SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
ruben gallego
Sen. Gallego’s Laken Riley Act Sponsorship Exemplifies the Dems’ Strategy Failures
As long as Democrats keep putting their finger to the wind and trying to follow the right-wing narrative instead of reshaping the narrative to one that is better for the country, they are going to keep losing.
Feb 15, 2025
In a recent article published by NPR titled, “New to the Senate, Gallego Challenges Democrats’ Views on 'Working-Class Latinos’,” the newly elected Senator from Arizona, Ruben Gallego, defends his co-sponsoring of the Laken Riley Act.
Responding to his critics, Gallego stated, “They’re welcome to give me advice and everything else like that… but don’t come and try to lie to me and say that that’s where the Latino voter is… because that’s not the case.”
Gallego’s statement is very telling. It gives us critical insight into the way Democrats think, why they keep shifting to the right, and why they are doomed to keep losing in the face of a Republican Party that is becoming increasingly authoritarian and detached from reality.
When Democrats Follow the Narrative Instead of Driving the Narrative, They Are Sowing the Seeds of Their Own Defeat
In the quote above, Gallego is saying that Latino voters, like other voters, are also “concerned” about new immigrant arrivals at the border. He therefore reasons he has to speak to that concern by supporting militarized right-wing immigration policies, many of which are actually causing the crisis at the border. The Laken Riley Act is not only a due-process nightmare, allowing for detention of noncitizens who have merely been accused of minor crimes like shoplifting, but it will also allow red state attorneys general to sue future Democratic administrations for their immigration policies, effectively kneecapping any immigration policy change they may want to enact and thwarting the exclusive federal authority over immigration law. Gallego’s logic is that it’s OK to sponsor unconstitutional laws because the voters he has spoken to want “tougher” immigration laws.
This thinking perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with the Democratic Party. It is a failed political calculus that has led to decades of bad immigration policy outcomes and repeated electoral defeat. Democratic politicians look to where the polls are, look to the narratives in the public discourse (often planted there by bad faith right-wing propaganda outlets like Fox News), and then try to move their policy prescriptions toward what they perceive to be public sentiment. They should do the exact opposite, i.e. they should hold a core of strong policy beliefs and use those to drive a narrative on issues that addresses people’s concerns. Democratic, consultant-filtered thinking is completely backward because it fails to take into consideration that public sentiment is fluid and can be shifted with a compelling narrative. Instead, Democrats take the narratives blasted out by the right-wing propaganda machine and try to adjust their policies to fit them.
The “immigrants are dangerous” narrative is not only demonstrably false (immigrants, both documented and undocumented, commit crime at a lower rate than citizens do), but when Democrats concede this narrative, they are setting the stage for their own defeat. Instead of implicitly endorsing the “dangerous immigrant” framework, Democrats should counter it with a narrative about how immigration is good for the country, immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than citizens are, and that right-wing policy is the cause of illegal immigration. If the public buys into the “dangerous immigrant” narrative, they are always going to be more receptive to the Republican Party because the Republicans are always going to push further and further to the right. If you think immigrants are dangerous criminals, you are going to support the guy who is talking about walls and tough policies, instead of the party that is constantly giving mixed messages about how immigrants are good but also that they are the ones who are really “tough” on the border.
Instead of giving the Republicans the strength and uphill advantage of conceding their narratives, the Democrats need to flip the script by embracing immigration so that they are the ones attacking from an uphill position of strength.
The effectiveness of the Republican narrative on immigration, even though it is completely false, is reflected in several data points, such as the fact that immigration is a bigger priority to more Americans now than it was a year ago, as well as the reports showing that many Latinos have bought into the right-wing narrative and voted for Trump under the impression that he would only deport the “bad” undocumented immigrants. Of course, this has turned out to be completely false, as Donald Trump’s press secretary recently confirmed that they view all undocumented immigrants as criminals, even if they don’t have a criminal record.
In the NPR article cited at the beginning of my piece, Gallego says, “It’s usually white liberals that are talking to liberal Latinos, and they are essentially saying that’s what working-class Latinos feel and think about immigration… when in reality, they don’t.” I think Gallego is pointing to something that is true, but he’s got the wrong takeaway. For too long, the Democratic Party has assumed that barbaric right-wing immigration policy will inherently drive Latinos to vote for the Democrats. Gallego is essentially saying, “Working class Latinos are concerned about illegal immigration, so Democrats should move to the right on this issue.” I think the more accurate takeaway is that Latinos, just like anyone else, can be susceptible to the right-wing “dangerous immigrant” narrative. Even though right-wing immigration policy will disproportionately impact the Latino community, if the Democrats allow the “dangerous immigrant” narrative to take hold, more and more Latinos will vote Republican. I think the takeaway that Gallego is missing is that, instead of endorsing the right-wing immigration narrative, it is essential for the Democrats to offer a framing of the immigration issue that counters the one pushed by the Republicans.
