The problem for Congressional Democrats was conflating border enforcement and interior removal. FOX News successfully propagandized around massive caravans heading from Mexico towards our southern border, creating widespread fear among FOX viewers and a broader consensus on the need to close our southern border, which was reflected in the compromise Senate bill that Trump blocked early in 2024. But there was never broad support for interior removal, which is why ICE quickly became so unpopular. Unfortunately this distinction was lost on DC Democrats.
Comments here suggest that doing anything about ICE is abolishing ICE. But Murphy and others have called to rein in ICE, not abolish it. I think it’s possible Schumer fears doing something about ICE would prompt Trump to smear the Democrats, saying they want to abolish. But it doesn’t have to be that way, and Democrats can name Stephen Miller more on this. A lot of voters are outraged and will be upset if Schumer does nothing. I’m pretty moderate and have been reticent about leadership but anyone watching Minneapolis can see ICE stomping on the Constitution.
It has always been amazing to me that, when Dems win on messaging, it is almost always because Conservatives have shown their true colors. Imagine what we could do if we were actually working in concert to frame the public debate. Here's my take on how we should be framing this.
I thought that Democrats lost the immigration issue over the last 30 years because they just ignored it. There was a lot of hand-waving and saying “nothing to see here!” Instead, Democrats should have taken the issue seriously and said “Immigration is a problem; and it needs to be managed. Immigrants need to be acclimated into the United States, and that takes resources, so we need to limit the flow of immigrants. But at the same time, immigrants provide many benefits to the United States; they are predominantly young, so they provide a willing labor force to do work many Americans are not willing to do, so they reduce the cost of food and housing and eldercare. And they pay into Social Security to guarantee your retirement benefits. So we need a balanced approach to immigration that manages the flow of immigrants and provides them with a path to citizenship while reaping its benefits.” That’s what Democrats should have been saying over the last 30 years; what they should be saying now is comparable — while some immigrants (very few) may commit crimes and need to be deported, most immigrants are valued members of our communities, who are producing for our economy and should be welcomed (but we still need to manage the flow of immigrants so they can be absorbed into the economy without disruptions).
Abolishing ICE is just uninformed nonsense. There is a substantial role in administrative paperwork that is required and should remain required to process those legally crossing our borders. Removing Federal law enforcement from the role of enforcing immigration is not only justified, but clearly out of control and just another autocratic attempt by unqualified leaders and field agents. There needs to be a more sophisticated discussion of these issues.
I hope you are correct that it is possible to win the Immigration narrative as we try and paint a horrifying picture about current ICE enforcement in the "heads" of the public. However, I find it interesting that you quote from the 1922 book, Public Opinion. In that time period the public pictured painted was used to craft the 1924 Imagination Control Act which set quotas for legal immigration to the US. for many countries, with the notable exception of Latin American and Canada. The number of immigrants was capped to two percent of the number of immigrants present in the US based on the 1890 census. The 1890 census was chosen because that was before the Catholics and Jews from southern and eastern Europe began immigrating to the US in large numbers. The Act was designed to perpetuate the current racial and ethnic makeup of the US and it worked. The percentage of foreign born in the US dropped from 14.7% in 1910 to 5.2% in 1960. (Immigration stats as presented by William Gudelunas at a lecture presented in Feb 2023 at the Rancho Mirage Library https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDrUcBK33AM )
In his recent newsletter, Mike Madrid advises that it’s no longer immigration:
“The Reframe: From Enforcement to Overreach”
“This is the strategic shift that matters: Voters stopped evaluating ICE actions as immigration policy and started evaluating them as federal power deployed violently against communities.”
Yes and we need to keep in mind this is just the beginning of the ramp-up of ICE hiring and concentration camps. And as we can see in Minneapolis, Kristi Noem will not back off in the face of public opposition - instead she will double down.
I worry that "abolish ICE" will backfire like the (asinine) "defund the police" slogan.
The number of Republicans that support the fascist shit show is still strong.
REFORM ICE, which could mean rewriting their role and restrictions in the ways Senator Murphy suggested, may be more popular with that sliver of "conservatives" that we need in order to peel away Trump's ever so tiny margin of voters with which he won in 2024.
How would one reform the secret police? A Stasi-like group, now full of former proud boys, oath keepers, and other unemployable illiterates? ICE is full of folks who responded to the fascist recruitment ads.
As long as the reform is (1) putting everyone who committed crimes in service of the Trump agenda on trial for criminal charges, (2) firing almost everyone else and reassigning those we need to desk work while all their other essential duties are re-assigned to other departments in the government, then fine. But that's about what I mean by "abolish."
