誰偷走了他們的“美國夢”？
只要你努力工作，遵守規(guī)則，就可以過上更好的生活。這是美國夢的精髓。然而，在唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)看來，無數(shù)“夢想者”——童年時期非法進入美國的移民——違反了規(guī)則。約三分之二的美國人不這樣認(rèn)為，其中包括幾乎所有知名商業(yè)領(lǐng)袖和許多共和黨要人。如果國會未能保護這些“夢想者”，特朗普可以歸咎于他們。反正特朗普是永遠(yuǎn)不會讓皮球停在自己面前的。
He has given Capitol Hill six months to agree on what it has been unable to do in more than 30 years: pass an immigration reform bill. After that, most Dreamers will be at fate’s mercy. The odds that this Congress, which has had the least productive first eight months of any in US history, will do so are slim. No big reform is likely without White House support. In theory, Mr Trump is neutral on whether it should legalise the Dreamers, or kick them out of the country. In reality he is in favour of deportation. He just wants others to press the eject button.
他給了國會六個月時間，就如下這件國會三十多年都未能做成的事情達成一致：通過一項移民改革法案。在那之后，大多數(shù)“夢想者”就只能聽天由命了。本屆國會前八個月的工作堪稱美國史上最低效，它用六個月通過這一法案的可能性很小。沒有白宮的支持，任何重大改革都不太可能實現(xiàn)。理論上，在白宮該給這些“夢想者”合法身份還是該將他們趕出美國的問題上，特朗普是中立的。實際上，他支持將他們驅(qū)逐出境。他只是想讓別人按下“驅(qū)逐”按鈕。
The move is quintessential Trump on many levels. First, his reasoning is typically garbled. All of a sudden Mr Trump believes in constitutional limits to his power. Barack Obama offered a reprieve to the Dreamers by executive order, thus supposedly trampling on Congress’s turf. But that interpretation is by no means clear-cut. Other scholars say presidents have the right to interpret how to enforce the law. Mr Obama simply rolled out a “deferred action” on one type of illegal immigrant — children brought to the US by their parents, typically around the age of six.
從許多層面上看，這都是典型的特朗普式做法。首先，他邏輯混亂。突然間，特朗普相信起憲法對總統(tǒng)行政權(quán)的限制了。巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)以行政命令的方式讓“夢想者”暫時免于被驅(qū)逐，因而理論上侵犯了國會的地盤。但這種解讀根本不嚴(yán)密。一些學(xué)者稱，總統(tǒng)有權(quán)解釋如何執(zhí)行法律。奧巴馬只是針對一種類型的非法移民——通常在六歲左右被父母帶至美國的兒童——推出了一項“暫緩遣返行動”(deferred action)。
Even if the courts rejected special treatment for Dreamers, Mr Trump has a history of giving judges the middle finger. That was his response to the various courts that ruled against his “Muslim ban” on travellers from six Muslim-majority nations earlier this year. He is appealing against them to the Supreme Court. When it comes to the fate of the Dreamers, however, Mr Trump is a paragon of executive modesty. His move seems even odder 10 days after he stretched the limits of presidential clemency to pardon Joe Arpaio, a former Arizona sheriff who was convicted of racial profiling.
即便法院拒絕為“夢想者”提供特殊待遇，特朗普也不是沒有對法官亮過中指。今年早些時候多家法院否決特朗普“禁穆令”(針對六個穆斯林占多數(shù)國家的旅行者)的時候，他就是這樣回應(yīng)的。他正在向最高法院提出上訴。然而，到了關(guān)系“夢想者”命運的事情上，特朗普卻變成了克制總統(tǒng)行政權(quán)的典范。讓他的這一舉動更顯奇怪的是，10天前，他還以考驗總統(tǒng)特赦權(quán)限度的方式，赦免了因種族貌相(racial profiling)而被定罪的亞利桑那州前警長喬•阿爾帕約(Joe Arpaio)。
So much for the law. Then there is Mr Trump’s odd economics. Much as he would love to help the Dreamers, his first duty is to help the “the unemployed, struggling and forgotten Americans”. African Americans, in particular, are victims of illegal immigration, says the White House. Here Mr Trump is falling for the lump of labour fallacy, which assumes the economy has a fixed number of jobs. If America deports 800,000 people, the thinking goes, the same number of jobs will open up.
