An immigrant family wades through the Rio Grande while crossing from Mexico into the United States on Sept. 30, 2023 in Eagle Pass, Texas. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)
The incumbent for Maine’s U.S. Senate seat on the November ballot, independent Angus King, has emphasized the importance of finding common ground across party lines to reform immigration policy.
After months of bipartisan negotiations teed up the first immigration policy overhaul in decades, the deal collapsed in a matter of days. While that bill died, the policy proposals within it may still be a starting point for reform in 2025.
King, who has held his Senate seat since 2013 after serving as Maine governor, is being challenged by Republican Demi Kouzounas, Democrat David Costello and independent Jason Cherry.
Maine Morning Star asked Maine’s candidates for U.S. Senate whether they’d support the policies in the bipartisan deal that ultimately fell apart. Specifically, the candidates shared their stance on three planks of the plan: creating a procedure to shut down the border at particularly active times, increasing funding for personnel and expanded capabilities at the nation’s borders, and shortening the wait period for asylum seekers to obtain work permits.
Immigration is often found to be a top concern for voters in polling and has been a throughline in the campaign of former president and Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, whose opposition to the bipartisan deal played a pivotal role in its collapse.
First a part of a larger package also including foreign aid, the immigration reform bill lost Republican support after Trump opposed it, arguing it would be a political gift to President Joe Biden. King had voted in favor of the package.
Later considered as a standalone Senate bill, the immigration reforms again failed, receiving even less support than the combined measure. King also supported the standalone measure in the high chamber.
Here’s how King’s votes stack up against his challengers:
Costello and Cherry said they’d, for the most part, also support the types of reforms in the bipartisan deal.
Kouzounas did not respond to multiple requests for comment regarding her stance on the reforms in the bipartisan deal. On Kouzounas’ campaign website and social media, she’s shared that she’d focus on securing U.S. borders if elected, particularly the southern border, but has not outlined policy plans. She often describes herself as a “daughter of legal immigrants.”
For Cherry, his support of the reforms in the bipartisan deal would hinge on whether any such future legislation also included provisions to tax businesses that rely on mass immigration.
“I am not against immigration,” Cherry said. “We are a nation of refugees, many of whom live in deplorable and unjust conditions. I am just not in favor of mass, unplanned immigration which is paid for by middle class citizens and impacts the urban poor while the firms and politicians that own businesses, such as those in the restaurant, agricultural, and hotel/motel industries, are able to obtain cheap labor on the proverbial taxpayer’s dime.”
While Costello would have voted for the bipartisan deal, he said, “I would have preferred voting for a more comprehensive bill that included more to modernize our outdated immigration system and provisions to create lawful pathways to citizenship for children brought into the U.S. without authorization known as Dreamers, farmworkers, and noncitizens who have been in the country for decades.”
At the time, immigrant advocacy groups argued Democrats gave up too much in negotiations.
One of the specific reforms in the border security bill had been allowing for the border to be shut down at particularly active times. Costello said he would support that measure but Cherry said he was unsure of its merits.
The bipartisan bill would have given the secretary of Homeland Security the option to shut down the border if, during a period of seven consecutive days, more than 4,000 encounters are recorded with migrants. If that number reached 5,000 encounters for a period of seven consecutive days, the U.S. would be required to shut down the border. The only way the border would be shut down within one day would be if there is a combined total of 8,500 migrants encountered.
“It would leave many vulnerable people outside the United States border where they could be preyed upon by other groups, such as drug cartels, unless the Mexican government provides security,” Cherry said.
Instead Cherry said he’d prefer a “triage system,” where the focus for expediting application processing is on the most vulnerable people. “However, as this process will encourage additional immigration, we may need to cap the border processing sadly,” Cherry added.
The legislation also included $20.23 billion for border security, to be used to address existing operational needs, expand capabilities at the nation’s borders, resource the new border policies included in the package, and help stop the flow of fentanyl and other narcotics.
Both Costello and Cherry said they’d be in favor of increasing funding for hiring more personnel and expanding resources at the border, although Cherry said that is “if we can get fair tax contributions to pay for these items from the firms that profit from mass immigration.”
The border security legislation also would have made changes to the timeline for asylum seekers to get work authorization, an issue Maine’s congressional delegation has also been working to address through their own bills.
The Asylum Seeker Work Authorization Act of 2023, sponsored by Republican U.S. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and co-sponsored by King, would shorten the waiting period from 180 days to 30 days, provided that the asylum seekers entered the U.S. through an official port of entry.
Democratic U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree of Maine introduced a similar bill in the House, which does not require asylum seekers to enter the U.S. through an official port of entry.
Overall, both Cherry and Costello would support shortening the waiting period.
Again, Cherry said he’s support such a measure if funded by the businesses that benefit from immigration. He also said that his support would be contingent on the shortened waiting period not imposing “dangers to the U.S. population.”
Costello said he thinks shortening the waiting period to 60 days would be sufficient for reasonable resettlement and integration purposes.
Curious about the immigration policy positions of Maine’s other candidates for U.S. Congress? Read about the stances of Maine’s candidates for the U.S. House for the 1st Congressional District and the 2nd Congressional District.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.