Why is it always one or the other? Can’t we have both?

In Washington, things tend to be either-or. Either you give me the money for a border wall, or I will keep the government shutdown. Either build a wall, or forget about a path to citizenship for the undocumented now living in the U.S. But does it have to be either-or, or can it be both? La Crosse Congressman Ron Kind has a proposal that would allow the federal government to reopen, allow the dreamers to stay, and raise money for a border wall. Kind is recommending a system where those currently living illegally in the U.S. are allowed to stay if they pay a fine of, say, $2000. There would be other requirements, but if they meet them, they could qualify for citizenship. Kind claims that would raise $24 billion, more than enough to pay for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. And even more money could be raised by making these undocumented U.S. citizens who now are required to pay taxes in the U.S. Kind is also pushing other ideas to secure the border other than a wall, such as the use of drone technology to keep our border secure. These seem like reasonable ideas, worthy of debate. Instead, today, the U.S. Senate will vote on two proposals. One from democrats to reopen the government and reopen negotiations over border security, the other a plan to provide money for Trump’s wall. Once again, it is either-or. And neither is likely to get the votes to pass. It is time to consider other options, to allow the government to remain open, and to better secure the nation’s borders.