Connect with us

Immigration

All five of the main DACA bills go well beyond the 700,000 illegal immigrants currently protected

Published

on

All five of the main DACA bills go well beyond the 700000 illegal immigrants currently protected

When all is said and done, it’s very likely that the Republican-controlled Congress will offer some variation of amnesty than President Obama was ever able to protect through executive order. Moreover, their protections will be legislative, permanent, and unlikely to draw nearly the same legal challenges the former President prompted.

When President Trump rescinded DACA protections following a six-month period, he passed the buck to Congress to act in time. He even declared that if they didn’t act, he would. The number of people protected under DACA is around 700,000. Of the five main bills on the table, the lowest level of protection extends to 1.3 million while the heaviest, proposed by Luis Gutierrez, triples that number.

In other words, the best-case scenario is that the GOP will only protect twice as many illegal immigrants as President Obama did.

This shouldn’t sit well with immigration hawks who believed the President’s promise to deport illegal immigrants and prevent more from coming over. Nine months into his presidency, he and the GOP majority on Capitol Hill have done the exact opposite. Sure, the prototypes for the border wall are currently being built, but that’s a long-term fix that currently doesn’t even have any funding appropriated.

I’ll post some final thoughts below, but first, let’s look at how this is being received around the web:

Perspectives

Up to 3.6 million Dreamers in line for citizenship under DACA replacement – Washington Times

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/20/36m-dreamers-line-citizenship-daca-replacement/As many as 3.6 million illegal immigrant “Dreamers” could be in line for permanent legal status in the U.S. under plans being circulated on Capitol Hill to replace the Obama-era DACA deportation amnesty, according to a new report Friday from the Migration Policy Institute.

In each case it’s well beyond the 700,000 people being protected by the DACA program right now, underscoring the creeping scope of amnesty Congress is considering.

Pelosi: Trump ‘would not walk away’ from Dreamers – ABC News

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pelosi-trump-walk-dreamers/story?id=50613675House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said today that while President Donald Trump’s actions on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program have been “heartbreaking,” she has “confidence” he will stand by the young immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children, known as Dreamers, going forward.

Pelosi told “The View” Friday that every president “in recent history,” including Republicans like Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush, “have been respectful of what immigration means to our country.”

Uber, Intel, and other tech firms will urge Congress to let “Dreamers” stay | Ars Technica

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/uber-intel-and-other-tech-firms-will-urge-congress-to-let-dreamers-stay/This Obama-era executive action allowed “Dreamers,” undocumented immigrants who arrived as minors, to register with the government and legally study or work without fear of deportation. The newly organized Coalition appears to be unrelated to an Oklahoma-based group founded in 2006 that shares the same name: Coalition for the American Dream. (The Oklahoma group also “advocate[s] for and protect[s] the rights of disenfranchised immigrants and new Americans from all nations.”)

Final Thoughts

The sad reality is this: fewer illegal immigrants would have been granted protections if they’d just left DACA the way it was. It would have possibly been struck down by the Supreme Court, anyway. Now, it seems like Congress is going to up the ante on the former president’s legacy and protect many more illegal immigrants than Obama ever could. So much for “America First.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Immigration

Media highlight why migrants left their countries, but neglect one important fact

Published

on

Media highlight why migrants left their countries but neglect one important fact

Buzz around the migrant caravan has been waning over the last week. President George H. W. Bush’s death and other stories have moved the swelling problem in Tijuana and all along the border to page two, but the problem keeps getting worse. As it moves into the stage of being labeled a humanitarian crisis, mainstream media is focused on spreading two narratives, both of which are centered around choices.

The first narrative has been up and down in the news cycle. Sometimes, it’s the focus, as it was when the migrant caravans were first forming and also today as the narrative is being reintroduced. Other times, it’s simply inserted into other stories as a reminder to reinforce the narrative. This is the “no choice” narrative.