由此可見，他關(guān)于尊重法律的理由站不住腳。此外，特朗普的經(jīng)濟盤算也很奇怪。盡管他很樂意幫助“夢想者”，但他的首要職責(zé)是幫助那些“沒有工作、身處困境、被遺忘的美國人”。白宮表示，非洲裔美國人受非法移民的沖擊尤其嚴(yán)重。在這里，特朗普犯了“勞動總量固定”的錯誤——假定美國經(jīng)濟中只有固定數(shù)量的就業(yè)機會。這種思維認(rèn)為，如果美國驅(qū)逐80萬人出境，同樣數(shù)量的工作崗位就將空出來。
It is untrue of course. It is also hypocritical. Mr Trump seems only to remember “forgotten Americans” when they serve as rhetorical victims of other groups. Though the president is neutral on what happens to the Dreamers, he supports a bill that would halve legal immigration to America.
這當(dāng)然是假的，也很虛偽。當(dāng)特朗普說到受其他族群沖擊的美國人時，他記得的似乎只是“被遺忘的美國人”。盡管特朗普對“夢想者”的遭遇持中立態(tài)度，但他支持一項將進入美國的合法移民數(shù)量減半的法案。
But the most visceral target of President Trump’s action is Mr Obama. By helping the Dreamers, Mr Obama had violated “the core tenets that sustain our republic”, Mr Trump said. In so arguing, Mr Trump did not just misportray the American creed. He nullified it. But that may well be an afterthought. The thread that links Mr Trump’s actions since taking office is his obsession with undoing all of his predecessor’s legacy.
但是，特朗普此舉最終目標(biāo)是奧巴馬。特朗普表示，通過幫助“夢想者”，奧巴馬違反了“維系我們這個共和國的核心信條”。特朗普的這種說法不止是歪曲了美國信條——他毀掉了美國信條。但這說法很可能是他事后想出來的。自上任以來，特朗普行為的主線就是不遺余力地消除其前任的一切政治遺產(chǎn)。
Mr Trump has repeatedly tried to repeal Obamacare — and failed, much to his chagrin. He has reversed Mr Obama’s partial opening up to Cuba. He has undone most of Mr Obama’s anti-pollution actions. And he has pulled the US out of the Paris deal on global warming. Dreamers were always on his hit list. Even where Mr Trump has continued Mr Obama’s policies, notably on Afghanistan, he presented it as a departure. Anyone hoping Mr Obama’s landmark Iran nuclear deal will survive Mr Trump’s first year should take note. It is in his sights. The same applies to Mr Obama’s US-South Korea trade deal.
特朗普已多次試圖廢除“奧巴馬醫(yī)改”(Obamacare)，又多次失敗——令他惱火不已。他推翻了奧巴馬政府對古巴部分放開的政策。他取消了奧巴馬的大部分反污染行動。他還讓美國退出了解決全球變暖問題的《巴黎協(xié)定》。“夢想者”一直就在他的打擊名單上。即便在繼續(xù)推行奧巴馬政策的領(lǐng)域——主要是阿富汗問題——他也采用了“新戰(zhàn)略”這樣的表述。寄望于奧巴馬具有里程碑意義的伊朗核協(xié)議能挺過特朗普上任第一年的人們都應(yīng)注意了。該協(xié)議在他的目標(biāo)名單上。奧巴馬的美韓貿(mào)易協(xié)定也是一樣。
Can Mr Trump ever forgive Mr Obama? It may be too much to expect. Mr Trump is like Captain Ahab on a never-ending hunt. Unlike Ahab’s whale, however, Mr Obama cannot be harpooned. Mr Trump essentially launched his political career in 2011 when he accused Mr Obama of faking his birth certificate. He was rightly mocked for alleging Mr Obama was born in Africa.
特朗普能饒過奧巴馬嗎?或許不能。特朗普就像一心捕殺大白鯨的亞哈船長(Captain Ahab)。然而，不同于亞哈追捕的鯨魚，奧巴馬不能被魚叉擒住。特朗普真正開啟自己的政治生涯就是在2011年，當(dāng)時他指控奧巴馬偽造出生證明。由于斷言奧巴馬出生與非洲，特朗普理所當(dāng)然地受到了嘲諷。
Long before Mr Trump thought of the Dreamers, Mr Obama was his original illegal immigrant. It is hard to forget how well Mr Obama ridiculed him for having spread the mother of all fake news stories. Innocents are still paying the price for Mr Trump’s humiliation.
在特朗普想到“夢想者”很久之前，他最初想到的非法移民就是奧巴馬。很難忘記奧巴馬當(dāng)初是如何奚落特朗普傳播了一條假新聞之王的。無辜的人們?nèi)栽跒樘乩势债?dāng)初所受的羞辱付出代價。
