Tuesday, May 7, 2019


Efforts by the big business lobby, Chamber of Commerce, Koch brothers, and George W. Bush Center include increasing employment-based legal immigration that would likely crush the historic wage gains that Trump has delivered for America’s blue collar and working class citizens.


In fact, Trump is steadily moving in the precise opposite direction of what he promised.

Illegal immigration is on track to hit the highest levels in more than

a decade, and Trump has willfully decided to keep amnesty 

advocates Jared, Ivanka, Mick Mulvaney, Marc Short, and 

Mercedes Schlapp in the White House. For all his talk about 

immigration, did he ever consider hiring people who share his 

MAGA vision?

Report: White House Plan Drops Reduction of Legal Immigration

Legal Immigrants
Chip Somodevilla/Getty

The White House is dropping a longtime initiative of President Trump’s that reduces overall legal immigration levels to increase U.S. wages, a senior administration official tells the media.

Throughout 20152016, and 2017, Trump routinely touted his plans to reduce the number of legal immigrants who arrive in the U.S. on a myriad of visas. Since the 1990s, when it was expanded by President George H.W. Bush, legal annual immigration levels have remained at historic highs with about 1.2 million nationals legally admitted every year.
For example, since 1980, the number of legal immigrants admitted to the U.S. every year has not dipped below 525,000 admissions. Since 1999, annual legal immigration levels have not dropped below 645,000 admissions and since 2004, the average number of legal immigrants admitted every year has not dipped below a million admissions.
Trump often touted the need for reducing legal immigration levels to “reduce poverty, increase wages, and save taxpayers billions and billions of dollars” in 2017, arguing that the current importation of more than a million legal immigrants every year “has placed substantial pressure on American workers, taxpayers, and community resources.”
Trump said of the current legal immigration system:
Among those hit the hardest in recent years have been immigrants, and very importantly, minority workers competing for jobs against brand new arrivals. And it has not been fair to our people, to our citizens, to our workers. [Emphasis added]
An immigration plan by the White House, with only preliminary details available, does not seek to reduce any forms of legal immigration to the country, a senior administration official told the Washington Post and The Hill.
“A senior administration official told reporters after the meeting that the president had approved the effort to overhaul America’s immigration system and increase border security last week and that it should now be considered ‘the President Trump plan,'” the Post reported. “… under the plan, the same number of immigrants would be permitted to enter the country, but the composition would change.”
Senator David Perdue (R-GA) — who attended a meeting with Trump on Tuesday — confirmed to Breitbart News these details of the White House plan.
“While this is still in the preliminary stage, the president has proposed maintaining the 1.1 million legal immigrants we bring in each year but changing the mix to respond to the needs of our growing economy and workforce,” Perdue told the media following the meeting.
Instead, the plan shifts the way in which the U.S. admits the more than 1.2 million legal immigrants it accepts every year.
During an interview with Time Magazine last month, senior adviser Jared Kushner said Trump’s focus for reforming the national immigration system centers on protecting Americans’ wages.
“We have a lot of objectives … Number one, he wants to protect American wages,” Kushner said.
High levels of immigration, illegal and legal, puts downward pressure on U.S. wages while redistributing about $500 billion in wealth away from America’s working and middle class and towards employers and new arrivals, research by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine has found.
Economist George Borjas has detailed how the country’s working class, those without a high school diploma, have been primarily hurt by the annual admission of more than a million mostly low-skilled foreign nationals.
“The typical high school dropout earns about $25,000 annually,” Borjas wrote for Politico in October 2016. “According to census data, immigrants admitted in the past two decades lacking a high school diploma have increased the size of the low-skilled workforce by roughly 25 percent. As a result, the earnings of this particularly vulnerable group dropped by between $800 and $1,500 each year.”
Center for Immigration Studies Director of Research Steven Camarota has discovered similar wage depression trends.
For every one-percent increase in the immigrant portion of American workers’ occupations reduces their weekly wages by about 0.5 percent, Camarota finds. This means the average native-born American worker today has his weekly wages reduced by perhaps 8.5 percent because of current legal immigration levels.
In a state like Florida, where immigrants make up about 25.4 percent of the labor force, American workers have their weekly wages reduced by about 12.5 percent. In California, where immigrants make up 34 percent of the labor force, American workers’ weekly wages are reduced by potentially 17 percent.
Likewise, every one-percent increase in the immigrant portion of low-skilled U.S. occupations reduces wages by about 0.8 percent. Should 15 percent of low-skilled jobs be held by foreign-born workers, it would reduce the wages of native-born American workers by perhaps 12 percent.
At current legal immigration rates, about one-in-six U.S. residents will have been born outside of the country by 2060, the Census Bureau has found. The foreign-born population in the U.S. is expected to reach 69 million in the next four decades.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

