Readers debate if Gov. Bill Lee was right to visit border and defend Texas against Biden
Editor’s note: Today's debate is on immigration policy and border security. If you would like to join the conversation, send a letter of 250 words or fewer to letters@tennessean.com. Include your full name, address and contact information for verification; only writers' names, cities/towns and ZIP codes will be published.
Has immigration debate affected Gov. Lee’s moral compass?
Re: “Gov. Bill Lee defies famed Tennessee hospitality by backing Texas' harsh border policy,” guest opinion column by Lisa Sherman Luna, Jan. 31 (online) and Feb. 4 (print).
The guest column by Lisa Luna Sherman regarding Gov. Bill Lee forgetting Tennessee hospitality was excellent.
When Bill Lee campaigned for governor, his message was steeped with admirable moral platitudes. Now, however, his Texas visit and tacit approval of Texas Governor Gregg Abbott's reckless, life threatening border actions have caused me to wonder about Mr. Lee's moral compass.
Can such blatant disregard for human life and loving one's neighbor ever be compatible? I think not. Governor Lee needs to be consistent with his actions and moral messaging.
Otherwise, he is just a clanging cymbal, never worthy of my support at the ballot box.Let us welcome new arrivals to our state with compassionate support.
Mark Dorais, Nashville 37217
We must secure our border as a matter of quality of life
My comments on the current immigration problem along our Southern Border are in response to an invitation, to do so, posted in a recent Tennessee Voices newsletter.
The problem is simply our inability to control and properly vet the overwhelming number of immigrants swarming across our border. The Southern border is like a sieve.
The previous Administration’s plan was to plug the holes in the sieve by building a wall along the border that would direct human traffic to “funnels” or control points so that each could each handle a manageable number of immigrants for processing. The number of immigrants legally entering would be controlled by the number of “funnels.” This would make costs manageable as well as reduce the effectiveness of the cartels that deal in human trafficking and drug smuggling.
This plan was working before the current Administration took office and is the logical answer to effective border control today. Until the numbers can be controlled, the cost of not securing our Southern Border is going to rise as reflected in the increasing fiscal impact on some of our major cities. The quality of life in cities like New York and Chicago is on the decline and resulting in many citizens having to choose between leaving or revolting. Not good!
Richard J Baines, Murfreesboro 37130
U.S. government is complicit with border crisis
My concern regarding the border crisis is different from the usual concerns about criminals entering or refugees inundating our cities.
My question is why there isn’t more emphasis on why the people come. So many are fleeing countries that have been taken over by lawlessness and violent groups such as the cartels. And how have the cartels been able to seize power, e.g., in Mexico?
They have received huge shipments of arms manufactured in the U.S., coming across the border into Mexico illegally and arming the cartels with the Mexican government unable to get ahead of this onslaught.
If we don’t want this massive influx of refugees coming here then it behooves our government to stop the huge influx of weapons going south through our gun show loophole, legislation which Congress has still failed to pass since we personally lobbied Congress about back in 2001!
We may not be able to economically bail out all the dysfunctional leadership of these countries, but surely we can do something to cut down on one source of destabilization by limiting weaponry coming unabated across the border from the U.S.
Susan Menking, Nashville 37204
Border security politics are all about power
To avoid being narrow minded, I try to understand what motivates people I disagree with. As an example, for a long time I have failed to understand why many politicians are in favor of open borders when it seems so obvious that the hordes of undocumented immigrants flooding into our country is not a good thing.
Inflation stressed taxpayers have to foot the bill for food, shelter, travel, etc., for these uninvited masses.
Perhaps worst of all are the powerful drug cartels that are responsible for bringing in tons of fentanyl and other narcotics that end up killing Americans.
I just couldn't figure it out until recently when I finally realized that it is all about political power. Why do Democrats want to give citizenship to those brought to the U.S. as children called "Dreamers"? Why is there a push to count all residents regardless of citizenship in the Census that directly influences representation in congress?
Lisa Sherman Luna, executive director of Tennessee Immigration and Refugee Rights Coalition, admitted that the goal should be to "create an opportunity for citizenship to those already here."
