Trump campaign will undoubtedly take advantage of border crisis

OPINION:

So, the unconscionable border deal is dead, and the incomprehensible effort to impeach the leader of the Department of Homeland Security is hopefully equally dead. Good riddance to both of them.

As this column noted last week, impeaching Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in the absence of an actual crime — or even the allegation of an actual crime — would set a terrible precedent that would have been used immediately against appointees in the next Republican administration, assuming we ever have one of those again. Moreover, it would accelerate the dangerous pathology of criminalizing policy differences.

Apart from that — and just like the border deal — it is just plain wrong.

The border deal, which would have allowed almost 2 million people to enter the United States illegally each year without any need to fear the law, was a disaster from the beginning.

Both efforts were understandable. Congressional Republicans and some Democrats — in Congress and elsewhere — are eager to respond to voter concerns about our lack of a southern border. That’s good. That’s what elections are all about. Occasionally, our rulers need to be responsive to the great unwashed.

But the reality is that the impeachment and conviction of Mr. Mayorkas would have no effect whatsoever on conditions at the southern border. He would simply be replaced by another administration stooge, who also would have carried out the wishes of the president. That’s how presidential administrations work.

The only durable solution to Mr. Mayorkas’ problem is to fire his boss in the election come November.

In the same vein, the border deal would have been an excellent deal if this were 2017 and if we had not endured three entire years without a southern border. 

Again, the simple reality is that President Biden has not enforced the current laws, so we should have no illusions that he would enforce any new laws, even ones created with his own nominal support.

You can’t make deals with folks like Mr. Biden.

Moreover, the presence of 6 million to 12 more illegal immigrants — and the scalding genius of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who nationalized the problem of border security by transporting trespassers to sanctuary cities and states — has fundamentally changed the border security debate.

An entire new generation of Americans has been radicalized on the issue, which means that any durable solution is likely to include provisions addressing repatriation, birthright citizenship and the absolute necessity for nationwide E-Verify to ensure that the business community is part of the solution and not part of the problem.

In short, the centerline of this conversation has shifted noticeably to the right. The days when the creation of a border wall set the rightward post of the national conversation are over. Mr. Biden senses that as well. During the discussion phase of this fiasco, the president said without prompting that if he had the authority, he would close the border. Leaving aside the uncomfortable fact that he does have that authority, an announcement like that would have been unthinkable as recently as six months ago.

The imagination and creativity of legislators are going to have to shift with the sensibilities of the voters or we are going to see repeated embarrassing collapses of “deals.”

Finally, this shift provides former President Donald Trump — who is already running 30 points ahead of Mr. Biden with respect to which candidate voters prefer on border security — with ample opportunity to drive his agenda.

It seems likely that he will take advantage of that.

• Michael McKenna, a columnist for The Washington Times, is president of MWR Strategies. He was most recently a deputy assistant to the president and deputy director of the Office of Legislative Affairs during the Trump administration.