The Washington Post editorial board set forth a “plan” to deter migrants claiming asylum at the southern border. But it would inevitably just invite even more migrants to take advantage of the system.
It’s essentially everything the Democratic Party would want: still more legal immigration, more foreign aid (because we’ve seen how well it works), and legalization for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients.
The one area where Democrats might oppose the Post’s plan is on how to deal with the thousands of people claiming asylum. Democrats right now have a de facto position of turning all of those people loose into the country, provided they’ve been given free health and child services first. The Post, in contrast, proposes the construction of “detention centers near the border, suitable for families, that could accommodate many multiples of their current capacity while migrants await the adjudication of their cases.”
But therein lies the rub. Define “suitable for families.” What does “suitable” entail?
We know what “suitable” means when liberals set the terms. It’s free healthcare. It’s a “living wage.” It’s free college tuition. It’s $1,000 per month, just because.
If you can’t afford healthcare in the U.S., become a Guatemalan, then come back and claim asylum. America gives healthcare to Central Americans for free!
We know exactly what happens when we set up little spas “suitable for families” at the border. Thousands upon thousands of people show up, ready to wait for their day in court, courtesy of the American taxpayer.
Give the Post editors credit for at least addressing the gaping asylum loophole as our biggest immigration problem. But the paper got the solution wrong. The solution isn’t to offer more amenities to foreigners. The solution is to shut the whole scheme down.