Amid “full employment,” no recovery in US wages

The US jobs report for November, released Friday, provides further evidence that the much vaunted economic “recovery” in the United States has overwhelmingly benefited Wall Street, whose stock bonanza is based above all on stagnant wages and the destruction of working-class living standards.
The Labor Department reported that nonfarm payrolls increased by 228,000 and the jobless rate remained unchanged at 4.1 percent, the lowest level since January 2000 at the height of the “dot.com” bubble. Manufacturing payrolls rose by 31,000; construction in the aftermath of the hurricanes in Texas and Florida added 24,000 jobs. There was also a boost in the low-wage retail (18,700) and leisure and hospitality (14,000) sectors.
Despite what economists, the media and politicians are calling “full employment,” average hourly earnings rose only 0.2 percent, or five cents, to $26.55 an hour, from a downwardly revised 0.1 percent drop in wages in October. Year-to-year wage increases in November were only 64 cents, or 2.5 percent. If wages rise by another nickel in December, yearly salaries will be up a mere 2.4 percent in 2017, barely above the official projected inflation rate of 2.0 percent.
“President Trump’s bold economic vision continues to pay off,” White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders boasted on Friday. “The economy’s vital signs are stronger than they have been in years,” the New York Times declared. “Companies are posting jobs faster than they can find workers to fill them. Incomes are rising. The stock market sets records seemingly every month.”
Economic analysts have pointed to anemic wage growth, euphemistically called weak “inflationary pressure,” as a major factor in the determination of the Federal Reserve to continue pumping up the stock market with cheap credit. Although most economists expect a modest interest rate hike at the Fed’s meeting Wednesday, Jerome Powell, President Donald Trump’s nominee to head the Federal Reserve, made clear last month at his Senate confirmation hearing that he would keep rates at historically low levels. At the same time, he assured the senators that there was little danger of a wages push because of continuing “slackness” in the labor market, i.e., an ample supply of workers desperate for full-time employment.
Other analysts agree. “Wage growth has been muted thus far,” especially given the “very healthy pace of job creation,” said Michelle Meyer, head of US economics at Bank of America. “It’s been the story throughout the course of this year.”
Describing November’s wage increase as “tepid,” Carl Riccadonna and Yelena Shulyatyeva of Bloomberg Economics wrote: “Even though job gains are well in excess of the natural growth rate for the labor market, labor scarcity is not yet driving wage pressures higher. The moral of the story from this jobs report is that full employment is indeed much lower in the current cycle relative to history.”
US employers are exploiting a reserve of unemployed and underemployed workers to keep wages low. At the same time, corporations are filling positions with young workers who are paid far lower wages and benefits than the older workers they are replacing.
According to the government, 6.6 million workers in the US remain unemployed, including 1.6 million, or nearly one out of four jobless people, who have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more. Another 4.8 million were forced to work part-time last month although they want full-time work, and 1.8 million were “marginally attached” to the labor force. The latter want to work but did not search for employment in the four weeks preceding the survey and were therefore not counted as “unemployed.”
The labor force participation rate, or share of working-age people in the labor force, remained at 62.7 percent in November. However, just 79 percent of the prime-age work force, aged 25 to 54, is actually working—below the rate before the 2008 financial crash.
The situation facing the young generation is particularly dire. According to the Class of 2017 report by the Economic Policy Institute, the unemployment rate for young high school graduates is 16.9 percent (compared with 15.9 percent in 2007 and 12.1 percent in 2000). For young college graduates, the unemployment rate is currently 5.6 percent (compared with 5.5 percent in 2007 and 4.3 percent in 2000), and 7.1 percent for young male college graduates.
