Flake floats Dreamers extension

[DonViejo]

Source: Politico




By SEUNG MIN KIM and BURGESS EVERETT 02/08/2018 10:56 AM EST

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) is preparing a fallback measure that would extend Obama-era legal protections for young undocumented immigrants paired with some border security funding if Congress fails to come up with a broader agreement on so-called “Dreamers.”

That result is one few on Capitol Hill want, yet may become reality as lawmakers struggle to reach a broader immigration deal that satisfies the Trump administration yet garners sufficient support from congressional Democrats.

In a pen-and-pad with reporters Thursday morning, Flake said he believes Democrats would ultimately back a legislative punt on Dreamers, “if it comes to that.”

Still, “that would be considered a failure by all of us to not do something permanent now,” Flake said. “This has been far too long for us and others to wait. But I do think, in the end, they would take that.”

Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/08/dreamers-extension-jeff-flake-398819?lo=ap_a1

[asiliveandbreathe]

1. Jeff Flake speaking for the Democratic reps in congress.. I think not - not

after Nancy Pelosi's reading of letters, sponsored by their reps, and written so eloquently by Dreamers...

Flake is dreaming if he thinks the Dems have come this far, just to come this far....a legislative punt!!!!NOT!!!!!

[Bleacher Creature]

2. It will be DOA in the House, and a sure veto by Trump.

DACA is only going to be extended in one of two ways. The first is for it to be attached to something that must pass, like the budget. Our side seems to have given up on that fight. The other option is to agree to Trump's racist demands on immigration, which should never happen.

Does anyone see a third option?

[customerserviceguy]

3. Only one

Nobody gets anything legislatively, because there is not enough support for all parties, including Trump, to get behind anything.

Then, the whole thing goes to the courts, which eventually winds up in the Supreme Court. As that Court is currently constituted, we face the serious risk that there will be a 5-4 ruling that says what one Chief Executive can giveth, a different Chief Executive from a different political party can taketh away. Then, the Rethugs in Congress wash their hands of the matter and say, "Well, it was all decided by the courts, there's nothing we can do."

Yes, it could go the other way, and the SCOTUS could impose DACA as the law of the land, and that would still get the GOP off the hook with their base. But it would absolutely poison the well for any possible future immigration law, and may lead to a backlash in 2020. I would certainly expect Trump to use right wing dog whistle phrases like "Black Robed Tyrants" to try to get re-elected.

We can cut some kind of a deal now, or we can take the chance on that coin flip.

[The Mouth]

4. Seems likely

Politics is the art of the possible.

the question is how the equation would play out: Wall = Dreamers, Wall = dreamers and path to citizenship for the undocumented already here, nothing for anyone?...

Neither side is going to get everything they want, the question is priorities, is stopping the 'wall' worth keeping the dreamers, or not.

and yeah, gambling everything on a roll of the dice in SCOTUS is not a real good idea now and is highly unlikely to get better any time soon.

[customerserviceguy]

5. It is a trade off

Either it is the legalization of immigrants who are already here, or the legalization of immigrants who want to come here from their home countries. We're not going to get both. We may wind up with neither.

[The Mouth]

6. I think legalizing everyone already here would be a stretch

with GOP control of the government. We can try, though, but it will cost something.

Probably the stupid wall in exchange for some path to citizenship is going to be the best deal, short of taking back the house.