Tag Archives: immigration reform

national news

DACA ‘deal’ produces more … chaos

Chaos, anyone? Anyone?

“Chuck and Nancy” had dinner Wednesday night with the president of the United States of America and then announced they had reached an agreement with Donald J. Trump on the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals rule.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said the deal involves legislation to restore DACA that “excludes the wall” that Trump wants to build across our nation’s southern border.

Cheers went up. The illegal immigrants who were brought here as children wouldn’t be rounded up and deported back to countries they don’t know, given that they grew up as de facto Americans.

Trump had rescinded the DACA executive order and gave Congress six months to craft a legislative solution to this problem. The Chuck-and-Nancy announcement seemed to give the DACA residents some hope, some reason to believe they could proceed toward full U.S. citizenship or permanent immigrant status.

Not so fast, said the president.

He insists he didn’t agree to forgo money for the wall — which he has said Mexico would pay for, over the strenuous objections of that country’s president, Enrique Pena Nieto.

Good grief, dude! Two leading Democratic politicians — both of whom have been at this governing thing for a long time — make an announcement, that is contradicted immediately by the president of the United States.

Perhaps Chuck and Nancy should bear some responsibility for this latest round of chaos as it involves the president.

But all told, the rollout of this so-called deal bears the marks of the man who is unable to formulate a smooth strategy — for anything. 

Do they have a deal or don’t they?

Just think: We’re only eight months into a four-year term for the president. This confusion and chaos does seem to make the time drag, doesn’t it?

national news

Congressman goes beyond the pale in this attack

U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez needs to chill out. He needs to take a breath. He needs to rethink the insult he hurled at one of Donald Trump’s more celebrated and worthy appointees.

The Illinois Democrat is angry that the president decided to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals order signed by President Barack Obama. He’s so angry that he said that White House chief of staff John Kelly has “disgraced the uniform he used to wear” by enabling the president to rescind this order.

I have two words for Rep. Gutierrez: Shut. Up.

I will stipulate first of all that I agree that the DACA rescission is a mistake. I wish the president had not done it. I believe DACA rules are humane, in that they protect undocumented immigrants who were brought to this country as children illegally by their parents; many of them know no other country than the United States of America. They deserve a clear and unfettered path to citizenship or permanent legal immigrant status.

But to say that Kelly — a retired Marine Corps general and a Gold Star father whose son was killed in combat in Afghanistan — goes far beyond what is decent and honorable.

I get that Gutierrez is emotional about immigration reform. He feels it in his gut. But let’s put the hyper-heated and defamatory rhetoric in cold storage while we discuss DACA, shall we?

Oh, one more thing: Luis Gutierrez’s own military service? None.

International news

Trump makes our heads spin over DACA

My head is spinning. I feel almost like the Linda Blair character in the film “The Exorcist.”

Donald Trump decides to rescind the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals executive order; he gives Congress six months to find a legislative solution.

He then says he’ll “revisit” the issue if Congress fails to come up with a way to shield undocumented immigrants who were brought here by their parents when they were children.

He does all this while — and this is truly mind-boggling — granting a full presidential pardon for a former Arizona sheriff who was convicted of breaking the law. “Sheriff Joe” Arpaio, the ex-Maricopa County sheriff, got a pardon after a judge convicted him of flouting a federal court order that banned him from rounding up individuals who he suspected of being illegal immigrants.

So … Trump rescinds DACA, then says he’ll “revisit” the issue, sending out a signal that he might take back his decision to rescind DACA order. He spoke this week of the feelings he has for DACA residents, how he “loves” them, how heavily the issue weighs on his heart.

I might be inclined to believe the president on that score — except for the Arpaio pardon!

Which is it, Mr. President? In what direction is this individual leaning?

There goes my head again. It’s spinning.

national news

Trump’s DACA decision tests civility boundaries

The president of the United States is testing my pledge to speak with a civil tone.

Donald Trump’s decision to rescind the Differed Action on Childhood Arrivals order has me straining against my more angry angels. But I shall resist the temptation. I shall remain civil.

The president has given Congress a six-month deadline to enact a legislation solution to DACA, which President Obama signed to protect undocumented immigrants against deportation. Specifically, DACA aims to shield those who were brought to this country as children, but who grew up as de facto Americans, from being kicked out of the only country they’ve ever known.

Is there a compelling need to rescind that order? No.

Did the president have to act for reasons other than fulfilling a campaign pledge? Again, no.

Does the president have a plan ready to go six months from now in case Congress fails to enact a legislative solution? Probably not.

We’ve got about 800,000 U.S. residents who have grown up as Americans. Many of them are now university students; they hold responsible jobs; they are serving in the military — and some of them have died in service to this nation.

These folks were brought here by their parents. They were children. Some were infants, or toddlers, or in grade school. They came here because Mom and Dad sought a better life. Should the parents have come in legally? Should they have sought legal immigrant status? Yes. I don’t dispute that.

Why, though, are we punishing the children — the so-called Dreamers — who were brought here because of a misjudgment by their parents?