The figures are even higher for “underemployment,” which includes young graduates who are involuntary part-timers or are only marginally attached to the labor force. For young high school graduates, the underemployment rate is 30.9 percent (compared with 26.8 percent in 2007 and 20.8 percent in 2000). For young college graduates, the underemployment rate is 11.9 percent (compared with 9.6 percent in 2007 and 7.1 percent in 2000).
The share of young graduates who are “idled” by the economy—neither enrolled in further schooling nor employed—remains higher in the wake of the Great Recession than in 2007 and 2000, the report noted. This includes 15.1 percent of young high school graduates and 9.9 percent of young college graduates, many of whom are burdened with unsustainable debts.
The stagnation of wages is a long-term tendency. Since the early 1970s, hourly inflation-adjusted wages have grown by only 0.2 percent annually, and labor’s share of national income has fallen from nearly 65 percent in the mid-1970s to below 57 percent in 2017.
The deterioration in the social position of the working class and accompanying explosion of social inequality are not simply the result of objective economic laws. They are the intended outcome of the policies of the American ruling class, implemented by successive Democratic and Republican administrations alike. The transfer of production to lower-wage countries, deindustrialization and mass layoffs in the 1980s and 1990s were used as a hammer to beat back the resistance of workers to a historic lowering of their living standards.
This process was aided and abetted by the trade unions, whose pro-capitalist and nationalist orientation left workers without any progressive response to globalization. Far from opposing wage and benefit cuts, the United Auto Workers and other unions suppressed working-class opposition and collaborated with the corporations to slash labor costs in the name of boosting competitiveness and “protecting American jobs.”
This assault was escalated in the aftermath of the global financial crisis of 2008. In the course of the eight years of the Obama administration, the unions limited strikes to the lowest levels since the Labor Department began recording work stoppages in 1947. They collaborated with the Democratic president to crush a potential wages push in 2015-16 as workers in auto, steel, oil, telecom, airlines, rail, health care, retail and other industries, as well as teachers and other public employees, were coming up for new labor agreements.
While workers were determined to recoup lost income after corporate profits had fully recovered from the crash, the unions signed deals that limited pay hikes to the rate of inflation or barely above it while shifting health care and pension costs onto the backs of workers. This was key to Obama’s “in-sourcing” strategy for attracting investment on the basis of low wages, as well as his “quantitative easing” interest rate policy, which fueled the massive rise in the stock market that continues to this day. Virtually all of the net increase in new jobs created under Obama’s “gig economy” were part-time, contingent or temporary OR ILLEGALS!
Trump claims his $1.5 trillion tax cut—including the slashing of the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent—will create more jobs and increase wages. As in the Obama years, however, this massive windfall for big business and the rich will not be used to expand production, let alone increase the wages and living standards of workers. It will go for stock buybacks and dividend increases, which benefit the richest investors.
Wages are so low now that 7.6 million Americans are forced to work multiple jobs, a number not seen in 20 years. In a recent article titled “China-Like Wages Now Part of US Employment Boom,” Forbes noted that a forklift operator hired at $12.75 an hour at Amazon’s Fall River, Massachusetts fulfillment center makes $382 for a 30-hour week, “not much more than the average guy in Beijing,” where the median weekly wage is $329.53. At 40 hours a week, a higher paid, full-time Amazon worker in Fall River earns $28,800 a year before taxes, roughly what Amazon’s billionaire CEO Jeff Bezos pockets every minute.

