Staff Reports
The Associated Press recently tried to put a perfumed spin on Vice President Kamala Harris’ handling of the immigration crisis, painting her as a visionary leader. However, this narrative falls flat when challenged with the reality of the ongoing migrant surge at the southern border. According to the AP, Harris has adopted a “long-term” strategy in response to the unprecedented migrant flood. But if “long-term” means watching millions of migrants stream across the border while stating a preference for addressing “root causes,” then perhaps her definition of success is worthy of a sitcom.
It’s easy to claim that Harris was merely tasked with addressing the “root causes” of migration from Central America, but the truth is a bit murkier. When President Biden handed her this “critical” mission in March 2021, it seemed more like a political hot potato than a genuine pursuit of solutions. By focusing on causes such as climate change and poverty, which are certainly worthy issues but far from immediate fixes, Harris avoided the reality that her constituents at the border were dealing with the chaos unfolding in real time. Mark Krikorian from the Center for Immigration Studies pointed out that Harris was more concerned about her image than truly taking charge of border security.
AP: Lyin' Kamala Harris Has a 'Long Term' Strategy for Border Migration – Breitbart pic.twitter.com/EX7QLgAmaL
— Ian Hansen 🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@IanHansensX) August 15, 2024
The consequences of the administration’s misguided approach became painfully evident when approximately 10 million migrants crossed into America from various parts of the globe. This massive influx didn’t just harm border communities—it’s also straining local economies by pushing down wages and skyrocketing housing prices. As Harris gears up for the 2024 election, all those migrants could prove to be a rather inconvenient hurdle on her path to a presidential nomination.
While Harris’ team claimed she was responsible for securing over $5.2 billion in investments for Central America, the actual spending tells a different story. Many were left astonished when it was revealed that only a meager $1.3 billion had been allocated to address the “root causes” of migration. This revelation, buried deep within the AP article, raises eyebrows and casts doubt on Harris’ supposed achievements.
Flashback to March 2021 when Biden confidently touted Harris as the “most qualified person” to handle the mess at the border. Instead of rising to the occasion, Harris chose to focus on what many see as an overly theoretical approach, repeatedly dodging the “border czar” title. This title was never quite rightfully hers in the first place. As migrants continued their relentless march to America, her aloofness has not only frustrated the administration but also left many questioning exactly what her role was supposed to be. Many Democrats were keen to distance themselves from the growing chaos—an embarrassing contrast to Biden’s promises of “returning migrants home,” which seemed to vanish like cotton candy at a summer fair.
In what can only be described as a classic case of political mismanagement, Harris’ reluctance to wrestle with the issue reflects a troubling trend within the Democratic Party. Their inability to confront the realities of a porous border is leaving them trapped in a narrative that relies heavily on platitudes rather than effective policy. With every day that passes, the administration’s attempts to shift focus back to “long-term solutions” become increasingly laughable when faced with the mounting reality of their border failures. If she hopes to convince Americans she can get a grip on this crisis, she might want to start listening to the facts on the ground and stop reshaping them to fit a liberal agenda.
