chain migration

Immigration Stalemate

February 19, 2018 by GregC

The U.S. Senate rejected multiple attempts at immigration reform legislation, suggesting it is unlikely Congress can reach a deal this year that tightens up the nation’s immigration system and also clarifies the future for those holding legal status under the expiring DACA program.

President Trump announced last year that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program would expire in March 2018. DACA is the 2012 initiative taken by President Obama to grant legal status to people in the U.S. who were brought here illegally as children. Roughly 700,000 enrolled in DACA.

In announcing the end of DACA, President Trump made it clear he wanted Congress to address the issue through legislation and use the opportunity to make changes in immigration law such as ending the visa lottery and significantly reducing chain migration, by which family members can be sponsored by new citizens to come to the U.S.

Democrats want nothing to do with that approach, insisting only a “clean” DACA fix of simply granting legal status and a pathway to citizenship is acceptable.

In January, Democrats ended a brief government shutdown after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell promised to allow debate on the issue in the weeks to come. That promise was kept last week, but no bill was able to get the 60 votes needed to end debate and proceed to a final vote.

There is little likelihood that stalemate will be broken anytime soon.

“It’s unclear what will happen now, probably not much,” said Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies.

Only 39 senators voted for the bill most closely resembling President Trump’s wish list. He wants a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million people, which includes DACA recipients and those who qualify but never enrolled. Trump would also scrap the visa lottery and limit the chain migration policy to spouses and minor children.

He also wants $25 billion to secure the border and begin constructing major portions of a border wall.

The highly-touted “bipartisan” bill sponsored by Republicans Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Mike Rounds, R-S.D., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., fell six votes short of the 60-vote threshold. It kept the 1.8 million number in place as well as $25 billion in border security.

However, Camarota says it fell far short in reforming the legal immigration system.

“It did not have any ending or phasing out of the chain migration categories. And it had other things, like how priorities on enforcement would move forward and it seemed it was going to make it more difficult to enforce the law in some other areas. So while the border might be more secure, the interior might be less secure,” said Camarota.

So why did the bill Camarota considers weaker than the Trump-backed measure get 15 more votes in a GOP-controlled Senate? Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, says many in his party are now to the left of Barack Obama on immigration, at least compared to the parameters Obama imposed on DACA.

Camarota sees Cruz as hyperbolic in that comparison given that Obama wanted legal status and a pathway to citizenship for 10-11 million people in the U.S. illegally. But he says Cruz does bring up an important point.

“His basic insight is not ridiculous. If you’re the party of enforcement against amnesty, the president was agreeing to a pretty generous amnesty of 1.8 million.

“I think the reason he did that, and this is the way politics works and you have to decide what you think of it. He thought it was the only way he could get the things that he wanted, like the reform of the legal immigration system and the wall. The hope was that this trade-off would go through, but some of his own party and the Democrats didn’t want it,” said Camarota.

And what do the Democrats want?

“The Democrats are pretty unified that they want to keep immigration (numbers) as high as possible, letting the most number of people in and increase it. (They want) as expansive an amnesty as possible and tend to not want to spend more on enforcement. There are a lot of Republicans who tend to support that agenda,” said Camarota.

While the Center for Immigration Studies likes Trump’s efforts to limit chain migration, Camarota says the group has major misgivings about the president’s willingness to place the so-called Dreamers on a path to citizenship.

“One of the reasons you want to reform the chain migration system or give citizenship to DACA members is that pretty quickly it means they might be able to sponsor their parents, and the parents are the ones who brought them here.

“The whole idea of a DACA amnesty was that we’ll do this for people who aren’t to blame, but eventually it means amnesty for everyone who is to blame unless you end those categories. Don’t allow people to sponsor their parents to come in or don’t give citizenship to the DACA recipents,” said Camarota.

With just two weeks until DACA is rescinded, Camarota says the courts may end up having a critical say in how this debate plays out.

“Although the DACA program is ending so people will not be able to renew, more than one judge as ruled – crazy as it may sound – that although it was a discretionary policy and that’s how it was sold, that the administration can’t end the program,” said Camarota.

