OpenCDA

January 21, 2019

Why Is This So Difficult?

Filed under: Probable Cause — Bill @ 8:50 pm

puzzledI simply cannot figure out why it is so difficult for President Trump and some of the alleged leaders in Congress to sit down together and find a way to resolve the border security stalemate.

The starting point is that most of the key players have agreed at one time or another that border security is important.  They all seem to want it, but when charged with doing something to achieve it and invited to sit down with the President and discuss it, “the other side” seems to develop a craving for pineapples or pork chops.  Why are they so afraid of success?   Or maybe they’re confusing terms.  Maybe they’re saying “secure borders” when what they really want and mean is “open borders”, no borders at all.  You know, Pueblo Sin Fronteras or Centro Sin Fronteras type stuff.

It seems to me the first step is to agree on what “secure borders” are in assuring the continued sovereignty of the United States.  If you don’t know exactly what it is you’re after, how will you recognize it if you stumble upon it?  I have yet to hear either side’s definition of “secure borders” though they intone that phrase reverently as if it’s etched on a marble wall somewhere.

Regardless, both President Trump and “the other side” would be taking a step in the right direction if they both started by explaining (truthfully if possible) what “secure borders” look like in their respective worlds.   At that point, they can then begin to intelligently agree on the methods to implement areas where they agree and resolve the issues over which they disagree.

One suggestion I’d make humbly is that all the participants on both sides agree that they could learn a lot from Customs and Border Protection’s field employees, the people from all twenty CBP Sectors.  Please notice I used the terms “field employees” and “people” rather than “BP agents” or “officers.”   Not every employee is a commissioned law enforcement officer, yet all of the employees have a role to play in successfully completing the agency’s mission.  Too often in many federal law enforcement agencies, the input is not sought from administrative, technical, and professional employees on whom the law enforcement officers depend.  The assumption is that if you’re not a handcuff jockey, then you couldn’t possibly have any meaningful input that would improve enforcement and removal operations.

My suggestion would be for each sector chief to designate a very experienced operational employee from each job series (administrative, enforcement, professional, and technical) to represent the sector.  Designate experienced boots rather than suits to participate.  Why?   Because whether you’re the President or one of the Fools on the Hill, your objective should be to try and get a very clear, apolitical, nonpartisan understanding of what a “secure border” looks like in each of the sectors.   Lobbyists for companies are less likely to be able to BS experienced boots from the field than suits whose last decade has been spent inhabiting the Swamp.

It’s also important to remember that a border needs to be secure in both directions.  The present emphasis is on illegal immigrants coming into the US.  However, the illegal transmission out of the US of currency or electronic funds which are the proceeds of contraband smuggled in needs to be addressed as well.

What I would expect this boots working group might reveal to the Mahogany Row denizens from DHS,  the White House, and the Hill is that “border security” is not a nice, tidy one-size-fits-all concept.  In other words, there’s no easy single fix like a wall or a drone or technology or more warm bodies with badges and guns.  Remedies will be most effective if they’re complementary rather than discrete and tailored rather than cookie-cutter produced.  They need to be regularly reviewed and modified when necessary.

But nothing is going to happen until both sides agree to sit down and start talking seriously.

The “other side” has invoked the deceptive practices of their hero, J. Wellington Wimpy who famously said, ““I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”  They’ll gladly start talking about border security if the President simply reopens the government.   Wimpy never came around on Tuesday to make his promised payment.  The “other side” used to be led by Senator Harry “Wimpy” Reid who bragged about how effectively his lie about Mitt Romney had cost Romney the 2012 presidential election.  When Leader “Wimpy” Reid was confronted with his obvious lie, he smiled and said, “Romney didn’t win, did he?”

I’m quite certain President Trump understands that J. Wellington Wimpy is the role model for those who favor open borders and no immigration controls.  The instant he relies on the assurance of Pelosi and Schumer and reopens the government, neither they nor their toadies on the Hill have any further incentive to cooperate with him and “… support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic …”

3 Comments

  1. In your opening sentence of this article, you say you can’t figure out why they can’t sit together and find a way to resolve the border security stalemate. That would be wonderful, but here’s what I think: they can’t because the Democrats hate Trump. They are so mad, so jealous, bitter, that he won the election after it had been promised to them, that they are determined to be against anything he proposes and are doing whatever they can to get him out of office. On a recent The View show, which could be called The Hate Trump show, Whoopi talked about the incident involving the teenage students from the Catholic school in Kentucky and the Indian chanter who claimed the boys were mocking him. Whoopi asked why all the media rushed to judgment against the boys and why so many “notables” condemned them and even suggested several ways of helping their demise. Joy Behar answered it was because we hate Trump and are desperate to get him out of office. No matter what trump does, the dems are going to be against it. At this point in time I don’t think it would do one bit of good to sit down and discuss secure borders. They all know having secure borders would be wise, and have even stated it publically (when it was their side pushing the idea), but now they won’t even think about sitting down to discuss it, only because it is Trump who wants it. I don’t know the answer, but perhaps declaring a state of emergency is the only way to go at this time.

    Comment by reddy — January 22, 2019 @ 12:44 pm

  2. reddy,

    I can’t disagree with anything in your comment.

    President Trump is what sociologists call a “rate buster.” Typically the term is used to describe a piece worker who works on a production line. The prescribed rate of production may be 20 units per day per worker, because that is the rate the workers are comfortable with. But then some outsider comes in and starts turning out 30 units per day. The managers decide to increase the rate for everyone else, and the everyone else’s don’t like having to be more productive and work harder. That’s President Trump. In his first two years he has accomplished more than Obama did in eight. On certain things that Congress has declared, “We tried and can’t do that,” President Trump has said, “Yes, we can,” and he’s done it. He’s raising the bar for elected officials, and the elected officials don’t like it at all. The people who voted for him think it’s great.

    Comment by Bill — January 22, 2019 @ 2:09 pm

  3. Agreed, he is a “rate buster”, and I for one think it’s great. Also, there are many in DC who are terribly afraid they will be exposed and their deep secret lives will be out for all to see, so they will try anything to keep that from happening.

    Comment by reddy — January 22, 2019 @ 3:31 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress
Copyright © 2019 by OpenCDA LLC, All Rights Reserved