More Opinion

COMMENTARY: Lucius condemns Trump's immigration plan

Republican candidate for Congress says the United States and Mexico need to strengthen ties; calls Trump's policy proposals "divisive and intolerant"

Donald Trump met with the president of Mexico, Enrique Pena Nieto, (Aug. 31) to talk about the future of America’s southern border.

Mexico is America’s third largest trading partner with over half a trillion dollars in goods going between the two nations. It is important that we strengthen our friendship with Mexico, especially as our local economy relies on legal migrant farm workers.

After leaving Mexico, Trump flew to Phoenix, Arizona to lay out his immigration plan.

Donald Trump’s divisive and intolerant policy proposals are impractical, cumbersome, and would extend the intrusive arm of the federal government. Instead, we must simplify the process for guest workers who live and work here legally and who contribute greatly to our local economy. After all, America’s greatest strength is our diversity and tolerance.

Casey Lucius is a Pacific Grove City Councilwoman and candidate for California Congressional District 20. She is a former board member of Jacob’s Heart and the Americans with Disabilities Act advisory board.

BenitoLink Logo

Become a Member Today

Support your local independent news.

We work hard to give you the news and information you need. By becoming a member, you will be part of something bigger; BenitoLink, your community-supported news source.



Donald Trump's immigration statements certainly lack the eloquent flair of Mr Reagan's semantics, but they both said the same thing. Donald wants to deport 11 million illegals and Ronald said he wanted "to expedite (consistent with fair procedures and our Constitution) the return of those coming here illegally..." Same thing, smoother delivery. Donald wants to eradicate sanctuary cities, Ronald wanted to "penalize those who violate our [federal] laws." Donald has set his election strategy at appealing to the frustrated white grassroots population which requires using the vernacular. Ronald went for people in a higher plane. But both delivered the same message. However, it is the latter people who run the world and Donald has yet shown me that he can communicate with those folks. Maybe 60 days of politiking at a higher plane might help his cause. Perhaps he should hire Ms Lucius' excellent speechwriters to add grace and intellect to his news blurbs.

William McCarey

I disagree. President Reagan led a bi-partisan effort to address immigration and resolved to execute an amnesty program culminating in The Immigration Reform and Control Act signed into law November 6, 1986.

Also known as the Simpson–Mazzoli Act, the new law provided for illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt; candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language. 

The difference between Reagan and Trump is not merely tone or semantics as you suggest. Reagan wrote:

• We have a special relationship with our closest neighbors, Canada and Mexico. Our immigration policy should reflect this relationship.

• We must also recognize that both the United States and Mexico have historically benefited from Mexicans obtaining employment in the United States. A number of our States have special labor needs, and we should take these into account.

• Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration.

• We shall strive to distribute fairly, among the various localities of this country, the impacts of our national immigration and refugee policy, and we shall improve the capability of those agencies of the Federal Government which deal with these matters.

Trump is a bombastic, divisive demagogue and iconoclast. Ms. Lucius - who I believe wrote and contributed the commentary herself to Benito Link - is intelligent and discerning enough to recognize Trump for what he is and separates herself from the predictable political train wreck that Trump has engineered for himself and the Republican party come November 8. 

Submitted by (Seth Capron) on

There's a reason that Jimmy Panetta supports comprehensive immigration reform, not the piecemeal approach offered by Lucius. There are many competing interests and points of view on this contentious issue, and the only practical path to a legislative solution is a comprehensive bill, reflecting compromises on all sides. The Senate passed such a bill a couple of years ago, but it never saw a vote by the House of Representatives. As long as we have a Republican Speaker of the House who follows the Hastert Rule and won't bring anything to the floor without support from a majority of House Republicans, much legislation with popular support won't be given a chance for a fair up or down vote. A vote for Casey Lucius is a vote for continuing undemocratic gridlock in Washington. It's ironic that she voices support for many moderate positions that are out of step with the Republican platform and which won't get past the unreasonable control of a Republican Speaker of the House.

Add new comment

Add Facebook comment

Comment using your Facebook account. Facebook comments will be published on this page, and on Facebook. It will not be posted to the "Recent Comments" list on the BenitoLink front page.