When Republicans fearmonger about immigrant crime, Democrats need to push back with a factual narrative like this: “Immigration is good for the country and good for the economy. Study after study shows that immigrants commit crime at a lower rate than U.S. citizens. Republicans love to complain about illegal immigration, but their policies are actually the main cause of illegal immigration. The best way to reduce illegal immigration is to give people more legal pathways to come to the U.S. and stop the conservative policies that cause them to flee their home countries. Instead, Republicans want to cut off pathways for legal immigration, and pursue disruptive policies that make conditions worse in Latin America and the Caribbean.” If Democrats can convince the public that immigration is good, immigrants are not dangerous, and that Republicans are the cause of illegal immigration, it will lead the public to move away from the Republican party.
As long as Democrats keep putting their finger to the wind and trying to follow the right-wing narrative instead of reshaping the narrative to one that is better for the country, better for immigrants, and better for their political prospects, they are going to keep losing and the nation is going to experience increasingly worse immigration policy outcomes. In The Art of War, Sun-Tzu wrote, “So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong, and strike at what is weak,” as well as, “It is a military axiom not to advance uphill against the enemy, nor to oppose him when he comes downhill.” Instead of giving the Republicans the strength and uphill advantage of conceding their narratives, the Democrats need to flip the script by embracing immigration so that they are the ones attacking from an uphill position of strength. This is not limited to immigration. Indeed, it is applicable to all issues. The Democrats need to steer the carriage of public discourse and opinion in the direction they want it to go, instead of being tied to the back of it and getting dragged along.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Head of Largest Federal Worker Union Urges Senate to Block Russell Vought
Meanwhile, leading Democratic senators held the upper chamber floor in opposition to his nomination to lead the Office of Management and Budget.
Feb 05, 2025
The head of the largest federal employees' union is urging U.S. senators to vote against confirming Russell Vought as Office of Management and Budget director, as the Senate's top Democrat delivered a scathing floor speech Wednesday highlighting Vought's "role as the chief architect of Project 2025 and the devastating impact his policies would have on working families across the country."
American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) national president Everett Kelley said in a letter distributed to media outlets this week that "Russell Vought's agenda in the previous Trump administration is clearly alive and well as the current Trump administration has already taken steps to reimplement an even more expansive Schedule F and to purportedly override collective bargaining agreements in various contexts."
Schedule F refers to an executive order issued by Republican President Donald Trump at the end of his first term that would have stripped employment protections from career civil servants had former President Joe Biden not rescinded it within days of taking office in 2021. AFGE and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees last week filed a lawsuit arguing that Trump "illegally exceeded his authority" by attempting to weaken Biden-era worker protections.
"Of all people Donald Trump could have picked to lead White House policy, he chose the godfather of the ultraright."
"As OMB director during President Trump's first term, Vought pursued an agenda to effectively nullify the nonpartisan civil service system by attempting to convert tens of thousands of career employees to political appointments, gut their collective bargaining rights, and prevent unions from providing fair and effective representation to all workers," AFGE explained in an email Wednesday. "Vought has also made deeply disturbing comments about the civil service, including portraying them as villains and saying he wants to put federal workers in trauma."
Also on Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) held the Senate floor in opposition to Vought's nomination.
"Of all the harmful nominees, of all the extremists that Donald Trump has elevated, of all the hard-right ideologues who have come before the Senate, none of them hold a candle to Russell Vought," Schumer said. "He is far and away the most dangerous to the American people."
"Most people have never heard of Russell Vought before, but make no mistake about it, my fellow Americans: He is the most important piece of the puzzle in Donald Trump's second term," the senator continued. "He will be the quarterback of White House policy. For all intents and purposes, he will run the command center of the Trump administration. His decisions will reverberate from one end of America to the other, in every city, in every town, every household, and every rural area."
"And of all people Donald Trump could have picked to lead White House policy, he chose the godfather of the ultraright," Schumer added. "Make no mistake, Russell Vought is Project 2025 incarnate."
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) said Wednesday that he would lead a Thursday filibuster against Vought.
Vought currently leads the think tank Center for Renewing America, whose motto is: "For God. For Country. For Community."
