by Mike SmithPresident Donald Trump and GovernorPhil Scott are both Republicans, but that’s where the similarities end. Nothing illustrates the differences between these two politicians more than their opposing positions on immigration.
President Trump issued an executive order that attempted to temporarily halt immigration from seven, mostly Muslim, countries. In the case of Syria, it’s an indefinite ban. The president said he wanted time to review the vetting process of refugees coming from these countries to ensure Americans are safe from terrorism. In contrast, Governor Scott has aligned himself with Vermont’s Democratic attorney general as well as the Democratic legislative leadership to denounce the ban and supports legislation to circumvent the order.
Public support for the travel ban will either wax or wane in various public opinion polls, depending on how the poll question is asked, according to Kathy Frankovic, polling director at YouGov. “Historically, if you ask people about illegal immigration and terrorism, you can guess that very high majorities will say it’s a serious problem,” Frankovic told Vox, an online news service. On the other hand, Frankovic observed, if the question implies that the ban is on those refugees fleeing oppression, Americans seem to respond differently.
Vox illustrates the importance of how the question is asked by comparing two recent polls. ARasmussen poll asked whether respondents supported the Trump ban. The question contained the names of the countries that were affected by the travel ban, and the ban’s purpose, according to the question, was to “screen out potential terrorists from coming here.” Fifty-seven percent of Americans supported the ban according to the Rasmussen poll. When CBS News polled Americans about the ban, it asked the question differently. It asked respondents if they supported an executive order that prevented refugees from coming to the United States who are “forced to leave their country due to violence or persecution.” Fifty-one percent of Americans opposed the ban, according the CBS News poll.
You’ll hear President Trump stress that his travel ban is about protecting Americans, while Governor Scott and Democratic leaders in Vermont talk about how this ban prevents the United States from welcoming refugees fleeing oppression. How you frame the debate will determine what Americans, and Vermonters, think about the ban.
Although Scott is a Republican, he has some latitude in opposing Trump without adverse political impacts, at least in the near term, because of the political landscape of this state. In Vermont, those identifying themselves as Republicans are outnumbered by Democrats, almost two to one. Scott was elected because he formed a coalition of voters that included Republicans, independents (the largest voter bloc), and some Democrats, too.
Governor Scott is less dependent on Republicans for his re-election than governors elsewhere, and therefore he can be more resistant to the president’s executive order without political repercussions. However, this doesn’t mean that Scott can ignore his Republican base altogether. Some Republicans are undoubtedly angered at his position on immigration. Others are upset with the number of state officials appointed by the governor that are holdovers from Governor Shumlin’s administration. Still others are upset with his policies. At some point Scott may need these Republicans in order to win future elections, especially close elections. So he must walk a fine line to make sure he maintains his broad coalition while not alienating too many Republicans.
But Governor Scott has four things going in his favor: First, many Vermonters view President Trump unfavorably. Second, Vermont, according to a recent Gallup poll, is the most liberal state in the nation and not likely to support Trump’s policies, including immigration. Third, immigration may not generate the same intensity among Vermont Republicans as it does with Republicans in other parts of the country. Here, Republicans are probably more focused on the state’s economy, affordability and taxes, rather than immigration. As long as Scott does not abandon his fiscal promises, he probably will maintain the support of Vermont Republicans. And fourth, Scott still remains popular with Vermonters.
Reviewing our immigration policies from time to time is not something that should be met with massive resistance. In fact, it should be done routinely. But the executive order on immigration is pitting a Republican president against a Vermont Republican governor.
What’s missing in this debate is an attempt to strike the proper balance between maintaining our reputation as a welcoming country for refugees while enacting immigration policies that protect our security. Neither Trump, nor his opponents, including Governor Scott, has attempted to strike that balance. Unfortunately, the haphazard, chaotic and half-baked way the Trump administration chose to roll out this immigration executive order may have prevented reasoned discussion regarding our borders. Instead, we are at each other’s throats, and in the end we are doing little to advance coherent immigration policy in this country.
Mike Smith is the host of the radio program, “Open Mike with Mike Smith,” on WDEV 550 AM and 96.1, 96.5, 98.3 and 101.9 FM. He is also a political analyst for WCAX-TV and WVMT radio and is a regular contributor to Vermont Business Magazine, the Times Argus and Rutland Herald. He was the secretary of administration and secretary of human services under former Gov. Jim Douglas.