From Illegal Immigrants to Republican Voters

In his address to Congress this month, President Trump boasted—and justly so—of his administration’s astonishing success in stopping illegal border crossings over just six weeks. “Since taking office, my administration has launched the most sweeping border and immigration crackdown in American history. And we quickly achieved the lowest numbers of illegal border crossers ever recorded.” This is no Trumpian bombast: A 94% year-on-year reduction in illegal entries really is an unprecedented accomplishment. It is also a popular one: a majority of Americans approve of controlling the border.

An even larger majority—some 76%—approve of his policy of deporting undocumented aliens who have committed felonies. Even some on the Left like Jon Stewart have been wondering: if ICE knew exactly where to find all those murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and human traffickers, as clearly they did, why then did the Biden Administration never act to deport them? Good question.

So far, so good. But closing the borders and deporting criminals is the easy part. What will be Homeland Security’s next step? During the 2020 campaign, President Trump promised to begin “the largest domestic deportation operation in American history,” targeting undocumented immigrants. This could potentially include even individuals who have been granted special status under DACA (the so-called “Dreamers,” persons brought as children to America by undocumented parents), those accorded Temporary Protected Status (TPS), and others granted entry as refugees or on other humanitarian grounds. Republicans suspect, not without reason, that some of these programs have been abused with the intention of manufacturing future Democratic voters or supplying cheap labor for their well-connected donors.

But is it really good for the country and politically smart to start rounding up and deporting millions of illegals? In the existing, long-term population of illegals there are millions with no criminal record who have been living quietly with their families and holding jobs, in some cases for decades. As their advocates like to point out, undocumented immigrants often attend local churches, have children in public schools, and pay some taxes. Setting aside the issue of whether competition from illegals hurts working-class Americans—opinions among economists differ—there is no doubt they make up an important part of the workforce in many parts of the country. The sudden withdrawal of their labor from the economy could be highly disruptive.

Deporting criminal aliens is overwhelmingly popular with American voters. But support for mass deportations drops precipitously when the public is asked whether it is a good idea to expel millions of people who have committed only the misdemeanor of crossing the border illegally. Democrats are losing the immigration issue now, but they are looking forward to scoring big in the next stage of the president’s mass deportation projects. When ICE agents start invading schools, churches, and hospitals to make arrests; and when the military starts building detention centers for potentially millions of people, opposition to Trump’s policies can be expected to mount dramatically. If Democratic-aligned media can collect enough video of immigrants suffering in detention camps, tearful family separations, children denied schooling, and so forth, Trump’s immigration policies could turn into a major wedge issue for Democrats in the 2026 election cycle.

So now is the time to think outside partisan boxes and consider common-sense solutions that would be good for the country. The issue of illegal immigration has long troubled U.S. politics, owing to contrasting moral instincts and conflicting political interests. Republicans have the moral high ground when they insist that illegal immigrants should not be rewarded for breaking our laws. They shouldn’t be given benefits when they haven’t paid the same taxes citizens pay. Tax money lavished on illegals is money not spent on citizens. Above all, they don’t deserve a special path to citizenship. Lawbreakers should not be allowed to “jump the line” ahead of people who have applied legally for permanent residence status, an exhausting and expensive bureaucratic process. As a matter of politics, it is assumed by both Democratic and Republican politicians that if illegals are given “a path to citizenship,” most of them will end up voting Democratic.

For Democrats, the moral case is different. Some among the globalist Left believe that the miserable of the world, the so-called “global majority,” belong to their constituency, so that any unfortunate who wants to come to the U.S. should be allowed to do so. This belief is not widely shared by the broader electorate. More successful are emotional arguments for offering citizenship to illegals. The Democrats have a point that the lives of illegals in our country are often miserable ones. Illegals may live better in a financial situation than in their countries of origin, but their undocumented status offers them few prospects for bettering their lives once they are here. They often feel trapped. They can’t go back to their home countries and visit the families they have there and expect to be able to return. Most live in fear of breaking traffic laws or making other mistakes that will bring them to the attention of the police. They can never be promoted out of low-paying jobs or start a business, and they can never really feel part of their local communities. Getting an education for their children is difficult, and the urban public schools to which many have access are poor.

There is a way, however, to satisfy the legitimate moral concerns of both Republicans and Democrats without changing the current electoral balance of power. If anything, the bargain I propose would likely, in the long run, benefit Republicans. The grand bargain proposed here would provide conditional legal status—worker permits for well-behaved illegals—in return for restrictions on illegals’ ability to apply for citizenship. The proposal would build on current Trump Administration efforts, announced by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, to register illegals. The full deal would look something like this:

