Trump rolls out plan for path to citizenship for 1.8 million 'Dreamers'

[webfact]

Trump rolls out plan for path to citizenship for 1.8 million 'Dreamers'

By Roberta Rampton and Susan Cornwell

 

U.S. President Donald Trump waves as he arrives in Zurich, Switzerland January 25, 2018. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump is ready to sign on to a plan that would open a path to citizenship for as many as 1.8 million "Dreamers," young immigrants brought illegally to the country as children, senior White House officials said on Thursday.

 

The White House presented the offer as a major concession aimed at attracting enough votes from Democrats. But it includes a number of elements such as tightening border security and deterring new immigrants to appeal to Republican hardliners.

 

"This is kind of a bottom line for the president," a senior official told reporters, saying it would be up to lawmakers to determine some of the details. "If it's realistic, then he'll sign it. If it isn't realistic, then he won't sign it."

 

Trump's plan, which the White House hopes will be first voted on in the Senate in early February, would require Congress to set up a $25 billion "trust fund" to build a wall on the southern border with Mexico, and invest in better protections at the northern border with Canada.

 

It would also require Congress to limit family sponsorship of immigrants to spouses and minor children and end a visa lottery system for certain countries, the officials said.

 

Congress would have to allocate additional money to border guards and immigration judges, and change rules to allow for the rapid deportation of illegal immigrants from countries other than Mexico and Canada who arrive at the U.S. border, the officials said.

 

To become law, the measures would also need to pass the House of Representatives. A second senior official declined to speculate on whether the plan would pass the Republican-controlled chamber.

 

"I think the House will have an independent vehicle," the second official said. "We're not trying to force something on the House."

 

Trump, whose hardline immigration stance was a key part of his 2016 presidential campaign, said in September he was ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, programme for Dreamers that was created by Democratic predecessor Barack Obama unless Congress came up with a new law.

 

(Reporting by Roberta Rampton and Susan Cornwell; Additional reporting by Blake Brittain; Editing by Cynthia Osterman and Peter Cooney)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-01-26

[Samui Bodoh]

Wah!

 

I don't think that I have said this since Trump became President, but this seems like a reasonable proposal. I think building a wall is a stupid idea, but as there needs to be some compromise all around, then it would make sense.

 

However, the devil is in the details. A big part of this would be getting it through the House of Representatives; that won't be easy if Republicans don't open the voting to Democrats in a big way. Further, Trump will have to play a major role in selling the plan; does he have the ability to promote actual legislation that is both agreeable and sustainable? To date, he has not shown that he can do this. Finally, there are thousands of tiny but important details to figure out; can they do this in a bipartisan fashion?

 

This is a good start. Lets hope they (Dems, Repubs, and Trump) don't screw it up.

 

[sirineou]

It needs to be done it is the right thing to do but done without adequate countermeasures we will find ourselves in the same place in a few years again.

Amnesty was done before and here we are again.

We are an open society, stopping them at the border, without changing who we are, will never be effective.

IMO there needs to be strict enforcement of labor laws, they will not come here if there was no work, and we need to have a guest worker program, where people come here, work and the go back home.

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The White House presented the offer as a major concession aimed at attracting enough votes from Democrats. But it includes a number of elements such as tightening border security and deterring new immigrants to appeal to Republican hardliners.

The grand poobah of trumptopia just blinked...

[lannarebirth]

46 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The grand poobah of trumptopia just blinked...

 

I think Trump was always going to do DACA, he just didn't want it conflated with the budget, which it should never have been. I think he really wants to get rid of the lottery and put some constraints on chain migration. The big figure for the stupid wall idea is the thing that can get reduced drastically to get the other stuff done. Everybody wins, except non DACA aliens without documentation which I predict he will go after with renewed vigor once this deal gets done.

Edited January 26, 2018 by lannarebirth

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I think Trump was always going to do DACA, he just didn't want it conflated with the budget, which it should never have been. I think he really wants to get rid of the lottery and put some constraints on chain migration. The big figure for the stupid wall idea is the thing that can get reduced drastically to get the other stuff done. Everybody wins, except non DACA aliens without documentation which I predict he will go after with renewed vigor once this deal gets done.

I predict he’ll back down again. 

Edited January 26, 2018 by Bluespunk

[lannarebirth]

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I predict he’ll back down again. 

 

Yeah, maybe; but I think only if new demands are put on the table.

[Bluespunk]

7 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Yeah, maybe; but I think only if new demands are put on the table.

Or a shut down looms again and threatens his ego. 

 

However, whatever the reason, I’m glad DACA is being secured. 

Edited January 26, 2018 by Bluespunk

[malibukid]

something that he is actually good at. and will probably bring it in under budget.  with the $$ saved there may be enough left over for a moat.

Edited January 26, 2018 by malibukid

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I think Trump was always going to do DACA, he just didn't want it conflated with the budget, which it should never have been. I think he really wants to get rid of the lottery and put some constraints on chain migration. The big figure for the stupid wall idea is the thing that can get reduced drastically to get the other stuff done. Everybody wins, except non DACA aliens without documentation which I predict he will go after with renewed vigor once this deal gets done.

You got it. It was obvious to me that he only terminated DACA to force congress to give him the wall.

The wall is the centerpiece of his election campaign, and he has to get it to keep his base.

He knows that the congress will never give him the wall without a bargaining tool to hang over them. Too many GOP want illegals to keep wages down and obviously the Dems want them for different reasons.

 

Worth remembering that if Obama hadn't written the DACA regulation, Trump wouldn't have DACA to use to get the wall. He must be thanking Obama for that, though I doubt that was Obama's intention.

[farcanell]

I’m thinking that it’s dispicable to link the fate of the dreamers to any concessions.

 

have the inquiry or whatever it was that was promised to stop the shutdown.... implement relevant recommendations from the inquiry... no problems, but to negotiate the freedom of these people’s for political gain is wrong.

 

from what I understand (corrections and education welcomed) by and large, these folk only know America, so are as American as apple pie ... so threatening to deport them to an unknown environment (a scary and dangerous environment, perhaps made worse by American intervention) is all kinds of <deleted> up.

 

 

[farcanell]

 

You can see it in his smirk.... “hello Zurich... here I am to <deleted> up your day”

[thaibeachlovers]

On 1/26/2018 at 3:51 PM, farcanell said:

I’m thinking that it’s dispicable to link the fate of the dreamers to any concessions.

 

have the inquiry or whatever it was that was promised to stop the shutdown.... implement relevant recommendations from the inquiry... no problems, but to negotiate the freedom of these people’s for political gain is wrong.

 

from what I understand (corrections and education welcomed) by and large, these folk only know America, so are as American as apple pie ... so threatening to deport them to an unknown environment (a scary and dangerous environment, perhaps made worse by American intervention) is all kinds of <deleted> up.

 

 

1/ Trump has to have the wall, period. It defines his campaign and his presidency.

2/ Congress will never give it to him without being forced into it.

3/ Obama gave him a gift when he wrote DACA.

4/ Trump will keep them in exchange for the wall. 

5/ the future of "those folk" is in the hands of congress.

[farcanell]

15 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

1/ Trump has to have the wall, period. It defines his campaign and his presidency.

2/ Congress will never give it to him without being forced into it.

3/ Obama gave him a gift when he wrote DACA.

4/ Trump will keep them in exchange for the wall. 

5/ the future of "those folk" is in the hands of congress.

This underscores the fact that trumps dispicable and lacking in morals and compassion... right?

 

or not?

 

your points;

1/ because he’s an idiot

2/ bullying and blackmail

3/ obama revamped and improved the 2001 dreamer act

4/ a result of a successful blackmail

5/ is it? Trump can simply leave the 2 year renewal, on provision of good behavior ( as in, being a good citizen of the USA), as it is.... and then there’s the US Court involvement and intervention to consider.

 

i want to understand.... I really do... can you perhaps reword and pad it out a bit... I don’t mind if it’s the idiots version.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 minutes ago, farcanell said:

This underscores the fact that trumps dispicable and lacking in morals and compassion... right?

 

or not?

 

your points;

1/ because he’s an idiot

2/ bullying and blackmail

3/ obama revamped and improved the 2001 dreamer act

4/ a result of a successful blackmail

5/ is it? Trump can simply leave the 2 year renewal, on provision of good behavior ( as in, being a good citizen of the USA), as it is.... and then there’s the US Court involvement and intervention to consider.

 

i want to understand.... I really do... can you perhaps reword and pad it out a bit... I don’t mind if it’s the idiots version.

OK here's the "The Wall for Dummies"

Trump wants Wall

Congress wants DACA

Trump gets Wall.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 1/26/2018 at 3:57 PM, farcanell said:

 

You can see it in his smirk.... “hello Zurich... here I am to <deleted> up your day”

Nah, the elites in Davos were all happy to see him. From CNN so has to be true, yes?

 

 

[farcanell]

17 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

OK here's the "The Wall for Dummies"

Trump wants Wall

Congress wants DACA

Trump gets Wall.

Lol.... negotiations 101... OK

[Trouble]

On 1/26/2018 at 3:51 PM, farcanell said:

I’m thinking that it’s dispicable to link the fate of the dreamers to any concessions.

 

have the inquiry or whatever it was that was promised to stop the shutdown.... implement relevant recommendations from the inquiry... no problems, but to negotiate the freedom of these people’s for political gain is wrong.

 

from what I understand (corrections and education welcomed) by and large, these folk only know America, so are as American as apple pie ... so threatening to deport them to an unknown environment (a scary and dangerous environment, perhaps made worse by American intervention) is all kinds of <deleted> up.

 

 

 

Yes it is very sad to hold them hostage, but without it the Dems would never even come to the table.  There are still Dems that are vehemently opposed to doing anything about the chain migration issue.  If someone decides to immigrate to the USA should the laws be such that the extended family is also allowed in?  Limiting it to immediate family is reasonable and prudent.  

 

The dreamers have been set aside as special because they were young when they came or were brought here. Understandable but the Dems have used them as some kind of political tool for years, always showing some young kids in college wanting to be doctors, etc.  That's unfortunately not the vast majority.  They have been used by the Dems far longer to try to get their agenda but when the other side uses them, it's a sin.  

 

The DACA people are just the tip of the iceberg. If the Dems are smart they will accept this offer and move forward. There is still a long road ahead in dealing with the other 9 or 10 million here illegally.  Simple reasoning here is to figure out the next phase and let most of them stay, minus the criminals, and set some rules for them remaining such as no citizenship, ever. That should be the price for breaking the law. There have been numerous categories of people allowed to stay here and each one will have to be dealt with.  My housekeeper is El Salvadorian , part of the 200,000 from 20 years ago allowed to stay here legally, has a husband also from there, has kids some from there, some born here, hard working.  Can't see deporting them so another deal will have to be made for this group and that group.  There is long road to fixing this and as was said things will have to be fixed so that the verification system works so employers can be held responsible for hiring people without permits.  It's not just the chain migration, lottery, or security at the border that has to be fixed, the whole system has been broken for too many years. 

[lannarebirth]

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

OK here's the "The Wall for Dummies"

Trump wants Wall

Congress wants DACA

Trump gets Wall.

 

Yeah, but the wall's a pretty stupid idea and I'm sure even Trump knows that. It's his throwaway in the negotiations. At least the $25 Billion is. I expect he'd take a lot less to put constraints on chain migration and end the green card lottery which is actual immigration reform though not very comprehensive.

Edited January 26, 2018 by lannarebirth

[Opl]

19 hours ago, sirineou said:

It needs to be done it is the right thing to do but done without adequate countermeasures we will find ourselves in the same place in a few years again.

Amnesty was done before and here we are again.

We are an open society, stopping them at the border, without changing who we are, will never be effective.

IMO there needs to be strict enforcement of labor laws, they will not come here if there was no work, and we need to have a guest worker program, where people come here, work and the go back home.

and the " pursuit of happiness"?

[isaanbanhou]

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 OK here's the "The Wall for Dummies"

Trump wants Wall

Congress wants DACA

Trump gets Wall.

OK here`s the wall for dummies....  yes, he is building a wall to please the dummies that voted for him.

[lannarebirth]

1 hour ago, Opl said:

and the " pursuit of happiness"?

I think you're mixing up the Declaration of Inpependence with the US Constitution. Even if it were in the Constitution it is important to remember that it begins with "We, the people of the United States".

[isaanbanhou]

8 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

I think you're mixing up the Declaration of Inpependence with the US Constitution. Even if it were in the Constitution it is important to remember that it begins with "We, the people of the United States".