“If, which seems likely, the administration can overcome the ridiculous judicial activism that says they can’t end the program, then it would put more pressure on Democrats and then we might see some meaningful reform,” said Camarota.

Standard Podcast [ 8:46 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Trump Blasted from Right Over Immigration Blueprint

January 26, 2018 by GregC

Immigration policy conservatives are giving President Trump’s immigration reform blueprint a thumbs down after the plan moves to the left on two key issues, leaving activists fearing a more timid final bill and no end in sight to the dangerous flood of illegal immigration into the United States.

The Trump framework focuses on four key areas: spending $25 billion on border security including additional portions of a wall, extending legal status and a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million illegal immigrants who either enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program or are eligible for it, limiting chain migration to only spouses and minor children, and ending the visa lottery.

The Center for Immigration Studies, or CIS, sees two major problems with Trump’s more moderate approach: a sudden embrace of amnesty and a refusal to tighten the screws enough on chain migration.

CIS Research Fellow Andrew Arthur says Trump’s offer of a pathway to citizenship goes far beyond the DACA recipents and will ultimately include way more than 1.8 million.

“We’ve seen similar proposals in the past. There have been amnesties floated, amnesties passed. Inevitably, the number of people who end up being granted is higher than the number that was anticipated.

“Inevitably there is going to be a certain level of fraud in this process. Logically, you’re going to have to identify that you’ve been in the United States since a [certain time] and the documents you can offer are generally fairly vague,” said Arthur.

And by including illegal immigrants who are not part of the DACA program, Arthur says Trump is inviting a bureaucratic nightmare for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service.

“If it was simply the 690,000 DACA people, USCIS already knows who those people are and can do a one to one match. When you’re talking about an additional 1.1 million individuals, that’s going to require brand new files being opened, documents being reviewed, and the fact is USCIS just doesn’t have the bandwidth to do that work right now,” said Arthur.

Arthur is generally pleased with the movement to limit chain migration, keeping it to spouses and minor children, as opposed to current law which allows adult children, siblings, and parents. However, he says Trump is making a big mistake in how he wants to implement the plan.

“The problem is that the framework will also make these changes prospectively, not retroactively. It’s going to process through the four million people who are currently in that backlog, people who have had petitions filed on their behalf and who are awaiting a number in order to apply and go through the process of being vetted,” said Arthur.

“That’s a pretty big concern of ours because of course you’re going to end up potentially giving an additional four million people status,” said Arthur.

But while some conservatives are wary of Trump’s plan, most Democrats are greeting Trump’s policy retreat with full condemnation.

“Dreamers should not be held hostage to President Trump’s crusade to tear families apart and waste billions of American tax dollars on an ineffective wall,” said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who says Trump is reaching for a hardline immigration agenda on the backs of young people.

Arthur is not surprised.

“That’s just plain sanctimony. I could have anticipated what Dick Durbin was going to say and I could have written it myself,” he said.

Democrats and liberal immigration activists accuse Trump of clamping down on legal immigration because of his efforts to limit chain migration and kill the visa lottery. But Arthur says there’s a very good reason for imposing limitations.

“The proposals set forth in the framework are necessary changes that we need in order to ameliorate the problems that got us here to begin with. The fact is there are huge loopholes in the law that allow unaccompanied alien children to show up at a port of entry. They don’t even have to enter illegally.

“Once in the United States, United States government officials complete the work of the smugglers that brought them to the border to begin with and reunite them with family members or friends or other individuals in the United States who will take care of them. This is a huge problem and it’s a huge magnet that draws minors to the United States,” said Arthur.

Why is that a huge problem? Arthur says that magnet leaves kids vulnerable to unspeakable horrors at the hands of their smugglers so long as the parents of those kids think their children are virtually guaranteed a chance to live in the U.S.