Democrats believe that most of these undocumented immigrants will finally get citizenship and vote for Democrats. I believe leaving our borders wide open and ruining our country just to gain political power is nothing short of unconscionable.
John Bridges, Nashville 37217
Bill Lee is right to want to defend the U.S.-Mexico border
Re: “Did Bill Lee forget Tennessee is known for hospitality?" by Lisa Sherman Luna, Feb. 4.
First of all, I offer a brief history of our Tennessee Volunteer history for Ms. Luna.
Tennessee was known as the Volunteer State when a large number of volunteers went with Gen. Andrew Jackson down to New Orleans to fight the British in the War of 1812.
More than 20 years later, Davy Crockett and about 30 volunteers went to the Alamo where Crockett died on March 6, 1836. Again Tennessee answered the call for volunteers – this time to support Texas.
Then another history-making year was 1848 – when the Mexican-American War broke out. Tennessee sent about 30,000 volunteers who responded to the call for only 2,800 men. Again this enhanced the name Volunteer for Tennessee.
In the first decade of the 1900s, University of Tennessee officially adopted the name Volunteers. We have been known as the Volunteer state ever since.
I am not equating Bill Lee with Andrew Jackson or Davy Crocket or the men of the Mexican-American War. Lee was only embodying the Tennessee Volunteer spirit by, once again, supporting our Texas brothers and sisters!
In no way should anyone impute Gov. Bill Lee's intentions as a volunteer to help Gov. Abbott fight against the influx of undocumented immigrants past our Southern border with Texas. Bill Lee and Gov. Abbott approve of legal immigration, but not the current administration’s policies.
Anyone who attacks our state when we go and support other states and offer to volunteer needs to know our history and not be so critical when we do offer to help.
Tennesseans will always support lawful immigration and will always volunteer when called. Bill Lee Did not Forget that Tennessee is the Volunteer state!
Paul Knowles, Nashville 37211
Lee abets Abbott in snubbing the Constitution
Is there any meaning to oaths of office? Has Gov. Bill Lee violated his oath of office? Has he placed Tennessee National Guard members in a position that violates their oaths of office.
The governor and members of the National Guard all take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the governor of Texas cannot keep the U.S. federal officials from controlling the border and cannot place razor wire in the river to stop people from crossing.
Governor Lee has publicly supported the effort by Gov. Greg Abbott the disobey this court order and has sent the Tennessee National Guard to assist in violating the Constitutional decision of the Supreme Court as well as the Constitution itself which assigns to the federal government the sole responsibility for our borders.
Are not Lee's actions in violation of this oath? Is he not forcing our National Guard members to violate their oaths?
Donald Dawson, Nashville 37212
Columnist is only half-right about MAGA
Re: “MAGA is no longer fighting the Republican establishment. It is the GOP establishment,” column by Cameron Smith, Jan. 31 and Feb. 4 (print).
Recently, Cameron Smith informed readers that “MAGA is the new Republican establishment,” replete with numerous examples. I agree. He then points out some failings in the MAGA movement including failure to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and electoral loses in 2018, 2020 and 2022, noting that “Trump has taken none of the blame,” and implying that MAGA voters blame the old Republican establishment, Democrats, the deep state, “and just about every other possible explanation that doesn’t involve a serious look in the mirror.”
Fair enough. They’re delusional, but …
Mr. Smith ends with the idea that MAGA came about due to political elites having a disconnect with the people and constant justifications for policy failures. I disagree.
I believe MAGA came about because goal posts were moved, success could only occur when Republicans got their way, compromise was the enemy. We see it in the current dysfunctional House where attempts to pass a bipartisan bill on immigration are DOA. Quit whining about policy failures when Republicans haven’t laid out policy initiatives in years. Repealing ACA is not policy when 20 million people lose insurance and Republicans offer no alternatives.
Republicans need to look at MAGA for what it is, an extremist political ideology, not a functioning political party that can do business with the other half of the country. Until then, they’ll keep losing elections in places where they haven’t gerrymandered the outcome and will struggle to attract over 50% of the vote.
As for you Cameron, stop denying it to your friends and yourself, you’re MAGA.
Tim LaGrow, Antioch 37013
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Border security: Bill Lee's defense of Texas spurs readers to debate