The problem for Congressional Democrats was conflating border enforcement and interior removal. FOX News successfully propagandized around massive caravans heading from Mexico towards our southern border, creating widespread fear among FOX viewers and a broader consensus on the need to close our southern border, which was reflected in the compromise Senate bill that Trump blocked early in 2024. But there was never broad support for interior removal, which is why ICE quickly became so unpopular. Unfortunately this distinction was lost on DC Democrats.
"Unmask Ice"
There, Dems, that's free, take it. Stop cutting checks to dumbass tankies, ffs
I wish every Democrat in leadership read this. Great analysis.
Comments here suggest that doing anything about ICE is abolishing ICE. But Murphy and others have called to rein in ICE, not abolish it. I think it’s possible Schumer fears doing something about ICE would prompt Trump to smear the Democrats, saying they want to abolish. But it doesn’t have to be that way, and Democrats can name Stephen Miller more on this. A lot of voters are outraged and will be upset if Schumer does nothing. I’m pretty moderate and have been reticent about leadership but anyone watching Minneapolis can see ICE stomping on the Constitution.
It has always been amazing to me that, when Dems win on messaging, it is almost always because Conservatives have shown their true colors. Imagine what we could do if we were actually working in concert to frame the public debate. Here's my take on how we should be framing this.
https://open.substack.com/pub/reframingamerica/p/a-call-to-freeze-ice?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=7t9yn
Forgive the pun. It's called "A Call to Freeze ICE."
IMHO #FreezeICE is brilliant. Good slogans are catchy and this certainly is.
I thought that Democrats lost the immigration issue over the last 30 years because they just ignored it. There was a lot of hand-waving and saying “nothing to see here!” Instead, Democrats should have taken the issue seriously and said “Immigration is a problem; and it needs to be managed. Immigrants need to be acclimated into the United States, and that takes resources, so we need to limit the flow of immigrants. But at the same time, immigrants provide many benefits to the United States; they are predominantly young, so they provide a willing labor force to do work many Americans are not willing to do, so they reduce the cost of food and housing and eldercare. And they pay into Social Security to guarantee your retirement benefits. So we need a balanced approach to immigration that manages the flow of immigrants and provides them with a path to citizenship while reaping its benefits.” That’s what Democrats should have been saying over the last 30 years; what they should be saying now is comparable — while some immigrants (very few) may commit crimes and need to be deported, most immigrants are valued members of our communities, who are producing for our economy and should be welcomed (but we still need to manage the flow of immigrants so they can be absorbed into the economy without disruptions).
Abolishing ICE is just uninformed nonsense. There is a substantial role in administrative paperwork that is required and should remain required to process those legally crossing our borders. Removing Federal law enforcement from the role of enforcing immigration is not only justified, but clearly out of control and just another autocratic attempt by unqualified leaders and field agents. There needs to be a more sophisticated discussion of these issues.
I hope you are correct that it is possible to win the Immigration narrative as we try and paint a horrifying picture about current ICE enforcement in the "heads" of the public. However, I find it interesting that you quote from the 1922 book, Public Opinion. In that time period the public pictured painted was used to craft the 1924 Imagination Control Act which set quotas for legal immigration to the US. for many countries, with the notable exception of Latin American and Canada. The number of immigrants was capped to two percent of the number of immigrants present in the US based on the 1890 census. The 1890 census was chosen because that was before the Catholics and Jews from southern and eastern Europe began immigrating to the US in large numbers. The Act was designed to perpetuate the current racial and ethnic makeup of the US and it worked. The percentage of foreign born in the US dropped from 14.7% in 1910 to 5.2% in 1960. (Immigration stats as presented by William Gudelunas at a lecture presented in Feb 2023 at the Rancho Mirage Library https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDrUcBK33AM )
In his recent newsletter, Mike Madrid advises that it’s no longer immigration:
“The Reframe: From Enforcement to Overreach”
“This is the strategic shift that matters: Voters stopped evaluating ICE actions as immigration policy and started evaluating them as federal power deployed violently against communities.”
Yes and we need to keep in mind this is just the beginning of the ramp-up of ICE hiring and concentration camps. And as we can see in Minneapolis, Kristi Noem will not back off in the face of public opposition - instead she will double down.
I worry that "abolish ICE" will backfire like the (asinine) "defund the police" slogan.
The number of Republicans that support the fascist shit show is still strong.
REFORM ICE, which could mean rewriting their role and restrictions in the ways Senator Murphy suggested, may be more popular with that sliver of "conservatives" that we need in order to peel away Trump's ever so tiny margin of voters with which he won in 2024.
How would one reform the secret police? A Stasi-like group, now full of former proud boys, oath keepers, and other unemployable illiterates? ICE is full of folks who responded to the fascist recruitment ads.
As long as the reform is (1) putting everyone who committed crimes in service of the Trump agenda on trial for criminal charges, (2) firing almost everyone else and reassigning those we need to desk work while all their other essential duties are re-assigned to other departments in the government, then fine. But that's about what I mean by "abolish."