Fixing America’s Unemployment Crisis

Trump was elected in part on the promise of creating jobs, but how about those who stopped looking for work?
What has been called a “quiet catastrophe” has been unfolding in America: the collapse of work for millions of America’s men, and, more recently, for America’s women as well.
Nicholas Eberstadt, the Henry Wendt Chair in political economy at the American Enterprise Institute, estimates there are 10 million men who are jobless and no longer looking for work. According to calculations using 2014 data, an estimated 3.6 million women are in the same situation.
President-elect Donald Trump has announced a raft of policies meant to spur economic growth and create jobs, but thought needs to be given to what specific measures might help this urgent situation.
How to address this crisis depends on what one understands the problem to be. A graph showing the prime-age employment rate for men provides a kind of Rorschach test for possible responses.
Jared Bernstein, senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, former economic adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, and author of, most recently, “The Reconnection Agenda: Reuniting Growth and Prosperity,” focuses on the cyclical upturns in the jagged line, on those periods of prosperity when workers regain jobs that had been lost.
Eberstadt focuses on the straight trend line, which has been going inexorably and disastrously downward for decades.
Bernstein and Eberstadt represent two typical and contrasting approaches to the unemployment problem.
If you look at the employment rate for prime-age workers, they have actually clawed back two-thirds of their losses since the great recession.
Bernstein published the graph in a chapter he contributed to Eberstadt’s book “Men Without Work,” in which he critiques Eberstadt’s diagnosis of the employment crisis.
For Bernstein, the key is a missing demand for labor.
“If you look at the employment rate for prime-age workers, they have actually clawed back two-thirds of their losses since the Great Recession,” Bernstein said in an interview. “That doesn’t sound to me like a group that has given up. It sounds to me like a group that is not facing ample opportunity.”
For Eberstadt, the problem is a detachment from work.
Using various government databases, Eberstadt gives a composite portrait of those men who are out of the workforce and not looking for work.
They don’t read newspapers, seem to have few familial responsibilities, and tend not to be involved in a church or their communities. They spend most of their time entertaining themselves with TV or hand-held devices; 31 percent admitted to survey takers that they used illegal drugs.
Bernstein counters this portrait by noting that the causal connection may go from a lack of employment opportunities to suffering from depression, which then leads to these men planting themselves on the couch.
As to the individual motives of the non-working, Bernstein said, “We just don’t know.” His advice to Trump is to aggressively pursue full employment, which involves the federal government using a number of different tools.
An officer waits to escort Harvey Lesser, an unemployed software developer, from his apartment after serving him with a court order for eviction in Boulder, Colo., on Dec. 11, 2009.

Stimulus and Subsidies

Bernstein believes the key to the downward trend his graph shows is the disappearance of manufacturing jobs. He favors trade policies that will reduce America’s chronic trade imbalances, which will create more demand for domestic manufacturing.
Bernstein also favors an infrastructure program, with the caveat that “you have to do it right,” he said.
He would like to see the federal government get involved in communities that “don’t have enough businesses, child care slots, supermarkets, and stores—these are a classic market failure.”
The federal government could subsidize private employers in these neighborhoods, giving them an incentive to move their businesses there.
Bernstein also favors special efforts to help those with a criminal record, and Eberstadt agrees finding ways to help this population is key to addressing the problem of non-working adults. He estimates that, by the end of 2016, there will be 20 million with a felony conviction in their past.
Source: Jared Bernstein’s analysis of Bureau of Labor statistics in “Men Without Work” by Nicholas Eberstadt
Bernstein supports the Ban the Box initiative, which calls for removing the box on employment applications that must be ticked by anyone with a criminal record.
He also would like to see direct job creation. The federal government would offer a heavily subsidized wage, and at the local level there would be training for specific jobs that would be available in that area.
He would also like to see the federal government fund an apprenticeship program, which would involve recruiting local businesses.
Finally, Bernstein wants to see the federal government get the macro economic policies right to support full employment. This means using monetary policy—primarily interest rates set by the Federal Reserve—and fiscal policy to stimulate the economy. In Bernstein’s view, we took our foot off the pedal of fiscal stimulus too soon—the United States should have carried larger deficits in the years following the Great Recession.
Eric Gilliam, an unemployed coal miner, in his garage at his home in Lynch, Ky., on Oct. 18, 2014. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