The second narrative is one that calls for the United States to make a choice. There’s only one acceptable choice in the minds of leftists and mainstream media that is even remotely acceptable. Let’s look at each choice and see how they work together. When we dig deeply enough, we’ll see that the premise of the first choice (or lack thereof) doesn’t jibe with the second choice at all.

Of course, they don’t want you to think that deeply into this matter.

Narrative 1: No choice for the migrants

An article today sought to justify not only the trek the migrant caravans made but the decision many of them have made to bypass the system and enter the United States illegally.

Why members of the immigrant caravan are entering the US illegally — Quartz

https://qz.com/1485613/why-members-of-the-immigrant-caravan-are-entering-the-us-illegally/Some members of the caravan of Central American immigrants that arrived in Tijuana last month are starting to illegally slip through the US-Mexico border.

The Trump administration has tried a variety of strategies to stop them since they set out on the long trek weeks ago—from insults to troop deployment to the use of tear gas. But for citizens of countries that have long been convulsed by tragedy, those may seem like minor obstacles.

The article then goes on to try to convince us that everything from natural disasters to poverty have given many of the citizens of Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador no choice but to seek asylum. If the Guatemala civil war (which ended in 1996) doesn’t kill them, then violent crime will surely get them, or so we’re told. While armed conflict shouldn’t be downplayed, it’s nowhere near as bad as mainstream media wants us to believe. As for violent crime, it’s bad. But then again, it’s bad elsewhere.

The murder rate in Guatemala is lower than the murder rate in Newark, NJ.

I’m not suggesting we ignore the problems they’re facing. The conditions those in the migrant caravan are fleeing are serious concerns. This narrative works when trying to convince Americans the migrants had no choice. Let’s go with it for now.

Narrative 2: The United States must choose to let the migrants in

This particular narrative is the natural followup to the first narrative. We are a nation and a people that seeks solutions. Mainstream media and leftists are offering us a very simple solution: Let them in.

This has been the off-and-on-again narrative for a decade. There was a time (I know, hard to believe) when Democrats and mainstream media acknowledged the problems associated with our porous borders. It’s hard to imagine today, but I remember investigative reports that demonstrated how easy it is to sneak into America. These reports would often focus on dangerous men who crossed the borders and quickly reunited with their gangs who had already crossed.

One in particular (I wish I could find the video) talked to a man who claimed he traveled with people he suspected to be terrorists. This was right after 9/11 when fears of infiltration were not being called “Islamophobia” yet, so mainstream media happily covered it.

Today, the narrative is all about our abundance and the migrants’ needs. It’s the standard socialist talking point meant to pull at our humanitarian heartstrings. We have, they don’t, so let them in so we can take care of all those poor women and children.

The ignored choice

In all the reporting I’ve been reading today about the migrant caravan, I had to turn to a source I don’t like to use in order to find a reporting of the real solution.

Mexico offers asylum to thousands in the migrant caravan

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/12/mexico-offers-asylum-thousands-migrant-caravan-181207143116460.htmlMexico offers a choice of a humanitarian visa or access to a speedy asylum process. Tijuana was supposed to be a transit point for the Central American migrant caravan.

But, as access to the US is becoming more difficult, many of these asylum seekers are opting to start a new life in Mexico instead.

That’s it. That’s all there was to the article. The attached video on the page continues to reinforce the two primary narratives, as if reporting on the actual solution needs to be overshadowed.

Mainstream media and leftists are ignoring the fact that the two narratives they’re pushing are both reconciled by Mexico’s offer of asylum. The migrants left a dangerous situation. They’re being offered security, jobs, healthcare, and asylum by Mexico. Problem solved, right?

No. The vast majority of migrants are not seeking safe haven from dangerous conditions. If they were, they’d take it.

Our real choice as a nation is whether we are sovereign or not. If we are sovereign, then we enforce the law and protect our borders. Migrants who choose to go through the legal process to get granted asylum are welcome here. Those who choose to ignore the law are not welcome. It really should be that simple.

