A Closer Look at Policies and the Current Crisis
The U.S. border has remained a focal point of political debate, with differing approaches from former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. Each administration took unique strategies to address immigration, with Trump focusing on immediate deterrence through enforcement and Harris prioritizing long-term solutions to address migration’s root causes. As of 2024, the border crisis continues to escalate, with alarming statistics on criminal non-citizens and “gotaways” entering the country. Compounding the issue, the media erroneously labeled Harris as the “border czar,” leading to public confusion about her actual role in the crisis.
Trumpโs Approach: Enforcement and Deterrence
During his presidency, Donald Trump centered his border strategy around strict enforcement, framing illegal immigration as a national security issue. His administration’s hallmark policies included the construction of the border wall and the “Remain in Mexico” policy, which kept asylum seekers outside U.S. territory while their claims were processed. This approach was intended to reduce illegal crossings and limit the number of migrants entering the U.S. unlawfully, and it was working, until the Biden administration scaled back and reversed Trumpโs policies.
Additionally, Trumpโs zero-tolerance policy led to family separations, which his administration defended as necessary to verify the relationships between adults and children at the border and to prevent human trafficking. Critics objected, but Trump maintained that it was vital for protecting children from traffickers. Family separations occurred because, under the law, children could not be housed with adults awaiting prosecution. While controversial, this approach paralleled the process when American parents break the law and are incarceratedโtheir children do not accompany them.
Trumpโs tenure saw a notable reduction in illegal border crossings, with a strong focus on immediate border control, aligning with his constitutional responsibilities to ensure national security. His strategy emphasized physical barriers and strict policies to ease the immediate pressure on the U.S. border.
Harrisโs Role: Addressing Root Causes
In contrast, Vice President Kamala Harris was tasked with addressing the long-term drivers of migration from Central America, such as poverty, violence, and corruption. Her diplomatic efforts focused on working with countries like Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador to create better economic conditions and governance structures aimed at reducing the need for migration to the U.S. However, this focus left unaddressed the growing influx of migrants from other continents.
While Harrisโs work generated over $5.2 billion in private sector commitments to boost jobs and improve infrastructure in the region, the results have been slow to materialize. Critics argue that while these efforts might yield long-term benefits, they have done little to alleviate the immediate border crisis. The number of illegal crossings has surged during the Biden administration, raising concerns that long-term solutions are not enough to manage the current situation.
The “Border Czar” Label and Media Confusion
Confusion surrounding Harrisโs role in border security was exacerbated by the media, which repeatedly labeled her as the “border czar” after President Biden tasked her with addressing migration. This term, often used to describe individuals with direct control over specific policy areas, inaccurately reflected her actual role. Harrisโs assignment was never meant to involve direct control over border enforcement but rather focused on diplomatic missions addressing the root causes of migration in Central America.
Neither Harris, Biden, nor the media made consistent efforts to correct this misrepresentation, and the misconception persisted until Harrisโs presidential campaign. Outlets like Axios and The Washington Post later revised their reporting, but many Americans were left with the mistaken belief that Harris was directly responsible for handling the border crisis, contributing to public confusion and frustration over the lack of immediate results.
The Current Crisis: Alarming Statistics on Criminal Non-Citizens and “Gotaways”
As of 2024, the border crisis has reached unprecedented levels. According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the House Homeland Security Committee, 2.4 million encounters were recorded at the southwest border in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 alone, with more than 3.2 million encounters nationwide. In addition, over 1.7 million โgotawaysโโindividuals who entered the U.S. illegally and evaded captureโhave been recorded since January 2021.
“Gotaways” represent a particularly concerning issue, as these individuals bypass the immigration system entirely and often have criminal backgrounds. Border Patrol reports indicate that many of these individuals are single, military-age men, though women and children are also among them. Many are believed to have criminal records, adding to the risks they pose.
The border crisis no longer primarily involves migrants from Mexico and Central America. Increasingly, migrants from China, Venezuela, Africa, and the Middle East are crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. In FY 2023 alone, 24,314 Chinese nationals were encountered at the U.S.-Mexico border, alongside growing numbers from Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil, and African nations like Nigeria.
The situation becomes even more dire when considering the number of criminal non-citizens currently released into U.S. communities. As of July 2024, nearly 662,566 non-detained non-citizens with criminal backgrounds were living in the U.S., with over 425,000 convicted criminals and 222,000 with pending charges. Among these, more than 13,000 individuals convicted of homicide and 15,000 convicted of sexual offenses were released pending immigration proceedings. Critics argue that the Biden administrationโs “catch-and-release” policy is allowing dangerous criminals to roam free in U.S. communities.
A Comparative Analysis: Trump vs. Harris
Comparing Trump and Harrisโs approaches reveals two vastly different philosophies. Trumpโs policies were focused on immediate enforcement and deterrence, delivering short-term reductions in illegal immigration and addressing the immediate pressures at the border. His strategies aligned closely with the constitutional responsibility to secure the country.
In contrast, Harrisโs approach centered on long-term diplomacy, targeting the root causes of migration in Central America. While potentially effective in the distant future, this strategy has failed to address the current crisis, as illegal crossings have surged since 2021. The presence of gotaways and the release of criminal non-citizens into U.S. communities have fueled concerns that stronger enforcement measures are urgently needed.
Conclusion
As the U.S. grapples with mounting challenges at its southern border, the debate over the best approach to immigration and security is intensifying. Trumpโs enforcement-focused policies provided immediate results by reducing illegal crossings and bolstering national security, while Harrisโs diplomatic efforts aimed at long-term solutions. However, the current crisisโmarked by criminal non-citizens, global migrants, and gotawaysโsuggests that more robust enforcement may be necessary to protect the safety and security of U.S. citizens.
Both approaches have their merits, but the urgency of the situation underscores the need for more effective border security measures to address the growing risks posed by the current wave of illegal immigration.
Dave Soulia | FYIVT
You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Parler (@fyivt)
#fyivt #BorderSecurity #TrumpBorderPolicy #ImmigrationCrisis #CatchAndRelease #MigrantCrisis
Leave a Reply