Rep. Steve King to DREAMer Erika Andiola and Cesar Vargas: "You keep your card. I don’t do individual policy. I do national policy for everyone."
Steve King, you may recall, is the Congressman who said: “For every [DREAMer] that's a valedictorian, there's another 100 out there that they weigh 130 pounds and they've got calves the size of cantaloupes because they're hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert.”
One-hundred to one is a pretty high ratio of drug smugglers to valedictorians, but it’s arguable that those cantaloupe-calved guys are not staying in the US. They make their living running drugs to the US and running other items back. They are not, by definition, DREAMers. Which begs a question: if, as he protested, Rep. King was only talking about drug runners during his various deportation comments, why did he identify drug runners as DREAMers, liken immigration to a slow terrorist attack and say: "As soon as they raise their hand and say, 'I'm unlawfully present in the United States,' we're not going take your oath into the military, but we're going to take your deposition and we have a bus for you to Tijuana.”
Erika Andiola and Cesar Vargas were putting exactly that assertion to the test when—after a speech in which the Congressman called for their deportation—introduced themselves to him and asked about his attitude toward them. Erika offered to let him act on his words—she handed him her DACA card and invited him to tear it up. He said, “That’s not what I do,” (If you have not seen the viral video, please do watch.)
King did not distinguish himself by complimenting Erika’s English, grabbing her hand, and offering the above assertion about doing “national policy”. He later denounced the “ambush” as being a typical liberal tactic—trying to make this personal, engaging the emotions.
Several points stand out:
1. To Erika, Cesar and the other people King is focused on creating national policy for, it IS personal. Intensely personal. As Cesar put it, “This is not an abstract political issue, these are our families.”
2. Yes, the DREAMers are trying to evoke emotions: positive, constructive emotions: compassion, justice, loyalty, even pride that the US is a country so great that people like Cesar wish to serve by going into the military and that DREAMers in general wish to contribute to.
3. Mr. King and those on his “side” of the immigration issue are also trying to evoke emotions. The difference lies in which emotions they evoke—notably defensiveness, fear of losing something personally (jobs) or collectively (ethnic or national identity), anger, distrust, malice. All negative, destructive emotions.
There's more below the flourish, so please read on.
Public policy has personal consequences and it concerns me that an elected official of my country doesn’t seem to realize that. Rather, King sees a dichotomy between doing “individual policy” and doing “national policy for everyone”. That’s nonsensical; any national policy affects individuals—large numbers of individuals. And therein lies one of the problems that plagues us as a nation: politicians make national policy without an awareness of how it affects the individuals who make up “everyone”.
Worse, they assiduously avoid that awareness.
I started to write that have no sympathy for Mr. King. On reflection, I realize that’s not true. I do feel sympathy for someone who does not understand that the words he speaks, the attitudes he promotes, the actions he takes, and the policies he supports affect real people at a very personal level. I feel deep pity for someone who feels that being made aware of the effects of his words and actions on a personal level is an unfair “tactic”.
In the scriptures of my faith is a passage that relates very directly to how our thoughts and words shape discourse. I think it is pertinent here:
“Every word is endowed with a spirit, therefore the speaker or expounder should carefully deliver his words at the appropriate time and place, for the impression which each word maketh is clearly evident and perceptible. ... One word may be likened unto fire, another unto light, and the influence which both exert is manifest in the world. ...One word is like unto springtime … while another word is even as a deadly poison. It behoveth a prudent man of wisdom to speak with utmost leniency and forbearance so that the sweetness of his words may induce everyone to attain that which befitteth man’s station.” — Bahá’u’lláh,Tablet of Maqsúd
Awareness of the effects of one’s words, attitudes, actions and policies is critical to being, not just a good administrator, but a conscientious citizen of any community, and a better human being—one who makes positive contributions to our shared world.
None of us should dodge the awareness of how our beliefs and the way we express and act on them affects others, but most especially those of us who shape national policy and who claim to be “public servants”. Listening to the current discourse, I am persuaded that many of us are confused about the meaning of servitude and leadership alike.