Democrats Aid Pro-Amnesty GOP Rep. Newhouse with Title 42 Theater

Concerned Democrats staged a theatrical committee vote to help an embattled Republican, Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-WA), survive his August 2 primary race against a small-government candidate endorsed by former President Donald Trump.

The vote was “just a political ploy [by Democrats] for him to try to remain in office,” responded Loren Culp, the Trump-backed candidate:

This is the Democrats paying him back for voting to impeach President Trump, for him voting for red flag laws, and for him voting for the January commission … They’re giving him some payback to help him make it through the election.

“If you look at what the bills that he’s proposed, he’s proposed bills to incentivize people coming across our southern border illegally by giving them amnesty,” Culp added.

An April poll by Spry Strategies showed Culp leading Newhouse by 28 percent to 19 percent. The Democrat, Doug White, scored just 18 percent of the very conservative district. The top two vote-getters will face each other in a runoff after the August 2 primary, giving Democrats a second opportunity to help Newhouse survive the Culp challenge.

The poll also showed that only 11 percent of local voters strongly approve of Newhouse.

Newhouse is an orchard owner in Washington State and has pushed the GOP to endorse a bill that gives farm companies an endless supply of cheap foreign labor to help pick crops. He worked with Democrats to draft the 2021 “Farm Workforce Modernization Act” which cuts the migrant workers’ cash wages but rewards them with a fast track to citizenship and the ballot box.

The flood of cheap labor imported into the district cuts wages for young Americans and raises their rents.

The cheap migrant labor also ensures that farm companies face little pressure to invest in new harvesting technology that allows Americans to earn more wages by getting more work done each day. That cheap-labor/low-tech process leaves the agricultural part of the state relatively poor while tech companies raise the wealth of the coastal districts.

“He doesn’t care about that at all,” Culp said about Newhouse. “He cares about cheap labor for his farm and other farms, artificially driving [wages] down, and letting people come across our border … This is just for him to try to remain in office, and it’s Democrats helping him out with it.”

“We have to stop all immigration, put a moratorium on it, and figure out who’s here, get the bad ones out for sure,” Culp said, adding that the illegal migrants impose costs on local schools, hospitals, and anti-poverty programs.

Establishment media outlets in the district favor Newhouse and cheap-labor immigration policies.

Newhouse’s amendment would extend the Trump-imposed Title 42 border barrier until six months after the White House rescinds the coronavirus emergency declaration. “Title 42 is critical to managing the current border crisis,” Newhouse told the House border-security appropriations committee on June 24:

We know that once Title 42 is rescinded, there will be a flood of migrants at the border … My amendment would give additional time for [border officers] an additional six months to plan what could be a turning point for border operations.

“I rise in opposition to this amendment,” responded Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), the pro-Title 42 chairwoman of the homeland security subcommittee:

The vast majority of the [migrants] pose no threat to the country [officials should] focus on actual threats posed by smugglers and the relatively small number of people who do pose a threat … Individuals who are likely to be expelled under Title 42 take increasingly dangerous paths in order to evade the Border Patrol, leading to injuries and deaths and smuggling vehicles, and to migrants being held for ransom stash houses … As an immigration enforcement policy, it is an abject failure. Meanwhile, it contravenes our asylum laws, generally denies due process to migrants, and makes the job of the Border Patrol harder than it has been. I strongly urge a No vote on the amendment.

However, the Democrats remained silent during the voice vote, allowing Newhouse’s amendment to pass the committee vote.

The amendment has a long path ahead of it. Democratic leaders can remove it from the bill before it gets to a floor vote. The Democratic caucus can kill it during the floor debate. The Senate can strip it out during the end-of-year budget conference, long after the August 2 primary.

Democrats clearly oppose Title 42. On June 22, 215 Democrats united to kill a similar GOP bill by Rep. Yvette Herrell (R-NM).

Migration supporters were initially shocked by the Newhouse vote. But their worries quickly dissipated.

Outside Congress, President Joe Biden’s pro-migration deputies are also trying to kill the Title 42 barrier. But they are being forced to maintain it for at least several months because of a court decision.

Nonetheless, Biden’s pro-migration border chief is exempting several classes of migrants from the barrier. In May, for example, they used the barrier to exclude only half of the migrants who appeared at the border.

Media reports say that a large number of Democrats want to show support for the Title 42 barrier, largely because the public overwhelmingly opposes Biden’s loose border policies.

The June 24 vote may have been a Democratic gift to Newhouse, said Mark Krikorian, the director of the Center for Immigration Studies. “Or [Democrats] are confident that the administration is gutting [Title 42] anyway so it’s just political CYA for Democrats without it actually reducing the flow of people that much across the border,” he added.

Extraction migration also distorts the economy and curbs Americans’ productivity, partly because it allows employers to use stoop labor instead of machines. Migration also reduces voters’ political clout, undermines employees’ workplace rights, and widens the regional wealth gaps between the Democrats’ big coastal states and the Republicans’ heartland and southern states.

An economy built on extraction migration also alienates young people and radicalizes Americans’ democratic, equality-promoting civic culture because it allows wealthy elites to ignore despairing Americans at the bottom of society.

The extraction migration economic policy is hidden behind a wide variety of noble-sounding excuses and explanations. For example, progressives claim that the U.S. is a “Nation of Immigrants,” that Americans have a duty to accept foreign refugees, and that the state must renew itself by replacing populations.

But the colonialism-like economic strategy also kills many migrants, exploits poor people, and splits foreign families as it extracts human-resource wealth from the poor home countries. The migration policy also minimizes shareholder pressure on companies to build up complementary trade with poor countries.

The economic policy is backed by progressives who wish to transform the U.S. from a society governed by European-origin civic culture into a progressive-directed empire of competitive, resentful identity groups.

“We’re trying to become the first multiracial, multi-ethnic superpower in the world,” Rep. Rohit Khanna (D-CA) told the New York Times on March 21. “It will be an extraordinary achievement … we will ultimately triumph,” he boasted.

Not surprisingly, the wealth-shifting extraction migration policy is very unpopular, according to a wide variety of polls. These polls show deep and broad public opposition to labor migration and the inflow of foreign contract workers into careers sought by young U.S. graduates.

Clarification: The article has been modified to remove the statement that Newhouse’s office did not respond to questions from Breitbart News. A request for comment was sent to an incorrect email address.