The editors of the Wall Street Journal who have long supported an open borders policy either de facto or in jure, have come out as opposed to the president’s announced policy change:
The polls show the American people are uneasy about Mr. Obama’s unilateral law-making, and liberals should be too. Mr. Obama is setting a precedent that Republican Presidents could also use to overcome a Democratic majority. How about an order to the IRS not to collect capital-gains taxes on inflated gains from property held for more than a decade? That policy would be broadly popular and also address a basic lack of fairness.
Mr. Obama’s rule-by-regulation has already been rebuked more than once by the Supreme Court. His “I, Barack” immigration decree is another abuse that will roil American politics and erode public confidence in the basic precepts of self-government.
I think there are only two likely explanations for their reaction:
- Either they think he’s done the right thing in the wrong way or
- They’re opposed to it because he’s doing it.
Just as a reminder, I’m in favor of increasing the number of work visas given to Mexican workers by a factor of ten or even a hundred, serious workplace enforcement with serious penalties, and increased H1B visas providing the jobs are advertised in a central clearing house well before the visa is received with draconian penalties for abusing the system. I also would not oppose some version of the DREAM Act as long as it were systematically and consistently applied and enforced.
That’s neither a conservative nor a progressive position but I think it comports with the realities of life in today’s United States rather than riding somebody’s political hobby. It’s a lot more liberal than the view of a majority of Americans but based on the polls it’s closer than what either Republicans or Democrats support.