But that’s not a narrative you’ll see from mainstream media because it doesn’t push their agenda.

If it’s asylum they seek, they have it available to them in Mexico. But that’s clearly not what they seek or more would accept the generous offer. Why won’t mainstream media or leftists acknowledge this inconvenient truth?

Continue Reading

Immigration

The real reason Republicans aren’t pressing for the border wall

Published

on

The real reason Republicans arent pressing for the border wall

A Tweet by conservative commentator David Limbaugh caught my attention today. I was a little surprised that Limbaugh, one of the most astute and underrated voices in the conservative movement, was wondering why the GOP has been dragging their feet on both the border wall and making tax cuts permanent. Then it occurred to me that if Limbaugh didn’t see it, maybe others weren’t seeing it either.

Here’s the Tweet:

The tax cuts can’t be made permanent through reconciliation. Otherwise, I believe they would have at least tried. The border wall, on the other hand, could be funded quite easily during the lame duck session on Capitol Hill. We know it will be nearly impossible to get the wall funded once Democrats take over the House of Representatives next session, so why isn’t the GOP pushing for it now while they have the chance?

Answer: The wall is part of their 2020 election strategy.

The GOP succeeded in 2010, 2014, and 2016 because of fear of Obamacare. It was a bluff, of course. All of it was. They never intended to repeal it as they promised for six years. They wanted to change it, perhaps make it more palatable, but it’s hard to change the status quo when so much money is wrapped up in it. That’s why they put a clean repeal bill on President Obama’s desk in 2015 for him to veto but couldn’t put anything on President Trump’s desk while they had the power to do so. Most will blame Senator John McCain, but he was just part of the reason they couldn’t do it. In the end, they read the tea leaves and figured they couldn’t afford to rock the boat ahead of the 2018 midterms. It was a terrible miscalculation, but it’s done.

Either way, Obamacare repeal is essentially off the table.

Now, they need other items to run on in 2020. The border wall is one of them. They want to drive voters in 2020 by telling them Democrats are blocking their efforts to build the border wall. They’ll bet on the news-cycle-centered mentality of modern American society that makes people forget the GOP is squandering the opportunity they have right now to fund the border wall. It’ll work, too. By the time 2020 rolls around, everyone who wants a border wall will blame Democrats for blocking it.

The wall is unlikely to be their premier plank. Candidate Trump hammered it hard in 2016. He’ll need to run on the premise that he fulfilled his promises and has new ones to get done in order to make America great again. But he’ll mention the wall. Republicans on (or hoping to be on) Capitol Hill will point fingers at Democrats for preventing the wall from being built. They’ll tread lightly but nonetheless they’ll push the idea forward.

“If you want the wall, we need your help,” their messaging will say.

2020 GOP candidates will push the notion that to build the wall, they’ll need to regain control of the House while maintaining control of the Senate. What Republican voters should be asking is why they didn’t fund the wall when they had the chance in 2018.

Continue Reading

Immigration

The Five reacts to migrant caravan children being dropped from 18-foot walls

Published

on

The Five reacts to migrant caravan children being dropped from 18-foot walls

There are two real takeaways from the discussion on yesterday’s The Five when they tackled the topic of illegal immigrants dropping their children over an 18-foot wall in order to get into the United States. The first is the obvious one – we need better border security, including better walls. Second, leftists like Juan Williams pretend like they don’t see the obvious in order to protect their ideology.

The whole thing is a joke right now. Every major study in the United States and across the globe has concluded that walls and proper border security dramatically influence the flow of illegal border crossings. This is indisputable. The current talking point for Democrats is that it’s a waste of money. No, seriously. That’s the story they’re going with right now and it’s pitiful.

It would be better if the left just came out and said they are against the border wall because President Trump is for it. If a Democrat from a border area like California suggested a wall, many on the left would probably agree. Maybe not.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report