 

48 of the 56 signers  of the Declaration of Independence were born in America. Two were born in England (Button Gwinnett, Robert Morris), two in Ireland (George Taylor, Matthew Thornton), two in Scotland (James Wilson, John Witherspoon), one in Northern Ireland (James Smith), and one in Wales (Francis Lewis).

declaration.fas.harvard.edu/faq/how-many-signers-were-born-american-colonies

 

Seven of the 39 men who signed the Constitution were immigrants. In fact, two of the three men most associated with its passage, Alexander Hamilton and James Wilson, were foreign-born. One of the three men who wrote the Federalist Papers explaining the Constitution was born abroad.

When George Washington chose Justices of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution, three of his choices were immigrants. James Wilson of Scotland, James Iredell of England, and William Patterson from Ireland made up the immigrant third of the original of the Supreme Court.

Four of the first six Secretaries of the Treasury were immigrants, one each from Switzerland and Scotland, and two from the West Indies. President Washington appointed an Irish immigrant, James McHenry, as Secretary of War in 1796.

https://longislandwins.com/news/national/the-immigrants-among-the-founding-fathers

 

Pesky immigrants

[lannarebirth]

5 minutes ago, isaanbanhou said:

 

48 of the 56 signers  of the Declaration of Independence were born in America. Two were born in England (Button Gwinnett, Robert Morris), two in Ireland (George Taylor, Matthew Thornton), two in Scotland (James Wilson, John Witherspoon), one in Northern Ireland (James Smith), and one in Wales (Francis Lewis).

declaration.fas.harvard.edu/faq/how-many-signers-were-born-american-colonies

 

Seven of the 39 men who signed the Constitution were immigrants. In fact, two of the three men most associated with its passage, Alexander Hamilton and James Wilson, were foreign-born. One of the three men who wrote the Federalist Papers explaining the Constitution was born abroad.

When George Washington chose Justices of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution, three of his choices were immigrants. James Wilson of Scotland, James Iredell of England, and William Patterson from Ireland made up the immigrant third of the original of the Supreme Court.

Four of the first six Secretaries of the Treasury were immigrants, one each from Switzerland and Scotland, and two from the West Indies. President Washington appointed an Irish immigrant, James McHenry, as Secretary of War in 1796.

https://longislandwins.com/news/national/the-immigrants-among-the-founding-fathers

 

Pesky immigrants

 

Yes, and they were all British subjects. What's your point?

[isaanbanhou]

11 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Yes, and they were all British subjects. What's your point?

To enlighten biggots

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, isaanbanhou said:

To enlighten biggots

 

Oh, I thought it was that if one were dissatisfied with how one's country treats its citizens, one should be prepared to risk their life, their fortune and their sacred honor in an attempt to revolt against one's government.

 

[isaanbanhou]

19 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Oh, I thought it was that if one were dissatisfied with how one's country treats its citizens, one should be prepared to risk their life, their fortune and their sacred honor in an attempt to revolt against one's government.

 

I take it we agree then place of birth doesn t determine ones country then and America is  a land of immigrants

[lannarebirth]

4 minutes ago, isaanbanhou said:

I take it we agree then place of birth doesn t determine ones country then and America is  a land of immigrants

If one is born in America then one's place of birth does determine one's country. One is free to acquire other citizenships or permanent residencies but unless you take an active step to relinquish your US citizenship you are forever a US citizen. I think it works pretty much the same for most other countries unless one chooses to emigrate away from them.

 

 Except for the indigenous peoples America is indeed a land of immigrants and the descendants of immigrants. If you are born in America you are a native American no matter your family's ancestry.

[isaanbanhou]

47 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

If one is born in America then one's place of birth does determine one's country. One is free to acquire other citizenships or permanent residencies but unless you take an active step to relinquish your US citizenship you are forever a US citizen. I think it works pretty much the same for most other countries unless one chooses to emigrate away from them.

 

 Except for the indigenous peoples America is indeed a land of immigrants and the descendants of immigrants. If you are born in America you are a native American no matter your family's ancestry.

I wonder if the immigrant signers of the US  constitution or the declaration of independence would meet the criteria of Trumps desired immigration policies.  

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, isaanbanhou said:

I wonder if the immigrant signers of the US  constitution or the declaration of independence would meet the criteria of Trumps desired immigration policies.  

 

You mean white men of means? What do you think?

 

I'm not sure what immigration even looked like back then. Just show up on a boat? If you were born anywhere in the  British Empire back then I guess you'd be a migrant rather than an immigrant.

Edited January 27, 2018 by lannarebirth