House Democrats’ Surprise Campaign Play: Embracing Border Security

WASHINGTON—Some House Democrats are leaning into border security on the campaign trail after years of playing defense against Republican criticism, hoping to defuse a top political liability headed into the fall elections.

The party now argues that Democrats in competitive races can run on fixing the border, while painting Republicans as obstructionists for rejecting the Senate’s bipartisan border deal, according to a memo from House Democrats’ campaign arm. Republicans currently have a 217-213 majority in the House, and the fight for control of the chamber is seen as a tossup.

Meanwhile, Senate Democrats are teeing up plans to hold a new vote on the bipartisan border deal, which failed in February, while the Biden administration is considering its own actions.

The efforts show Democrats are trying to flip the script on an issue that has long bedeviled them politically, as record numbers of illegal migrants have crossed the southern border since President Biden took office. Immigration has emerged as voters’ top concern, with polls showing they prefer GOP candidate Donald Trump over Biden on the issue.

The House Democrats’ memo, viewed by The Wall Street Journal, points to polling that found February’s Senate deal, designed to sharply cut down on illegal border crossings and speed up asylum claims, was broadly popular with Americans even as Trump and other Republicans said it wasn’t tough enough. The memo charges that Republicans killed the border deal so that they could campaign on the issue and deny Biden a political win.

The memo also highlights the victory by Rep. Tom Suozzi (D., N.Y.) in a hard-fought special election earlier this year. Suozzi campaigned on his support for the border deal, while his Republican opponent, Mazi Pilip, called the pact an “absolute nonstarter.” The memo says Suozzi’s willingness to engage with voters on the issue was a “blueprint” for winning tight races.

Republicans, who blame Biden-era policies for the surge in crossings, argue that Suozzi’s win can’t be chalked up to his stance on immigration, but rather such factors as his opponent’s inexperience and Suozzi’s strong name recognition in the Long Island district he had previously represented.

“Transparent spin can’t obscure these facts—so if Democrats say ‘lean in’ on the border, we say: ‘it’s your political funeral.’” said Jack Pandol, spokesman for the House Republicans’ campaign arm.

Republicans passed a border bill in the House last year, but the Senate declined to take it up.

In an interview, Suozzi said he emphasized immigration because it is what people in his district were talking about—after nearly 200,000 migrants came to the New York area from the border, many of them on buses paid for by the state of Texas. His internal polling showed it was a key issue.

“Democrats have to recognize this is not just a Republican issue, this is an American issue. When you see the images on television of people streaming across the border, and it looks chaotic, then you are like, ‘Hey, something is wrong here,’” he said.

On the Senate side, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York told Democrats that he is considering bringing the bipartisan bill back up for a vote, according to a person familiar with the matter. News of the potential vote was reported earlier by Axios.

The border situation “is unacceptable,” Schumer told reporters Wednesday. “Our Republican colleagues may have given up on acting on the border, but Democrats have not,” he said.

Polls show that voters give Republicans an edge over Democrats on securing the border. A Wall Street Journal survey in February found that immigration ranked as the top issue for voters, surpassing the economy and inflation. In the same poll, 65% of voters said they disapproved of Biden’s handling of border security, and 71% said developments in immigration and border security are headed in the wrong direction.

After the border deal’s collapse, Biden wavered about whether to issue an executive order that would mimic one of its key provisions, allowing the government to effectively turn away any asylum seeker who crosses the border illegally. Biden’s legal advisers have warned that such an action, unless passed by Congress, would likely be quickly struck down in court, and border officials have told him the order would have very little effect without the billions of dollars the bipartisan border deal would have invested to hire personnel.

Biden has said in interviews and to associates that he is likely to move ahead with such an order anyway, in large part to show voters he is taking any steps possible to control the border.

On Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security proposed a rule that will screen asylum seekers earlier in the process for reasons they can’t qualify for asylum, such as previous criminal convictions.

Immigrant advocates believe the change will deny asylum seekers due process, because they likely wouldn’t be able to find lawyers before a screening where they could be determined to be ineligible for protection. The policy will take months to finalize, though, and could never take effect if Trump wins in November and decides not to stick with it.

Write to Natalie Andrews at [email protected] and Michelle Hackman at [email protected]