“The people who engage in these activities don’t simply smuggle people for money. The fact is they rob, they rape, they hold people ransom for money. They do that with children as well. Turning off that magnet is an absolutely crucial element of any plan that’s going to grant any kind of amnesty to any population of DACA people,” said Arthur.

Arthur sees positives and negatives for the political path forward on immigration. He’s deeply concerned that Trump’s willingness to compromise at the outset will ultimately lead to a far worse bill.

“Inevitably, bills like this are a race to the bottom. If you say (you’re going to allow) 1.8 million people who got here on X date, why not people who got here on X date plus one year, or (if we accept) people who came here below the age of 16, why not people who got here below the age of 18,” said Arthur.

At the same time, he says some House conservatives are not happy with Trump’s plan and may be able to improve it.

“There are some individuals in the House who are vociferously opposed to any plan like this. You can anticipate that those individuals will attempt to pare back the amazingly generous proposal that the president has made,” said Arthur.

While he has serious problems with Trump’s concessions, Arthur says Democrats are foolish to demonize a major outreach on Trump’s part.

“Quite frankly, if the Democrats don’t take this deal and end up scuttling it, this is going to be on their heads,” said Arthur.

Standard Podcast [ 10:48 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

House Judiciary Chairman: There Is No DACA Deadline

January 24, 2018 by GregC

The author of the House of Representatives bill to clamp down on illegal immigration and address the fate of people brought to the U.S. illegally as children says there is no reason for lawmakers to rush immigration legislation and says his goal is to make sure the nation never faces an illegal immigration crisis again.

Senate Democrats tried to attach immigration legislation to efforts to keep the government funded past January 19. Three days later, they agreed to fund the government in exchange for a promise that an immigration debate would begin prior to the next funding deadline of Feb. 8.

At issue is the fate of roughly 700,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children. President Obama granted legal status for anyone who enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, through executive action in 2012. In September, President Trump announced the executive DACA program would end in March 2018.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., is author of the Securing America’s Future Act. He says despite some lawmakers waving frantically at the calendar, Congress does not need to race to get legislation done.

“We should take our time and not feel we’re compelled to do anything by any deadline. There is no deadline. February 8 is not a deadline to solve this bill. It is a deadline to keep the government funded but not to solve this problem. March 5, the deadline the president has set, can be changed if necessary,” said Goodlatte, who also notes a federal judge has ordered a stay on Trump’s order.

“We should use all the time that’s necessary to get this done right and not a minute longer,” said Goodlatte.

The Goodlatte bill and the Senate’s Gang of Six legislation differ significantly in many ways. It allows current DACA enrollees to receive legal status for three years, which they can renew in perpetuity. The bill does not offer them a pathway to citizenship, and it grants no legal status to people eligible for DACA but failed to enroll.

The Senate plan offers a pathway to citizenship to DACA recipients as well as the other so-called “Dreamers.” It also confers legal status on the very parents who broke the law to bring their families to the U.S.

Goodlatte’s plan would also greatly limit chain migration to only spouses and minor children, kill the visa lottery, authorize whatever is necessary to beef up border security, and make overstaying one’s visa a crime.

Goodlatte says his legislation comes from a very straightforward premise.

“We agreed we would negotiate on four points: security, chain migration, ending the visa lottery, and DACA. That’s what my bill does,” said Goodlatte.

He also explained his mindset in crafting the legislation. He wants “a fair way way to deal with the problem created by President Obama in this unconstitutional program and ended by President Trump.”

“But then [Trump] turned around and said these individuals need a solution and Congress should do it. We provided that in our bill,” said Goodlatte.

He also wants this to be the last time Congress has to deal with the immigration mess.

“We also are the only plan that addresses Speaker Ryan’s concern and that is that we not allow this problem to happen again,” said Goodlatte.

While the Senate and the media focus on the Gang of Six bill, Goodlatte says he has assurances from Republican House leaders that his legislation will come to the House floor. He says before that time, he plans to educate his colleagues on why all of the various enforcement mechanisms are required and why he thinks they will be effective.

Goodlatte is ready to defend his bill, starting with his refusal to grant DACA enrollees a pathway to citizenship.

“We don’t object to people who are DACA recipients finding an opportunity to get a green card and U.S. citizenship as long as they follow the existing law like anybody else who has followed the rules and come here legally,” said Goodlatte.

“Under our bill, DACA recipients would be allowed to live in the United States permanently with three-year renewables but indefinitely. [They can] work in the United States, own a business in the United States, travel in and out of the country and if they find a way under the normal law to qualify for U.S. citizenship that’s fine, but not a special pathway to citizenship,” said Goodlatte.

He says the parents who perpetrated the crime of illegal immigration should not be rewarded in any way.

“I am not unsympathetic to the situation, but it is a situation that their parents created for them and one we have to respond to with that in mind. In other words, take care of them but don’t give them an opportunity to petition for those same parents who were responsible for coming here illegally in the first place,” said Goodlatte.

In exchange for granting legal status for DACA recipients, Goodlatte’s bill clamps down hard on chain migration, ending the practice of an immigrant sponsoring many extended family members to come into the U.S. It also ends the visa lottery.

“The visa lottery is a crazy program that gives 55,000 people green cards every year, not based on family relations, not based on job skills, but based upon pure luck. That is totally unfair and it is a national security concern as well,” said Goodlatte.

When it comes to border security, President Trump has made it clear that there will be provision for a border wall or he will not agree to DACA legislation. Goodlatte says Republicans are in agreement on what that means.

“There is a need to repair fences, to extend the wall and build a wall in some places, particularly in high population areas and in high crime areas where there is a lot of smuggling going on. You do not need it where there are mountains, where there are large deserts, or where there are rivers,” said Goodlatte.

But he cautions enforcement advocates that there is a lot more to preventing the influx of illegal immigration than just the wall.

“That is one tool but it doesn’t at all address the 40 percent of [illegal immigrants] who come into this country legally and them simply ignore the laws and overstay their visas. Nor does it address the people who come into the country illegally and are not trying to evade the border patrol but are actually going to them and turning themselves in,” said Goodlatte.

He says those people are then released into the U.S. and told to show up for a court hearing, which they rarely do.

Goodlatte’s bill is officially known as H.R. 4760.

Standard Podcast [ 9:53 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Gang of Six Pushes Massive Amnesty

January 16, 2018 by GregC

While the media and many politicians focus on President Trump’s verbiage in response to the immigration legislation presented by the “Gang of Six,” one major immigration reform group says the plan itself is nothing but an amnesty push for more than 10 million people.

The Gang of Six is led by Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.

At issue is the effort to provide legal status to young people brought to the U.S. illegally by their parents. In 2012, President Obama unilaterally granted legal status to young people who agreed to sign up with the Deferred Action for Child Arrivals program, or DACA.

President Trump announced in September that he would end the program in March of this year and lawmakers were ostensibly working on a bill to continue granting legal status to DACA enrollees while also tightening some immigration restrictions. Most estimates suggest there are between 800,000-850,000 people impacted by DACA.

Instead, Numbers USA reports the Gang of Six bill extends permanent legal protection to all illegal immigrants who fit the DACA criteria rather than those who actually enrolled and sets them on a path to citizenship.

“They expand DACA to include the entire pool of dreamer illegal aliens. The Migration Policy Institute estimates that that population exceeds three million and is about 3.3 million,” said Numbers USA’s Chris Chmielinski.

In fact, Numbers USA has released a worksheet comparing the Gang of Six bill with a much more conservative plan from house Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, known as the Securing America’s Future Act. It also lines up both plans against President Trump’s immigration reform priorities.

He says there’s a big difference between DACA and everyone who fits under the ‘dreamer’ label.

“When President Obama announced the DACA program, he limited it to folks that entered prior to 2007, had maintained continuous presence until 2012 and were under the age of 31.

“The dreamer population is much, much more broadly defined than that. And again, the Migration Policy Institute estimates that population is about 3.3 million,” said Chmielinski.

So how does the estimate get to 10 million? By opening the doors for the parents of the dreamers.

“It also offers an amnesty for the parents of the dreamers. So if you assume that all the parents have two parents, that’s another 6.6 million. 6.6 million plus and 3.3. million and you’re at 10 million,” said Chmielinski, who says that is clear-cut amnesty even though the parents are not in line for citizenship.

“We define amnesty as anything that allows illegal aliens to stay in the country and work in the United States,” said Chmielinski.

Furthermore, Chmielinski says those parents actually could wind up being rewarded with citizenship.

“Once the dreamers become citizens, they will be able to sponsor their parents under the chain migration laws, because even though they say they address chain migration, they really don’t,” said Chmielinski.

In fact, it’s unclear what immigration enforcement advocates get in exchange for legalizing DACA in the Gang of Six bill. Chmielinski points out the plan does not address chain migration or the visa lottery in any serious way. It does provide almost $1.6 billion for border fencing, but it comes with a massive caveat.

“They appropriate a little funding towards border fencing, but they say that this $1.6 billion they’re assigning can only be used for existing fencing. They’re telling the administration that as part of this deal, you cannot build any new fencing or any new walls. You can only use the money to repair existing fencing,” said Chmielinski.

The Goodlatte bill, in contrast, gives the government broad authority to build new fences and even walls. However, it does not include funding for such projects, meaning lawmakers would have to approve a separate bill to pay for such construction.

Overall, Chmielinski is encouraged by the Goodlatte bill. He says it limits chain migration to an immigrant’s spouse and children, although there is an exception for elderly parents to come over without a path to citizenship so that their children can care for them.

The Goodlatte plan also scraps the visa lottery entirely, makes overstaying a visa a crime and mandates all employers use E-Verify to confirm their new and existing employees are all in the country legally.

Chmielinski also says Goodlatte wants to use cutting edge technology to keep track of who is in the country.

“It requires the implementation of a bio-metric entry-exit system. This is something that was actually passed by Congress in the mid-2000’s as a recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. This is basically a tracking system. Every non-citizen that enters the United States is checked in to the country and then we check them out when they leave, so we know when folks overstay,” said Chmielinski.

The Goodlatte bill seems to have little traction on Capitol Hill right now and the mainstream media have ignored it completely while often hailing the Gang of Six bill. The issue prominent this week as Democrats try to attach legalization of DACA to legislation to keep the federal government running at full capacity.

So what is likely to happen? Chmielinski doesn’t expect much to happen for a few weeks.

“You’ll see a [continuing resolution] passed for about a month. Then over the next three to four weeks, this DACA situation will completely play out. But I think this might be the last time we’re talking about it. I think if nothing’s taken care of over the next month, then nothing will probably happen on it,” said Chmielinski.

Standard Podcast [ 12:57 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Rohrabacher: Forget Leverage, Ditch DACA Altogether

January 11, 2018 by GregC

While Republicans and Democrats work to produce legislation to grant legal status and a pathway to citizenship for people brought to the United States illegally when they were children, one Republican congressman says Congress should refuse to enshrine that policy into law to avoid a flood of new illegal immigrants looking to benefit from the same policy.

In September, President Trump announced that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, would end in March 2018, but also suggested that the people impacted by his decision ought not to worry. President Obama enacted DACA in 2012 and the program survived despite fierce criticism that such a change in the law could come through an act of Congress.

With the DACA expiration now just weeks away, House and Senate leaders in both parties appear united in wanting to pass legislation to protect those impacted by the policy. A “Gang of Six” in the Senate is working on the bill, although President Trump has rejected their first overture.

Many conservatives are urging GOP leaders and President Trump to use DACA as leverage to squeeze concessions out of Democrats, including a reduction in chain migration, and end to the visa lottery, expanded E-Verify at businesses and greater border security including at least portions of a new border wall.

However, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., rejects the premise of the discussions. He doesn’t want DACA as part of federal law.

“If we legalize the status of 850,000 young people who are here illegally, we can expect tens of millions of young people throughout the world to notice that.

“If they would like the government benefits of health care and education that comes from legally being in the United States, there is no reason for me to believe this won’t obliterate out chances of getting control of our border,” said Rohrabacher.

The congressman says once Congress gives the green to putting “dreamers” on the path to citizenship, it may be impossible to restore integrity to our immigration system.

“We’re talking about millions of people here who will be brought into this country and there’s no way we can build a wall high enough or dig a ditch deep enough to stop it after we’ve given them a treasure house of medical care and education. We are going to undo any good we can possibly do otherwise,” said Rohrabacher.

Rohrabacher says even if the legislation agrees to significant limits on chain migration, providing legal status to people who came to the U.S. illegally will still be crippling.

“We cannot secure our borders as long as we’re giving this ultimate prize to people who have made it across the border illegally. When we have young people like this, we’re notifying parents all over the world, ‘Whatever you do, get your kid to the United States,'” said Rohrabacher.

While Rohrabacher admits many young people are suffering terribly in our own hemisphere and around the world, the resources of the United States only go so far.

“There are people who are living in horrible situations overseas. Young people. We cannot afford to take care of every one of them while we don’t even have the money now to take care of our own people, meaning the veterans and the seniors, and yes, the young people who need educational training here,” said Rohrabacher.

At an on-camera negotiation this week, President Trump was open to a two-step approach to immigration offered by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who wanted a “clean” DACA bill now with a commitment to address comprehensive immigration reform later. Trump later explained he considers a border wall part of a clean DACA bill.

Rohrabacher has no interest in that.

“The only thing I would have a stomach for if DACA comes first is if it’s defeated,” said Rohrabacher.

With Republicans, Democrats and the president seemingly agreeing to the general path forward to enshrine DACA, Rohrabacher says other critical voices are being ignored yet again.

“What hasn’t changed is the American people. They keep getting left out of this as if their point of view doesn’t count. Up until now, nobody’s made the case to the American people of the magnitude of what we’re talking about,” said Rohrabacher.

He says people who casually follow the debate think it’s about helping a few impoverished kids from Latin America or Asia when the facts are very different.

“They don’t know that they’re talking about the large number of people that we’re talking about and the impact that it will have later on as people all over the world pay attention to the fact that if young people can get to the United States, we don’t have the heart to send them back. Then what we’ll see is a flood of millions more people coming in,” said Rohrabacher.

Rohrabacher has been part of efforts to beat back immigration legislation in 2006, 2007, and 2013. He says public pressure clearly makes a difference.

“The only thing that’s saved us from a massive onslaught of people crossing our borders from all over the world, many of whom probably would have been detrimental to us in terms of terrorism, it’s been alerting the American people that’s given us the leverage,” said Rohrabacher.

President Trump campaigned vigorously on enforcing immigration laws and beefing up border security, most famously with a wall. However, Rohrabacher says the performance of Republicans in the televised meeting suggests most GOP members have no intention of pursuing Trump’s campaign vision.

“I don’t think there was anybody in that meeting that was someone who was, on principle and in practicality, opposed to legalization of illegal immigrants,” said Rohrabacher, who admits no lawmakers would admit to such a label.\

However, the congressman says actions speak louder than words and the emerging talks suggest a major disconnect between lawmakers and the voters who sent them there. He says it could have a major impact come Election Day 2018.

“We could turn off our base the same way moderate Republicans have turned off their base and lost elections for the last 20 years,” said Rohrabacher.

Interestingly, despite his vehement opposition to congressional legislation on DACA, Rohrabacher is not guaranteeing a ‘no’ vote.

“I’m not telling you that if I lose in my argument that I will vote against any bill that has DACA in it or any other type of immigration reforms or changes they plan to make,” said Rohrabacher.

“I’ll pay attention to the compromise to see if it’s possible that I could vote for it. I’ll keep an open mind, but I think it will do us great harm, so I would prefer not to have a legalization, especially of 850,000 young people,” said Rohrabacher.

Standard Podcast [ 9:34 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download