Republicans have argued that the southern border is in a state of crisis and the situation is hurting Americans (and illegals) in many ways—notably in the flow of illegal drugs and the incidence of crime and homelessness. They also are puzzled as to why Democrat legislators refuse to use their power to solve the problem by passing comprehensive immigration legislation.
Liberal Democrats have answered the question concerning a crisis in two very different ways. When Barack Obama was president, they acknowledged its existence and affirmed the need to correct the problem. Since Donald Trump became president, they have denied that a crisis exists. Logic requires that they admit being mistaken in the first instance or in the second. But they have ignored logic.
Why have the Democrats contradicted themselves on the border issue? And why do a substantial number of them now go further and advocate “open” borders—that is, repealing (or ignoring) existing immigration laws and allowing anyone who wishes to enter the country to do so? Also, why do many argue that America should grant whoever enters this country the rights and privileges of citizenship, thus qualifying them to vote, obtain drivers’ licenses, and receive welfare and other government benefits?
Republicans and independents have proposed two main answers to these questions. One is that Democrats’ compassion has led to naiveté and rendered them oblivious to the economic unfeasibility of open borders, as well as to the fact that America’s enemies could take advantage of the situation and do our country harm. Another, less generous answer is that Democrats have rejected the concepts, principles and values that have guided this country, including those expressed in the U.S. Constitution, and are intent on replacing them with socialist ideas.
Both answers are plausible. Some Democrats are surely naïve and others are manifestly intent on changing the country’s principles and values. But I believe there is another explanation for their wanting open borders: fear that dwindling numbers in their party may result in a weakening of their political influence. I say “influence” rather than “power “because I want to avoid implying that liberal Democrats are driven by self-aggrandizement. It is more likely, in my view, that even the most aggressive liberals are true believers and thus are driven by philosophic commitment.
Their concern for their dwindling numbers is well-placed, but the reason is not, as they say and perhaps even think, because of the evil force of fascist capitalism or any other action of those on the right. The real reason is far from diabolical, but it is certainly ironic.
The cause that liberal Democrats have zealously championed for half a century—abortion—has from the moment they first embraced it ensured the depletion of their ranks; for they have been more inclined than conservatives to abort their children and thus limit their progeny.
There have been over 60 million abortions over two-and-a-half generations since Roe v. Wade. If those unfortunate individuals had been born, and if half of them got married and each had one child, that would mean an additional 30 million Americans, for a total of 90 million, a 27% addition to the present population. Those numbers would represent more people working and paying taxes that, among other advantages, would increase tax revenues and thus help Social Security and Medicare remain solvent. It would also represent more contributors to all fields of endeavor, including law, medicine, science, and technology, and more benefits to the country and humankind.
But let us keep our focus on the Democrats’ quandary. If, as seems likely, a majority of those who escaped abortion had been born to Democrat parents, Democrats would today enjoy a comfortable advantage in registered voters over Republicans. And here is the important point—in that case, Democrat numbers would not be dwindling, their political cause would not be weakened, and they would not feel the pressure to encourage (“recruit” may be the better word) millions of illegals to flood the country by promising sufficient rewards to win their votes. To put it differently, the Democrats would be free of the pressure to put self and party above common sense and the good of their constituents.
To summarize my argument, Democrats are victims of their own decades-long support of the greatest sin of the present age, abortion. It is difficult to imagine a more dramatic example of Karma.
Copyright © 2019 by Vincent Ryan Ruggiero. All rights reserved