Trump’s popular and ambitious immigration principles, released October 8, says Americans need safeguards — including a large reduction in immigration numbers — before any legalization can be offered to help migrants. Numerous polls show Trump’s two-track proposals are far more popular than the Democrats’ business-backed, pro-migrant, anti-American rhetoric.
Democrats and business leaders have tried to distract the media from Trump’s popular, productivity-boosting, election-winning immigration policy by getting the media to focus on the smaller issue of several hundred thousand young illegals, so the so-called “Dreamers.” That has been an easy task, ensuring a steady river of fake news from media outlets about the cost, reality, and politics of immigratio
On October 11, for example, the Democrats’ leader in the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi described mass immigration as a “fundamental” part of the United States, and suggested that ‘dreamer’ illegals have a veto over the nation’s policies and Trump’s immigration principles:
They aren’t principles, they are trash – are unacceptable to the DREAMers and those of us who fight for them, opposed by the overwhelming majority of Americans and anathema to our national values. Together, these brutal proposals – each one of them is horrible – but the cumulative effect of them would destroy a fundamental part of the American character: a free nation proud of its immigrant heritage.
The Democrats’ business allies — who value immigrants as consumers and as cheap workers — also want to shift the debate away from numbers and from Trump’s principles.
In September, Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, insisted the DACA amnesty is “the biggest issue of our time,” that Americans are inhuman for not supporting a no-strings amnesty, that DACA illegals are better Americans than Americans, and each illegal is as useful to the economy as billionaire Mike Bloomberg:
This is the biggest issue of our time because this goes to the values of being American. This is ‘Are we human’? ‘Are we acting in a track of morality?’ right? These people … At Apple we have many … they love America deeply. When you talk to them, I wish everyone in America loved American this much. They have jobs, they pay taxes, they are pillars of their community, They’re incredible people, and so, to me, it would be like someone coming to Mike [Bloomberg] and saying ‘Mike, I just found out you aren’t really a citizen here, you need to leave.’ This is unacceptable. This is not who we are as a country, and so I am personally shocked that there is even a discussion of this.
But then Cook dropped the schmaltz and unveiled his larger goal of turning Americans’ raucous society into a billionaires’ tranquil cubicle-farm:
On the broad subject of immigration, if I were a country leader right now, my goal would be to monopolize the world’s talent. I’d want every smart person coming to my country because smart people create jobs and jobs is the ultimate, ultimate thing that creates a great environment in a country … it gives people a sense of purpose.
This hostility towards Americans’ civic society is political suicide for Democrats, says a variety of polls and says a growing number of left-leaning activists.
“Democrats in 2017, in general, tend to criticize the use of immigration enforcement and tend to side with those accused of violating immigration law, as a broad matter of principle … This is, to be blunt, political suicide,” said Andrew Sullivan, the immigrant British-born author who championed the same-sex movement, in New York Magazine.
Even the New York Times has recognized the Democrats’ vulnerability: “The pressure from some immigrant activists to reject any compromise that would tighten border security has frustrated Democratic leaders, who recognize the political risks of being labeled the party of open borders — a potentially lethal tag as they seek to regain support from working-class voters across the Midwest.”
Democrats and business groups, however, continue to bluff their way through the polls. They are bluffing the credulous media despite the nine-seat electoral disaster Senate Democrats suffered after Sen. Chuck Schumer personally led the “Gang of Eight” amnesty-and-cheap-labor bill in 2013 and 2014. On October 22, for example, Schumer declared on Meet The Press:
Well, I I would hope that we can get DACA done before the end of the year. Um, there’s overwhelming support in the House and Senate, once again, to deal with these kids. Even the president has expressed sympathy. And I think in this case, it’s genuine for the DACA kids. What happened here, same thing on health care. We came to an agreement, the right wing attacked, and he backed off. He cannot let a fringe wing of the Republican Party run the show, or his presidency will not accomplish anything. And that’s the greatest rap against him, even with his supporters. So what he ought to do is follow through on the agreement he had with Leader Pelosi and I. If not, we will figure out a way to get this done before the end of the year. We think it’s really important.
In contrast to the Democrats and the GOP leaders on the Hill, administration officials are already hinting that they are aiming for a big victory, not just a defeat of the latest amnesty demanded by business-first lobbies and migrant-first Democrats.
On October 18, for example, Attorney General Jeff Sessions told a Senate hearing:
I would just note the president has said he wants to work with Congress. He has a heart for young people, but we have got to have more than just an amnesty, friends. We need a good improvement in the illegality that’s going on, and there is an opportunity right now, I’m telling you — an opportunity now to do something historic.
“I am prepared to say, and I think I’ve said previously, something could be worked out on this. But it can’t just be one-sided,” Sessions told pro-amnesty GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham at the hearing. “President [Trump] has set out a reasonable and effective plan with numerous immigration priorities for this body to consider, including a border wall, significant asylum reform, swift border returns and enhanced interior enforcement.”
So what are the historic goals of taking the initiative?
Trump’s popular principles offer a good set of guidelines, say reformers. In his October 8 letter to Congress, Trump declared:
I have enclosed the detailed findings of this effort. These findings outline reforms that must be included as part of any legislation addressing the status of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients. Without these reforms, illegal immigration and chain migration, which severely and unfairly burden American workers and taxpayers, will continue without end.
Immigration reform must create more jobs, higher wages, and greater security for Americans — now and for future generations. The reforms outlined in the enclosure are necessary to ensure prosperity, opportunity, and safety for every member of our national family.
The benefits of any deal must be large to overcome the damage of signing another amnesty said Kobach. “Amnesty is a bad public policy … no matter what is connected with [because] any amnesty will result in a new surge” of migrants towards the Texas border, he said.
That disaster was demonstrated in California, where the federal 1986 amnesty spurred a huge wave of illegal immigration and chain-migration from Mexico. Twenty years later, the state is dominated by a combination of far-left unions and extreme progressive elites, amid huge gaps between rich and poor, educated and uneducated and a huge number of people who can’t speak English.
According to Kobach,
It would take quite a lot to justify the negative consequences of an amnesty: At a minimum, there would have to be nationwide E-Verify, plus something like the RAISE Act, plus funding for the wall, plus additional measures to preserve the rule of law … at a minimum, all of those things.
At this point, it does not look that kind of deal is on the table … [so] I can’t see any [pending deal] that would justify an amnesty.
“Going on the offensive is the thing to do, but [the goal] has to be more than [offsetting cuts in] chain migration,” said Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies.
Reformers say they needed to get strategic fixes for several problems:
