Mediaboss Marketing

Sign Up for

Our free email newsletters

You'd have to be pretty heartless to oppose legal status for DREAMers people who were brought to the United States illegally when they were children.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is apparently of requisite heartlessness.

Rubio declared last week that he can't support the bipartisan Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act that some of his Senate colleagues are desperately trying to enact to make DREAMers off-limits to the Trump administration's harsh deportation regime. Regrettably, instead of embracing compassion, he's throwing in his lot with Trump's gang of cruel restrictionists.

Now, President Trump has repeatedly assured us that he has a "big heart" and would concentrate on deporting "bad hombres" while "taking care" of DREAMers. The reality, however, is quite different.

A bit of background: President Obama created the Deferred Action Against Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that, as its name suggests, deferred deportation proceedings against DREAMers and handed them temporary work permits. But DACA does not offer any guarantee against detention or deportation, just a postponement. Its protection can be rescinded for the slightest of infractions even traffic violations which is what Trump has effectively been doing.

In other words, Trump has left DACA in place but rendered it essentially toothless. Even so, 10 hardline attorneys general from red states are not satisfied. They have given Trump an ultimatum and told him he has to totally scrap the program or they'll sue, just as they did with President Obama's DAPA initiative that gave a temporary reprieve even to parents of DREAMers. If the administration obliges them or declines to fight them in court all 1.8 million DREAMers could eventually be deported, including the 750,000 who have DACA status.

Please remember: These are people who had no say in how they were brought to America, and who have lived in this country practically their whole lives with little to no contact with their birth land. They deserve compassion, not icy cruelty, especially since deporting just 750,000 would cost Uncle Sam $60 billion and lead to $280 billion in economic losses over the next decade.

To that end, Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) have dusted off the DREAM Act, which would hand green cards to illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children so long as they (i) graduate from high school or serve in the military; (ii) pass a background check; (iii) speak English; (iv) demonstrate knowledge of U.S. history; and (v) pay a fee. About 1.5 million DREAMers are expected to qualify because they tend to be hardworking, law-abiding people who desperately want to come out of the shadows and participate fully in American life.

Even many vocal immigration hawks don't have a problem with giving these DREAMers legal status so long as it's done via legislative rather than executive action. Rush Limbaugh, who has single-handedly killed many an immigration reform bill, has conceded that "no one's gonna win by deporting a bunch of kids that we let in." Likewise, Pat Robertson, who has derided undocumented immigrants as "moochers," admits that DREAMers are not criminals. "They're teaching kindergarten, for heaven's sake," he says. "They ought to stay. They enrich our society. They bless our society, and what have we got to loose." Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, another immigration opponent and Trump ally, counsels: "Why pick a fight over this group of people who have a lot of emotional stories to tell?" Even more to the point, polls show that 75 percent of Trump supporters Trump supporters don't want DREAMers booted out for the sins of their parents, and actually want them legalized.

So who on Earth are the opponents of the DREAM Act?

Breitbart, the rabid online mouthpiece of immigration hawks, of course. The right-wing nationalist website is trying to kill the bill by calling it amnesty, a curse word in ultra-restrictionist circles. And then there are all the outfits that are part of the quasi-racist FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) network, including the Center for Immigration Studies and NumbersUSA. Both of their leaders are vehemently opposed to any relief for DREAMers without tough border restrictions first.

And now Marco Rubio has jumped on their side.

The Florida senator has declared that he can't support the Graham-Durbin effort because it does not take into account the "reality of the situation" and guard against "unintended consequences." What reality? What unintended consequences? Apparently, Rubio fears that this law will be misinterpreted in Central America and encourage kids to show up on U.S. shores in the hopes of getting amnesty, fueling a repeat of the 2014 unaccompanied minor crisis. But the notion that amnesty not the labor needs of the American economy or the dangerous conditions in their own countries drives desperate foreigners to risk their lives to come to the United States is a right-wing trope with little basis in reality.

The fact is that the "unintended consequences" Rubio is concerned about are for his own political career. He was one of the Gang of Eight senators whose support for a comprehensive immigration reform bill in 2013 made him the favorite whipping boy of ultra-restrictionists in the last presidential election and no doubt (in his mind) cost him the Republican nomination. His opposition to the DREAM Act is now surely calculated to avoid giving them any reason to target him in 2020, should he decide to run again.

But going full Breitbart is unlikely to prove a winning strategy. President Trump derided Rubio as "Little Marco" during the campaign. Rubio could use the DREAM Act to stand up to Trump and ask him to produce that "big heart" he claims to have and sign the bill. Stooping to the level of the restrictionist fringe, unfortunately, would only prove Trump right about just how small Little Marco really is.

Visit link:
Marco Rubio's shameful immigration skid - The Week - The Week Magazine

President Trump has endorsed a sweeping new Senate immigration plan that puts a preference on job skills and not family ties in granting immigrants entry into the United States.

In a speech in Ohio Tuesday night, the president also bragged that his administration is being "rough" on illegals, especially criminals, and "liberating towns and cities" from MS-13 and other illegal gangs..

"We are dismantling and destroying the bloodthirsty criminal gangs. And, well, I will just tell you this -- we're not doing it in a politically correct fashion. We're doing it rough," said the president of his Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. "Our guys are rougher than their guys. We have tough people. Our people are tougher than their people. Our people are tougher and stronger and meaner and smarter than the gangs. One by one we're finding the illegal gang members, drug dealers, thieves, robbers, criminals and killers, and we're sending them the hell back home where they came from," he added.

Trump gave a strong shoutout to the Republican authors of the new legislation, Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton and Georgia Sen. David Perdue.

"As we speak, we are working with two wonderful senators, Tom Cotton and David Perdue, to create a new immigration system for America," said Trump.

The duo are currently updating the legislation they introduced earlier this year. Basically, it will focus more on immigrant merits, such as job skills, over family ties to those already in the U.S. The goal is a system that doesn't reward illegal crossings or let immigrants take jobs from Americans.

Said Trump, "Instead of today's low-skilled system -- just a terrible system where anybody comes in -- people that have never worked, people that are criminals; anybody comes in -- we want a merit-based system -- one that protects our workers, our taxpayers, and one that protects our economy. We want it merit-based. We want people that work really hard in their country and that are going to come into our country and work really, really hard. We don't want people that come into our country and immediately go on welfare and stay there for the rest of their lives."

The legislative effort comes as the administration is collecting success after success in its war on illegal immigration. ICE officials said that illegal immigration is down 70 percent and the arrests and deportation of criminal illegals is up.

What's more, Attorney General Jeff Sessions has made good on threats to some 300 sanctuary cities and regions, prompting some to change course and cooperate with ICE.

"American cities should be sanctuaries for law-abiding Americans -- the people that look up to the law, the people that respect the law -- not for criminals and gang members that we want the hell out of our country," Trump said during his address in Youngstown.

And, he added, people are cheering his actions.

"We are actually liberating towns and cities. We are liberating. People are screaming from their windows, Thank you, thank you,' to the Border Patrol and to General Kelly's great people that come in and grab these thugs and throw them the hell out. We're liberating our towns and we're liberating our cities," said the president.

Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com

See the article here:
Trump endorses immigration reform, says he's 'liberating cities' with ... - Washington Examiner

AZCentral.com

Schumer: McCain Said to Me, 'Let's Get Immigration Reform Done' CNSNews.com He even said to me when I called him this weekend, 'Let's get immigration reform done,' so he's thinking of the future. As you know, he and I worked on that [2013 comprehensive immigration reform] bill. And it was great to see him back, strong as he was.. Roberts: Is John McCain's finest hour yet to come?AZCentral.com When it comes to John McCain, some journalists will never, ever learnMedia Matters for America (blog) Horowitz: John McCain; An AppreciationGoLocal Worcester all 1,000 news articles »

Read more here:
Schumer: McCain Said to Me, 'Let's Get Immigration Reform Done' - CNSNews.com