A defender of Christian nationalism, Vought co-authored the policy portion of Project 2025, a blueprint for a far-right overhaul of the federal government. Vought's Project 2025 proposals include dramatic cuts to critical public programs, abolishing or gutting essential government agencies, a national abortion ban, and other right-wing wish list items.
While Trump has attempted to distance himself from the deeply unpopular initiative led by the Heritage Foundation, at least 140 people who worked in his first administration—including six former Cabinet secretaries—have been involved with Project 2025.
Keep ReadingShow Less
12 Senate Democrats Help GOP Pass Laken Riley Act as Trump Takes Office
The bill, noted one opponent, "has some egregious provisions that will have dramatic consequences beyond its stated goal of locking up undocumented individuals like the man who murdered Laken Riley."
Jan 20, 2025
A dozen U.S. Senate Democrats on Monday helped the GOP pass the Laken Riley Act—an immigration bill decried as a far-right power grab—just hours after Republican President Donald Trump was sworn in for a second term.
Those 12 Democrats are Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Maggie Hassan (N.H.), Mark Kelly (Ariz.), Jon Ossoff (Ga.), Gary Peters (Mich.), Jacky Rosen (Nev.), Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (Mich.), Mark Warner (Va.), and Raphael Warnock (Ga.). Fetterman and Gallego co-sponsored the bill.
A version of the legislation—named for a 22-year-old woman murdered by a Venezuelan migrant in Georgia last year—was passed by the House of Representatives earlier this month in a 264-159 vote, with support from 48 Democrats. However, it must be approved by the chamber again before it will head to Trump's desk.
"I just voted against the Laken Riley Act," said Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). "This bill won't accomplish its goals. I'm disappointed in its passage as it stands, and I'm deeply concerned about how it will be implemented."
Writing to members of Congress ahead of the Senate's 64-35 vote, over 70 national groups said that "the senselessness of the murder of Laken Riley does not justify making unprecedented changes to immigration detention laws that—like all mandatory incarceration provisions—will only result in more discrimination while doing little to increase public safety."
Urging lawmakers to oppose the bill the coalition explained:
S. 5 would require the mandatory detention—without any possibility of bond—of undocumented persons who are merely arrested for or charged with certain offenses, including misdemeanor shoplifting. It does not require conviction. There is no statute of limitations, and the bill does not specify any process by which a person might contest either their immigration detention or the underlying criminal charges (if charges are even pursued). Mandatory immigration detention on the basis of a mere arrest is unprecedented, and it would invite abuses that almost certainly would disproportionately impact people of color.
We are also concerned with language in the bill that would give states standing to sue the federal government over any allegation that the federal government is improperly implementing immigration laws, such as detention and removal provisions, visa provisions, or its discretionary parole authority. This language would open the floodgates to litigation, and it would enable individual states to shape federal immigration policies.
"Laken Riley should be with us today. Her murder is a tragedy, and the perpetrator should be held fully accountable," said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) after the vote. "The Laken Riley Act, however, has some egregious provisions that will have dramatic consequences beyond its stated goal of locking up undocumented individuals like the man who murdered Laken Riley. Specifically, it requires mandatory imprisonment for undocumented children who have never been charged with or convicted of a crime. This is twisted."
"We've seen time and again the damage the federal government can cause our children with dangerous immigration policies like this," he added. "I will continue to champion proposals that keep all of us safe, fix America's broken immigration system, and strengthen our border security. Our families and communities demand nothing less."
The Senate vote came as Trump began imposing his anti-immigrant agenda with a slew of executive orders. The Republican, who campaigned on mass deportations and ending birthright citizenship, is expected to sign the Laken Riley Act once it reaches him.
"Trump's first actions as president show us exactly who he is and what he believes about America," said Congresswoman Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.). "While he talked about unity, he used his first moment in the office to stoke fear and fuel division. While he talked about a 'golden age,' he signed unconstitutional and un-American executive orders that gut equality initiatives, criminalize immigrants, end asylum, roll back climate protections, and endanger our national security. There is nothing great about an America that denies peoples' civil rights, refuses refuge to the persecuted, or denies future generations clean air and water."
"I believe America is greatest when we pursue justice, equality, and peace and honor our shared humanity," she added. "This daughter of immigrants, citizen by birthright, and congresista from a district that celebrates our diversity, stands ready to fight for the soul of our nation. Regardless of who is president, I will continue to fight for the policies working people demand: affordable housing and healthcare, good-paying jobs, clean air and water, public safety, and comprehensive immigration reform."Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular