When President Trump punted deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA) to Congress, and gave it six months to arrive at a legislative solution, the political neophyte faked out Capitol Hill swamp veterans.
If Congress can’t agree, then the blame for DACA’s dissolution shifts, at least in part, from the president to the legislative branch. President Trump promised to end DACA, and he ended it, but with the caveat that Congress could revive it. But anyone who knows anything about immigration history, and that apparently includes President Trump, is fully aware that congressional amnesty bills fail to pass year after year.
Just weeks ago, Senate and House Minority leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi were triumphantly aglow, and crowed – falsely, as it turned out – that they had come to an agreement on DACA with President Trump that would be long on amnesty but short on enforcement. Today, they have egg on their faces.
Over the weekend, DACA advocates, clinging to the hope that President Trump would agree to a something-for-nothing deal, got a rude awakening. The White House released its 70-point immigration principles, none acceptable to congressional Democrats or Republican amnesty devotees like Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain.
The principles include mandating E-Verify that would stop unscrupulous employers from hiring illegal aliens, and replacing chain migration categories that give lifetime work permits to immigrants’ extended family members, which adds to unsustainable population growth, with a merit-based immigration system. Other principles include closing loopholes in asylum petitions, returning unaccompanied Central American minors and family units safely and expeditiously to their home countries, and hiring 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. Further, stopping catch and release, enforcing the interior more vigorously to remove visa overstays, and funding the border wall completely are other tenets.
Broken down, the principles advance 27 border security recommendations, 39 interior enforcement improvements, and four major legal immigration overhauls. A White House representative confirmed that without the principles, no DACA deal will be made.
In a joint statement, Schumer and Pelosi charged the administration’s list as “anathema” to most Americans. But they’re wrong. By criticizing President Trump’s proposed immigration changes, Schumer and Pelosi are indirectly confirming that they’re okay with illegal immigrants displacing Americans in the U.S. labor force, with open borders that allow aliens to enter with impunity, with rampant visa fraud, and with an increasingly overpopulated nation. Schumer, Pelosi and congressional Democrats may favor lax immigration, but Americans rejected it last November, and still reject it 11 months later.
A broad majority wants immigration laws enforced, and illegal immigration ended. Here’s why. A recent Federation for American Immigration Reform study based on federal, state and local data found that the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants cost Americans a net $116 billion annually. About eight million illegal immigrants hold non-agricultural jobs that E-Verify would block them from keeping. Employment-based visas for low-skilled workers add nearly one million temporary workers to the labor force; many never return home. And finally, the Department of Homeland Security calculates that the initial immigrant in the chain petitions an average of 3.5 new immigrants. A DACA amnesty alone would increase the immigration chain by 1.5 million people.
If Schumer, Pelosi, other top Democrats, Republican turncoats, and the immigration lobby want green cards and work permits for DACAs, their goal is within easy reach. Get on board with President Trump and his immigration principles, and their wishes will come true.
Joe Guzzardi is a Californians for Population Stabilization Senior Writing Fellow. Contact him at [email protected] Follow him on Twitter @joeguzzardi19.
This content is published through a licensing agreement with Acquire Media using its NewsEdge technology.