I do not understand it. I never will understand it.

Ezekiel 18:20 tells us, “The child will not be punished for the parent’s sins … ” Mr. President, is your DACA decision in keeping with what Scripture instructs us?

International news, national news

OK, Congress, it’s your turn to fix DACA

So, now we’re left to hope that Congress — the outfit that couldn’t come up with a plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act — is supposed to find a legislative answer for undocumented immigrants who came here as children.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Differed Action for Children Arrivals is being rescinded in six months. Congress has a chance, then, to enact a law that gives DACA residents a fighting chance at avoiding deportation to countries they didn’t know. Why is that? Because they have lived their lives as Americans. They came here as children when their parents sneaked into the country.

Donald J. Trump now wants to punish those individuals for the sins of their parents.

Sessions said today that President Obama’s executive order establishing the DACA program is “unconstitutional.”

Read Sessions remarks here.

If that’s the case — and it’s debatable, of course — then Congress has the chance to make it right for those who have lived as de facto Americans. Their “home country” is the United States of America.

Will Congress deliver the goods in six months? Lawmakers’ track record pretty much stinks to high heaven. They had seven years to come up with a suitable replacement for the ACA. Trump got elected president as a Republican, giving the GOP complete control of the legislative and executive government branches. They choked, failed, sputtered, face-planted on ACA repeal and replacement.

Oh, and the president failed miserably, too. Let’s not forget that he’s the GOP’s leader now.

We have about 800,000 U.S. residents facing potential deportation to places they do not know. The president once again has played solely to his political base. The rest of us be damned!

Get to work, Congress.

national news

Where will these DACA residents go?

I keep reading stories about undocumented immigrants who came here as children telling the world about their worries and fears regarding potential deportation.

They are so-called “dreamers.” They live here under a provision called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. Donald Trump reportedly has decided to end the DACA program in six months, giving Congress a window to enact a legislative solution to this knotty issue.

Still, the question remains stuck in my craw: Where are these DACA residents going to go if the government rounds them up and sends them back to the country of their birth?

I watched two California university students tell a TV reporter that neither of them have been to Mexico since their early childhood. The United States of America is their home. They grew up here. The USA is all they’ve known. Sure, their parents broke the law, but their children have done nothing wrong — except seeking legal status.

President Barack Obama signed the executive order granting temporary reprieves for DACA residents from deportation. Donald Trump wants to rescind the order, or so we’re led to believe. Some members of Congress say Obama’s action might be unconstitutional.

OK, then. If that’s the case, let’s craft a legislative answer. Send a bill to the president’s desk, ask him to sign it and grant the “dreamers” a streamlined path to obtain U.S. citizenship or permanent legal residence.

Send these people back to their country of origin? Donald Trump said this year he wants to treat DACA residents “with heart.” OK, Mr. President. Show us your heart.

International news, national news

So much for compassion: Trump dumps DACA

Donald J. Trump is likely to demonstrate yet again that his presidency is the product of a diehard Republican “base” and that he owes the base every favor he can bestow.

He has decided, according to Politico, to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. But, get this: He’s going to wait six months before he pulls the plug. The president’s announcement is set for Tuesday.

What does this do? It allows the president to say he’s kept this campaign promise that the base loves; it also gives Congress a window to legislate a solution to allowing U.S. residents who as children were brought here illegally by their parents.

I had maintained a sliver of hope that Trump would agree to let Barack Obama’s executive order stand. DACA residents comprise those individuals who came here as children — some of whom were infants and/or toddlers. Their parents entered the country illegally, but those children have grown up living as Americans.

The United States is the only country they know. Yet they remain “criminals” in the minds of those who want ’em all tossed out.

Many of Trump’s Republican Party “allies” in Congress have broken ranks with the president on this issue. House Speaker Paul Ryan didn’t want to rescind DACA; neither does U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, the Senate’s senior Republican; other key Republicans across the country have weighed in against efforts to repeal DACA. Florida Gov. Rick Scott, a leading conservative GOP executive, wants DACA to remain.

Not the president. At least not six months from now.

As Politico reports: Some Republican lawmakers, including Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, have said that Congress needs to pass a law to protect the so-called Dreamers.

“My hope is that as part of this process we can work on a way to deal with this issue and solve it through legislation, which is the right way to do it and the constitutional way to do it,” Rubio told CNN in June.

Here’s the Politico story.

How would that legislation work? What would it look like? Would the president sign it or veto it? I guess the answer to the last question would be whether Congress could approve a DACA law with a veto-proof majority.

Given the tensions that have roiled the nation in recent weeks and the growing belief that the Trump administration cares damn little about sticky issues such as comprehensive immigration reform, such a majority might be in the cards.

This decision isn’t as stark as it could have been. It’s still pretty damn heartless of the president to toss aside millions of residents who have known no other life than what they’ve established in the United States of America.

My advice to Congress? Get busy. Right now.

International news, national news

Toddlers are ‘criminals’?

