Comment by xdennis

3 months ago

Biden. His policies led to a huge increase in illegal immigration.

Look at the huge jump due to his policies: https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20240127_EPC...

The same was not true for Obama, who was actually much better than Bush.

Biden did not support "open borders", nor did he cause the immigration surges during his term. CATO of all places refutes both of these ideas:

- https://www.cato.org/blog/biden-didnt-cause-border-crisis-pa...

- https://www.cato.org/blog/biden-didnt-cause-border-crisis-pa...

- https://www.cato.org/blog/biden-didnt-cause-border-crisis-pa...

(Also, FWIW, those immigration surges were good things (for the US), and likely helped the US stick the "soft landing" instead of slipping into a post-covid recession)

What was the policy change though?

  • Biden: "Here's an app where you can make an appointment to illegally cross the border. Our system will be so backed up that you won't need to go to actual immigration court for years, and even then if we tell you to leave and you don't we probably won't go after you. You'll have plenty of time to make an anchor baby. Oh, I can't close the border without a bipartisan bill that essentially enshrines a certain level of illegal immigration. Can't be done."

    Trump: "Border is closed. We're deporting people, starting with mostly those that have committed serious crimes."

the graph actually makes it look like the jump was due to Trump's policies, since the spike started in his term. if anything the graph shows that Biden policies arrested it shortly after. I recall reading deportations were actually very high during Biden's term.

Biden, his party, and some Republicans worked for years on the toughest border legislation ever endorsed by a Democratic president. Trump demanded it be shot down so he'd still have an issue to campaign on.

  • Biden's executive actions resulted in the loosest de facto border in recent memory. That he later worked on some legislation that was ultimately ineffective isn't a great defense. He could have just directed the executive branch to be less lax the whole time!

    • > That he later worked on some legislation that was ultimately ineffective isn't a great defense.

      The in-effectivity was due entirely and directly to Trump interfering in the matter. How can a president sign legislation that doesn't reach his desk because the party in control of the legislative body is in the pocket of a man who cares more about his career than the nation's well-being?

      1 reply →