Letter: Response to immigration ban was poorly implemented

To the editor:

U.S. Rep. Erik Paulsen says Donald Trump’s immigration ban was “poorly implemented.” But it’s Paulsen’s response to Trump that’s poorly implemented.

Any manager, executive, or hockey mom could tell that Trump’s implementation of the ban was bad. Poor communication, unclear directives and questionable authority turned hard-working officers in airports into Keystone Kops, embarrassing them, the federal government and the country. There’s little dispute there.

Where Paulsen falls short is failing to go beyond that. He says immigrants should be vetted before being admitted. That’s already happening, but Trump argues there’s not enough vetting.

Trump’s excuse is that he’s new to government and needs four months to “find out what the hell is going on.”

But Paulsen has been in government for eight years. He should know what is going on. If Paulsen has a problem with the immigrant vetting process, specifically what is the issue? And why has he been silent on this critical issue since 2008?

In fact, why has Paulsen been silent on so many of the issues the president has raised? Did 3 million people vote illegally? Should we send our military into Mexico to root out some “bad hombres?” Should we tax imports from Mexico to pay for a border wall?

We need to know where Paulsen stands. His silence is not golden.

Dave Bender
Edina