Small Business

Eberstadt said it is “small not big business that employs most Americans.” Over the last eight years, he said, there has been only marginally more small business births compared to small business deaths. A healthy labor market will be one with “many, many new businesses being formed,” he said. Part of the solution? Undo regulatory strangulation and rationalize the tax code.
While Eberstadt agrees that manufacturing jobs are important, he would urge the Trump administration not to “fetishize” manufacturing jobs. The percentage of manufacturing jobs in developed economies around the world has steadily dropped. “Jobs that employ people are good,” Eberstadt said, “whether they have the word manufacturing in them or not.”
In order to protect the manufacturing jobs we do have, Eberstadt urges that we not get into a trade war with China, Mexico, or other countries, saying that trade wars lose jobs, they don’t create jobs.
Clearly there has been a change in the way most people think about what is decent and appropriate for able-bodied, working-age men to do with their lives 
— NICHOLAS EBERSTADT, economist, American Enterprise Institute
Because our entitlement programs are administered locally, they tether people to the states in which they are receiving benefits. Finding a way to cut that tie will give people mobility, which will open up more job opportunities.
Eberstadt’s book is meant to initiate “a broad conversation on our ‘men without work’ problem, a conversation of many voices and differing perspectives.” One important solution is to bring this mostly invisible problem “into the public spotlight.”
Shortcomings in the data we have limit the kinds of conversations we have. The Bureau of Labor Statistics does not count the 13.6 million people who have stopped looking for work as unemployed. When the American public is given an unemployment rate of 4.9 percent, the crisis of the non-working is hidden from them.
The government surveys that are conducted do not reveal the mindsets of those men who are disconnected from work—vital information for anyone who wants to understand this crisis. The Social Security Disability Insurance program does not have an effective audit that would tell us whether it is being used as a substitute for employment insurance.
Butch Youshaw, an unemployed card dealer, with his girlfriend in Henderson, Nev., in 2008. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)


Eberstadt notes that relevant context for the crisis of the non-working is a change in our society’s “mores, and viewpoints, and motivations.”
“Clearly there has been a change in the way most people think about what is decent and appropriate for able-bodied, working-age men to do with their lives in their prime working ages,” Eberstadt said.
Over half of non-working men in their prime years are getting money from at least one government disability program, according to Eberstadt. These funds, Eberstadt writes, finance the non-working’s decision not to work.
He would like to see these programs have a work requirement, as was done 20 years ago with single mothers on welfare. Requiring work stigmatizes non-work and so provides a moral incentive for individuals to move off the couch and back into the workaday world.
Bernstein writes he sees “no good for making these programs less generous or further conditioning them on work.”
Stigma, Eberstadt said, “is often a kinder and gentler way of achieving social objectives than police power.”

HIS CRAP ON BORDERS AND HIS PRETEND WALL IS ONLY ONE MORE TRUMP HOAX! Only a complete fool would believe that Trump is any more for American Legal workers than the Democrat Party for Billionaires and Banksters!
“Trump Administration Betrays Low-Skilled American Workers.”
The latest ad from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) asks Trump to reject the mass illegal and legal immigration policies supported by Wall Street, corporate executives, and most specifically, the GOP mega-donor Koch brothers.
Efforts by the big business lobby, Chamber of Commerce, Koch brothers, and George W. Bush Center include increasing employment-based legal immigration that would likely crush the historic wage gains that Trump has delivered for America’s blue collar and working class citizens.

Mark Zuckerberg’s Silicon Valley investors are uniting with the Koch network’s consumer and industrial investors to demand a huge DACA amnesty


A handful of Republican and Democrat lawmakers are continuing to tout a plan that gives amnesty to nearly a million illegal aliens in exchange for some amount of funding for President Trump’s proposed border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.



Does Trump Really Want “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”? What Does That Mean?