I continue to grapple with the “logic” — and I use the term as loosely as is humanly possible — that those who come to the United States illegally as children should be treated as lawbreakers.

They are those who come here as children living with parents who sneak into the United States without proper immigration documents.

They live here under an executive order signed by President Barack Obama that grants them temporary permission to live in the United States. Foes of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals call it “amnesty,” which it isn’t.

Obama is now out of office and Donald J. Trump is pondering whether to rescind the former president’s action and order the deportation of those DACA residents back to their country of birth.

I cannot think of many more inhumane reactions to a standing U.S. policy than that.

Yet, many anti-DACA proponents suggest that those who were brought here — perhaps as infants or toddlers — are “criminals,” that they need to be treated as lawbreakers. I certainly get that those who come here illegally aren’t following the law; they should face potential deportation if they are discovered by immigration and customs officials.

Their children? Those who arrived here under their parents’ care and who’ve grown into de facto Americans and carved out productive lives? Should we treat them that way, too?

I just cannot fathom why we would do such a thing to these individuals who’ve known no other country than the United States of America.

The events of the past few days on the Texas Gulf Coast and the possibility of rescinding the DACA order that affect so many displaced residents — who fall into that category of “illegal” immigrants — might make it tremendously more difficult for the president to make good on his campaign threat.

Someone, though, will have to explain to me — in language I can grasp — why those who come here as children need to be manhandled as if they broke the law.

They did no such thing. They deserve the chance to continue living here and they need protection so they can do what’s right: seek to become U.S. citizens or obtain permanent immigrant status — that makes them legal residents of the only country they know.

national news

DACA decision now looms even larger for Trump

Americans very well could learn quite soon whether Donald Trump’s display of compassion and good will along the Texas Gulf Coast was a mere show or whether it reveals a side of him few of his believe existed.

That revelation could occur when the president decides whether to repeal the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival provision.

DACA has become a kind of shorthand for immigration reform.

My hope is that the president — having visited Houston, Corpus Christi and Rockport — understands this point: Many of those families affected by Hurricane Harvey’s devastation involve DACA residents, individuals who were brought to this country illegally while they were children.

I should add, too, that DACA residents helped build those devastated neighborhoods along the Gulf Coast and are going to help repair them.

These Americans had no say in what their parents did. They have grown up in this country, which is the only country they have known. Rescinding DACA status for these individuals would send them back to the country of their birth — and would deprive them of the only life they have experienced.

Against that backdrop, we know that many DACA families are suffering in cities such as Houston, which has a huge population of residents comprising those who came here as youngsters.

This isn’t entirely about the Texas Gulf Coast suffering. It’s also about whether the president is going to continue to appeal to his Republican Party “base,” which detests DACA provisions; the “base” wants DACA residents booted out, no matter the circumstance.

Donald Trump has a serious choice to make: keep pleasing the “base” or finally — finally! — reach out to millions of Americans who do not favor repealing DACA status for American residents.

It’s not an “amnesty,” as candidate Trump called it during the 2016 campaign. DACA provides a path toward citizenship or permanent legal residence.

Which side of the president will present itself when he announces his DACA decision? Time will tell. I’m hoping the “better angels” have seized Donald Trump’s attention.

International news, national news

Promises made often are promises broken

“I’ll build a big, beautiful wall … and Mexico is going to pay for it!”

I’m sure you remember when Donald John Trump Sr. made that proclamation. If you missed it the first, or even the second or third times, well, he kept saying all along the trail he followed right into the White House.

Mexico will foot the bill for a wall that the president of the United States wants to build. Check. Got it. Done deal.

Except that Mexico will do no such thing. Just ask them. Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto has made as clear as he possibly can make it: In no way, in no fashion, is Mexico going to spend a single peso to pay for the wall.

What does Trump do now? Why, he turns to us — to you and me. We’re going to pay for it, he declares with a bravado equal to what he displayed while making that foolish campaign-trail pledge.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders keeps muttering that tiresome — and mostly false — contention that Trump “got elected” on the promise to build the wall. Wrong, young lady! He got elected by declaring that Mexico was going to pay for it.

The wall now is being used as a piece of political bait. The president is threatening to shut down the government if Congress refuses his demand for money — coming from our pockets, remember — to erect that 2,000-mile wall. Congressional leaders, though, have been burned before by attempts to shut down the government. They’ve done so in the past and have paid a price politically for it.

Trump has no direct knowledge of the political pain that comes with making stupid promises that he cannot keep.

I am all for increased border security. If we’re going to do more to deter illegal immigrants, then invest in better surveillance monitoring techniques; hire more Border Patrol officers and put them on duty along our southern frontier. I get that those who enter the country illegally are, by definition, lawbreakers.

Here’s another notion: How about enacting some comprehensive immigration reform legislation that makes it easier for those who want to come here in search of opportunity to do so legally?

But to build a wall? And then force a neighboring sovereign state to pony up the cash to pay for it? That was never in play. To now force U.S. taxpayers to carry that burden has become just another broken campaign promise.