Border Security Compromise or Tit for Tat?

PPPS (Washington, DC)—As another government shutdown deadline looms on February 15th, both sides in the border security debate are desperately seeking compromise. A select group of Democrat and Republican members of Congress is currently meeting to work out a deal. As part of these negotiations, however, two very interesting, but not particularly helpful, proposals have emerged.

On the one hand, President Trump has put forth a proposal to counter demands by Democrats for the elimination of ICE, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. The Democrats claim that ICE is guilty of separating children from their migrant parents while attempting to enforce our immigration laws.

The President has proposed a clever solution by adding the word National to the beginning of the agency name, in order to emphasize its sovereignty in immigration matters over local jurisdictions, and in particular, states and municipalities claiming sanctuary status.

The resulting new acronym, NICE, would present a much less intimidating image to desperate migrant families seeking asylum, violent alien criminals seeking to avoid deportation, and to American voters.

In an equally clever counter proposal, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi has floated legislation that would redefine the mission of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from one of defending our citizens against all threats foreign and domestic to a more holistic mission of inclusiveness.


In light of a call by at least one Democrat for the complete defunding of DHS, Speaker Pelosi's proposal is a model of moderation.

Her legislation, which is quite lengthy (over 4,000 pages), can best be summed up in the proposed new logo for the department.





It is certainly our hope that compromise will become the word-of-the-day in this debate over border security, and that another government shutdown disaster can thus be avoided.