, politicians from both parties have sold us out for cheap labor and other incentives. Trump’s green card plan would effectively swap out American elites with people who come from places extremely foreign to American tradition.
Not only is this plan an ethical disaster, but it’s also a massive strategic failure. For the first time in almost twenty years, a majority of Americans want to limit legal immigration. Who is President Trump trying to win over with this policy? Republican voters obviously wouldn’t disqualify Trump if he came out against legal immigration; many would be more excited to vote for him. It seems like the president’s campaign advisors have forgotten how to win an election. Trump will win if he gets his base out to vote for him; winning over the most radical democrats is an obvious pipe dream.
Throughout the 2016 campaign, Trump did not promote legal immigration like this. His rhetoric on the difference between legal and illegal immigration was notably more ambiguous. He proposed significant limitations on H-1B visas and recognized that American jobs were being taken by foreigners. President Trump’s original, nativist position from 2016 is clearly the winning strategy.
While in office, Trump certainly tried to solve the immigration problem. Predictably, the cowardly Republicans in Congress refused to give the president the money for the wall. Originally, the Trump Wall was supposed to be a thirty feet high, concrete goliath. After Trump’s emergency usage of the national defense budget, we got 458 miles of an eighteen feet high steel fence.
In many ways, Trump did solve the tragedies of illegal immigration. Child and sex trafficking along the border went down, but overall encounters continued to go up, with notable inflection points.
The famous chart that saved Trump’s life on July 13th, titled “Illegal Immigration into the U.S.”, shows that illegal immigration numbers rose until Spring 2020. According to the chart, that’s because of a combination of a Trump tariff threat on Mexico and new DHS tools. Does anyone remember anything else that happened in Spring 2020? An easy argument could be made that illegal immigration only declined in a significant way under Trump because of the COVID-19 Worldwide Pandemic. Once Biden got in, illegals got the green light to invade our country, and that’s what ended up happening.
There are serious concerns from likely Trump voters that his second term will not be tough enough on immigration. The line of “stapling green cards to diplomas” is not new. Mitt Romney ran with it in 2012. How did that work out for him?
Trump 2024’s rhetoric of “Mass Deportations Now!” is certainly a step in the right direction, but how will the mass deportations actually happen? Vance said to prioritize the violent illegal aliens, but it’s not entirely clear what happens after that. Will the generally peaceful but still criminal immigrants be deported next? The mainstream media will undoubtedly lambaste Trump if he ever tries to deport twenty, even fifteen million illegal immigrants.
There is some good news, though. On Sept. 15, Trump posted a coherent immigration policy on Truth Social. He wrote “We will stop all migrant flights, end all illegal entries, terminate the Kamala phone app for smuggling illegals (CBP One App), revoke deportation immunity, suspend refugee resettlement and return Kamala’s illegal migrants to their home countries (also known as remigration).” These are tangible, realistic goals from a second Trump Administration.
As of right now, Trump 2024 on immigration is a mixed bag. Increased legal immigration threatens American jobs and our traditional way of life. Under the Biden-Harris Administration, illegal immigration is worse than ever. President Trump will inevitably reduce illegal immigration, but the question is, by how much?
As immigration continues to rise, it will become increasingly impossible for Republicans to win national elections without compromising on their values. A majority of immigrants will vote for Democrats, no matter what. It’s simply the way it is. With only a month left until the election, Trump needs to make it a referendum on immigration. Hopefully, he will win and return to his 2016 roots. The existential problem of immigration to the United States must be solved quickly by a leader with an iron will. Republicans need to say “Sorry, we’re full.” They have to go back.
The College Republicans of Notre Dame have agreed, along with the College Democrats of Notre Dame, to write a bi-weekly debate column in The Observer's Viewpoint section in the name of free, civil discourse in the 2024 election cycle. You can reach out to the College Republicans at creps@nd.edu.