• Persons unlawfully present in the U.S. who apply for worker permits by a certain date will have any misdemeanor charges for illegal entry dismissed. Felony charges for making false statements to the immigration authorities or for missing inspections or court appearances could be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Persons guilty of serious felonies, including illegal reentry after deportation, would not be eligible for worker permits. Holders of worker permits would be allowed to work at any job for which they have been lawfully hired, or even to start their own businesses. These worker permits would constitute a category distinct from existing H-1A and H-1B permits, which apply mainly to agricultural workers and persons with specialized skills.
• Guest workers would have the right to travel abroad, with or without their children and parents, and could return back to the U.S. and to their jobs. Some portion of those returning can be expected to reconnect with their home countries and will decide to stay in them, i.e., self-deport.
• Guest workers would be permitted to apply for U.S. citizenship from their home countries. They would not, in other words, be allowed to “jump the line,” although lawful residence in the U.S. and gainful employment here might count in their favor. After ten years of lawful residence, persons holding worker permits would be able to apply for citizenship for their children. They would be allowed at any time to apply for permanent resident status (green cards) for wives and parents, but not for other relations.
• Guest workers would be allowed to receive state and local benefits, including schooling, with the permission of state and local authorities. They would not be eligible for federal benefits like Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare or loans for higher education. They would be required to file federal tax returns but would not pay taxes for Social Security or Medicare. They would not be permitted to join labor unions.
• The states might issue guest workers with driver’s licenses, but these must be stamped Non-Voter. States that failed to do this would lose federal funds for highway construction or other federal programs. If some jurisdictions decide to allow residents with worker permits to vote in state and local elections, they would have to issue them separate voter registration cards.
• Congress would appropriate substantial new resources to the Department of Homeland Security to improve the speed and efficiency of applications for worker permits, lawful residency, and citizenship. The process would no longer be the costly and grindingly slow process it is at present, and that reform alone will likely improve compliance. Some of the federal employees who are unable to justify their salaries to DOGE might be transferred to Homeland Security to help lighten the administrative burden. Being presumptively Democrats and sympathetic toward immigrants, they ought to find the work of improving immigrants’ lives more rewarding than their current make-work employment (aka “bulls**t jobs”).

Natural Allies

The advantages of this proposal may not seem obvious at first sight to Republicans. That’s because they are used to thinking of the vast majority of illegal immigrants as undesirables or potential Democratic voters. Under the above proposal, some percentage of guest workers would surely apply for citizenship. But is it really the case that most of them will end up voting Democratic?

The great majority of illegals in the U.S.—approximately 76%—are Hispanic. Hispanic voting preferences have been shifting rapidly in a Republican direction since 2012. As reported in The New Republic: “After Barack Obama won Latinos by 39 points in 2012, Democrats underperformed among them in 2016. In 2020, Trump made further inroads, culminating in 2024, when Harris won the Latino vote by only 10 points. Over 12 years, that’s a staggering net shift of 29 points toward Trump among Latino voters.” The Economist/YouGov survey of November 2024 showed Trump with 48% favorability among Hispanics.

The Democrats may still believe there is some congenital reason Hispanics should belong to their party, but they are likely mistaken. Hispanics and other illegals are disproportionately male (54%), with low incomes and little formal education. That ought to make them natural MAGA voters. Democrats, now disproportionately the party of women and college-educated urban professionals, will have increasing difficulty appealing to them. Hispanics are far more conservative culturally than the radical progressives who maintain their grip on Democratic politics. In short, the future political loyalties of guest workers who apply for citizenship should not be taken for granted.

And what issues do illegals—the potential population of guest workers—really care about? Most will say they came to this country for a better life. In other words, they came here to make money, leaving poor countries with broken political and economic systems. Studies suggest that some 15-20% of what illegals make gets sent back to their home countries in the form of remittances. Being able to vote in elections is not high on their list of priorities.

The one issue they really care about and pay close attention to, obviously, is immigration. That issue doesn’t automatically make them future Democratic voters. Latinos and other immigrants well remember that President Obama, despite positive headlines for his DACA legislation, still holds the record among U.S. presidents for removal of illegals—three million, way in excess of the numbers deported in President Trump’s first administration.

If Trump’s leadership facilitates legalizing the status of well-behaved illegals, one could expect a further slide of Hispanic support toward Republicans. A shift of just a few percent would make Hispanics into majority Republican voters. The same applies to Asians (including South Asians from India and Pakistan), who make up about 16% of unauthorized immigrants. Those ethnicities have also begun to move into the Republican column. The president who gave the undocumented a real, enduring benefit—legal residence in America—and allowed them to come “out of the shadows” and take part in community life would surely win their gratitude and loyalty.

There would be other political benefits to adopting a guest worker policy as well, both for Republicans and the country at large. It would instantly discredit the many voices who, intentionally or not, are inducing panic in undocumented communities, transparently with the goal of acquiring political power for themselves. Although it is not true that non-citizens vote in detectable numbers in federal elections, the suspicion that they do so, or that the previous administration promoted illegal immigration for that purpose, would be greatly reduced by regularizing the status of unlawfully present workers. A humane policy aimed at alleviating the plight of the undocumented would likely appeal to independent voters as well.

Democrats, who reflexively attack any proposal coming from President Trump, would likely oppose the bargain, further eroding their support among Hispanics, Asians, and independents. And once Hispanics were no longer a net-positive client group for their party, one could expect Democratic enthusiasm for unrestricted immigration to wane. We would hear much less from them about paths to citizenship for illegals, much less special pleading about which groups of immigrants should count as refugees. We would finally be able to address the issue of immigration in a rational way, with less partisan bitterness and at a lower decibel level. We could move forward on important reforms, such as merit standards for legal immigration.

Relaxing deep party tensions over immigration would be only the beginning of possible benefits for the country. These would be both economic and cultural. Legalizing the status of undocumented immigrants would greatly weaken the underground economy, reducing the expense of border control policies and law enforcement and increasing tax revenues.

Culturally, we could also take advantage of one huge difference between immigration to the U.S. and to Europe. In Europe, a very large percentage of migrants are poor Muslims. Low fertility among Europeans and the decay of Christian faith there, combined with a growing percentage of Muslims with high birth rates, threatens to transform Europe’s cultural future radically.

The situation is completely different in America, with its tiny population of Muslims. By reliable estimates, some 83% of immigrants unlawfully present in the U.S. are Christians of a more conservative stamp than most native believers. It is often said these days that America needs a religious revival to rebuild its lost Christian civilization, recover its traditions, and restore its moral standards. But if we want to re-Christianize our country, maybe we just need to start looking in the right places.

The post From Illegal Immigrants to Republican Voters appeared first on The American Mind.