Mediaboss Marketing

By Frank Thorp V

If congressional Republicans were hoping that a Texas judge's injunction on President Obama's immigration actions was going to change Democrats' tune when it comes to the House-passed DHS funding bill, they shouldn't hold their breath.

"Nothing changes," a Senate Democratic Leadership aide told NBC News.

At issue are the three failed attempts by Senate Republicans to bring up the House-passed legislation that not only funds DHS until the end of the fiscal year, but also curtails Obama's executive actions related to immigration.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has scheduled yet another vote on the motion for next Monday, when Congress gets back from their Presidents Day recess. The motion is set to fail again because Democrats are expected to unanimously oppose the measure, a move called a filibuster.

"This procedural ruling, in our opinion, is very unlikely to be upheld," Sen Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in a statement. "But regardless of the outcome Democrats remain united in our belief that funding for the Department of Homeland Security should not be used as a ransom by Republicans, period."

Even moderate Democrats, whom Republicans have been targeting as possible 'Yes' votes on the motion to move forward with the House-passed bill, are saying the court ruling doesn't change anything. An aide for Sen Joe Manchin (D-WV) told NBC News that Manchin still believes funding for the DHS should be separate than the riders attached by the House.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) has repeatedly said it's up to Senate Democrats to allow for consideration of the House-passed bill in the Senate, or they will be responsible for the DHS shutting down at the end of the month. McConnell has said the House-passed bill is "stuck" in the Senate, and told reporters last week it's time for the House to pass another bill that can achieve the 60 votes needed to move forward in the Senate.

Funding for DHS is set to expire at midnight on February 27th if Congress fails to act.

First published February 17 2015, 10:47 AM

Follow this link:
'Nothing Changes' : Democrats Aren't Budging in DHS Funding Fight

In the wake of Dave Fahrenthold's great piece about Scott Walker's college years, Democrats have begun to openly question the Wisconsin governor's ability and readiness to be president, given that he doesn't have a college degree.

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean went on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" late last week and called Walker "unknowledgeable" because he didn't graduate from college."I worry about people being president of the United States not knowing much about the world and not knowing much about science," Dean added. "I worry about that."

Then on Friday, Media Matters for America's Eric Boehlert tweeted this out:

Boehlert later retracted that tweet.

This seems to me to be a MAJOR strategic mistake that could badly backfire on Democrats if Walker happened to become the Republican nominee in 2016. Here's why:

1. The idea that smart/able = college graduate reeks of elitism. Lots -- and LOTS -- of very successful people have never graduated from college. (There is a Web site called the College Dropouts Hall of Fame.) And, no one likes the guy (or gal) who asks what you got on your SAT scores or what college you went to when you meet them. Elitism is rarely an appealing trait in a political party. Democrats would do well to remember that.

2. A majority of people in this country don't have college degrees. According to Census numbers from 2009-2013, less than three in 10 Americans (28.8 percent) over the age of 25 have a bachelor's degree or higher. That means that there are tons of people who have a similar educational background to Walker, people who almost certainly don't (or wouldn't) appreciate a dismissal of their intelligence because of their lack of a college degree. Remember, too, that there's a growing belief in conservative circles that higher education has become a liberal's paradise -- so not having a college degree may well help Walker with that crowd."He'll lay to rest the absurd belief that you're a nobody if youdon't have a college degree," wrote conservative Glenn Reynolds of Walker in a USA Today op-ed. "And he might even cut into the surprisingly recent takeover of our institutions by an educated mandarin class, something that just might save the country."

How to talk (or if to talk) about Walker's lack of a college degree is going to be a hot topic in the coming weeks as the Wisconsin governor's just-launched attempt to pare back funding for the University of Wisconsin system is sure to be a massive political fight in the state with big 2016 ramifications. Conflating Walker's lack of a college degree with his effort to reduce funding to the state's university system seems to me like a political loser. Yes, it is true that Walker didn't graduate from college. And, yes, it is also true that he is pushing to cut some funding for the University of Wisconsin system. But simply because both statements are true doesn't mean they grow out of one another.

Democrats would be on far safer ground framing Walker's latest move on higher ed as an example of his putting his own presidential aspirations ahead of what's good for Wisconsin. (To their credit, many in-state Democrats are doing just that.) That's an argument that can be made without even mentioning Walker's level of academic achievement and one, it seems to me, that is more likely to succeed as well.

Viewed broadly, the fact that Walker didn't finish college does make him unique among modern presidents and those who want to be president. (Truman was the last president who didn't finish college.) But it's hard to imagine a lack of a degree as a disqualifying trait in the eyes of most Americans -- even if Howard Dean doesn't agree.

The rest is here:
The Fix: Scott Walker never graduated from college. So what?

Every morning, Miguel Tapia Colin stands up at school to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. He wasn't born here, but he considers the star-spangled banner his. For Colin, 18, the U.S. is home -- a land of opportunities he'd never see in his birthplace of Huehuetln El Chico, Mexico -- and he wants it to stay that way. Under President Barack Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, Colin plans to enroll at New York's Columbia University as a scholarship student in the fall to study political science.

"I consider myself part of this country," he said, praising Obama's policy. "It has been life-changing, but more than anything, it has been empowering."

Colin is one of the more than 700,000 immigrants who have applied for the deferred deportation program since its 2012 launch, and when he graduates, he'll join an estimated 225,000 undocumented students in U.S. colleges. Enrollment numbers have climbed in the past three years as immigrants received temporary deportation relief, sparking debate about whether states should give in-state tuition to immigrant residents who don't qualify for federal financial aid. Obama's latest actions are expected to increase undocumented students' access to higher education and renew the focus on state tuition laws aimed at helping immigrants pay for college.

"It's really the deciding factor for a student to be able to attend a four-year university or not," saidAndreaGaytan, the director of theAB540 and Undocumented Student Center at the University of California, Davis. "We're losing as a nation on a lot of talent and potential if we don't incorporate undocumented students into our educational system for higher ed."

In November, Obama announced his intent to broaden his 2012 initiative to include anyone who came to the U.S. as a child and has lived in the country since Jan. 1, 2010. DACA requires applicants to be currently in school, have a diploma or be a veteran, among other requirements. It can authorize them for driver's licenses and work permits, and for the majority of young applicants, the policy opens another door: college.

A federal judge temporarily blocked Obama's expanded immigration policy late Monday, but some schools are still preparing for an influx of undocumented students if the programs is implemented. At the University of California-Berkeley, enrollment more than doubled from 60 students during the first semester DACA was available, according to Meng L.So, the director of its Undocumented Student Program. Now, they have 380.

California is one of 20 states that offers residential immigrants in-state tuition rates, which often cut the cost of college in half. Since 2001, legislatures in Florida, New York, Texas and other states have passed laws affording undocumented students cheaper tuition if they attended state high schools and are working toward legal status. The efforts have ramped up in recent years, prompting controversy and increased enrollment.

Cost is a major barrier for undocumented students considering college, So said. Many of them have immigrant parents forced to work odd jobs under the table. In 2007, the annual household income for undocumented immigrants in the U.S. was $36,000, compared to the median income of $51,900 in 2013 for all Americans, according to the Pew Research Center. For a student paying out-of-state tuition, one year of college costs $22,203 on average.

Undocumented students often can't rely on their families for monetary support and have to put themselves through school. Even people covered under the 2012 policy are not eligible to apply for federal, and in many cases, state, financial aid.

California laws allow immigrants to apply for private scholarships and state aid. Gaytan credits those, as well as Obama's initiative, with the tripling of undocumented students at her university. Enrollment skyrocketed from 78 a few years ago to 290 now.

See the original post:
Immigration Reform 2015: More Undocumented Immigrants ...

A day after Judge Andrew S. Hanen of the federal district court in Brownsville, Texas, issued an injunction preventing the Obama administration from implementing itsplan to delay deportation for millions ofundocumented immigrants, the statusof U.S. immigration policyis as confused and uncertain as ever. A few ideas about what might come next are in the links below.

