In discussing the commentary offered by Santos on the border situation under President Joe Biden's administration, it is necessary to address the stark reality conservatives face when grappling with the ongoing crisis. Santos asserts that the border "deal" being proposed is lacking in substance and, in many ways, is a political sleight of hand designed to pacify public concern without effectuating real change. As a conservative, it becomes essential to weigh in on the legitimacy of such claims.
First and foremost, the contention that President Biden possesses the executive authority to staunch the flow of illegal immigration by declaring a national emergency is on solid ground. Historically, presidents have used executive orders to address pressing national concerns. This administration's reluctance to exercise such authority suggests a tacit approval, if not an outright agenda, to facilitate a lax border policy.
The issue at hand is not merely procedural but fundamentally rooted in the question of sovereignty and the rule of law. Acceptance of any number of illegal entries, let alone 5,000 per day, undermines the principle that a nation must control its borders to ensure security, uphold its laws, and maintain orderly immigration processes. The suggestion that the appropriate number of illegal entries should be zero is not simply a conservative talking point—it's a demand for adherence to the concept that ingress to a country should be legal and methodically managed.
Moreover, the current administration's proposed deal, which seemingly presents a reduction in numbers, does nothing to address the magnitude of the crisis. Lowering from 10,000 or 15,000 illegal crossings a day to 5,000, while it may appear statistically significant, remains an entirely unacceptable concession. This so-called progress may serve to create an illusion of control, providing political cover for Democrats in the upcoming election, while the reality remains that our borders are far from secure.
Furthermore, the focus on a numerical cap ignores the substantial issue of "got-aways"—individuals who evade capture and enter the country undetected—which adds a shadowy population to the already substantial count of illegal border crossers.
It is disconcerting to consider the implication that, for some Republicans, this deal might signify an acceptable compromise. True conservatism should demand more than band-aid solutions or half-measures. It should advocate for comprehensive and potent policy initiatives that will not only staunch illegal immigration but also create a framework for lawful, merit-based immigration that serves America's interests.
This argument resonates powerfully when considering that border security isn't merely an electoral bargaining chip to be used at convenience. It's a matter of national security, economic sanctity, and social cohesion. The assertion that the deal is a bad one not for political reasons, but due to its intrinsic inability to adequately safeguard the nation, illustrates a principled stance that many conservatives, including Governor DeSantis and Mark, share.
Biden's potential decision to let this deal pass without genuine action to secure the border represents a failure in leadership. Conservatives must, therefore, remain vigilant and outspoken against measures that offer nothing more than a political facade. The American people deserve—and should demand—a border policy that truly protects and preserves the integrity of their nation.