In his fiery Grand Rapids MI rally tonight (March 28), President Donald J. Trump dwelt at length on the collapse of the southern border, perhaps in response to repeated chants of “Build The Wall!”—and, hopefully significantly, came up to but did not actually again repeat his recent calls for increased legal immigration because of the economic boom.
Trump should get out and do more rallies. His Washington entourage obviously want him to cave on immigration. But on tonight’s evidence, his base is telling him NO!
Thus, Trump’s lawyer Jay Sekulow, in multiple interviews this week, said Congress should focus on comprehensive immigration reform in the wake of the Mueller investigation.

Trump attorney Jay Sekulow on @Morning_Joe says instead of investigating the president and those around him, Democrats in Congress should focus on comprehensive immigration reform.

Sekulow, a long-time Beltway immigration enthusiast, claims the president is all for this idea:
“Let’s focus on things for the American people. The president said he is in favor of comprehensive immigration reform—let’s get it,” Sekulow told Fox & Friends
Trump has always been erratic on immigration. He talked about “comprehensive immigration reform” in the past. He considered introducing such a bill in his first months of office. [Trump says again that he's open to an immigration reform bill and may mention it in his speech to Congress, by Brian Bennett, Los Angeles Times, February 28, 2017]
But what could he mean by “comprehensive immigration reform” now? Pre-Trump, it meant Amnesty for all illegal immigrants plus a massive increase in legal immigration. Trump became the Republican nominee campaigning against that idea and has always insisted on his opposition to Amnesty. While Trump has occasionally suggested Amnesty for illegal aliens who came to the U.S. as minors—the so-called Dreamers—in exchange for patriotic immigration reform, he has never proposed legalization for the majority of illegals.
According to some Trump World figures, “comprehensive immigration reform” now means increasing legal immigration without Amnesty. That’s the impression left by a recent op-ed from David Bossie, who was (for a while) a top aide on the Trump 2016 campaign.  [An ‘America First’ immigration policy looks like thisFox News, March 24, 2019]
Bossie asserts that an America First policy should “end the flood of illegal immigration”—while handing out more visas to high-skilled workers. Bossie defends his position by claiming mass immigration benefits the economy. But all of the studies Bossie relies on come from long-time immigration boosters, such as Trump’s chief economist Kevin Hassett:
As President Trump’s Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors Kevin Hassett pointed out in a 2013 paper for the American Enterprise Institute, the United States could add half a percentage point to economic growth by doubling the number of immigrants[emphasis added] it lets into the country, especially if they come on employer-sponsored visas. President Trump’s chief economist continues to make the case that "for a country that has long thought of itself as a nation of immigrants, the U.S. falls far behind almost all the other countries in the number of immigrants it admitted relative to its population size.”
Throughout, Bossie argues there are not enough Americans for these high-skilled jobs. It appears he missed the Council of Economic Advisors’ report that said there are still too many American citizens out of work. [White House Economic Staffers Suggest No Need for More Immigrant Workers, by Neil Munro, Breitbart, March 19, 2019]
These comments by Sekulow and Bossie must disturb immigration patriots. But they should not be treated as the final word on Trump immigration plans. Neither of these men work in the administration, much less handle immigration policy. Bossie was an important figure in the Trump campaign in 2016, but sources tell The Watcher that the 2020 campaign has kept him at a distance. But Bossie’s column certainly reflects the President’s recent rhetoric on the issue.
Trump continues to lament the negative effects of illegal immigration and vows to curtail it. On Thursday, he actually tweeted that he may shut down the border due to the migrant surge:

Mexico is doing NOTHING to help stop the flow of illegal immigrants to our Country. They are all talk and no action. Likewise, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador have taken our money for years, and do Nothing. The Dems don’t care, such BAD laws. May close the Southern Border!