Fort Worth Star Telegram

Keep politics out of this tragedy, Dan Patrick Fort Worth Star Telegram Immigrants in the back of a sweltering tractor trailer in San Antonio this weekend served as a grisly illustration of the sacrifices some are willing to make to get to the United States. By the time authorities found the stifling semi truck in a Wal ... Deaths show need for immigration reform: EditorialEl Paso Times Death toll in San Antonio immigrant-smuggling case rises to 10Texas Tribune Smuggling deaths show need for humane immigration lawsTimes Record News mySanAntonio.com -Washington Post all 2,630 news articles »

Read more:
Keep politics out of this tragedy, Dan Patrick - Fort Worth Star Telegram

Does Donald Trump realize how close he is to fatally undermining the core policy on which he campaigned?

It really looks as though President Trump is trying to bait his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, into resigning. Sandwiched between two interviews with the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal in which he criticized Sessions for recusing himself from the investigation of the Trump campaigns ties to Russia, the president tweeted his displeasure at Sessions for following Trumps own stated post-election policy of leaving Hillary Clinton alone. It was Trump, after all, who first reneged on his demagogic threat to lock her up, with Trump spokesperson Kellyanne Conway instead saying he wanted to help her heal.

What really seems to be at work is that Trump wants Special Counsel Robert Muellers Russia investigation contained or stopped altogether, and he is angry that Sessions took himself off the field. Trump is daring Sessions to resign so that he wont have to take the responsibility for firing him.

If the president continues to stay angry about this, he will likely fire Sessions and then appoint someone who will restrain or fire Mueller. Major media outlets, which know how to play on Trumps insecurities, will, in their plausibly deniable way, begin to dare him to do it, hoping this brings about the ultimate crisis of his administration, or at least heapmore guilt on the Republican party for its complicity in his presidency.

Trumps treatment of Sessions is already dissuading prominent congressional Republicans from tying themselves more closely to the administration. If this is the reward Sessions gets for his loyalty he gave Trump his earliest Senate endorsement and worked closely with him on his signature campaign issue hen why on earth would Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell stick their necks out for the president?

Even if Trump does fire Sessions, I doubt that Republicans are yet willing to hasten the end of this presidency. Regardless, losing Sessions would politically hobble Trump in a serious way going forward. The administration has so far failed to learn from the congressional health-care debate that its the White House that needs to lead on legislative efforts, not only to whip a working coalition together, but also to select for popular reforms. The Senate is pushing forward on its promise to repeal Obamacare even though the various bills they have put together are about as popular as poison.

On the long-overdue issue of immigration reform, Sessions was primed to provide leadership from within the executive branch. Any restrictionist bill was already going to be a tough legislative battle, given opposition from Republican elites, corporate America, and the media. Firing Sessions or forcing him to resign would tip the balance of power in the White House even farther away from conservatives towards the New York moderates, very likely killing any chance of immigration reform. And that, in turn, would deprive Trumps earliest and most vocal supporters of their rationale for supporting his presidency. The entire premise of the Trump campaign was that he was, in Steve Bannons words, a blunt instrument who could be used to push through restrictionist immigration reform and other needed change. The support of Sessions was the social proof of this thesis.

Instead, Trump is proving another theory correct: namely, that he is an incompetent and politically unreliable buffoon. He is not loyal to people who risk their reputations for him, and his promises are worthless. The wall isnt going to be built, and Mexico isnt going to pay for it.

David Frum rightly credited Ann Coulter with changing the 2016 election with her tub-thumping immigration-restrictionist book, Adios America. She followed it up with In Trump We Trust. That trust was misplaced. Trump will not be used as a blunt instrument. Rather, he is the one who used Jeff Sessions, and every other populist who supported him. Restrictionists need a new theory for how to translate their ideas into policy.

Michael Brendan Dougherty is a senior writer at National Review.

See the original post here:
Losing Jeff Sessions Means Losing Immigration Reform with Him - National Review