The price for ‘dream kids’ could be David Perdue’s immigration bill

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of N.Y., accompanied by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of Calif., left, and other Democratic members of the House and Senate, speaks during a Capitol Hill press conference in Washington earlier this month. AP/Jose Luis Magana

Huddled masses yearning to breathe free may be about to take it in the neck.

That could be the price for saving nearly 800,000 “dream kids” from the threat of deportation. If you’re David Perdue, that’s a fair trade.

Heads, most of them Republican, are still spinning from Wednesday’s White House meeting between Donald Trump and Democratic leaders in Congress. A meeting in which the president appeared to pledge his support for legislation to salvage the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program established by President Barack Obama.

At least that was the line from Democrats.

“We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that’s acceptable to both sides,” the minority leaders of the House and Senate — Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, respectively — in a joint statement after a rather strange meal.

Chocolate pie after Chinese?

The reaction from the anti-immigration wing of the GOP was withering. “Amnesty Don,” shouted Breitbart.com. “At this point, who DOESN’T want Trump impeached?” Tweeted the demanding Ann Coulter. “@POTUS needs to keep his promises,” warned Sean Hannity, the anchor of the Fox News “opinion show.”

Trump appeared to backtrack the next morning. “No deal was made last night on DACA,” he said on Twitter. The wall “will continue to be built,” he assured the faithful.

And then the president whiplashed fervent Trumpists with this: “Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military?”

In fact, there might have been some misdirection. But there was no back-tracking.

Here’s something you may not have known: A few hours before Chuck and Nancy sat down with Donald, their new BFF, David Perdue, R-Ga., and Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, on Wednesday conducted a mini-seminar for the rest of Senate Republican caucus.

It was a refresher course on the details of the pair’s bill to enact a profound change in U.S. immigration policy that would put a greater emphasis on the job skills and education levels of foreigners over family ties. Legal immigration would be cut by half in just a few years. A hard cap would be put on refugees.

Only a few hours later, as he exited the Chocolate Pie Summit, U.S. Rep. Henry Cueller, D-Texas, said Trump had countered during the bargaining session not with a wall, but with elements of the Perdue/Cotton bill.

Another sign that we may be headed for a shotgun marriage of DACA with the Perdue/Cotton RAISE Act came with a Friday morning Tweet from the president: “CHAIN MIGRATION cannot be allowed to be part of any legislation on Immigration!”

Tightly restricting the ability of new American citizens to bring in family members is at the heart of the Perdue/Cotton bill. Which Trump endorsed last month.

The DACA concession isn’t a gift to Democrats. It is the first part of the transaction. Let us take Schumer and Pelosi at their words and accept that Trump’s “big beautiful wall” will not be part of the deal.

This makes good political sense. At its core, the wall is a budget issue. Which makes it a different animal from what a DACA fix would become.

President Donald Trump shakes hands with Sen. David Perdue (R-GA) during an immigration announcement at the White House in August. Zach Gibson – Pool/Getty Images

What other immigration-related issues are out there? The deportation of 11 million illegal immigrants said to live here is something every Democrat – and most Republicans – oppose. And sacrificing millions for 800,000 makes no sense, mathematically or morally.

An end to birth-right citizenship? That’s a constitutional issue and so, again, a different animal.

The only bargaining chip left on the table is the Perdue/Cotton bill. Its “like-for-like” nature makes it attractive. “Dream kids” – who are young adults now – could be given legal status in this country. But at the same time, Republicans could put restrictions on their ability to serve as a touchstone for relatives.

The Perdue/Cotton bill has many critics, even among conservatives. The Cato Institute disputes the senators’ contention that American wages can be raised by limiting the entry of unskilled labor.

Already, the U.S. has become a low-birth rate country, an unhealthy situation for a growing economy. Between 1990 and 2015, the only thing that kept a 4 percent drop in births in the U.S. from becoming a 10 percent drop was an increase in children born to immigrant mothers, according to a Pew Research Center report made public last month.

The point is that nearly every aspect of the Perdue/Cotton bill is amenable to negotiation, so long as Trump can retain the loyalty of his base of supporters.

Another aspect that could make this deal politically possible: If the Labor Party in Britain is any example, Democrats might be willing to accept some new restrictions on immigration in order to win back lost white voters.

In the snap election called by Prime Minister Theresa May this spring, intended to bolster Conservatives during the coming Brexit negotiations, Labor enjoyed a surprising surge — in part by conceding an end to the right of free movement between British citizens and those remaining in the European Union.

At the same time, Labor promised to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens already living in Britain. The DACA parallel is there.

Whether true or not, many white blue-collar workers – a constituency lost by Democrats in the U.S. – believe that their stagnant position in society can be linked to the demographic changes now occurring in the U.S.

Richard Ray is president emeritus of the Georgia State AFL-CIO, but he is still a member of the Democratic National Committee. After the Trump-Pelosi-Schumer dinner on Wednesday, I rang up Ray to ask whether his AFL-CIO friends might accept restrictions on immigration as part of a DACA deal.

Members of public employee and manufacturing unions might be lukewarm to the idea, he said. But building trade unions – roofers, bricklayers and the like — would be on board.

“The argument has to be, in exchange for DACA, let’s not let so many in. That would be a trade-off,” Ray said.

Reader Comments 0

13 comments
CH123
CH123

 Some people don't know much about the RAISE Act.
1. The reductions are popular. 62 percent of likely mid-term voters support immigration levels of 500,000 per year or less.
2. The reductions are mainstream. The reforms to Chain Migration are in line with the recommendations of President Clinton's bi-partisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform.
3. Chain Migration makes every amnesty bigger than advertised. Without mandatory E-Verify and the elimination of Chain Migration parents around the world will continue to put their children in the very same situation. Chain Migration would turn a DACA amnesty of 723,000 into eventual green cards for 3,760,000; Chain Migration would turn a DREAM Act amnesty of 3,338,000 into eventual green cards for 17,358,000.

30303
30303

Poll after poll consistently shows the public favoring reduced immigration.

Gene Hartke
Gene Hartke

Dems should agree to pass draconian, xenophobic legislation to save DACA kids because Trump voters are misinformed or flat out racist. Huh? Or the Dems could grow a spine, refuse to play BS games and offer legislation that actually helps working people. The Republicans control Congress and most Americans support DACA. The GOP either relents and does what's right for Dreamers, or the party keeps digging its grave ahead of 2020.

Our porous borders
Our porous borders

What other country allows migrants to determine its immigration policies?

GraceD
GraceD

I do not support the Raise act. At best, it is another band aid to a huge problem of immigration. I do support the Daca because these kids are American & know no other country.

What we really  need is a Comprehensive Plan that addresses all the issues to include the over stay of Visa holders (estimated at 40% of the illegals. 

A bipartisan comprehensive plan was passed by the Senate in 2013 or14. The House refused to take it up.

Nothing has been done by any congress since Reagan gave amnesty during his term of office. 

The major blame lies with congress that simply obstruct & kick the issues down the hill.

And this is what the voters are stuck with. Until we the voters fire them & replace with legislators that will work with the other side.


Our porous borders
Our porous borders

To protect American jobs we need a wall, mandatory E-Verify and an end to birthright citizenship and chain migration.

Letting these "Dreamers" stay would mean letting 5 or more relatives and family members stay too.

Anna_
Anna_

I’m making over $10k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is where i started>>>>>> http://tiny.cc/online-jobss


Ralph-43
Ralph-43

At this point the majority of Americans see through the outdated 'White Power' movement initially lead by Trump-Bannon-Sessions.  Trump may not be brilliant but, unlike Perdue, he does not like to look stupid and foolish.

DavidFarrar
DavidFarrar

There should be no DACA amnesty without three conditions first being met: The wall, funded, the RAISE Act, passed, and Birthright Reform accomplished, wherein the offspring born here of illegal aliens would not be deemed U.S. citizens at birth,

Of the three, the wall will be by far the least effective and most expensive. Of the other two: The RAISE Act will be important in curbing chain migration, but its effectiveness will always depend on "enforcement," and we know the DEMOs and RINOs in Congress are antithetical to strict immigration enforcement. While birthright reform will be by far the most effective in curbing illegal immigration into this country and the least expensive to achieve.

Starik
Starik

I despise what the Republican Party has become, but the Perdue plan has some merit, depending on how it's written and administered. Building the wall would be a waste of money, but if it leads to real reform, including legalization of those already here, I'm for it.