Blogger Candidate Forum: Shifting The Focus

Hello Everyone:

It is Wednesday and Blogger Candidate Forum is back after a week off.  Before we get started on today's post, some news notes.  First, the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee has voted to subpoena the final Special Counsel's report, in full.  Next, presumed candidate for the Democratic nomination former Vice President Joe Biden found himself facing the wrath of #MeToo for his affectionate nature.  The VPOTUS has a very long history of borderline inappropriately touching women and invading their space.  It sort of reminds you of that creepy uncle whose affectionate nature makes women uncomfortable.  To his credit, he pledged in a video released today that he promised to be more respectful towards women.  We will see.  Finally, Mr. Donald Trump directed the Justice Department to take a position against the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and challenged congressional Republicans to come up with a new and improved plan, making the Grand Old Party the "Party of Healthcare."  To quote Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, "good luck with that."  Not going to happen.  There is no shiny, new and improved plan for healthcare but it did give Democrats more ammunition for next year.  Another big issue for 2020 is immigration.

Robert Beto O'Rourke
en.wikipedia.org

Former Texas Congressman and official candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination Robert Beto O'Rourke is someone who thinks differently.  One of the Gentleman from Texas' policy proposals caught The Candidate Forum's eye.  In his formal announcement (c-span.org; Mar. 30, 2019; date accessed Apr. 3, 2019), he offered a very intriguing plan to stem undocumented immigration from the Northern Triangle countries: El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.  He argued "to solve America's problems at the border, America's leaders must help people in Central America where they are" (theatlantic.com; Apr. 1, 2019; date accessed Apr. 3, 2019).  In making this argument, the Gentleman from Texas is, in effect, rebutting Mr. Trump's signature issue: immigration.

Every major Democratic candidate has denounced the president's actions at the southwestern border.  Mr. O'Rourke's competitors are correct in demanding more humane and fair treatment but, Peter Beinart points out, "...improved asylum system won't reduce the number of people fleeing violence in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador--... To the contrary, the better chance migrants have of gaining asylum, the more likely they are to seek it" (Ibid).

All the protestations plays right into the president's hands.  "His core argument is that only by treating asylum seekers brutally--making it harder for them to apply, raising the standard of proof of their claims, and even separating them from their children--can the United States deter from coming" (Ibid).  His rivals shake fists in protest, playing nicely into the president's hands, frames the debate as a choice between the harsh policies that deter Central American migration and more humane policies that encourage it.  Therefore, by addressing the migration problem at the root, Mr. O'Rourke avoids falling into the trap laid by the president of reducing the argument to choice between polarities, instead offering a possible solution.  Shall we have a look?

Map of Northern Triangle Countries
news.com.au

 In 2015, the organization Doctors Without Borders (Medecins Sans Frontieres) asked (brookings.edu; June 26, 2018; date accessed Apr. 3, 2019) migrants from the region, in Mexico, why they undertook the perilous journey, 39-percent cited fear of physical harm (theatlantic.com; Apr. 1, 2019).  The caravans, demonized by the president, hail from the countries, highlighted in orange on the map, where brutal fighting between the drug cartels has escalated violence, according to MSF, to unprecedented levels, outside of a war zone (msf.org; updated June 14, 2017; date accessed Apr. 3, 2019).  The United States can help curb the violence and the attendant migration through aid intervention.

USAID logo
usaid.gov

      One source of intervention is United States Agency for International Development. (usaid.gov).  USAID is the world's leading international development agency and catalyst for development.  The agency's work advances American national security and economic prosperity, demonstrating generosity and promotes a path to recipient self-reliance and resilience (Ibid; Apr. 3, 2019).  The facts speak for themselves: Peter Beinart cites a 2014 study released by the Latin American Public Opinion Project at Vanderbilt University (Ibid; October 2014; date accessed Apr. 3, 2019) on USAID's program intended to improve public safety in the Northern Triangle Countries.  USAID funded job training and local policing, installed streetlights, and removed graffiti.  According to the researchers,

51 percent fewer surveyed residents reported being aware of murders in their neighborhoods "than" we would expect to see without USAID interventions. (theatlantic.com; Apr. 1, 2019)

Michael Clemens, the co-director of migration, displacement, and humanitarian policy at the Center for Global Development, went on to analyze American government statistics compiled from the 179,000 unaccompanied minors from the highlighted countries, detained by Customs and Border Protection agents, over a six year period.  Mr. Clemens compared the homicide rate in a given Salvadoran, Honduran, or Guatemalan town with the rates to detained children.  He found (ipsnews.net; June 5, 2018; date accessed Apr. 3, 2019) that

a decline of 10 homicides in an average municipality of this region cause six fewer children from there to be apprehended at the U.S. border... (theatlantic.com; Apr. 1, 2019)

His final conclusion (ipsnews.net; June 5, 2018):

Projects financed by U.S. aid have been shown to reduce violence in the region, and that violence is a major driver of illegal migration (theatlantic.com; Apr. 1, 2019)

These conclusions run completely counter to the Trump administration narrative of migrants as a marauding invasion force headed north to commit violence crime and fleece the social welfare system.  This is why the president's seemingly sudden decision to cut off American aid to El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala is an epically dumb idea because American aid is the most effective tool for reducing the violence in the Northern Triangle Countries that leads its citizens to migrate north in the first place.  By shifting the focus to conditions in the Central American countries, Beto O'Rourke can re-frame the narrative: "Central Americans aren't migrating to commit violence but to flee it" (Ibid).  Further, by linking immigration to foreign policy, the Gentleman from Texas offers something his competition cannot: a viably humane promise to treat asylum seekers more justly while reducing their numbers.

Despite his light government resume, the Gentleman from Texas is doing something that other marquee candidates have not done, put Central America front and center of his foreign policy agenda.  Candidates like Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro have endorsed the idea of aid.

Beto O'Rourke is fortunate enough to draw on his life experiences as resident of a border town, El Paso, Texas.  This is an issue he understands, probably, better than Mr. Trump and his competition.  Thus far, the policy debates have been driven by Senators Warren and Bernie Sanders (D-VT) and have centered on economic inequality, which makes perfect sense if you are running against freshman Senator Mitt Romney (R-UT).  However, Mr. O'Rourke is ideal candidate to challenge the president on his signature issue: nationalism, making Robert Francis Beto O'Rourke all the more interesting to watch and see how his candidacy unfolds.