Welcome to Wonkbook. To subscribe by e-mail, clickhere. Send comments, criticism or ideas to Wonkbook at Washpost dot com. Follow Wonkblog onTwitterandFacebook.

What's in Wonkbook:1) Policymakers respond to immigration ruling 2) Opinions, including Wolf on the dollar3) A surprising poll on gay marriage, and more

Number of the day: 11.4 million. That's how many people signed up for health insurance plans under Obamacare this year, according to the White House. The number will likely decline as the year progresses, as people leave their policies. Jason Millman in The Washington Post.

1. Topstory: Policymakers respond to immigration ruling

An appeal could take months. "President Barack Obama's administration faces a difficult and possibly lengthy legal battle to overturn a Texas court ruling that blocked his landmark immigration overhaul, since the judge based his decision on an obscure and unsettled area of administrative law, lawyers said. ... There was no consensus among lawyers with expertise in administrative law and immigration law on whether Hanen would be reversed on appeal. But they said the judge was wise to focus on an area of administrative law where legal precedent is sometimes fuzzy." David Ingram and Mica Rosenberg for Reuters.

Primary source: The opinion.

It doesn't look as though the opinion will resolve the debate in Congress over funding Homeland Security, as some had hoped. "Dont count on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to play dealmaker in the fight over Department of Homeland Security funding. The Kentucky Republican is under intense pressure from conservatives to hold the line against President Obamas immigration actions, and he shows no signs of backing down. ... McConnell could have seized on the injunction to push conservatives toward funding the DHS while the court fight plays out. The fact that he didnt, Senate Democrats say, is a sign that McConnell wont be coming to the negotiating table." Alexander Bolton in The Hill.

Much of Obama's agenda is now in the hands of the courts. "Along with the immigration action, the fate of two of Obamas other signature initiatives a landmark health-care law and a series of aggressive executive actions on climate change now rests in the hands of federal judges. It is a daunting prospect for a president in the final two years of his tenure who believes he is on the path to leaving a lasting impact on intractable and politically perilous issues, despite an often bitter relationship with Congress." David Nakamura and Juliet Eilperin in The Washington Post.

Here's what you need to know to understand the injunction. The Washington Post.

More:
Wonkblog: Heres whats next for immigration reform

Story highlights Ana Navarro: Judge's halt to Obama's executive actions on immigration reveal they were always a Band-Aid She says Congress must do its job and craft a bi-partisan fix to the hot, ugly mess of America's immigration policy

An executive action is a temporary and limited fix. On the night President Obama announced his most recent immigration executive action, I called it a Band-Aid.

Today, we found out, the Band-Aid may not stick.

In a case brought by 26 states, a federal judge in Texas issued an injunction halting implementation of the President's executive actions: the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (or DAPA) -- which would have granted work permits and extended deferred deportation status and expanded the the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program for undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children.

What the immigration ruling means

This is just the beginning of the legal wrangling over this. At issue is whether President Obama exceeded his powers and tried to legislate. This is Congress' job, and the problem, to state the obvious, is that Congress is not doing it. For decades, Congress has been talking about fixing the broken immigration system. This has gone nowhere.

On the other side, you have mounting pressure on President Obama from an increasingly frustrated Latino community and Democratic base. He made pie-in-the-sky campaign promises offering immigration reform in his first year in office. In his first two years, he had a Democratic Senate and Democratic House. He had the chance to act. Instead, he sat on his hands as the problem continued to fester.

What's worse, as part of the fight over the immigration executive actions, the Congress is now playing a game of chicken with the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations bill, set to expire in a few days, insisting on amendments to the bill that would block Obama's immigration actions.

Hill GOP emboldened after immigration ruling

Lastly, add to this equation the reality of the millions of confused undocumented families whose lives and livelihoods are in the balance, and who have no idea how this is going to end. The truth is, none of us do.

Read more from the original source:
Fix this hot, ugly immigration mess