Trump repeated this threat in his Grand Rapids speech. But he has made this threat numerous times before without action—making his “all talk and no action” ding at the Central American governments particularly ironic.
Still, it is good Trump shows that he wants to curb illegal immigration and not allow all of Latin America in. Trump’s Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen is now finally set to ask Congress for the authority to deport unaccompanied minors detained at the border, detain illegal alien families, and make those requesting asylum to do so from their home countries in response to the border crisis. [DHS to ask Congress for sweeping authority to deport unaccompanied migrant children, by Julia Ainsley, NBC News, March 28, 2019]
The Trump administration is still fighting in court to enforce immigration law. His executive orders will bring billions of dollars for the wall. And, fortunately, the president appears to have forgotten about the Dreamers and shows no sign of wanting to legalize illegal aliens.
Nevertheless, at the same time, Trump seemed to be making a call to increase skilled immigration a part of his typical stump speech (which is why Grand Rapids was such a relief). His son-in-law Jared Kushner is still in talks with business interests and pro-Amnesty Conservatism Inc. groups to craft immigration legislation. That proposal will reportedly increase guest worker visas. What else it will do is unknown. It is set to be revealed in early summer. [Trump befuddles his allies with ambitious legislative agenda, by Andrew Restuccia, Heather Caygle and Anita Kumar, Politico, March 28, 2019]
While Trump waits to unveil his proposal, two terrible ideas have emerged from the Democrat-controlled House.
  • House Democrats released their new Dream Act earlier this month. It would give a pathway to citizenship to Dreamers and aliens covered by Temporary Protected Status and Deferred Enforced Departure--legalizing millions of foreign nationals.
But while this is expected to pass the House, Senate Republicans show no interest in it and will likely kill it in the upper chamber. [Why once-supportive Senate Republicans may sink House Dreamer bill, by Alan Gomez and Eliza Collins, USA Today, March 13, 2019]
  • Long-time immigration squish GOP New York Rep. Peter King (NumbersUSA rating F) and Democratic Rep. Tom Suozzi (NumbersUSA rating F-), have drafted a “compromise” that would permanently legalize the same groups as the Democrats’ Dream Act. as well as relatives of Dreamers. In exchange for this mass Amnesty, Rep. King’s proposal asks for a mere $4.3 billion for wall infrastructure. But this sum would come from fees paid by the Amnestied illegals, which means America wouldn’t get this money for years.[A Grand Compromise on Immigration, by Peter King and Tom Suozzi, The New York Times, March 25, 2019]
It’s unlikely King’s bill will go anywhere, but it does show that some Republicans are still interested in Amnesty.
There is a possibility Trump will include Amnesty for Dreamers in his proposal, but it’s unclear at the moment. If he was considering this move, we would surely see him hint at it in his stump speeches. Trump hasn’t done so this far.
Kushner seems to support Amnesty, which does increase the chances Dreamer legalization would be included in the White House proposal. Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney has supported Amnesty in the past, but he appears more focused on healthcare right now. [Trump's decision on health care law puts spotlight on Mulvaney, by Peter Sullivan and Jordan Fabian, The Hill, March 28, 2019]
Which brings us to the good news. Trump and his Republican allies are apparently preparing to use the political capital from the Mueller Report to try their hand at healthcare again. Their attempt to repeal Obamacare in 2017 was a disaster and resulted in plummeting poll numbers. [Trump’s biggest midterm blunder: embracing Obamacare repeal, by Dylan Scott, Vox, November 7, 2018] There is no way Republicans can pass their own healthcare plan—a thing they don’t even really have—in a Democratic-controlled House. It’s incredibly stupid for Trump’s 2020 chances and will be a waste of his political capital.
But it may be a paradoxical gift to immigration patriots. If Trump and Republicans bog down in a fruitless fight over healthcare, it means they can’t push an immigration increase. Their political capital will be dissipated, and they will have to settle for gridlock.
It’s not ideal. But it’s better than a massive immigration increase.
Current events could also influence Trump to back off his comprehensive immigration reform and return to immigration patriotism. All it would take is one massive caravan to show up on Fox. Or another terrorist atrocity.
Trump may seem to have lost sight of his America First agenda at the moment. But no-one can say—not VDARE.com, not the immigration enthusiasts—that (especially if he does more rallies like Grand Rapids) he won’t rediscover it again.
Washington Watcher [email him] is an anonymous source Inside The Beltway.

No comments: